Home Politics and Debate
Exciting news! Join our watch club and get free access to NOW for 1 month

Singapore hang Australian drug trafficker

13

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That is exactly how it doesn't work.

    Do you really think that ALL the harm done by a sanction will be transmitted on the 'evil corporate fatcats and their profits'? I am sure you must realise that is completely ridiculous.

    Just as likely is that the sanctions are interpreted as an attack by the west, public opinion hardens against us, making it even more difficult to get anything done theorugh negotiation etc
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No, not like Iraq. Iraq was arguably the strictest, most cruel embargo ever imposed on a nation. Like I've said about 25 times by now, there are many levels of sanctions that can be implemented.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And you imagine a sanction that doesn't hurt the poor or the vulnerable in anyway do you.

    Please elaborate further.........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh so you are now developing a sense of deep concern for the wellbeing of the poor and the vulnerable in other countries are you?

    Funny that, seeing as corporate greed and free market capitalism create far more grief and misery to the poor and vulnerable than anything else on the planet, and yet you are an avid supporter of them.

    As I said, just one way of many would be to impose tariffs on certain products the country in question is an exporter of. Just the number of sales to overseas countries are reduced and so are the profits for the companies that sell the products in question.

    Believe me, no country is not going to be bankrupt for it. But rich people and corporations hate losing profits, even miniscule amounts of it, and you can be sure they'd put pressure to their government to have the tariffs lifted.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Or they could cut their workforce to make up the lost revenues, causing unemployment and misery, good idea!

    Where did you get the idea that I don't care about those in the developing world or that I am a supporter of corporate greed?

    You are the one suggesting a policy that would bring misery on the poor for the sake of some rich western drug dealers and sex offenders, you seem to be confused......
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Even if they resorted to cutting jobs within their own companies it would certainly have minimum (or no) effect on other industries. So the idea of mass unemployment and misery for millions doesn't quite ring true I'm afraid.

    And then there are many other things to consider: suspension from the Commonwealth or other trading alliances, cultural and sporting boycotts, temporary barring from entry in other nations government members or businessmen... the list of measures that will put pressure on the government but not affect the population at large is long.

    And I am afraid that by being an ardent supporting of unrestricted free trade you are directly supporting the exploitation of the poor in those countries. You might not see it as corporate greed... others do.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    1) All government actions mean force is used.

    2) Corporations have nothing to do with free markets.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    Even if they resorted to cutting jobs within their own companies it would certainly have minimum (or no) effect on other industries. So the idea of mass unemployment and misery for millions doesn't quite ring true I'm afraid.

    And then there are many other things to consider: suspension from the Commonwealth or other trading alliances, cultural and sporting boycotts, temporary barring from entry in other nations government members or businessmen... the list of measures that will put pressure on the government but not affect the population at large is long.

    And I am afraid that by being an ardent supporting of unrestricted free trade you are directly supporting the exploitation of the poor in those countries. You might not see it as corporate greed... others do.

    I never mentioned mass unemployment, unemployment of any kind is bad, not just the 'mass' variety.....

    Yes the second bit is true but off the debate we were having.

    The last bit is bollocks as you almost admit yourself in fact by admitting that there could well be job losses as a result of trade restrictions. Have the poor of Spain suffered form free trade under the Eu or have they massively benefited and Spain become a far richer country?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I never mentioned mass unemployment, unemployment of any kind is bad, not just the 'mass' variety.....

    Nah. It should be a victory. The idea that we can have some of us sat around doing nothing just shows how good we have got at manipulating the world in our favour.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote:
    I never mentioned mass unemployment, unemployment of any kind is bad, not just the 'mass' variety.....
    However short-term unemployment of a few hundred workers is price worth paying if it means human right abuses and/or death penalty are to dissapear from a nation, believe me.
    The last bit is bollocks as you almost admit yourself in fact by admitting that there could well be job losses as a result of trade restrictions.
    See above.
    Have the poor of Spain suffered form free trade under the Eu or have they massively benefited and Spain become a far richer country?
    Er... if they work for a multinational or a major producer/exporter, membership of the EU will have made little difference for them. They will still get paid semi-slave wages (though not so bad thanks to miminum wage laws) while the employer creams all the extra benefits.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    surely sanctions only work if all countries (or at least the vast majority) agree to them. And I can't see places such as China or Russia (both of whom retain the death penalty) putting in place sanctions on Singapore to persuade them to drop it. The end result is that sanctions would cause some slight discomfort to Singapore, help those countries who have the death penalty and continue to trade with Singapore and cause the most harm to those putting in place sanctions.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, sadly that's probably true. Still, it'd be nice to see the EU make a stand for what is right.

    They won't, however, seeing (as you said) as major partners such as China, Russia and of course the US are happily sending people to their deaths with alarming frequency.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    Er... if they work for a multinational or a major producer/exporter, membership of the EU will have made little difference for them. They will still get paid semi-slave wages (though not so bad thanks to miminum wage laws) while the employer creams all the extra benefits.

    Jesus Christ, why do people think this crap!

    Do workers at the Nissan plant in Sunderland get paid 'slave wages', no of course not......
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Labourers from deepest Almeria in South Spain do get paid semi-slave wages. And I can assure you that any increased trade due to EU membership made very little difference to their pay packet.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ah yes the classic way to debate, pick an obscure example in order to hide the wider truth.

    There I was thuinking you were one of the most ardent supporters of the EU, was I wrong?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Er... you were the one suggesting Spanish workers had benefited immensely from the additional trade membership of the EU might have brought to Spain. I have just pointed out one example that shows it has made bugger all difference for countless millions of workers.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No, one example does exaclty not show anything on a wider scale, that is my point.

    Do you support the Eu or not, I thought you did? If you do you would surely also recognise the benefits of free trade that have been one of the factors in increasing the prosperity of many nations, including Spain.......
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I support the freedom of movement and advance in social welfare though political integration the EU has brought for all its citizens.

    Freer trade might have brought more prosperity for some- but certainly not for all and for millions of people with dead end/unskilled jobs all that wonderful extra trading has brought them absolutely zero benefits.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    what about cheaper goods to consume, is that not a benefit?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    what about cheaper goods to consume, is that not a benefit?

    I think Al is one of those "making money = bad person" type self loathers mate. Everything is going to be down to some fat cat exploiter or some shit like that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    what about cheaper goods to consume, is that not a benefit?

    It is. How often do discounts get passed to the consumer though?

    Remember a certain recent discussion regarding DVDs, CDs, games and cars?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    I think Al is one of those "making money = bad person" type self loathers mate. Everything is going to be down to some fat cat exploiter or some shit like that.
    I think you need help.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    I support the freedom of movement and advance in social welfare though political integration the EU has brought for all its citizens.

    Freer trade might have brought more prosperity for some- but certainly not for all and for millions of people with dead end/unskilled jobs all that wonderful extra trading has brought them absolutely zero benefits.

    No of course, very few things bring benefits for all, there are nearly always winners and losers out of any economic change, but if the winners outweigh the losers then the change should be considered a good thing in my mind, and as you have said yourselg, trade had bought benefits to some at least thus is a good thing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think you need help.

    Well, of course I do. Who doesn't?

    Must be a pain seeing your wages every month and know that they come from the blood of the workers. :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote:
    No of course, very few things bring benefits for all, there are nearly always winners and losers out of any economic change, but if the winners outweigh the losers then the change should be considered a good thing in my mind, and as you have said yourselg, trade had bought benefits to some at least thus is a good thing.
    Yes there are good things to be had out of a healthy economy fuelled by trade but I happen to believe that for many ordinary people there are few benefits at all, and in some cases no improvement or even a deterioration in their quality of life.

    Call me a cynic but I've never been much of a believer in 'trickle down' Adam Smith theories. One sad fact of life is that the immense majority of profits and benefits will always be kept by the people at the top.

    A healthy economy should benefit most people but there must be limits to trade and there must be ethics in place to ensure everyone gets a piece of cake.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Well, of course I do. Who doesn't?

    Must be a pain seeing your wages every month and know that they come from the blood of the workers. :rolleyes:
    It must be pain seeing "people" every day and knowing some of your hard-earned cash is "stolen" from you to help those useless individuals who don't want to help themselves in the first place.

    Oh, if only there weren't any governments, countries, societies or people eh? What a wonderful place the world would be.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    Yes there are good things to be had out of a healthy economy fuelled by trade but I happen to believe that for many ordinary people there are few benefits at all, and in some cases no improvement or even a deterioration in their quality of life.

    Call me a cynic but I've never been much of a believer in 'trickle down' Adam Smith theories. One sad fact of life is that the immense majority of profits and benefits will always be kept by the people at the top.

    A healthy economy should benefit most people but there must be limits to trade and there must be ethics in place to ensure everyone gets a piece of cake.

    Trickle-down and Adam Smith are sperate theories and not really relevent to the the gains form trade.


    What limits to trade do you advocate specifically, and why must there be some?

    Maybe the people at the top do benefit more (though that is largely irrelevant given the far greater extent of social mobility) if the others benefit as well then why not do it.

    Do you think it is coincidence that all the richest and most prosperous nations, with the lowest number of poor and desperate people are heavy traders?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote:
    What limits to trade do you advocate specifically, and why must there be some?
    So they don't further damage poor and disadvantaged farmers and traders in third world countries; to ensure a fairer share of the profits reaches those who need it the most (and, I daresay, who made it all possible in the first place).
    Maybe the people at the top do benefit more
    Understatment of the millennium.

    Do you think it is coincidence that all the richest and most prosperous nations, with the lowest number of poor and desperate people are heavy traders?
    That doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement or that the poor and desperate people, both at home and abroad, need to to suffer to keep the system afloat.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    So they don't further damage poor and disadvantaged farmers and traders in third world countries; to ensure a fairer share of the profits reaches those who need it the most (and, I daresay, who made it all possible in the first place).

    I thought the left had come to terms with the fact that trade is generally good for the poor of the developing world hence the make poverty history campaign against trade restrictions in the developed world etc (though we have had a similar debate on here before and some of have sought to deny the support of freer trade)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    It is. How often do discounts get passed to the consumer though?

    Remember a certain recent discussion regarding DVDs, CDs, games and cars?

    Yes i remember it well.
Sign In or Register to comment.