Fill in the blanks -- need your opinions.

[xpanda]

Globalisation has been quite the hot topic in political, economic and trade debates over the past two decades. Since the protests at the WTO summit in Seattle, this debate has taken on a life of its own. I'm writing an article on the perceptions that exist surrounding globalisation and would love to hear your thoughts. (Even yours, KMan,

)

Thanks.



You know how it works:

Globalisation is ___________ because ________________________.

On the other hand, globalisation could be ___________ if _____________.

 

[PatPatriot]

Top of the morning X! Ill give you an opinion little later..half ass busy right now.

 

[KMAN]

Globalisation is good because the more competition the beter the products/services.

On the other hand, globalisation could be bad if American companies don't make the best products/services because the consumer money will be going to companies out of the US.


Is this what you are looking for?

 

[xpanda]

I am looking for whatever your initial response to those blanks is. If that is indeed your opinion, then, yes. And thanks.

 

[PatPatriot]

1)Another word for communism
2)Koffi Anan and his band of UN pygmys want to regulate US buis.

1)really dangerous
2)if US citizens have to be under some sort of world rules or laws outside the US Constitution.

 

[xpanda]

Patriot:

What are your thoughts on US-based companies moving into other countries to either buy or to sell? Should the laws of the US Constitution follow them or should they comply with the laws of the new 'host' country?

 

[PatPatriot]

X...I probably didn't answer the ques. very fairly or complete...simply because i don't know enough about it so that is my bumper sticker response.

I would think that the laws of a particular country would apply to americna buis. in that country.
When I hear the UN talk about a world court I shudder.
If your talking about human rights,we should not do buis. with violaters but other countries do anyway...defeating the whole purpose.

 

[xpanda]

Well, well, well ... seems we may agree on something (for different reasons, tho, I suspect.)

It is the WTO's principle mandate to ensure that no business engaged in international trade is treated unfairly by its extension nation through tarriffs or other trade barriers? This out and out includes a ban on nations passing laws stating that a business cannot operate in a country who practices human rights abuses. In other words, the WTO has put the rights of the corporation above those of the individual.

The US has 42 corporations of their 80-some odd that made the top-200 list globally who routinely engage in trade practices with nations who have made human rights violations part of their economic mandate. Most notably is Bangladesh, where an organisation (I forget what it's acronym is now) makes it illegal to form a labour union, and has lowered the national minimum wage for companies who are members. WalMart, GE, Disney, Nike (who also have their swoosh! logo on the rear windshields of police cars there) and a major handful of others all do business and are members of this organisation. WalMart has never paid a cent in taxes.

While I am all for the Libertarian model of free-markets, the WTO is doing everything in its power to limit human power in the land of corporations, which is precisely the root requirement for a market to truly be free.

Don't even get me started on the IMF.