Vineland revisited

[calbert at tiac.net]

Doigenes:

> "Illegal" immigration is
> tolerated to provide a pool of unprotected workers.

It is "tolerated" largely because it is impossible to stop it........If your 
idea of illegal immigrant labor is shaped exclusively by the horror 
stories of sweatshops, I suggest you get out for some air. I had 
lunch with the wife of just such a laborer today - her hubby pulls 
down over a grand per week in construction - money he can only 
dream of back in S.C. Brasil.


 In other words, I
> can move any time I want from Minnesota to Missouri, get a new
> driver's license, register to vote locally, but I can't move to Mexico
> without a proven outside income and a healthy bank balance.

But this does not hold for most highly developed economies like 
ours, the Canadians, most N. European countries, where the 
biggest obstacle may be quotas and the resulting waiting period. 
Mexico, and many other 2nd and 3rd world countries simply lack the 
means to either absorb or otherwise maintain large groups of 
economic refugees.....It seems that, at least for those seeking a 
safe haven, the most positive trend would be one leading to the 
expansion of national economies, and the critical vector here is 
foreign trade.....If you believe otherwise, you might take a moment 
and cite succesful examples of autarkies.....


> You are right that the world is very complicated, and that there is
> plenty of evil about without capitalism's adding theirs. But that
> likewise does not mean that global capitalism is not to blame for its
> predations.

I have to wonder whether you have spent much time in 2nd or 3rd 
world nations (outside the close supervision of your "tour co-
ordinator")......Efforts to insulate native economies from the 
"predations of GLOBAL capitalism" almost exclusively serve local 
interests (oligarchs and kleptocrats) at the considerable expense of 
local populations......the trend towards GLOBAL capitalism serves 
the purpose of disintermediating such concentrated power...... 


 The relationship remains that poor countries provide cheap
> labor and resources and get very little in return.

The presence of international competitors in local labor markets are 
of tremendous benefit, e. g.

increases competition for labor

exposes local workers to more advanced technologies and thereby 
increases THEIR value as employees and can contribute to their 
education

brings new ideas, perspectives....and they will more readily lead to 
improvement than ignorance and provincialism
 
> Modern globalism is colonial, because much of the
> trade relationship between rich and poor is determined by debt of the
> latter to the former, and the poor country rarely controls the
> industries the rich country has brought to them.

How painfully naive........It is driven by the needs of the buyer and 
seller.....my efforts to sell machines in S. America is not in the least 
affected by any potential market's national debt - it is solely 
governed by my desire to increase revenue and any potential 
buyer's desire to increase efficiency (thereby increasing his/her 
revenues)......International trade is simply the aggragation of little 
folks like me, with the occasional BIG BURP provided by a Boeing, 
Cisco or McDonalds......

 Trade is almost
> completely on the terms of the rich, which is not a democratic
> arrangement.

The above is illustrative of the utility of indefinate terms......Sellers 
will ALWAYS benefit from an INCREASE in the number of potential 
buyers. Limiting "the Franchise" to those currently in possession will 
do nothing to achieve such an end.........  


> True enough, alas, that some don't give a damn for democracy. The
> great majority, however, of the 30,000 protesters in Québec and the
> thousands demonstrating at border crossings and the week before in
> Brasil and Montréal do, I think, believe in democracy. And as long as
> capitalists claim that "free market" is the same as human liberty,

That argument is a straw man......though not the "same" they ARE 
linked. As tacky as their conclusions may be, there is some validity 
to the indicies generated every year by the Wall Street Journal 
which seek to link economic and "social" freedom.....squint and turn 
the numbers any way you please, but there remains a very high 
correlation between "per capita income" and "liberty", a similar 
correlation is readily visible between "poverty" and "political 
repression".....
> then yes indeed most of them don't like that capitalism. Shouldn't
> people enjoy the same rights of economic and social self-determination
> as corporations do? Shouldn't their liberty and welfare in fact come
> first?

Gotta bake the pie before you can eat it........

Here is a horrible fact for you to consider - there is no "free market" 
in Angola for staples....the trade of such into the country is currently 
controlled by a national police.....they have an exclusive contract 
with an agent in Panama for the sourcing of such, particularly rice 
and beans...this woman finds suppliers, takes a 200% margin and 
passes it on to the Angolan police........do you think Angolans are 
well served by the absence of SAFEWAY or even STORE 24 from 
their country?

love,
cfa