There was the Quality of Work Life movement in the 80's - spread good, well-paying jobs with good conditions. Instead we got the opposite.
On Feb 6, 6:08 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I ran across the following article on Britain and the E.U. > > http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/analysis-of-economic-benef... > > It gets into the Free Trade question and the WTO......Tariffs--I like > them.....I suggest the option of the E.U. getting out of the WTO, instead > of the suggestion that it (the WTO) is now the be all and end all..... END > ALL... I could agree with.... end all prosperity.... for the developed > countries, that is.....the "old" E.U had it right... (as did the Union > Movement, throughout the world)... Comparable (not "Free") Trade for and > with countries that share comparable fair labor laws... otherwise... > tariff the exploitative bloodsuckers out of your "markets"....The > "bloodsuckers" NOT being the nation states... but YES being the > "corporations" that... "slave-shop" for cheap labor....."Corporate > citizenship", that's what I suggest.... > > > > > > > > On Monday, February 4, 2013 4:41:13 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > I don't see an economic answer Nom. There are things we could do but > > I think that would entail writing a new morality into our societies > > concerning 'dirty hands' excuses. Walmart hasn't done well in > > Germany. > > > On Feb 4, 4:54 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > The problem has been allowing global arbitrage on wages and > > > job conditions. / Archytas > > > > That (your identification of the problem) makes a lot of sense to me, > > even > > > from my very limited knowledge standpoint.... Trading partners and > > trading > > > treaties.... Here in the U.S. there have been decades of "Free Trade" > > > agreements that have laid waste to large sectors of the U.S. > > manufacturing > > > and even agricultural bases of the economy. I thought for a long while > > that > > > the E.U. served as a better buffer against this, and perhaps it was > > > (requiring similar labor laws for E.U. member nations and the like).... > > but > > > the E.U. seems to be suffering something of the same fate as the U.S. > > > concerning foreign trade contracts... with non-E.U. countries that > > produce > > > "things" for less.... Tariffs against foreign goods seem to be > > discouraged > > > nowadays.What do you think about the notion of some sort of "corporate > > > citizenship".....whereby any and all business entities that operate > > > economically in a nation (or group of nations like the E.U. ) should be > > > required to produce the main part of the products the businesses sell in > > > that county (or countries).... in-house.... Simplistic (?), but that was > > > (used to be ) the general notion, I think. The same should extend to > > > "intellectual property".... patents and the like... I would think... In > > the > > > U.S.we have a "department store chain" called Walmart that specializes > > in > > > inexpensive products from foreign countries.... I just did a quick check > > > and noticed that it went to Britain, too (ASDA?)....there's one of the > > > "culprits".... It should have been "tariffed out" by the E.U.... while > > you > > > had the chance...... In the U.S., we got suckered in and have been > > > junkieing out on that crack (drug reference) for ages.... > > > >http://corporate.walmart.com/our-story/our-stores/united-kingdom-stores > > > > I found these web sites...... haven't looked into it much..... > > (numbers... > > > frightening....HAR) > > > But then.... even bringing up the notion of re-establishing > > > Tariffs.....could get someone shot, these days......go figure.... > > >http://www.intracen.org/World-tariff-profiles/http://www.wto.org/engl... > > > > Your much appreciated in-depth article on the economic picture is > > something > > > I want to think more about before I attempt any opinions......or > > > comments......The whole area of banking and investment leveraging and > > > "bubbles" is the real culprit... I agree....and it appears that there is > > > NOT much stomach to tackle it.... anywhere.... > > > > On Sunday, February 3, 2013 12:58:24 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > > > We really only have two main parties Nom - Labour and Conservative. > > > > The Greens, UKIP and BNP are largely irrelevant because we don't have > > > > PR and the Liberal Democrats don't usually play much of a role but > > > > poll about 8 - 15 %. They are currently part of a coalition with the > > > > Tories. I guess most of us feel all this has proved is that people > > > > who seemed decent when not really in the contest are total shits once > > > > in government. > > > > I agree your economic summary. On those of us not rich, I'd point to > > > > the fact that the bottom 50% had 14% of liquid assets around 1980 and > > > > that's down to 1% - if we don't scrap the financial system this won't > > > > improve. The problem has been allowing global arbitrage on wages and > > > > job conditions. > > > > > On Feb 2, 5:44 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > filibuster for the Senate... house has Republican majority....just > > to > > > > set > > > > > the record straight.... writing lapse... > > > > > > On Friday, February 1, 2013 1:05:36 PM UTC-5, nominal9 wrote: > > > > > > > Parliamentary govt. has its pros and cons.....What I like is your > > > > > > multitude of political parties, as compared to the U.S...... here > > > > there are > > > > > > two with maybe a handful of registered "independents" at the U.S. > > > > federal > > > > > > level... one thing about a multitude of parties is that it tends > > to > > > > isolate > > > > > > the radical fringes... and cooperation at the middle seems > > facilitated > > > > > > (what do you think?).... here, the right-wing Republicans (by > > > > filibuster) > > > > > > have been stymieing legislation in the U.S. House for the whole > > period > > > > of > > > > > > the Obama administration..... > > > > > > Palin is pretty much on the outs... she even lost her TV contract > > with > > > > Fox > > > > > > News media... I do not wish her ill, but I think her political > > days > > > > are > > > > > > over. > > > > > > You know... speaking of Fox (Rupert Murdoch owned, I think you > > know), > > > > > > there's one economics news personality named "Stuart Varney"... > > > > British > > > > > > fellow... did he do much in England?... he's quite the "tool" over > > > > here.... > > > > > > makes me chuckle with the propaganda and inanities he puts out.... > > but > > > > his > > > > > > English accent and delivery re quite "convincing"... there are > > quite a > > > > few > > > > > > British TV personalities, especially on cable TV channels.... the > > > > > > accent.... it's worth (must be) 50% toward getting hired on, here > > , > > > > I'd say > > > > > > HAR. > > > > > > Economy is on everyone's mind... as it should be.... Unemployment > > rate > > > > > > this month ticked up one decimal point to 7.9%. But today the > > Stock > > > > Market > > > > > > index (Dow) is hovering around 14000, hasn't been there since > > 2007. > > > > So, > > > > > > here at least.... the fat cats are getting fatter (they were fed > > > > plenty by > > > > > > the Govt bailouts) but the rest of the peons are > > > > struggling.....Capitalist > > > > > > economic growth model theories would seem to suggest that those > > > > without are > > > > > > pretty much out of the recovery, for a generation at least.... > > What > > > > does > > > > > > your expertise suggest, Archytas? > > > > > > Britain, I hear, has not seen any appreciable recovery in the > > > > > > "markets".... am I correct in this? > > >http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/01/25/1494541/austerity-pushes-... > > >http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/31/us-funds-poll-britain-idUSB... > > > > > > > Austerity... is that the cause?..... or is it something systemic > > or > > > > > > institutional with the banks and banksters (as you call them).... > > are > > > > they > > > > > > still hemorrhaging money?.... or hoarding it?.... which could > > cause > > > > the > > > > > > same effect? > > > > > > I'm the novice.... how do you see it? > > > > > > > On Friday, February 1, 2013 8:23:59 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > > > > >> We have an outfit called UKIP (UK Independence Party) > > under-cutting > > > > > >> the Tory vote - they have a couple of EU MPs - odd with a policy > > of > > > > > >> exit from EU but down to proportional representation for that > > body. > > > > > >> They don't get enough votes to get anyone in Westminster - but > > > > > >> probably take 15% natural Tory support. We have our own Nazis - > > the > > > > > >> BNP - sometimes taking 9%. Hence the Tory referendum ploy. Mass > > > > > >> politics here is a dumb as in the US - though we haven't thrown > > up > > > > > >> anything as bad as that basketball player shagger from your > > frozen > > > > > >> North yet. Our closest is Nick Griffin (BNP leader) - he'd be a > > real > > > > > >> problem if as pretty as Palin - but looks like a squit-eyed pig > > after > > > > > >> failed botox applications. > > > > > > >> We should be in the EU - tough much of it is farcical. The > > > > Parliament > > > > > >> sits in Brussels and Strasbourg (for a month) and various Mafia > > steal > > > > > >> funding - the whole shebang ain't democratic - and we need a > > modern, > > > > > >> electronic Parliament and a federal structure. > > > > > > >> On Jan 29, 6:59 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > I'm not up on European (and British) politics....at your level. > > It > > > > > >> appears > > > > > >> > to me that "big" ventures require "big" wallets, both at the > > > > private or > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > public levels. Smaller or less developed countries and > > economies > > > > just > > > > > >> > cannot do the "big-ticket" items... the big factories or the > > big > > > > > >> research > > > > > >> > ventures....I cannot see an "isolationist" Britain "going it > > alone" > > > > in > > > > > >> this > > > > > >> > day and age. In this sense, the Tories' > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
