And the winner is....... Here come the denials.... The remaining 24 So, what's your favorite banner on the media wall of shame?
In the words of "The Continental"...WOW, Wowey-wow... I WISH we could just laugh these articles of as the Bush-ite back-slapper's are sure to do.
wow...you'd have a very hard time convincing me that the Founders were attempting to initiate wealth equality through the Constitution. but i have to say...we clearly have a crisis on our hands...not merely because of the problems that poverty creates for US...but because it's hardly humane to carry on with swimming pools and BMW's when you're aware of such disparity.
It gets better Max, and I was a little partisan with my forst post, but read some of the other 24. Unfortunately, they are not so much "food for thought", but more like "food poisoning"...
It's ironic/fitting that our as our governments fiscal policy resembles that of Latin American banana republics, our socioeconomic structure begins to mimic theirs as well. Great news there....
I have a hard time considering stories on wealth disparity "censored." Underreported but definately not censored. I'm guessing you were using 'censored' to get a rise but IMO that does a disservice to issues that have truly been censored by governments.
Project Censored is a media research group out of Sonoma State University which tracks the news published in independent journals and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported or self-censored by the country’s major national news media. About Us (Project Censored) Please feel free to comment on the list, the story, or anything else on the link in the first post.
I will never dispute the wealth gap but a couple of things in this article bothered me. Consumption in the USA appears excessive - sure. But it is both a contributing factor and a product of the industrial and economic success of the country. Acquiring wealth and increasing standards of living is what drives people in a free market economy. Mess with that and you risk unravelling the entire the system. I have a hard time blaming the IMF and the WTO for "much of the damage caused to Third World countries over the past 20 years" For a start, the author loses credibility when he refers to the WTO as a "lending institution". Participation in free trade is purely voluntary. If a country believes it is harming them, they can isolate themselves (and bear the consequences!), but by and large they all know that it is the only way to increase the standard of living for its people. Developing her own resources (be they people, technology or minerals etc) and using comparative advantage allows a country to earn income from other (wealthier) countries. Corruption, poor internal economic policy and regulation, and conflict are the more likely culprits in disparate wealth distribution in developing countries. Institutions like the IMF and the Worldbank encourage reform in this areas when they step in (at the request of host Governments) to rescue or develop an economy. "World economists conclude that if enough of the world’s nations reach a point of economic failure, such a situation could collapse the entire global economy." Not only is this a statement of the bleeding obvious it is also ironic. The purpose of the IMF, WTO and Worldbank is to promote global economic prosperity and stability, and to assist 3rd world countries to develop. This author has the exact opposite view! "World Economists" also argue that globalization and investment by multinational corporations in developing countries acts to improve labour and environment regulation laws - not perfect, but an improvement on where they would be if left isolated. The article is thought provoking, but that is about it.
i would also point out that if we're serious about this...we may find it inconveniences us, big time. things like the Toyota Center and the Ballpark at Union Station don't take priority when we're forced to re-examine all of this. these shouldn't be tough decisions...but they are, because we're all so freaking spoiled.
Totally agree Davo! What bothers me about the anti-free trade / anti-Capitalism crowd is that they fail to consider the alternative. Countries are free to trade and a few have and invariably they end up backward with a deplorable standard of living. Take Albania and North Korea for example. Globally there is an uneven distrubution of wealth and trade is the way to even that. There really is no other practical way that developed countries will transfer capital to other countries without trade. Also trade isn't a zero sum game but is also the best way to generate new wealth. True there are many problems with the global trade system but many countries have shown that with good and clean management trade can be a huge benefit. For that matter for all of those who decry the exploitation of the Thirdworld by global corporations instead of criticizing trade they should be pushing for more trade. For instance small coffee growers in Central America can now sell their coffee directly to cafes in the US by passing the corporate middle men. Without free trade this couldn't happen. Trade and capitalism need not be tools of exploitation but already have with in them the tools to create social and economic justice. It all comes down to how the suppliers manage themselves and how you spend your dollars.
Trade and capitalism need not be tools of exploitation but already have with in them the tools to create social and economic justice. It all comes down to how the suppliers manage themselves and how you spend your dollars. Sirhan, you make some good points. However, if you are actually interested in "social and economi justice" you have to go further. Without a tax system and labor laws that promote justice you just lead to a small group of rich folks with little trikle down for the majority. Also some important aspects of justice lend themselves to primarily market solutions e.g., education, health care, the environment and even legitimate national defense.
Glynch; You're right and I didn't mean to oversimplify. Its just my opinion that trade and capitalism are the best system that we've been able to come up with to distribute resources. The alternatives to me have all proven worse but I'm not advocating totall deregulation just limited regulation. I know it was probably a slip but my name is spelled "SISHIR". "SIRHAN" makes me sound like the guy who shot Bobby Kennedy.
