hahah good for a laugh (1 Viewer)

[Jin-17]

Hello all,

yES as u can see, i have to go to fastfood, beacuse I cant afford to waste another day just sitting on my ass while all u guys seem to be getting richer But I guess money is money and n this long break I plan to save up to $4000. Hopefull that can last me a while and than we can see who is on top than also, whats people view on that demnstartion with the WTO. I think its a joke and the majority are just out there to wreak havoc and just lamers. As a economic student (U may hate me for this) I back the WTO nearly 100% on what they are doing. In the long run it will be better for everyone.

 

[Ozz^E]

i dont think it will be better for everyone. The Rich will just get richer and the poor poorer. The WTO couldnt give two shits for the comman man. They treat humans as a commodity.

 

[!meeee!]

so few ppl understand what the WTO is, i'm not saying you're one of them Ozze but let's just clarify a few things
a) The WTO aim to enforce trade agreements- that doesn't mean it's necessarily the US against Nigeria but it can be between developing nations
b) the WTO arbitrate on trade disputes and let me assure you they have often legislated against the "richer" nations such as the EU and US
c) the WTO is a body, an NGO, with no political bias
there were protestors who were there to protest against the war on iraq. wrong place to go ppl
if you're angry with the US go protest in front of their embassy but until you catch onto what the WTO is i don't think you have the right to be conducting demonstrations
the WTO does not embody western capitalism- it embodies the ideal of free trade
which will actually be beneficial to "poorer" or to be p/c, developing nations. Due to the fact their economy is highly dependent on the export of commodities, agriculture to be specific. And agriculture is one of the most highly protected industries eg. EU's CAP policy. Thus the WTO is in favour of decreasing global income inequality
So think about what you're protesting against ppl and if you really have something against the WTO

 

[Jin-17]

Originally posted by !meeee!
so few ppl understand what the WTO is, i'm not saying you're one of them Ozze but let's just clarify a few things
a) The WTO aim to enforce trade agreements- that doesn't mean it's necessarily the US against Nigeria but it can be between developing nations
b) the WTO arbitrate on trade disputes and let me assure you they have often legislated against the "richer" nations such as the EU and US
c) the WTO is a body, an NGO, with no political bias
there were protestors who were there to protest against the war on iraq. wrong place to go ppl
if you're angry with the US go protest in front of their embassy but until you catch onto what the WTO is i don't think you have the right to be conducting demonstrations
the WTO does not embody western capitalism- it embodies the ideal of free trade
which will actually be beneficial to "poorer" or to be p/c, developing nations. Due to the fact their economy is highly dependent on the export of commodities, agriculture to be specific. And agriculture is one of the most highly protected industries eg. EU's CAP policy. Thus the WTO is in favour of decreasing global income inequality
So think about what you're protesting against ppl and if you really have something against the WTO

I back u 100% and I see u have studied economics. Thats what people dont have. They dont have a vison, they can only see whats in front of them. They like go out there thinking they know what they are doing than why id it that they have to resort to violence and hurting innocent people, which I think is totally uncalled for.

 

[Sarah]

yeh i agree with meee!! cept even though the WTO is involved in settling trade disputes, the US have been able to get away with breeching the rules and the WTO aren't even doing anything about it e.g tariffs on steel. AND even if they do enforce punishment or whatever, by the time it's enforced it's already too late- as in a few yrs late. read this in economics somewhere

 

[Jin-17]

Yeah, I agree Sarah. But Australia cant have this innocent and baby face image either u know. For example for the Candian salmons, Australia either baned or had an embargos on the product due to it being an safety measuer for the local indusrty, but in the hearing, if was declared this was not the case. Amercias are not inncoent either with the illegal dumping of the oranges which realy hurt the local industry. But I hope that you will agree with me that the WTO has tried to and achieve to create a world where hopefully it would be better for the world. Such as the signing of the offical documents to break down all those protection levels in the memeber nations by a ceratin level (depends from country to country) by the year 2008 i believe. Of course its almost like a double edge sword where in the offical recod the income inequality has been rising since the late 1950s to now where the ratio has more than doubled.
But the point I am trying to deliever here is those people should not have resorted to viloence where the members of the police force who are doing their job was in danger of their life.
Once again from what we have studied from economics that there are certainly many more postives and goals that can be achieved in the long run. These little interfence of course as I see it is a minor disturbance, which yes has been happening in the world, but with the right way it can be fixed.
Yes, some country has been slow in cutting down the barriers and so on, but they still have to fulifuil that promise on the agreement nevertheless at the end.

 

[timmii]

I think the globalisation protests are ridiculous, and self-defeating. Any blanket, generalised statement such as "globalisation bad" fails to encapsulate the complexity of the process...compromise and acceptance of the situation and active involvement to improve the current situation (i.e assistance to help poorer nations develop legal/capital markets and boost trade volumes would probably be more helpful). Most of the protesters would also be hypocrites...eating maccas, drinking coke, wearing nike, watching cnn, using the net all = globalisation.

Yes there are disparities between the developing and developed nations, but studies show that those developing nations that HAVE embraced globalisation are improving their economic development, standard of living and levels of growth far more than those who have not. So rather than just looking at comparisons with rich countries, altruistically it can also be good for teh residents of those globalising nations.

Also - A country like China needs to create over 10million jobs a year just to absorb population growth - it is through globalisation that these opportunities are presented. Some call it "exploitation", but if the TNCs were not involved, there would be widespread unemployment and even more pverty. Ideally yes, I would prefer that they were paid more, but it doesn't help these exploited workers to protest against their source of income, meagre as it may be.

ALso, globalisation brings medicines, technology, education and overseas employment opportunities. At Doha, provisions were made to offer subsidised generic drugs to the poorer nations for TB, malaria and AIDS *oh yes! Thats despicable*

Yes, there are negatives to globalisation, like almost any situation in life. But rather embrace the change (ugh! area of study) and try to improve the conditions and modify them, rather than outright oppose them, because realistically, is the world just going to pack things in and go.."Yes, they're right. Shut down the internet, stop trade, halt investment...."

Hmmm, I'm quite clearly an eco student, and i think the fact that China was my case study was also fairly evident. Thanks for listening/reading.

 

[dissonance]

Well, where to start....

I agree with timmii on his point that globalisation has good and bad outcomes. As some have said it would be stupid to simply state 'globalisation is bad' but its obviously equally as stupid to state the opposite; that 'gloablisation is great'.

Most of the protesters would also be hypocrites...eating maccas, drinking coke, wearing nike, watching cnn, using the net all = globalisation.

I think no matter what your stance is on the issue - if you live in a society like Australia it is literally and practically impossible to lead a 'normal' life without consuming any types of global products or services...and I feel to expect anyone to do so would be a little far-fetched to say the least.


Many of you have already outlined many reasons why people could see globalisation as a positive thing. However as you all should know its not all fun 'n games - the destruction of local cultures, religions being militarily challenged and forced into "non-existance", the fact that (corperate) America is obviously a large contributer and coincidently have a history of pissing other nations off is very annoying to many people. People are against the way that (at least in their opinion) the United States practically runs this "global" world.

.

realistically, is the world just going to pack things in and go.."Yes, they're right. Shut down the internet, stop trade, halt investment...."

Yeah and realistically if you happen to seriously be against globalisation why would you not at least attempt to "shut down the internet, stop trade...etc". If someone really believed in something yet did nothing about it simply because their "ideal" outcome seemed impossible to reach I wouldn't think much of them. Besides why do people bother trying to end starvation? That still seems a pretty impossible problem to solve right now --

A book that I intend to read soon entitled 'globalisation and its discontents' by Joseph Stigliz probably covers the negative aspects quite well --- I might get back to you once I get my hands on it...


-----by the way I personally haven't yet formed a firm opinion on globalisation...still wieghing up the good and bad points of it at the moment.

 

[timmii]

Originally posted by dissonance
I think no matter what your stance is on the issue - if you live in a society like Australia it is literally and practically impossible to lead a 'normal' life without consuming any types of global products or services...and I feel to expect anyone to do so would be a little far-fetched to say the least.

Yeah and realistically if you happen to seriously be against globalisation why would you not at least attempt to "shut down the internet, stop trade...etc". If someone really believed in something yet did nothing about it simply because their "ideal" outcome seemed impossible to reach I wouldn't think much of them. Besides why do people bother trying to end starvation? That still seems a pretty impossible problem to solve right now --

Ok, let me clarify. Obviously you can't live life nowadays without being influenced by globalisation, almost by definition, its everywhere. I believe in moderation, with almost everything. Globalisation is good and bad...i have yet to find much that is clearcut either way. However, if u read some of the literature handed out by these protesters, it is so blatantly one-sided and impractical, they refuse to accept there are benefits of globalisation, they disclaim the benefits and THEN hypocritically participate in the globalised world.

I'm not saying people should not being idealistic. However, if their aim of protesting is to be productive (which I would hope it would be, or else its just disruptive and a public nuisance), then they need to be more open-minded and realistic. Again...moderation. Don't protest the WTO as an institution. Don't disrupt meetings that can help bring about benefits. Rather campaign for more attention, funds, assistance etc to be directed to the needy.

E.g your analogy about ending starvation, part of the globalisation protests are about that to an extent (i.e rich world has an abundance of food, yet so many go without)...and I too would love an end to starvation (how many ppl go "yay, ppl are hungry"?)...but be practical about it. You don't say "tomorrow everyone will eat". You begin donating money to food programs and agricultural programs etc...

Practicality and moderation i think are the key words. Idealism is great, but to achieve the ideals, one must compromise. I mean teh protesters don't want an end to globalisation for the sake of globalisation, they want an end/to minimise the adverse impacts of if - and a measured approach would be most effective, i believe. But then again, this is my own humble opinion, and u r of course more than welcome to disagree!

 

[Crazy]

what can i say?? lol
all of the above who've posted are nerds!!! haha seriously
but i think you've brought up some great points nonetheless
the protests were absolutely pathetic...many of them (protestors) uniformed on the issues but keen to stir up some shit and get a bit of publicity
ahh well
there will always be dickheads in society
just have to deal with them

 

[timmii]

Originally posted by Crazy

what can i say?? lol
all of the above who've posted are nerds!!!

*hangs head in shame* "yes i know"

 

[Jin-17]

hmmmm.... I wouldnt say I am, since my info is basic compared to all those other guys. But yeah, some of those sorry ass excuse people sicken me in that they hurt eash other so badly. If they dont know globalistaion is and think they do my favourite phase "GET LOST" or "GO TO HELL AND GIVE MY COMPLIMENTS TO THE DEVIL"

 

[dissonance]

I believe in moderation, with almost everything. Globalisation is good and bad...i have yet to find much that is clearcut either way.

Yep, I'm with you on that. Basically my felling at the moment is that you can accept the global for what it is, use it (internet), contribute to it, ENJOY parts of it (like the simpsons!) but always remember who you are. Thats my main problem with globalisation - once almost everything we consume becomes globalised were in danger of forgetting are identity. Like shit, I hardly even know where I come from. Not only do I have a seriously skechy knowledge of my ancestors but I'm a duel Australian/American citizen - born in America but spent more than half my life here -- I mean where the fuck do I come from? Hence I've kind of already lost part of my identity as many of us tend to define ourselves simply with that: "I am an Australian".

Don't protest the WTO as an institution. Don't disrupt meetings that can help bring about benefits.

I really don't know much about the WTO (didn't study economics) but I think I agree with what you've said -- if the WTO do what you've listed I'd also say most of these protests may be slightly misdirected.

but be practical about it. You don't say "tomorrow everyone will eat". You begin donating money to food programs and agricultural programs etc...

Basically I was attempting to say that if you want to fix the negative aspects of globalisation its better to protest (peacefully) than to not protest at all.

But then again, this is my own humble opinion, and u r of course more than welcome to disagree!

Ha, I think I basically agree with most of what you've said anyway.

all of the above who've posted are nerds!!!

hmmm, well yeah I guess - I kinda studied this in ext1 english though. Basically the only things I find interesting at the moment are current events, like globalisation and music.

 

[jessika]

Originally posted by Jin-17
Hello all,

yES as u can see, i have to go to fastfood, beacuse I cant afford to waste another day just sitting on my ass while all u guys seem to be getting richer

There's nothing wrong with fast food, its a job and well its not like you can expect a real good job when your 17 and basically inexperienced, so I say yay to working in the food industry.

 

[Pretz]

"E.g your analogy about ending starvation, part of the globalisation protests are about that to an extent (i.e rich world has an abundance of food, yet so many go without)...and I too would love an end to starvation (how many ppl go "yay, ppl are hungry"?)...but be practical about it. You don't say "tomorrow everyone will eat". You begin donating money to food programs and agricultural programs etc... "


And while we're being practical, more will starve to death. I know what you're saying is absolutely true, but it's still pretty depressing. I know almost nothing about how these things work, but man we're selfish. It couldn't be that hard for the governments of countries like our to set up enough of those agricultural programs to end that problem.

 

[Christine]

hmmm this thread is a little to deep for me

 

[MiuMiu]

this thread is stupid, the WTO protestors are just rent-a-crowd, they have no idea what they're actually protesting about

 

[:: ck ::]

i kno its kinda late to post

but back then when i saw protesting goin on

judging by the way many of the people there acted

man all i think is that they were there just to cause trouble and mayb even say hi to mum on the telly... if u know what i mean

many of them didnt know what they were fighting for... and yes as some1 sed before

the majority of them were dickheads who werent fighting for anything but attention and the thrill of being on tv