RE: tcmay in favour of redistribution of wealth?

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:15:35 -0800 tcmay wrote:
> While I won't get started again here, understand that my views are much
> more than just "justifiable apathy" about the people of the world.

Justifiable? I dunno bout that. (Sorry couldn't resist.)

>
> My point? I feel more strongly about the death of one of my pets than I do
> about hearing that some natural catastrophe in Bangla Desh has killed
> 100,000. And I think all honest persons will admit that this is a natural
> reaction. The "Hamming distance" matters, and people I have never met on
> the opposite side of the earth simply are _abstract numbers_ to me, as I am
> to them. Natural.

"Natural" is a dangerous word to use. I hadn't met any of the people
involved in
the Oklahoma bombing, nor had most of the world, yet there was worldwide
condemnation of the event. I hadn't met any of Hitler's concentration camp
victims but I'm still outraged at these events.

There are tangents and there are skew lines.

Oh yeah why people think I'm making an attack on Tim's character, his
looks, or whatever I don't understand, all I'm doing is criticising
something he wrote.

Where Walter Wriston/Third World debt is concerned the events are not
natural, we'r not talking about a flood, which is a "natural" event but the
actions of a man, or if you prefer an organisation. There is nothing "natural"
about these.

A country in debt to the IMF/World Bank or Citibank must accept
"Stabilisation Policies" :

"stabilisation policies are often viewed as measures designed primarily
to maintain poverty and dependency of Third World nations while
preserving the global market structure for the industrialised nations."

- "Economics for a Developing World", M P Todaro.

this is also known as "debt slavery". Not so good eh?

Zaid

Hard Media wrote:
> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:15:35 -0800 tcmay wrote:
> > While I won't get started again here, understand that my views are much
> > more than just "justifiable apathy" about the people of the world.

[snip]

> Where Walter Wriston/Third World debt is concerned the events are not
> natural, we'r not talking about a flood, which is a "natural" event but the
> actions of a man, or if you prefer an organisation. There is nothing "natural"
> about these. A country in debt to the IMF/World Bank or Citibank must accept
> "Stabilisation Policies" :

[snip]

Just a short comment: The smart guys will refinance any third-world debt (or similar
debt) as many times as they have to, as long as they can keep the interest payments
coming in.  This is how you get ahead in "new money".

When Reagan and his financiers descended on China in 1985, they commenced a deal that
would make the rapid development of Nazi Germany (a Reagan favorite as well) look like
kid stuff.

Some (not all) economic theories are quite simple, like the physics of flowing water or
falling objects, thus:

In the U.S., for example, you have the world's most highly disciplined and aggressive
consumers, and in China, for example, you are seeing what is becoming the world's
most prolific producers.  Like air flowing into a vacuum, the goods will flow from
the producer to the consumer, and the guys who make money on the interest (primarily)
will do *anything* to maintain that flow.