|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 31, 2005 2:32:45 GMT -5
United states is doing better than France and germany, believe me. while the economic growth in US is around 3%,4%/year, in France and Germany, it's around 0%. About 3% of the GDP of France goes to the pockets of poorer countries of The EU (Spain, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, etc...) And as if it wasn't enough, Romania and Bulgaria are going to join the E.U in 2007. Welcome to Millions of impoverished and starving immigrants. Welcome to Credit card fraud, car hijacking and prostitution. The european identity, My ass !.
|
|
|
Post by DeLacroix on Dec 31, 2005 2:48:10 GMT -5
I saw a documentary film, some time ago, on the central american immigration to the united states, and the route they take. Immigrants from salvador and other countries, have first, to sneak into Mexico, and for that, they have to pay a Mafia, or simply, bribe some corrupt mexican policemen. If they have enough money, they take the bus to northern Mexico, otherwise, they have to manage how to gather money, for the ultime trip. That's what I saw in the documentry. I don't know if there are central americans who go to mexico to settle there.
You must be joking. Then it's what? Even Brazil is considered a third world country.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Dec 31, 2005 3:05:23 GMT -5
That central Americans come to the US doesn't negate that many settle in southern Mexico to work. The work is there but some people prefer the higher wages in the US. Point is there is work for Mexicans.
It's poor. Like I said before. You use the example of subsaharan immigrants comming to Europe. Huge difference bewteen the poverty of subsahara Africa and Mexico.
Also, with regards to Brazil, southern Brazil on its own wouldn't be considered a third world nation. It's the rest of the nation that I'd consider 3rd world. It's not surprising that there is a strong separatist feeling in that region.
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 31, 2005 3:10:41 GMT -5
Yeah in Southern Brazil there are small towns where you think you are in Germany so obviously they are not gonna resemble the 3rd world.Blumineau in Southern Brazil has one of the largest Oktoberfests outside of Germany and is the second biggest cultural event in Brazil second only to Carnival.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 31, 2005 3:18:43 GMT -5
Not according to Ralph Nader. www.ratical.org/co-globalize/RalphNader/030100.htmlNo that's not by beef. You're not understanding the point. It's not as simple as boycotting this and that. It's far too comprehensive and built in fundamentally to even equate "boycott" or the like, as a means of change. In the context of Wal-mart??!!!?? You're not getting it. It Isn't a matter of choice. You're trying to simplify something that can't be simplified. It's not as if there are rules being broken. It's the rules themselves, or the lack thereof, that is the issue, it's the entire system, for which people come to accept on account of feeling as if there's nothing that can be done, regardless of misconduct they see in it.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Dec 31, 2005 3:51:05 GMT -5
<<<<Let me just conclude with some more recommendations we are going to be campaigning on. This will delight the television cameras I'm sure. The public airways belong to the people. We're the landlords. The television and radio stations are the tenants. They lease the space. They don't have to pay anything to the Federal Communications Commission for this very valuable free investment called the broadcast license.>>>>>
How are we the landlords? and how is television and radio stations the tenants? That would be true if taxpayers footed the bill but that's not case except for PBS.
<<<<It seems to me out of a sense of good citizenship, the people who run the broadcast industry should dedicate a certain amount of free time to all ballot-qualified candidates to local, state and national levels in the weeks before the election. That is the least they can do if they want to call themselves good corporate citizens. But if they don't do it voluntarily, it's quite clear that since the public airways are our property, we need to have legislation that will select out a certain amount of free time on radio and TV for political debates and discussions and statements of policy by ballot-qualified candidates. There has to be some self-imposed limit on turning the public airways into over 90% entertainment and advertising. The rest being fairly redundant staccato-like news."
How is Nader's belief of how things should be run prove that's how things have been run in the past? All I see is Nader presenting something new. As always he forgets that it's the business that takes the risk and not the public.
Ah, so people are too witless to run their affairs and need someone (the government, or perhpas you) to direct their lives. They hate Walmart but..... they can't stop shopping there so the government has to step in and help them along? because, of course, they're helpless. They're like children lost in the wilderness. That's the Nader stance.
It goes for all businesses. Most people who work at Walmart are unskilled.
I noticed that in kmart (they also don't have a union) you have a lot of high school kids working there. If there was a union it wouldn't be the case because older people with work experience would be attracted to the job and picked over teenagers who have no past references. Not only would teenagers have a tough time getting their foot in the door to gain work experience but there would be a limit to how many people can be hired because the wage is too high for a job that demands such little labor and skills.
There is something that can be done... you don't shop at Walmart. Simple as that. But many people do so therefore they have made their choice. You don' like the choice they made but it wasn't your choice to make.
|
|
|
Post by wadad on Dec 31, 2005 5:12:46 GMT -5
If what I said is egalitarian PC bull,then so is the American declaration of independence when it says "all men are created equal". I dont have contempt for white people, apparently to you advocating moral and legal egalitarianism for the destitute and weak equals contempt for white people, or else I wouldnt have spoken against the status quo, no? Im against illegal immigration anyway...but IM all for Legal and skilled immigraton, which you arent. care to share the drawbacks of LEGAL immigration? DukeofPain care to respond to this??
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 31, 2005 8:47:49 GMT -5
If what I said is egalitarian PC bull,then so is the American declaration of independence when it says "all men are created equal". I dont have contempt for white people, apparently to you advocating moral and legal egalitarianism for the destitute and weak equals contempt for white people, or else I wouldnt have spoken against the status quo, no? Im against illegal immigration anyway...but IM all for Legal and skilled immigraton, which you arent. care to share the drawbacks of LEGAL immigration? Maybe so. Though, I could care less what the American "declaration of Independence" says or doesn't say. What I do know is that after that declaration the united states still participated in slavery and in brutal subjugation and isolation of Indians. I never said you specifically had contempt for whites, since I don't know you personally, however, I know that people whom promote similar beliefs do it as a guise for their own virulent contempt. That is, minority egalitarianism, who parade themselves as civil rights activist. I already said why I am opposed to immigration. Specifically modern "multi-culturalist" immigration. Which I, and many others, see as being nothing more than fifth column stacking. The multi-culture culture is especially abominable to me, as it effectively nullified what little national culture Canada had. Essentially selling out Canada to aliens. Now the only remaining culture left at present is mostly in government, ironically, the same people that have been responsible for this, and the continued social decay that is it's effect. The Immigrants nowadays come with no obligation of assimilation in any way shape or form, and most don't, This hasn't been a new phenomena, ethnic enclaving is age old. And for you to say white Canada should "accept" immigrants is absurd for this reason. Everybody knows what this "acceptance" means: the privileged status in commerce, so as to lessen the current huge disparity. Since this is all it could mean, what other kind of "acceptance" would this entail? In multi-cultural societies there is no framework for "acceptance", and acting like there is, is laughable, especially coming from immigrants whose very presence is the cause. This isn't new, problematic immigration has been long understood and so have it's consequences in relation to the social situation of a society. For example, in America the passing of the immigration reform law of 1921, in response to growing social decay because of huge numbers of catholic European immigrants emigrating, and in many cases enclaving themselves. Obviously now such a reform seems extreme, being that they were also Europeans. but in reality it wasn't extreme, it was justified response to problems that came with immigration. What is extreme is the modern immigration policies of western nations, and the profound social impacts, especially crime related, that have been felt by the ethnic majority because of them.
|
|
|
Post by Batrus on Dec 31, 2005 9:51:47 GMT -5
United states is doing better than France and germany, believe me. while the economic growth in US is around 3%,4%/year, in France and Germany, it's around 0%. About 3% of the GDP of France goes to the pockets of poorer countries of The EU (Spain, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, etc...) And as if it wasn't enough, Romania and Bulgaria are going to join the E.U in 2007. Welcome to Millions of impoverished and starving immigrants. Welcome to Credit card fraud, car hijacking and prostitution. The european identity, My ass !. Spain is one of the poorest countries of the EU? I thought it was doing pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 31, 2005 17:06:46 GMT -5
Isn't Portugal or one of them East European countries like Romania or Hungary the poorest country in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Dec 31, 2005 17:16:57 GMT -5
Spain is doing very well, but of course they are not industrialized to the level of germany, france or the uk.
Tourism and construction are the 2 main sectors in spanish economy.
Portugal is the poorest country in western europe by far, and were rather third worldish in the 70´s, now they are in between a high middle income country and a first world country
some numbers
nominal gdp per capita (in dollars)
Norway 54,600 Switzerland 49,300 United States 39,935 United Kingdom 35,548 Germany 33,390 France 32,911 Italy 29,014 Spain 25,320 Portugal 15,982
I think both Spain and Portugal will stop getting the EU aid Delacroix mentioned before, because now it will be given to the eastern european countries that will enter the EU.
Probably Eufrenio or Amadis or Delacroix can confirm or cerrect what I said-
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Dec 31, 2005 17:26:50 GMT -5
It's poor. Like I said before. You use the example of subsaharan immigrants comming to Europe. Huge difference bewteen the poverty of subsahara Africa and Mexico. I agree, I've been to Mexico and the major cities that I've seen (Guadalajara and Mexico City) are pretty first world looking. Based on the photos I've looked at of major cities in sub-Saharan Africa, the same cannot be said.
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Dec 31, 2005 17:32:51 GMT -5
there used to be a term second world, used for the communist countries
first world industrialized capitalist nations second world communist countries third world, under developed capitalist countries
of course the poverty of ethiopia is not the same as the poverty of mexico, there are different degrees
the poverty of black americans looks quite middle class to me
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 31, 2005 17:34:58 GMT -5
Yeah Black Latin Americans live in much worst poverty than Black Americans.If you see how Mulattos and Blacks in Cuba,Brazil,the Dominican Republic,Colombia,etc live you will know what I am talking about.
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 31, 2005 17:50:34 GMT -5
Hey Josh I wouldn't go as far as to say that Mexico City is first world looking,you obviously have never left the downtown/business district if you think so.There is alot of poverty in Mexico City that would make the poverty that you see in New York or L.A look like the Hamptons in comparison.
|
|