Economics v. business --The Huck incident

[Said1]

I'm not the one claiming that they don't administer penalties, so you'll have to answer that question.

No.

What often happens is a free trade "zone" is set up inside a third world country to attract foreign cash.

Set up by the third world country right?

Because the multinationals are able to choose between many underdeveloped nations, a bidding war erupts between governments.

That's the norm for bidding on tenders/contracts all over the world. Silly coyote.

The winning government often pays part of the initial cost of factory setup, loosens environment protections and rules regarding negligence and the treatment of workers, and agrees to not ask for payment of taxes for a period of time.

They agree to it right?

If the host government does ask for taxes or tightens rules the corporation threatens to set up operations elsewhere, giving leverage at the bargaining table with more demands

Do you know what an EPZ and a free trade zone actually are? It's ok if you don't, most of the articles you read probably don't go into technical detail since it points to the flaws in their reporting.

Local businesses and manufacturers that are not within the zones face higher levels of regulation which causes them to be unable to compete with foreign firms that are established within the zones.

The same applies to multinationals.

Here's a link...http://allafrica.com/stories/200412070074.html

Is there anything about he following text that sorta jump out at you?

The report shows that while EPZs are often set up in countries that have ratified the core labour standards of the International Labour Organization (ILO), in practice these standards are regularly flouted. The ILO is a Geneva-based UN agency that promotes social justice and labour rights. .

With the exception of the highlited text (and even that's vauge and lacking in detail) you're article doesn't varify any federal or regional laws that are being violated by multinationals, or if they are even invovled in every case. The example of Egypt is totally bunk, it's almost funny.

You also said a country should buy building and equipment to prevent foreign ownership so I said "Capital accumulation is the key to growth, but if it comes with unaffordable debt, it can't stimulate growth." ie, I acknowledge that a country's ownership in buildings and equipment (capital) and the accumulation of buildings and equipment is key to economic growth, but if it comes with unaffordable debt these buildings and equipment can't stimulate growth because all earnings are sunk into debt reduction

Then how would more aid money for development help, and why would you be in favor of it? Like I said, aid money is just more debt.

Besides, foreign and international banks own the buildings and equipment until the debts are payed, so there is really no way for you to realistically say that foreign ownership is a dangerous practice that should be avoided. It simply can't be avoided.

Are you for real?
I also didn't say it was dangerous, I said it should be avoided.

The World Bank has recently started a program that is supposed to help with debt management of low income nations.

Are you aware of the stipulations attached to this help?

“.....that can't be abided by. Can you show me one fairly recent case where a third world government has agreed to loosen any existing labor and environmental policies in order to do business with a multi-national corporation?” Yes, I can show you a case where a third world government has agreed to loosen any existing environmental policies in order to do business with a multi-national corporation: Nigeria.

You gave Nigeria as an example of a bidding war/intimidation by the oil company first, then said it was an example of foreign ownership. Either way, the article gives no examples of what you are claiming the federal government is knowingly guilty of doing.

Ask me another one.

Are you a mongoloid?

You made a claim:"Give me a break, bad leadership and corruption is what most under developed nations are suffering from, the multination is not responsible for what some third world socialist government does to it's people after they start operating in their country."

And?

The multinational corporation benefits from regulations and laws (or lack of) that third world governments implement and enforce (or fail to) that result in abuses of human rights by multinational corporations. Corruption.

Were you going somewhere with this? Anyway, the WTO prevents multinationals from discrimination based on any given nations enviornmental or labor practices. I believe this is going to be changing soon, then we'll see who does what.

You didn’t ask me for proof of intimidation or bidding war when I gave you the Nigeria example.

Yes I did, I even underlined it diptard.

There are a few oil companies that are in the Niger Delta. If they shut production down, or even slow it down, for a short time, two things would happen. One, there would be a scarcity of oil that drives local prices high which would grind to a halt of the Nigerian economy (happened in the mid ‘90s). The scarcity would also lead to greater profits for the oil companies. Two, the government would lose $35 million in oil revenues a day until they started pumping again. Oil revenues account for 95% of export earnings for Nigeria. Who holds power over who?

If they have legitimate reasons for shutting production down, why shouldn't they? Disputes of that nature would have to be taken up with the WTO, that's what they're there for. Don't you wonder who's stealing the oil in Nigeria? I thought your spidy senses would be tingling over that one.

Is that a slur? Or are you just trying to differentiate between the federal government and some of the rural social organizational structures?

You didn't read the article did you lamo.

Well, for you to be able to claim that "The article points to the dangers of forien ownership", it must be true that the same dangers wouldn't exist without foreign ownership. Otherwise, you can't claim that this is what the article points to.

First of all, YOU said it was an example, I agreed - moron. Secondly, I've never said the dangers wouldn't exist. Man, are you some kind of burn victim (I mean stoner, not an actual burn victim).

But they don't say no, so what should be done now?

Nukem.

Doing what again?

That.

Do the same rules apply to everyone? Should they?

Probably, and they should if they don't

 

[shadrack]

Set up by the third world country right?

of course

That's the norm for bidding on tenders/contracts all over the world. Silly coyote.

yes

They agree to it right?

yes

Do you know what an EPZ and a free trade zone actually are? It's ok if you don't, most of the articles you read probably don't go into technical detail since it points to the flaws in their reporting.

Tell me what an EPZ and a free trade zone actually are.

The same applies to multinationals.

What do you mean?

Is there anything about he following text that sorta jump out at you?

Besides your bold print? What are you suggesting?

With the exception of the highlited text (and even that's vauge and lacking in detail) you're article doesn't varify any federal or regional laws that are being violated by multinationals, or if they are even invovled in every case. The example of Egypt is totally bunk, it's almost funny.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002102845_toys28.html

Then how would more aid money for development help, and why would you be in favor of it? Like I said, aid money is just more debt.

I think you've been reading into things, throughout this discussion, more than what I've said.

Are you for real?
I also didn't say it was dangerous, I said it should be avoided.

How should it be avoided?

Are you aware of the stipulations attached to this help?

Enlighten me.

You gave Nigeria as an example of a bidding war/intimidation by the oil company first, then said it was an example of foreign ownership.

I did? I thought I was answering a question that was very direct.

And?

I was trying to point out that the corruption that some governments engage in have a direct impact on multinational corporations. Multinationals benefit from lax enforcement or removal of regulations in areas that they often operate. I view this as corruption. If you don't view removing a country's federal regulations that require, for example oil spill clean-ups or labor rights, I don't know what to say.

Were you going somewhere with this? Anyway, the WTO prevents multinationals from discrimination based on any given nations enviornmental or labor practices. I believe this is going to be changing soon, then we'll see who does what.

We'll see who does what? What are you getting at?

Yes I did, I even underlined it diptard.

You didn’t ask me for proof of intimidation or bidding war when I gave you the Nigeria example. You asked a very direct question. You may have had bidding war in mind, but I read the question the way you wrote it. You later underlined it after you rephrased the question to include intimidation and bidding war.

If they have legitimate reasons for shutting production down, why shouldn't they? Disputes of that nature would have to be taken up with the WTO, that's what they're there for. Don't you wonder who's stealing the oil in Nigeria? I thought your spidy senses would be tingling over that one.

stealing the oil?

You didn't read the article did you lamo.

Why would you have contempt for anyone in the article? Why would you display that contempt by calling them a bottom feeder?

First of all, YOU said it was an example, I agreed - moron. Secondly, I've never said the dangers wouldn't exist. Man, are you some kind of burn victim (I mean stoner, not an actual burn victim).

Do you resent people who disagree with you?

Nukem.

You can't be serious.

Probably, and they should if they don't

 

[Said1]

Tell me what an EPZ and a free trade zone actually are.

Do your own homework Dippy.

What do you mean?

Can you smell that?

Besides your bold print? What are you suggesting?

I'm suggesting you are a dunce. Now back to the corner.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...845_toys28.html

Is there something specific you are trying to draw my attention to with this article?

I think you've been reading into things, throughout this discussion, more than what I've said.

How? It's not my fault your confused Shirley.

Enlighten me.

You're not a bright student are you? This info should have been present in any document you've been reading on the subject.

I did? I thought I was answering a question that was very direct.

You thought you were, but since you didn't read the article, you were mistaken. Again.

I was trying to point out that the corruption that some governments engage in have a direct impact on multinational corporations. Multinationals benefit from lax enforcement or removal of regulations in areas that they often operate. I view this as corruption. If you don't view removing a country's federal regulations that require, for example oil spill clean-ups or labor rights, I don't know what to say.

Still haven't seen proof of this yet Oopie.

We'll see who does what? What are you getting at?

Are you a mongoloid or not?

You didn’t ask me for proof of intimidation or bidding war when I gave you the Nigeria example. You asked a very direct question. You may have had bidding war in mind, but I read the question the way you wrote it. You later underlined it after you rephrased the question to include intimidation and bidding war.

YOU used bidding wars and initmidation as examples first fuckazzz. I ask you to produce an example, which you haven't done yet. If I rephrased it, it's probably because you didn't understand the first time I asked, and then the second, and then the third and so on. Do you understand? Am I typing loud enough for you?

stealing the oil?

Why don't you just admit you didn't read the article you posted. Loser.

Why would you have contempt for anyone in the article? Why would you display that contemption by calling them a bottom feeder?

I thought I was supposed to have contempt for those perpetuating violence and intimidation against innocent people asswipe. If YOU read the article YOU posted, you would know why I called the villiage cheifs bottom feeders.

Do you resent people who disagree with you?

So now you just disagree with me. Funny you didn't say "do you resent people who are right when you are wrong?". That's what I would have said.

You can't be serious.

What do YOU think?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Shadrack= own3d

Said1 RULEZ!

 

[Said1]

You've exceed you're quota.

 

[shadrack]

Do your own homework Dippy.

I was just wanting your take.

Is there something specific you are trying to draw my attention to with this article?

No, not really.

This info should have been present in any document you've been reading on the subject.

I just wanted to hear your version.

You thought you were, but since you didn't read the article, you were mistaken. Again.

Am I making myself clear on this point? If you look back through this discussion, I think I answered you as honestly as your wording allowed. And I did ask you to clarify on occasion. I've also asked many questions. Especially after the conversation got kind of convoluted.

Still haven't seen proof of this yet Oopie.

There is lots of information about it on the internet. You might log on sometime and try to find some.

Are you a mongoloid or not?

You're asking me if I have Down's syndrome?

YOU used bidding wars and initmidation as examples first fuckazzz. I ask you to produce an example, which you haven't done yet. If I rephrased it, it's probably because you didn't understand the first time I asked, and then the second, and then the third and so on. Do you understand? Am I typing loud enough for you?

I'm not sure I used intimidation as an example. I'll go back and check. Bidding wars, yes. This is simple fact.

Why don't you just admit you didn't read the article you posted. Loser.

I read it. I'm not claiming the article suggest that oil companies in the Niger Delta intimidate the poor little government of Nigeria. When you said "that statement assumes governments are harmless sheep.....", I said "yes and no". The simple fact that governments open up free trade zones to attract investment which often result in poor working conditions, sometimes exemptions from national legislation, and long-term tax concessions that American firms benefit from is wrong. You may want me to blame the foreign government but there is always lots of blaming of the foreign government by pretty much everyone about everything as well as blaming the multinationals. I don't quite understand your beef with most of the things I've really said so far. oh, you know what.....I bet you think I'm saying everyone should get everything FREE. Is that it?

I thought I was supposed to have contempt for those perpetuating violence and intimidation against innocent people asswipe. If YOU read the article YOU posted, you would know why I called the villiage cheifs bottom feeders.

See, now this is a fine example of why I think you might be reading more into some of the things I say. Why would you think you were supposed to have contempt? Contempt would mean that you think they are inferior or worthless.

So now you just disagree with me. Funny you didn't say "do you resent people who are right when you are wrong?". That's what I would have said.

Now I "just" disagree with you? I don't get it, you don't believe in right and wrong?

What do YOU think?

What do I think about your wanting to nuke them? I think it's strange. Or do you mean "what do I think should be done about Nigeria?"

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Shadrack, don't take this the wrong way, but you're a complete and utter moron.

 

[shadrack]

Shadrack, don't take this the wrong way, but you're a complete and utter moron.

From you, I won't take it the wrong way.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

From you, I won't take it the wrong way.

Good. I hate misunderstandings.
:usa:

 

[shadrack]

Good. I hate misunderstandings.
:usa:

that's pretty funny

 

[rtwngAvngr]

that's pretty funny

Well, you are a persistant mofo. We've gotta give ya that!

 

[Said1]

I was just wanting your take.

Does this mean you know the answer? Why is every other nation allowed to offer incentives and not the third world? Wouldn't you say that's a little repressive? Third world nations are missing the backwards/forwards links which are crucial to economic development, did you know that? I will ask again if you know what a Export Processing Zones and a Free Trade Zones actually are and why they are nessesary in severly under developed nations.

I just wanted to hear your version.

So you ARE aware of the stipulations. This must mean you do deliberately misunderstand and ask stupid questions.

Am I making myself clear on this point? If you look back through this discussion, I think I answered you as honestly as your wording allowed. And I did ask you to clarify on occasion.

I did clarify, more than once.

I've also asked many questions. Especially after the conversation got kind of convoluted.

I've responded to virtually everything you've written. You started getting selective first, so eat poo Mr. Convolutedpants.

There is lots of information about it on the internet. You might log on sometime and try to find some.

You might want to log on to some official trade websites instead of anti-trade websites dickwad.

You're asking me if I have Down's syndrome?

Well?

I'm not sure I used intimidation as an example. I'll go back and check.

You did.

Bidding wars, yes. This is simple fact.

A simple fact of trade and commerce around the world. Get used it. Why should it be different for them?

I'm not claiming the article suggest that oil companies in the Niger Delta intimidate the poor little government of Nigeria.

Yes you did.

When you said "that statement assumes governments are harmless sheep.....", I said "yes and no". The simple fact that governments open up free trade zones to attract investment which often result in poor working conditions, sometimes exemptions from national legislation, and long-term tax concessions that American firms benefit from is wrong.

If they are violating international laws, there are international bodies who need to get on their case. International standards do not mean western standards, and all governments offer incentives to attract foreign investment, that's a fact. The WTO protects the third world from discrimination based on their national labor and environmental practices. I think I mentioned this to you already. Did you forget or what?

You may want me to blame the foreign government but there is always lots of blaming of the foreign government by pretty much everyone about everything as well as blaming the multinationals.

Are you still blaming multinationals? Are third world nations exempt from responsibility because they are poor?
Do your teachers go easier on you because a previous hard hit to the head makes processing and retaining information difficult?

I don't quite understand your beef with most of the things I've really said so far. oh, you know what.....I bet you think I'm saying everyone should get everything FREE. Is that it?

You are against more debt. You have said this. How are they supposed to do anything with out investment that is not free of foreign ownership without borrowing money that has to be paid back? How do banks make money? Please use your head, it's not a display unit.

See, now this is a fine example of why I think you might be reading more into some of the things I say. Why would you think you were supposed to have contempt? Contempt would mean that you think they are inferior or worthless.

If you read the article you would know why I think corrupt bottom feeding village chiefs are inferior and worthless. If you know anything about third world nations, you would understand rural communities are more often that not still operating like ancient cheifdoms, which is bad. This is a fact. Since you claim you read it, I can only assume you have some serious learning disabilities.

Now I "just" disagree with you? I don't get it, you don't believe in right and wrong?

You don't get much do you?

What do I think about your wanting to nuke them? I think it's strange. Or do you mean "what do I think should be done about Nigeria?"

I meant to say "do you have shit for brains". Do you?

 

[elephant]

I think just heard the bell for the next round. And lets try to keep the bunches below the belt. It makes the thread funnier.

And... where did Huck go?

 

[Said1]

You've exceed you're quota.

Again.

 

[shadrack]

Does this mean you know the answer? Why is every other nation allowed to offer incentives and not the third world? Wouldn't you say that's a little repressive? Third world nations are missing the backwards/forwards links which are crucial to economic development, did you know that? I will ask again if you know what a Export Processing Zones and a Free Trade Zones actually are and why they are nessesary in severly under developed nations.

You rant, so how am I supposed to decifer this? oh, and maybe you should ask the Worldwatch Institute. They can probably tell you what the term export processing zone means.

So you ARE aware of the stipulations. This must mean you do deliberately misunderstand and ask stupid questions.

You're going to have to be more clear here.

I did clarify, more than once.

I've responded to virtually everything you've written. You started getting selective first, so eat poo Mr. Convolutedpants.

You were picking through things first.

You might want to log on to some official trade websites instead of anti-trade websites dickwad.

Official trade websites? What does this mean? You are going to have to articulate your thoughts more clearly. By using the word official, are you trying to suggest something? Can you give me an example of an "official" trade website?

Well?

Another slur?

You did.

With Nigeria? You were selective in pointing to labor and the environment. You're really going to have to articulate your thoughts to me before I know what you have in mind.

A simple fact of trade and commerce around the world. Get used it. Why should it be different for them?

Are you admitting that there are bidding wars? After all this, you just simply admit that there are bidding wars. See, I really don't understand your beef with what I've said.

Yes you did.

If they are violating international laws, there are international bodies who need to get on their case. International standards do not mean western standards, and all governments offer incentives to attract foreign investment, that's a fact. The WTO protects the third world from discrimination based on their national labor and environmental practices. I think I mentioned this to you already. Did you forget or what?

Do the international bodies get on their case? Is it effective?

Are you still blaming multinationals? Are third world nations exempt from responsibility because they are poor?
Do your teachers go easier on you because a previous hard hit to the head makes processing and retaining information difficult?

Exempt from responsibility because they are poor? C'mon.

You are against more debt. You have said this. How are they supposed to do anything with out investment that is not free of foreign ownership without borrowing money that has to be paid back? How do banks make money?

There are not only commercial loans. There is development aid. In the form of concessional loans and grants.

If you read the article you would know why I think corrupt bottom feeding village chiefs are inferior and worthless. If you know anything about third world nations, you would understand rural communities are more often that not still operating like ancient cheifdoms, which is bad. This is a fact. Since you claim you read it, I can only assume you have some serious learning disabilities.

You don't get much do you?

Not when it is a jumbled rant with missing words, bad grammar, and missing punctuation.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You rant, so how am I supposed to decifer this? oh, and maybe you should ask the Worldwatch Institute. They can probably tell you what the term export processing zone means.
You're going to have to be more clear here.

You were picking through things first.
Official trade websites? What does this mean? You are going to have to articulate your thoughts more clearly. By using the word official, are you trying to suggest something? Can you give me an example of an "official" trade website?
Another slur?
With Nigeria? You were selective in pointing to labor and the environment. You're really going to have to articulate your thoughts to me before I know what you have in mind.
Are you admitting that there are bidding wars? After all this, you just simply admit that there are bidding wars. See, I really don't understand your beef with what I've said.

Do the international bodies get on their case? Is it effective?
Exempt from responsibility because they are poor? C'mon.
There are not only commercial loans. There is development aid. In the form of concessional loans and grants.

Not when it is a jumbled rant with missing words, bad grammar, and missing punctuation.

Shadrack, you have been beaten roundly. All you do now is deliberately miss the point.

Do you think you look smart?

 

[Said1]

You rant, so how am I supposed to decifer this? oh, and maybe you should ask the Worldwatch Institute. They can probably tell you what the term export processing zone means.

I know what it is, and what it means. You're the one who came here arguing economics and trade. If you can't decipher, or even understand basic terms, I suggest you get your tuition back.

You're going to have to be more clear here.

Here's a hint: go to www.un.org. Pick a third world country you want to LEARN a more about. Then search for a "Poverty Assessment Report" on the country you have chosen. You should find everything you need to know contained within the document. CLEAR ENOUGH?

You were picking through things first.

Hardly.

Official trade websites? What does this mean? You are going to have to articulate your thoughts more clearly. By using the word official, are you trying to suggest something? Can you give me an example of an "official" trade website?

I've given you an example of an official trade organization. It's not my fault the idea of looking up their website never occurred to you. Stupid.

Another slur?

As accurate as it is, yes.

With Nigeria? You were selective in pointing to labor and the environment. You're really going to have to articulate your thoughts to me before I know what you have in mind.

I KNOW WHAT I ASKED FOR AND WHY. NIGERIA IS NOT AN EXAMPLE. Forget about Nigeria, since you didn't read the article, and don't know wtf you're talking about.

Are you admitting that there are bidding wars? After all this, you just simply admit that there are bidding wars. See, I really don't understand your beef with what I've said.

I have never denied this, not once - EVER.

Do the international bodies get on their case? Is it effective?

Other than economic threats, they probably do nothing. Although you might want go to the Hague and see if you come up with anything. Don't come back with nothing, there is stuff there.

Exempt from responsibility because they are poor? C'mon.

Now it's my turn "could you please articulate your point better?". What do you mean, they are exempt? If so why?

There are not only commercial loans. There is development aid. In the form of concessional loans and grants.

A loan is a loan chimp, it still has to be paid back. You are against more debt. Grants are another thing altogether, and tend to prevent the recipient from doing business with anyone other than the granter (among other things). I have no problem with this, do you?

Not when it is a jumbled rant with missing words, bad grammar, and missing punctuation.

Low blow man. Would you like me to bold and underline all your grammatical and spelling errors on top of everything else? I would be more than happy to do it. At least I read the article, bozo.

 

[Annie]

Memo to self: Do NOT make a stupid arguement with Said1. :

 

[shadrack]

I know what it is, and what it means. You're the one who came here arguing economics and trade. If you can't decipher, or even understand basic terms, I suggest you get your tuition back.

Free trade zones are a group of countries that agree to eliminate tariffs, quotas, and preferences on most goods. It's similar to a customs union, like the EU, but different in that members don't necessarily have the same policies toward non-members. FTZs are also a designated part of a country. Most FTZs in the third world countries are setup with the rationale that the zones are attractive to foreign direct investment. Many corporations are given tax breaks as additional incentive and the government bureaucracy is minimized by outsourcing this function to the FTZ operator. They also hope that FDI will result in the transfer of technologies (the backward link you were talking about). The results of FTZs are mixed.

EPZs are a FTZ. The term export processing zones was coined by the Worldwatch Institute. The prime focus is generating export revenues.

In some states, like Jamaica, companies outside a FTZ can apply for FTZ status and become a single entity free zone. These businesses are 100% tax free.

Here's a hint: go to www.un.org. Pick a third world country you want to LEARN a more about. Then search for a "Poverty Assessment Report" on the country you have chosen. You should find everything you need to know contained within the document. CLEAR ENOUGH?

Yes, it is very clear.

I've given you an example of an official trade organization. It's not my fault the idea of looking up their website never occurred to you. Stupid.

stop, already, with the “stupid”. It’s bad karma.

What did you reckon the WTO would have to say that would change anything that I have been saying? The WTO loves free trade and everything is going great! The WTO is not a Christmas tree used to hang every good cause. They leave “the good fight” up to other organizations. You have to learn to let those organizations place blame of human rights abuses on those who commit those abuses and engage in corrupt behavior. Believe it or not this is often multinational corporations.

As accurate as it is, yes.

clever

I KNOW WHAT I ASKED FOR AND WHY.

You see, this is where you come in: you have to let me know what you’re asking for and why.

The article is not about the “dangers of foreign ownership”. Every oil operation in Nigeria is a joint venture where majority ownership is Nigerian. You may hate that it’s nationalized, but there are many countries with nationalized industries. The problem isn’t nationalization. The problem isn’t foreign ownership. The problem is multinational corporations using sophisticated legal and financial means to circumvent the bounds of standards......and yes they use the NIGERIAN legal system to do this. You take center nation's legal systems for granted and have the nerve to say Nigerian standards “aren’t western standards”.

Transnational oil companies are not following Nigerian law. The Nigerian government is too weak (for lots of reasons) to represent its people properly and provide proper mechanisms of redress that are acceptable by international standards. The oil corporations doesn’t act because they say it’s Nigeria’s responsibility, so they don’t provide mechanisms of redress and actually participate in leveraging the Nigerian people using the people’s own court systems. The WTO doesn’t act because it’s not their job to address these complaints. NGOs step in to bring everything to everyone’s attention. Meanwhile, sludge is spilling, water is polluted, locals are pitted against one another (by corporations using financial means), civil war is brewing, and the UN places sanctions on Nigeria. My question to you is “who’s going to step up?” Should the US step up and provide oversight of its firms that operate in other countries and provide a mechanism of redress for the people of Nigeria? This corruption has been going on for decades. Different Nigerian governments have come and gone so it’s difficult for me to accept that we should pin the blame on the “corrupt Nigerian government”. It’s insulting to the people of Nigeria, frankly, because to take this view implies that the government is not only a representation for the people but that it is often coupled with the view that government is a representation of the people. It is this notion that I have a problem with. Colonialism, cold war, isolation of the wealthy are heavily to blame.

By the way, have you ever looked at the reforms that the WTO, World Bank, and IMF implement? Have you ever considered who the complainants were that prompted these reforms?

I have never denied this, not once - EVER.

good

Other than economic threats, they probably do nothing. Although you might want go to the Hague and see if you come up with anything. Don't come back with nothing, there is stuff there.

not so clever

Now it's my turn "could you please articulate your point better?". What do you mean, they are exempt? If so why?

Of course they’re not exempt. I was trying to point out that you offer a loaded statement. No one thinks that anyone should be exempt because of poverty. Have you ever read any complaints from NGOs, ILO, and others? They never exempt anyone of responsibility because of poverty.

A loan is a loan chimp, it still has to be paid back. You are against more debt. Grants are another thing altogether, and tend to prevent the recipient from doing business with anyone other than the granter (among other things). I have no problem with this, do you?

“A loan is a loan” is a ridiculous statement. I think the terms of a loan make a huge difference in whether it is or isn’t affordable. This whole debt thing is throwing me off, anyway. What are you trying to get at with the whole debt thing? Are you claiming the “effect” of a grant is an “indebtedness”? If so, isn’t that an example of using sophisticated legal and financial means?

I mentioned “development aid”. You must have evidently taken that as “commercial loan”. To be considered a concessional loan(which is what ODA is), the transaction must be administered with the promotion of economic development and have a grant element of at least 25%. A grant element of 100% would be a simple donation.

Hopefully nations will follow through on their promises.

Low blow man. Would you like me to bold and underline all your grammatical and spelling errors on top of everything else? I would be more than happy to do it. At least I read the article, bozo.

eats shoots and leaves

You got a lot of nerve calling a low blow when you've been mostly cursing the past several posts.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

What do you want to do, shadrack? What policy changes would you like?