[BurlyShirley]

I saw a dude with a bumper sticker that said that yesterday, and Ive thought alot about this before, but decided to make a thread.

You know those 'Feed The Children' ads for places like Burundi and that, well, this is sick, I know, but if you feed one, and grows up and has 3 kids, and they arent fed and they die, then you've actually starved three by feeding one.

Is that a good thing?

Im not sure what's morally right here.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Well...what about welfare in the country...the more kids you have the more money the government gives you....leading to women trying to actively get knocked up so they can get more cash, not for the kids, but for themselves.

No accountability - sheesh ...

 

[valve bouncer]

You used to be much better at trolling Shirl, this is weak quite frankly.

 

[gschuette]

Well...what about welfare in the country...the more kids you have the more money the government gives you....leading to women trying to actively get knocked up so they can get more cash, not for the kids, but for themselves.

No accountability - sheesh ...

That is why I despise welfare. That is one of the contributing factors to my fear of socialism. It just breeds laziness.

 

[BurlyShirley]

hey. get the hell back on topic.

 

[ncrider]

You know those 'Feed The Children' ads for places like Burundi and that, well, this is sick, I know, but if you feed one, and grows up and has 3 kids, and they arent fed and they die, then you've actually starved three by feeding one.

Is that a good thing?

Im not sure what's morally right here.

Wow, this one could get ugly or just die off like the sprekled boobie toed frickle (it's a bird).

Jokes aside, it really is a parodox. Do we maintain the exstence of people that are really contributing nothing to society or do we end the riscious cycle of abuse and neglect. Darwin and all.
In somewhere like Burundi the people that really need aid are usually to sick to get it. Think rationing devices. The strong will prevail.

 

[Toshi]

Do we maintain the exstence of people that are really contributing nothing to society or do we end the riscious cycle of abuse and neglect. Darwin and all.

do we attempt to cure those with debilitating genetic diseases? should we? what would happen to people like stephen hawking, just to use the most prominent example? should we cull people who are healthy but dumb from the gene pool?

 

[Changleen]

do we attempt to cure those with debilitating genetic diseases? should we? what would happen to people like stephen hawking, just to use the most prominent example? should we cull people who are healthy but dumb from the gene pool?

We could start with Bush voters...

 

[mr.terrible]

"The more we feed, the more they breed" - well that is one way to think of it. But the feeding part(food aid etc.) is not the real "issue" here, atleast in my point of view. Yes, the total fertility rate in Africa, for example, is really high compared to the firstworld coutries, but why is that? In the thirdworld countries children are often their parents "life insurance" and a really important source of "income" to their family. To add to this child/infant mortality rate is usually pretty high due to various reasons. The more kids you have the better(well, to some extend). Does that make any sense?

 

[TheInedibleHulk]

This really is a difficult question. It's true, tempory solutions to food problems will most likely only create a greater problem in the future. The correct answer to this problem is to implement a sustainable plan for food production or import in famine areas, "teach a man to fish".. ya know. This has been done successfully in many parts of Africa. Each specific area provides its own unique challenges, whether it be war, geographical accessabiltity, ect. But to give up and say "let them starve" for the sake of natural selection or population control is callous and misinformed. Really the one overiding solution to MOST of the worlds problems, including famine, is education... better education, less babies, more production, but there are certainly some more basic problems in places like Burundi to be overcome first.

Look how non-combative that post is... I better do something.... SCREW BUSH YOU REDNECKS!!!!

 

[TheInedibleHulk]

"The more we feed, the more they breed" - well that is one way to think of it. But the feeding part(food aid etc.) is not the real "issue" here, atleast in my point of view. Yes, the total fertility rate in Africa, for example, is really high compared to the firstworld coutries, but why is that? In the thirdworld countries children are often their parents "life insurance" and a really important source of "income" to their family. To add to this child/infant mortality rate is usually pretty high due to various reasons. The more kids you have the better(well, to some extend). Does that make any sense?

This is true and a pretty standard aspect of an agrarian society. However, families in third world countries often make their situation worse by having more children than they can feed.

 

[mr.terrible]

This is true and a pretty standard aspect of an agrarian society. However, families in third world countries often make their situation worse by having more children than they can feed.

Yes, that is also true. I just wanted to highlight some causes for the "crazy" polulation growth that leads to a handful of other problems.

 

[fluff]

Why not just built a huge chemical plant by the refugee camps, employ them really cheap, neglect safety and then when the plant becomes unprofitable allow poisonous gas to escape and wipe out all those no-longer-useful parasites?

That's the capitalist way, n'est pas?

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Why not just built a huge chemical plant by the refugee camps, employ them really cheap, neglect safety and then when the plant becomes unprofitable allow poisonous gas to escape and wipe out all those no-longer-useful parasites?

That's the capitalist way, n'est pas?

that reminds me of most of the abandoned copper mining center in Peru and Chile. in those little crappy towns, almost nobody passes age 50.

 

[Toshi]

that reminds me of most of the abandoned copper mining center in Peru and Chile. in those little crappy towns, almost nobody passes age 50.

in case you missed it, his direct reference was to bhopal

 

[N8 v2.0]

In a nutshell, these people are screwing themselves away from the dinner table...

 

[slein]

feeding them may be a stop gap measure. bumper stickers are bumper stickers. people, even the poor and exploited, will fornicate despite other people wanting them to stop fornicating.

look at the root cause: not enough food or too many people.

solution: help them provide their own food.

how? stop subsidizing local farmers exclusively. the first world is notorious for doing this, yet the third world can't do it. they have no market, since they need money to make money.

will it happen? not likely. instead of helping them, we'll make bumper stickers to exacerbate the situation.

the way ahead: send ignorant first world people to the third world to live the life they have. maybe then, something'll get done.

about Bhopal: it was a cluster-**** anyway... way too much nasties on site, poor engineering and the ridiculous compensation package. gotta love first world business input to third world catastrophy.

 

[JRogers]

feeding them may be a stop gap measure. bumper stickers are bumper stickers. people, even the poor and exploited, will fornicate despite other people wanting them to stop fornicating.

look at the root cause: not enough food or too many people.

solution: help them provide their own food.

how? stop subsidizing local farmers exclusively. the first world is notorious for doing this, yet the third world can't do it. they have no market, since they need money to make money.

will it happen? not likely. instead of helping them, we'll make bumper stickers to exacerbate the situation.

the way ahead: send ignorant first world people to the third world to live the life they have. maybe then, something'll get done.

about Bhopal: it was a cluster-**** anyway... way too much nasties on site, poor engineering and the ridiculous compensation package. gotta love first world business input to third world catastrophy.

First, watch your vocabulary. "Fornicate" implies immoral sexual conduct, usually between unmarried people or with a prostitute. It's not just another word for sex.

Also, farming isn't the whole answer. The problem is way too complicated for that to be the solution for lots of reasons. Examples: often, third world food production can be limited by means of distribution (either by lack of infrastructure or existing power structures) rather than production. If we want these people to actually live long and healthy lives according to modern standards, they need to do more than just have enough food to live. They need education, medical facilities etc. That needs money, which is not something that inefficient farming is really good at making. Also, in many places in the third world, the climate is not stable enough or conducive enough to farming for it to be as efficient as many other locations. Shouldn't we leave farming to the areas that can do it efficiently? One thing the third world has is labor, though. Especially with the formation of the primate city, which now exists, decentralizing production might not provide much of a benefit anyways if the means of distribution are still problematic.

Also, as for the feed/breed argument, that's ridiculous. As toshi points out, we don't follow that idea in other areas because we would find it reprehensible. Further, this problem is not just because they have more kids than they can feed. A large part of the problems in the third world, or whatever you want to call it, have been caused by the West. We need to do something.

If we want to talk about birth rates, 2 things are most effective in bringing those down: education and industrialization.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

in case you missed it, his direct reference was to bhopal

bhopal is iconic, rather than a landmark.
leaks, water polution, low wages, artificial trade barriers aint as freaky as people outside the world´s ghettos think they are.

they are common currency in the poor side of the wealthy-poor symbiosis of capitalism.

stuff like that happen everywhere all the time in the 3rd world, maybe not in the same intensity, but still, pretty crappy.

 

[ncrider]

Yes education is extremely important, but it's just a fraction of the solution. Third world countries can not solve there poverty problems by education alone. They need to be able to establish an efficient institutional framework that promotes and enforces private property rights. This is the only way it can be done. Unfortunatly most government officials in these places benefit greatly from corruptions and thy are to be blamed not the US

I hear all to often on this forum people saying the US is exploiting the third world. Thats BS. Sure by our standards things look bad, but to them it's a better job than anything else, or else they wouldn't be doing it.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

I hear all to often on this forum people saying the US is exploiting the third world. Thats BS. Sure by our standards things look bad, but to them it's a better job than anything else, or else they wouldn't be doing it.

else??? what is exactly that "else" you are talking about??

dude, its either 25 cents an hour or starvation.

duh! y´all guys talk like if the world was the US and people had choices other than they are given.
(which relates to my point about the unfairness of free capital flows but labor contrained to geopolitical meassures, rather than a true "free market" model.

since free inmigration is not a posibility yet, people in certain geographical locations have to do the only thing the laws and the constraints on their unfair labor trade (in which they dont choose who they sell to their labor, but otherwise). they dont have that "choice" you seem to be referring in "else they wont be doing it".

like slavery. just because they did it, its because it was the best than anything else. because according to your reasoning, slave should have done other stuff...

you see... constrained labor trade AND un-restricted capital flows equals partial slavery IMO.

 

[ohio]

bhopal is iconic, rather than a landmark.
leaks, water polution, low wages, artificial trade barriers aint as freaky as people outside the world´s ghettos think they are.

they are common currency in the poor side of the wealthy-poor symbiosis of capitalism.

Yeah, communists would never do that to people (*cough*CHERNOBYL*cough*)

The Bhopal distaster is a landmark because the offending party was brought to justice and punished for their negligence... something that wouldn't and couldn't happen under communism. Get over yourself. You've lost this argument, so stop trying to use it.

 

[ohio]

like slavery. just because they did it, its because it was the best than anything else. because according to your reasoning, slave should have done other stuff...

Are you trying to say that the ability to move anywhere in the world freely and easily (restricted by economics, but not legislation) except into maybe two dozen nations in the world that are unable to accept a flood of immigration is equivalent to slavery?

Let me ask you, did communist Russia ever bring in any starving Peruvians? Struggling Indians? Haitian refugees? But I bet communist China must have, right?

I want you to think very carefully, apply some logic to your arguments, maybe some DIRECT cause and effect, and then come back with something of value to say.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Yeah, communists would never do that to people (*cough*CHERNOBYL*cough*)

The Bhopal distaster is a landmark because the offending party was brought to justice and punished for their negligence... something that wouldn't and couldn't happen under communism. Get over yourself. You've lost this argument, so stop trying to use it.

the fact somebody went to trial is the landmark, not the fact it happened.

and well, i dont know if communism could have done worse. most likely is that under the usual pinko gvmts in SA, such conditions would not have happened in the first place. (unless we talk siberia or something like that)

unfortunately according to most 3rd worlders in my side of the 3rd world (people with previous experience with commies and righties), they still like the commies better 2 to 1. i argued for them. nor you, nor me know any better than that people themselves about in which time they were better off.

 

[ncrider]

else??? what is exactly that "else" you are talking about??

dude, its either 25 cents an hour or starvation.

like slavery. just because they did it, its because it was the best than anything else. because according to your reasoning, slave should have done other stuff...

you see... constrained labor trade AND un-restricted capital flows equals partial slavery IMO.

The "else" I'm talking about is their next best alternative. If that means, as you've said, 25 cents an hour or starvation, then it would be there best alternative to take the 25 cents.

Slavery has nothing to do with this.

Not quit sure what point your trying to make about unrestricted capital flows. Maybe I miissed something in the Evil Csapitalism thread. Unrestricted capital flows would actually realy help impoverished areas. To have the ability to use capital means there are strongly defined property rights and an institutional framework that is relatively more protectionism than predation.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Are you trying to say that the ability to move anywhere in the world freely and easily (restricted by economics, but not legislation) except into maybe two dozen nations in the world that are unable to accept a flood of immigration is equivalent to slavery?

Let me ask you, did communist Russia ever bring in any starving Peruvians? Struggling Indians? Haitian refugees? But I bet communist China must have, right?

I want you to think very carefully, apply some logic to your arguments, maybe some DIRECT cause and effect, and then come back with something of value to say.

yup, russian borders, (and pinko nations like france), are quite open with inmigrants. there are lots of cuban refugees around there, and a regular sized SouthAmerican colony in russia.

on the other hand... have you ever thought that 3rd world nations are also unable the cope the flood of foreign corporations with their dumping prices and capital competition?
just like the 1st world cannot cope with so many 3rd world laborers??

why in one side is OK, and the other one is a complete NO-NO.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

The "else" I'm talking about is their next best alternative. If that means, as you've said, 25 cents an hour or starvation, then it would be there best alternative to take the 25 cents.

Slavery has nothing to do with this.

Not quit sure what point your trying to make about unrestricted capital flows. Maybe I miissed something in the Evil Csapitalism thread. Unrestricted capital flows would actually realy help impoverished areas. To have the ability to use capital means there are strongly defined property rights and an institutional framework that is relatively more protectionism than predation.

i agree on you that unrestricted capital flows are GOOD for the economy overall. thanks to that, you can make 30 bucks and hour, and buy shoes for 80 bucks made by someoen getting paid 25 cents an hour. if it wasnt for this imbalance you´d be paying 800 bucks for the same pair of shoes.

BUT for it to be GOOD for people overall, it HAS to go in hand with free labor trade.

otherwise, you are just creating ghettos in the world surrounded by political walls, from which the people inside cannot escape, thus they have to work for whoever is comming, at whatever pay they are giving, or starve to death since they cannot flee this situation.
just like its going on now. that is my main point. am all for free trade. its a good equalizer... but it serves for virtually nothing, if you dont also equalize labor laws, etc.

 

[ncrider]

BUT for it to be GOOD for people overall, it HAS to go in hand with free labor trade.

otherwise, you are just creating ghettos in the world surrounded by political walls, from which the people inside cannot escape, thus they have to work for whoever is comming, at whatever pay they are giving, or starve to death since they cannot flee this situation.

What do you mean by free labor trade?

The second part of your argument is slightly victimized dramatization, don't ya think. Or else you ficticious world must be run by a dicator.

 

[ohio]

(and pinko nations like france)

Is that a joke? Are you under the impression that France is not a capitalist nation? That would explain a lot.

on the other hand... have you ever thought that 3rd world nations are also unable the cope the flood of foreign corporations with their dumping prices and capital competition?

I have no idea what you mean by "dumping prices." Aside from that explain how they are unable to cope with the economic impacts. What are the immediate and direct effects. I'm not talking about governmental failures and corruption, which occurs under any system not properly regulated during periods of development. I want you to point out the actual detrimental economic effects and their causes you claim exist.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

What do you mean by free labor trade?

The second part of your argument is slightly victimized dramatization, don't ya think. Or else you ficticious world must be run by a dicator.

by free labor trade, i mean people can work wherever they want at the employer they choose. not constrained by foreign laws to their location.

actually the 2nd part is exactly the opposite of a dictator. in a truly free world economy people should be able to choose were to work, and

everybody competing against everybody in the world, not everybody competing against their surrounding (which is defined quite dictatorially and unilaterally by the 1st world if you think about its foreign policy, self protectionism, and vandalizing of foreign markets and labor).

 

[ohio]

the fact somebody went to trial is the landmark, not the fact it happened.

The fact that Union Carbide went to trial insures that we hold companies to a continually higher standard in the future. Like I've pointed out, there is no greater carrot or stick than money.

unfortunately according to most 3rd worlders in my side of the 3rd world (people with previous experience with commies and righties), they still like the commies better 2 to 1. i argued for them. nor you, nor me know any better than that people themselves about in which time they were better off.

And, as we've been through before, communist rebellions and leftest parties don't count as "living under communism." Additionally, in an undeveloped country communism's ugly side barely shows itself. It's when the system becomes increasingly complex and developed (industrialisation, specialization of labor) that things get really bad.

Oh, and you still haven't posted actual data from the study, or a link to the study.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Is that a joke? Are you under the impression that France is not a capitalist nation? That would explain a lot.



I have no idea what you mean by "dumping prices." Aside from that explain how they are unable to cope with the economic impacts. What are the immediate and direct effects. I'm not talking about governmental failures and corruption, which occurs under any system not properly regulated during periods of development. I want you to point out the actual detrimental economic effects and their causes you claim exist.

by france, its capitalist, but for US standards, is kinda pinko.

by direct detrimental effects on economy, the first thing that comes to my mind is the ACTUAL DIMINISHING in per hour wages in Peru i saw on a report last night on TV. even after 10 years of STRONG foreign investment in the nation.

not to talk about the thousands of people who lost jobs since their companies cannot compete with for example and had to close.

US subsidized wheat, corn, and the rest of the heavily subsidized US agriculture. with dumping and under-cost prices coming into here. that has left a lot of farmers (in a poor ass country in which lot of people live from agriculture) without a job.

of course there are improvements... like i got a fast internet connection, or i can call anywhere in the world cheaper than before...
but wait.. we are talking about overall population benefits.. arent we?? and you perfectly know, you and I sitting in a computer arguing on the internet on a weekday afternoon are definately not estereotypical human beings..
or do you think people like us represent a big chunk of mankind???

 

[DRB]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/12/02/india.bhopal.reut/index.html

How interesting that Bhopal came up.

 

[ncrider]

by free labor trade, i mean people can work wherever they want at the employer they choose. not constrained by foreign laws to their location.

actually the 2nd part is exactly the opposite of a dictator. in a truly free world economy people should be able to choose were to work, and

everybody competing against everybody in the world, not everybody competing against their surrounding (which is defined quite dictatorially and unilaterally by the 1st world if you think about its foreign policy, self protectionism, and vandalizing of foreign markets and labor).

Think about the holes in your argument.
World trade is the result of world competition. People are not just confined to competeting against there surroundings. Why do you think America outsources low tech jobs to india or NIke and a ton of other appareal corporation go to China. CHEAP ABUNDANT LABOR. We don't need free labor flow. World trade brings product to where ever it is made cheapest, thus global competition, not only confined to ones surroundings.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Think about the holes in your argument.
World trade is the result of world competition. People are not just confined to competeting against there surroundings. Why do you think America outsources low tech jobs to india or NIke and a ton of other appareal corporation go to China. CHEAP ABUNDANT LABOR. We don't need free labor flow. World trade brings product to where ever it is made cheapest, thus global competition, not only confined to ones surroundings.

and that is freedom on one-way only.

its the freedom of the labor-buyer to decide who he is buy from to and at which prices and rules (decided by no other than he himself), but not freedom for the labor-seller to decide who he is gonna sell to, since he can only sell his labor to those buyers by default. (decided by laws dictated to them by no others than G8 lobbies)

just like buying a puppy or a slave. you can choose your puppy or slave, but the slave or puppy doesnt choose you.

is not exactly a 2-way freedom.

 

[ncrider]

and that is freedom on one-way only.

its the freedom of the labor-buyer to decide who he is buy from to and at which prices and rules (decided by no other than he himself), but not freedom for the labor-seller to decide who he is gonna sell to, since he can only sell his labor to those buyers by default. (decided by laws dictated to them by no others than G8 lobbies)

Did someone hold a gun to your head and say you will work hear and for this price. Didn't think so.

If a "labor buyer" wanted to purchase labor at a below market equilibrium price (whatever that may be for the region) he would not get any labor. Unless it's slavery and I've allready said that has nothing to do with this argument.
Remember people (as hard as it to believe) are all rational individuals. Evryone is trying to maximive their wealth. They aren't just going to acept low wages unless that is the best they can do.

 

[ohio]

by france, its capitalist, but for US standards, is kinda pinko.

Wow. It all makes sense now. You actually have NO IDEA what communism is.

by direct detrimental effects on economy, the first thing that comes to my mind is the ACTUAL DIMINISHING in per hour wages in Peru i saw on a report last night on TV. even after 10 years of STRONG foreign investment in the nation.

not to talk about the thousands of people who lost jobs since their companies cannot compete with for example and had to close.

I'm sorry, you'll have to complete your sentences. Cannot compete with whom? What jobs? Were these jobs that existed before western investment? How much have real wages diminished? Over what period of time? What does the trend for the 20 years before that look like?

US subsidized wheat, corn, and the rest of the heavily subsidized US agriculture. with dumping and under-cost prices coming into here. that has left a lot of farmers (in a poor ass country in which lot of people live from agriculture) without a job.

So, keeping in mind that the US government has subsidized its farmers for half a century or more, you're saying that farms in Peru that came into existence because at one point they could compete in the US despite the subsidies now can no longer do so. So you have a surplus of food. That can still be traded at a discount with other nations for other necessary goods. Before it goes bad. Like it would under communism.

So really you're complaining because capitalism encouraged more people to farm, and then priced them out of selling their goods. And you believe this to be worse than the government telling its people they must farm, which would result in the same surpluses, except the farmers would be stuck with them instead of being able to trade them through other outlets.

Did I understand you correctly?

edit: I just realized you were complaining about cheap food coming INTO Peru, not the inability export food produced in Peru. So you're complaining because the rest of the population (all the non-farmers) now have access to a cheaper source of food and can stretch their incomes further. Why do you hate those people so much?

of course there are improvements... like i got a fast internet connection, or i can call anywhere in the world cheaper than before...

You are the only one that ever brings western standard of living into any of these arguments. Why?

I want you to look up the following on google and read some of the links:
"microfinance"
"trade credits"
"pollution vouchers"

Then tell me if any of that would be possible under communism.

 

[ncrider]

Wow. It all makes sense now. You actually have NO IDEA what communism is.
I want you to look up to google the following and read some of the links:
"microfinance"
"trade credits"
"pollution vouchers"

Then tell me if any of that would be possible under communism.

Alexis DH do all of us a favor and educate yourself. I checked your profile, "full time college drop out." That expailns alot.

 

[ohio]

but not freedom for the labor-seller to decide who he is gonna sell to, since he can only sell his labor to those buyers by default. (decided by laws dictated to them by no others than G8 lobbies).

what laws? what do they restrict?

the goods/labor seller can only sell the goods or labor that he has. are you claiming that under communism a farmer can suddenly start selling IT solutions?

the goods/labor buyer only buys the goods he needs. he can't just buy any good. he is restricted to a single good or type of labor. Is that "slavery of buyers?"

edit: I've got the time, so I might as well continue. You claim there's no free movement of labor...
Two points:
1. Yes, the USSR was certainly more of a melting pot than the US. And you're right that USSR citizen's were free to leave and move about however they saw fit. NOT!
2. You're missing the demand side of your equation. Labor is free to move to where it is DEMANDED. You know what would happen if the US loosened it's current immigration policies? A massive brain drain on the rest of the world. Because there is much more demand here for the highly educated worker than the low wage worker. Right now, the US is only hurting itself with it's tightened borders. Are you under the impression Peru would be better off if all the highly educated Peruvians were able to emigrate to the US?

 

[ohio]

just like buying a puppy or a slave. you can choose your puppy or slave, but the slave or puppy doesnt choose you.

The puppy or the slave doesn't recieve money for their services which then makes them the buyer (or in your world the "slave owner").