tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33644323.post6420478303634133078..comments2023-11-02T09:02:29.847+00:00Comments on Globalisation and the Environment: "Trade and the Environment" Obama styleAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08649345297844206449noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33644323.post-58111990100636725892008-12-23T17:26:00.000+00:002008-12-23T17:26:00.000+00:00First of all Free Trade is not trade as historical...First of all Free Trade is not trade as historically practiced and defined. Trade is based on trading products per se. Free Trade is primarily based on portable production. Factories are moved from place to place for the sake of cheaper labor. Workers are the real commodities being traded. Workers are put on a global trading block to compete for the same jobs down to the lowest levels of impoverished workers and even children. <BR/>In addition it is senseless to talk global warming and protecting the ecology when we have products like the energy saving 8000 miles light bulbs that take 8000 miles of long haul shipping and extensive packaging to get to the USA. This product like many others are also manufactured in dirty conditions. In this case mercury is out in the open during manufacturing cycles. <BR/><BR/>See http://www.phillyfuture.org/node/5298 ( and node/5297 )<BR/><BR/>It also does not make any sense to deflate the value of labor and workers. In the USA a new working class has been put in place and outside the country we have underclass workers making our products now.<BR/><BR/>This is senseless in our economy that is based on making money on money rather than making things. <BR/>Workers and labor are a real tangible value and asset acting as a money standard. When the value of workers and labor are deflated, it also deflates the values backing up the printed paper dollars that need manipulations to give images on paper a value.<BR/><BR/>The first question to ask is this.<BR/>Who said we had to compete like this in a global economic arena?<BR/><BR/>The second question is part of the answer. <BR/>Why did the US Federal Government sponsor the moving of factories our of the US starting in 1956 with this "temporary" program never ending. <BR/>It evolved into the maquiladora factory program and Free Trade.<BR/>After getting it confirmed, President Clinton and the "Contract with America" Republicans rushed $20 Billion dollars to Mexico to save the peso and bail out Mexico. President Clinton also said he would funnel more money to Mexico through the international money funds.<BR/><BR/>In turn, imports like the PT Cruiser made by $1 an hour workers in Mexico flooded the USA.<BR/><BR/>Our auto makers and other industry were in essence told - Compete with this!<BR/><BR/>Obama comes from the same line of Globalist Free Traders. Until he denounces this betrayal of workers everywhere, not much will change.<BR/><BR/>For more information see<BR/>http://tapsearch.com/tapartnews/<BR/>http://tapsearch.com/flatworld/<BR/>http://www.bizarrepolitics.com/ben-says-buy-usa and<BR/>http://www.bizarrepolitics.com/greenspan-dancing-in-the-darkAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15555635879115959214noreply@blogger.com