The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Australian Conservatives

Australian Conservatives

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
This week, Cory Bernardi is justifiably flattered by Labor's imitation of the Australian Conservatives' policy on free trade.

“Labor is announcing plans for … a 10-year review of all (free trade) agreements, to ensure they live up to the public's expectations”, according to Jason Clare .

We all know how long the Labor Party has been around, letting things drift, but the website of the Australian Conservatives, who have been around for about 9 months, shows that their policy is to “... revisit all free trade agreements every ten years to ensure they are aligned with our national interest.” Pinched by backward, policy-free Labor.

The major parties have certainly gone well past their use by date, and the Australian Conservatives are a good bet for conservative voters in the next federal election, and in the SA state election next year, where the underwhelming Liberals, have come up with a Save Australia Day campaign, also filched from the Australian Conservatives.

With dark days ahead assured by the Liberals and Green Labor, Australian Conservatives give a glimmer of hope for Australians concerned about their country going backward.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 2:31:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Problem.

The free trade agreements are mostly written by or on behalf of big business.

They have so many restrictions on changes or getting out, a signatory just can't walk away from them once signed.
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 3:38:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Ttbn,

Sorry, but the Conservative party started on the left foot.

A true conservative with family values does not send robots to harass families on the phone, not even for a just cause.

Unless they learn quickly that means are at least as important as ends, the Australian Conservatives prove no different to any other gangster.

---

Regarding the FTA's, yes, scrap them all.

Regarding Philip's problem, one way to work around it is to dismantle the Commonwealth, which is the only signatory. The independent Australian states never signed the FTAs. Big Business can then go and sue the Commonwealth of Australia... if they can find it...
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 6:23:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
With this dysfunctional Governments MP's falling like nine pins, and Money Bags Malcolm no longer commanding a majority in the lower house."ITS TIME" for an election.

ttbn I can't agree with "a 10-year review of all (free trade) agreements, to ensure they live up to the public's expectations”.

It should be every 5 years in my opinion. Too much damage can be done waiting 10 years and then some.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 6:35:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu,

I think all parties cold call now. I'm not in the 'phone book, so I don't know. I agree with you on that, though.

Paul,

How about a compromise and go with Yuyutsu's solution: no free trade aggreements. I do not like them, and I liked them even less after Robb got a big-bucks job with a Chinese firm just after he signed an FTA with China. Should help him out with his parliamentary pension, poor bloke.

Philip,

Big business can't sign up to anything without government say so. It is entirely a political scam.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 7:24:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Travelicious,

Bugger off.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 7:25:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'll second that ttbn, I put a request into GY, censorship never, but advertisers can PO.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 8:07:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
He'll gone by the morrow. Say what you like about our Graham, he's vigilant against spammers.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 8:13:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As for free trade agreements, no argument from me ttbn, they don't protect ordinary Australians, only serving the interests of big business. Labor's opposition to FTA's was lukewarm at best, not surprisingly Labor failed to speak out for their own constituency. Begs the question, was Labor got at on the issue.

The Greens have this statement as part of their official policy;

"International trade can be a force for good. Open and transparent trade relations help breed trust between nations, which can help bring about a more peaceful and prosperous world. Multilateral trade deals can also be used to promote environmental sustainability, improve human rights and provide a decent standard of living for all.
Unfortunately, recent trade deals have not supported these aims and are instead giving corporate interests priority. The Turnbull Government is trumpeting the fact that they have managed to finalise a batch of trade deals. But ceding power to multinationals is not something to be proud of."
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 8:27:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405 - Quote "International trade can be a force for good."

I disagree for thousands of years people & companies traded with others
without the need for International trade agreements and for a long time without Government interference, they are there to protect big business not you or me.

If they are a force for good or for the people why are so many totally secret until signed.

Check on the last on TPP something like that, even most American politician were not allowed to see what was in it, the ones who did were not allowed to make any notes or copy it in any way.
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 1 November 2017 11:34:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Phil, the quote "International trade can be a force for good" does not imply support for any kind of formal FTA. In Australia's case international trade is essential. No sane person would advocate no trade what so ever, that would be ridiculous. What the Greens policy is, is support for a level playing field.
Secretly negotiated deals by our own government have been questioned as to whose interest is being served. Not the peoples that's for sure, more likely the interests of the Coalitions number one supporter, Big Business. Labor's "opposition" to these secret deals was weak kneed at best, and I question their motives as well, asking "was Labor got at on the issue".
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 2 November 2017 3:48:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Free trade has lifted most of the world out of poverty and established a standard of living for Australians that could only be dreamt of 50 years ago. All the fear-mongering of the left has been shown up as complete bollocks as none of it has come to pass.

10-year reviews are there to adapt to changes in the world economy, and 5 yr reviews would be a complete waste of time other than act as a soapbox for vested interests.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 2 November 2017 4:52:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shadow, is bollocks you word of the week. or something? You use it often enough. Surprising what words they are teaching children at kindy these days.

"10-year reviews are there to adapt to changes in the world economy" And in Australia's case they will be conducted in a friendly, bipartisan manor, between the two parties. One some political stooge such as Money Bags Malcolm and two his Big Business Bosses. Very simple, BB will give the orders and Money Bags will carry them out, quicker than you can say bollocks!
BTW, the lackey leader from the Labor Party will be serving the 'Dom Perignon White Gold' of course, nothing but the best will do when the taxpayer is footing the bill. Ah!

ttbn, when did you become a lefty and start fear mongering on FTA's?
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 2 November 2017 5:31:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405 - My bad, What I mean is people and business worldwide should be in a democratic free world be able to trade with whoever they want to.

This would be good for consumers,except in the case of BIG business when monopolies are involved as happens nowadays in too many cases.

The problems with this are Governments which impose restrictions,sanctions, tariffs, embargoes etc to control and punish people, businesses, and countries.

FTA's are made to protect BIG business and usually written by big business or representatives of them.

In a perfect world Government should just stay out of it in most instances, except to protect there citizens from unscrupulous businesses, unsafe and dangerous goods.
Posted by Philip S, Thursday, 2 November 2017 6:17:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trade is essential but business cannot be allowed to do as it pleases; there has to be govenment regulation to see to that business does not get free rein. Regulation is the key word where governments are concerned; they have no business involving themselves in any other way. Governments are no good at business.

We have to start asking what it is about 'free trade' that is free. It seems to me that, in many cases, it has cost Australia dearly - loss of industry, loss of jobs and, inferior products (China) that Australians, not so long ago, would not have tolerated. We are a long way away from the time innocent Malaccans of good will traded with Top End aborigines in trepang and other items.
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 2 November 2017 7:23:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn, I have to agree with you; " loss of industry, loss of jobs and, inferior products" . Governments of both persuasions have been lazy and neglectful when it comes to economic future building. With a small population and a large amount of natural resources the easy opinion has been to rely on a few people to exploit those resources, mainly for export. At the same time allow the vast majority to be employed in non wealth producing service industries, both private and government. Then through taxation distribute the real wealth produced to all the non wealth producers. They haven't been able to do that very well, allowing Big Business to undersell our resources on the world market, and not taking a reasonable cut for the real owners, us the people! But with a huge amount of resources, and only 24 million prople its been okay.
To give you an example; people working at 'Centrelink' are unemployable people, employed, to look after the unemployed. If they were not working at 'Centrelink' what gainful employment would they have, nothing. The same goes for the private sector, banking, insurance etc. Obvious in a complex society such as ours, you have to have service industries like 'Centrelink' and banks etc, but not to the extent Australia has.
A smart government would be doing all it can to secure the nations economic future, through education and training, real job creation, in real wealth producing industries. I'm not suggesting that we can go it alone, we can't be self sufficient, we have to rely on trade as an essential part of the economy, but it has to be fair trade for all.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 2 November 2017 10:03:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

The cost of the Australian Public Service has reached $52 billion annually. Our annual deficit is around $40 billion annually. While trying to cut the welfare budget to reduce debt, the government should be doing the same to cut the PS budget, which, in many cases, is a form of welfare for people who can't get 'proper' jobs. (I am allowed to say that because I used to be a public servant.)
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 2 November 2017 10:39:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Then there are the public servants, particularly in the Dept.of Defence, who farm out work to industry and keep some industries afloat, thus ensuring the ordinary jobs within those industries.
Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 2 November 2017 3:33:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

An efficient public service is essential; ours is just too bloated, with too many people doing nothing, or feeding BS ideas to politicians.
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 2 November 2017 4:31:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn,
Have you got any actual evidence our public service is too bloated? Are you sure you're not basing your opinion on the situation of the 1970s and just assuming nothing's changed?

A capable public service is essential otherwise the government has to spend more on consultants to get the work done, and huge amounts of money end up being wasted because the work is not properly being overseen.

The government should not be trying to reduce debt; instead it should be trying to grow the economy. Reducing the amount of money the government puts into the economy will shrink the economy and reduce tax revenue, so it wouldn't actually have any chance of reducing the debt at all.
Posted by Aidan, Thursday, 2 November 2017 9:52:18 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul, ttbn,

The whole point of free trade is that countries that are more cost efficient in a particular industry will produce in that industry and other countries will move to produce goods and services that they are better suited.

Manufacturing of certain goods in Aus is threatened by countries with cheaper labour, power and less regulation, but a thriving China is keen to buy Aus goods such as minerals, farm products etc, and considering that unemployment in Aus has been nearly always below 6% for more than 2 decades, with continued growth in living standards the claims of job losses don't stack up.

As for inferior products, it is true that China makes some inferior products, but it also makes some really good ones such as cars iPhones, wind and nuclear power etc. No one with even basic economics can honestly claim that free trade is a bad idea.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 3 November 2017 4:19:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi ttbn, as a Progressive Socialists, you might think I would believe in an inefficient bloated public sector. I certainly do not, Socialism is about providing for people, it doesn't mean that should be done inefficiently.

The catch 22, "The cost of the Australian Public Service has reached $52 billion annually. In fact its far greater than that, with the States and LG employing 75%, in total about 2 million people. If a politician with a zeal for efficiency was to come along and wave his magic wound and cut the PS by say 25%, very good you might say, no very bad, if nothing else is done, because you just doubled unemployment. At 5% unemployment is a non issue, at 10% (founder of the Liberal Party 'Pig Iron' Bob's ideal figure) you're in political trouble, at 30% (Great Depression figure) you're history. Besides you have to either make direct payments to the unemployed, the dole, very visible politically, or hide them by creating "new" jobs. And where can you do that, hidden in the public service.. much more politically acceptable. The old right wing catch phrase was "put em' in the army" soldiers are also PS, with modern warfare you don't need millions on the battle field to act as cannon fodder, aka WWI and II.

A bit of history, during the Great depression the NSW Government Railways employed 40,000 people, the equivalent of 200,000 today. Didn't pay them much, but with 30% unemployed it was a help. Many others were "employed" in manual relief work, like shifting sand hills. It wasn't all bad Labor's Jack Lang got the Sydney Harbour Bridge built, and many other worthwhile projects.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 3 November 2017 5:38:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SM,

I understand why you think that about 'free' trade; it is the perceived wisdom that movers and shakers thrust down our throats so much that we have come to believe it.

I think it is all a huge con trick run by a bunch of corrupt elites who stand to gain personally at our expense. Globalism and 'free' trade (remember the adage about there being no such thing as a free lunch?) has brought to Australia some of the worst aspects of non-Western practices. Not only are products from the Third World rubbish, not in keeping with what we used to have, but they are churned out by downtrodden, underpaid people who cannot afford the things they make. On our side, the average Australian is paying too much for goods that the elites want to export – crayfish comes immediately to mind, as does gas, since the government has allowed private firms to up the domestic price of that commodity so that they can sell it cheaper (less than we pay) to foreign consumers.

The most hypocritical thing about these free traders is that, while they are making a fortune off sweat shop labour, and rip off prices to us, is that they big note themselves by talking about worker-exploitation in these low wage dung heaps that make up the Third World.

There is nothing free about 'free' trade. It has cost Australian jobs, and lowered our standard of living, enriching already wealthy people. Think Andrew Robb, for starters.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 3 November 2017 7:51:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SM,

"As for inferior products, it is true that China makes some inferior products,"

I'm just taking this as a chance to have a personal gripe; clothing made in China, the quality is OK but they tend to use one size of zipper on men's pants with resultant discomfort when urinating.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 3 November 2017 8:03:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Issy, try unzipping the zipper next time, you might find you are more comfortable, and a bit dryer, for the rest of the day.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 3 November 2017 8:13:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

People, not the state, should be providing for themselves or they become slaves of the state, which is where we are steadily heading. Public services are essential, but the most essential of public services are being sold off by the state because politicians are no longer comfortable with scrutiny and accountability; the state will eventually retain only those departments which give them power over us: health and education in particular and, of course welfare. They are currently bloating these areas because they want the power, and they can talk about 'job creation'. The biggest increases in a shrinking job market are public service jobs – no matter that those jobs are unnecessary, and to hell with the fact that workers in real jobs have to pay for the public ones, to the tune of $52 billion a year and rising.

I certainly see your Catch 22 situation. You are right. However, if and when it does happen, it will be a consequence of years of socialistic and unrealistic activities. It will be very hard on some people, but as they say, actions have consequences, and the dark days ahead for all of us will be the result of the misguided, often stupid, vote-buying policies of politicians. The worst of it is that those mongrels will not suffer like the rest of us will.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 3 November 2017 8:17:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

I'm 'relieved' to see your comment on zippers; I thought it was just me. The Chinese zippers are too short and they cut off your water at the end of the process. The zip 'handle' folds into the bottom of the opening, and it takes for ever to fold it up to close the zip. When you get the zip almost up, you have to undo the top of your trousers to get the thing locked. Chinese zippers eventually force you to sit down to pee if you want to do it safely and with comfort.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 3 November 2017 8:28:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey Paul1405,
I'm not for all the progressive stuff, (as you're aware) and nor am I supportive of outright Socialism.
In regards to Socialism I'll tell you why I think the ideology is flawed.
Firstly in order to create a socialist state, you'd have to take the wealth from all the people that had wealth, otherwise there's no reason for them to work as a slave in your socialist utopia.
- So the only way you can bring about outright socialism in the first place is by civil unrest and taking from the people that which does not belong to you, land, assets etc.
Secondly, it won't be efficient.
When the 100kg strong bloke that can pick 1000 apples per day gets no more than the weak man who can only pick 100 apples per day, then the strong man simply does his 100 apple per day quota, and society actually becomes less efficient...
Lest the government then try to increase productivity and reduce quality of life for the people and soon you have communism 'Socialism at the barrel of a gun'.
And it's not one class anyway, you still have a slave and a slave master; more or less. Someones got to tell the others what to do. Someone's got to rule and make decisions...
So outright socialism sucks... been there done that...
If you want to argue to pro's and con's of democracy there's arguments on both sides, as there is capitalism.
The ability for a man to work as he see's fit and be rewarded fairly for his labours, create a life of his own choosing; but must also accept the consequences of bad choices made.

I don't think it's a question of Socialism V's Capitalism.
That's stoneage thinking, human beings are supposed to be intelligent, resourceful, tool makers.

All one need to do is look at Plato's Republic to get a fair idea of we're were headed; it's all been done before.

But there's one way out.
I want to know what you think of my idea here:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19382#344589
Posted by Armchair Critic, Friday, 3 November 2017 8:39:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[Cont.]
"The cost of the Australian Public Service has reached $52 billion annually. In fact its far greater than that, with the States and LG employing 75%, in total about 2 million people. If a politician with a zeal for efficiency was to come along and wave his magic wound and cut the PS by say 25%, very good you might say, no very bad, if nothing else is done, because you just doubled unemployment. At 5% unemployment is a non issue, at 10% (founder of the Liberal Party 'Pig Iron' Bob's ideal figure) you're in political trouble, at 30% (Great Depression figure) you're history. Besides you have to either make direct payments to the unemployed, the dole, very visible politically, or hide them by creating "new" jobs. And where can you do that, hidden in the public service.. much more politically acceptable."

This whole system itself is stupid and inefficient.
It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Technology can allow us to create a system that would create socialist base level employment 'The job you have when you don't have a job' with a fair wage.
The government pays $500 Newstart a fortnight for nothing
- why not pay $1000 a fortnight for a full time worker?

You don't need to force anyone to do it, the system itself allows people to get ahead if they choose to - all you have to do is create a system that makes use of the 5% pool of workers capitalism requires to prevent wage growth, and make it efficient, with incentives, training and rewards.

It's pretty simple.
Use the low wage base in conjuction with mass training at a lower cost level and save money by building infrastructure, the cost of which doubles every 10yrs, and the new infrastructure helps create more private sector jobs and business opportunities.

There would be jobs all across the country, and in regional outback areas as well.
BTW the post I linked to was 2 comments together, like this one, in case you didn't see the [Cont.] comment on the second page.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Friday, 3 November 2017 8:58:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(Cont.)

One or the other won't work.
We need to find the right balance.

This is why I support retaining medicare.
We need to refine our system of government, not cannabalise it.
Include socialist base level jobs; not remove socialist base level healthcare.

Technology allows us to now (with Apps) achieve this in a way humankind has never been able to do so before.
- And nobody else see it but me, appartently.

How do we have a fair system with socialist education and healthcare if we don't have socialist jobs to support these base level standards?
Posted by Armchair Critic, Friday, 3 November 2017 9:00:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well said Armchair Critic, we should all get what we earn, not what we would like to be given. I really don't mind if someone wants to go surfing all day every day, provided no one else has to support them while they do it.

I could have been a wealthy man today, if I had chosen to be. Instead for 6 years I spent half my effort racing cars, quite successfully, but in the day when you paid your own costs, & were not paid to do it.

I then chose to go sailing around the Pacific islands for 6 years. These were my choices, & I am glad I made them, but I had no right to have expected others to pick up my costs while doing such things, & did not.

Actually it is quite surprising how much you can earn in out of the way places, if you have some skills, & are happy to use them.

There is far too much sit down money paid to too many drones today, about half of them mislabelled as public servants. Newman tried to do the right thing, & got rid of over 20,000 of them, without effecting government services at all. The silly girl Labor have as leader replaced all of them with interest. Of course, public servants are all good loyal left voters to a man/girl.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 3 November 2017 12:44:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn,

By perceived wisdom, I think you mean the collective wisdom and experience of some of the brightest minds in the world that has enabled 90% of the world to be dragged out of poverty. That living standards have improved ever decade since WWII is evidence of this.

Paul,

No one in his right mind wants a bloated bureaucracy, it's just that every time a "progressive" socialist government gets in, the numbers of public servants rockets without the commensurate improvement in services. Queensland is a prime example of where Labor beefs up the public service with no discernible improvement in services.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 3 November 2017 1:27:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SM,

I would like to see evidence of your claim that 'free' trade has lifted “90% of the world out of poverty”. What percentage of the world lived in poverty before 'free' trade came into being?. Free trade has been around only since the 1990s, and today, 80% of the world's people live in poverty – on less that $10 per day. Almost half of these people live in China and India. 'Free' trade hasn't been much help at all, it seems.

“...  some of the brightest minds in the world” are into these trade treaties to screw some of the poorest people in the world. I'm not sure what you call a 'bright mind', and I don't know who your are referring to in the context of trade. More likely they are rat-cunning spivs and politicians (same thing, really).

All trade is between nation states, and controlled by very rich people. It has nothing to do with lifting people out of poverty. The people working in sweat shops throughout Asia still live in poverty.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 3 November 2017 4:10:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/trade/publication/the-role-of-trade-in-ending-poverty
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/pres00_e/pr181_e.htm
http://www.theeuropean-magazine.com/bjorn-lomborg/7511-free-trade-to-end-global-poverty

And there are 1000s more of similar articles.

In fact, the biggest hurdles to ending global poverty are the trade barriers that the rich countries have against imports from poor countries.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Saturday, 4 November 2017 10:02:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SM,

You have a right to be wrong: and relying on the World Bank, out to justify itself, and anything from the European Union is very wrong. Cheers.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 4 November 2017 11:00:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
But ttbn,

You do being wrong so spectacularly. Since you don't accept the educated opinions of the world's financial institutions, perhaps you could elucidate your "opinions" with some references of your own?
Posted by Shadow Minister, Saturday, 4 November 2017 11:53:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy