World, Writing, Wealth discussion

54 views
Wealth & Economics > Business and patriotism/social responsibility

Comments Showing 1-11 of 11 (11 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 15668 comments It's almost a given that business is deemed 'global' nowadays. And why wouldn't it be, if it has such a strong tailwind as free trade and removal of barriers. Billions worth production facilities moved East. Sometimes, it's existential - you don't move, you lose the competition and die, but I argue some other times - it's just maximizing the profit, nothing else.
How comfortable - to fire everyone: annoying union members, employees demanding raises all the time and move to other place, where you don't know anyone, can pay what you want, pollute as much as you like and so on and still have your merchandise sold locally... 'Hey, we are not guilty that our government is so oppresive with labor and environmental regulations..' - the proprietors think to themselves... - 'they didn't offer enough incentives to convince me stay.'
That's what happens. But should it be so in your opinion?


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Double edged sword of greed and opportunism. Everyone loses in some way but it can not be denied that it offers some benefit to laborers in developing countries. That's (barely) tolerable advantage.


message 3: by Eldon (new)

Eldon Farrell | 704 comments In my opinion despite all the advantages that globalization claims to bring to the table, this right here is the major drawback and the primary reason why it should be reconsidered.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that we should return to a closed off border economy, only that a more equitable middle ground should be sought out. Unfortunately, equitability and capitalism are contrary terms.

When corporations leave tightly regulated countries for poorly regulated countries we all suffer. They increase profits but the pollution of our world will come home to roost for all of us. They say that by moving there they aid the local population by giving them jobs. To some extent this is true, but the reality is that even with the wage they pay them the locals are still living below any reasonable standard of living. They bring them up a little and tear the rest of us down a lot.

There is equality here somewhere but I sincerely doubt it will ever be found by capitalist interests.


message 4: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 11452 comments I think that one of the things that should be done is to ensure that companies moving to the third world behave responsibly regarding the environment. I recall once driving through Cubatao (near Sao Paolo) at dusk, and there was what I think was a phthalic anhydride plant spewing dust into the atmosphere, and the sight of the furnace below could be seen reflected of the dust as a glow. Apparently the life expectancy of the local citizens at the time was a little over 30 years, and they all died of lung disease, with the managers etc all living comfortably somewhere else. There needs to be government action that stops that sort of thing.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments If underdeveloped nations don't form coalitions that look after their long-term interests they can't afford to set forth any conditions. Easier said than done.


message 6: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 15668 comments Eldon wrote: "In my opinion despite all the advantages that globalization claims to bring to the table, this right here is the major drawback and the primary reason why it should be reconsidered.

Don't get me w..."


Very well said, Eldon


message 7: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 15668 comments Ian wrote: "I think that one of the things that should be done is to ensure that companies moving to the third world behave responsibly regarding the environment. I recall once driving through Cubatao (near Sa..."

What a sad example. Some would call something like this as 'genocide'


message 8: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 15668 comments And what's your view?


message 9: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 11452 comments My view is my example was one of the uglier sides of the free market. Those chemical plants were own by multinationals that would never have got away with that in their home countries, but there, they could save a few dollars. Criminal


message 10: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 15668 comments Don't know if in many countries, but at least in some - they specifically stress that goods are produced locally in hope ppl will prefer to support local manufacturers over those produced elsewhere.
Does the country of origin matter to you? Would you prefer buying local stuff over foreign (even if designed in your country, but produced elsewhere) and if yes, would you spend a little extra to this end?


message 11: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 11452 comments I do, in a very limited number of cases because I know the quality, whereas from elsewhere it is unclear, but overall I go for the best that fits my need.


back to top