World Economics

[TSR]

This may well just be the ramblings of an idiot, but I’m gonna type them anyway. Just wondering if I’m insane really, or if anyone agrees with any part of this

---

There’s currently a set amount of money in the world, with a select few countries controlling it (these being your ‘first world’ countries such as Europe, America). In order for developing nations to develop, they are going to need money. Now, as there is a set amount of money in the pot, the current first world countries are going to have to give up some of that money in order for a third world country to have it. This will mean a drastic lifestyle cut for the inhabitants of the first world countries – and job losses.

The governments of the first world countries don’t want this, and so do things like provoke wars, give support to rebels, declare certain countries as evil and keep them poor/destroy them when they start to develop or become too much of a threat.

In Africa, they mine diamonds. We forbid them from selling diamonds, then send our arms dealers over…who, of course, take diamonds as payment. In effect, we take whatever money they mine AND keep them in a civil war in 1 go. Keep them in poverty, keep them from developing, add money into our pot.
Africa also has plentiful coal and oil supplies, however we prevent them from using them due to “global warming” and thusly prevent the economy from developing. There are many scientists who claim that “man made global warming” is a myth, and that the earth is simply being affected by sunspots…however that is another topic

(not the best link)

The governments manipulate the media into telling us who is good, and who is evil. However, can we really allow ourselves to be manipulated in this way in the modern world? With improved travel, the world is getting smaller. The last centuries foreigner was yesterdays neighbour and tomorrows business partner.

Back in 1588, the English navy wasn’t much to speak of, and when the first Spanish armada launched against England, a large number of merchant ships went out to meet them. Private entrepreneurs who saw the chance of a profit (through capturing ships). Could this form of capitalism be used in todays world? Minus the killing, of course. Companies who decide that they will do business wherever they want simply because there is a demand there: farmers making superfarms in starving communities.

In days gone by, we also had “Gentleman Capitalists,” who donated buildings such as churches. Is it time we started to encourage this form of behaviour again? “I am going to do business in your region, employ your locals, make a fortune, and I will also donate this sports center/school.”

Not everything is about profit.

[Jaemi]

Your video doesn't work.

[TSR]

i didn't intend for it to be embeded either. forgot about that. was an offshoot anyway for another thread and took 2 secs to find on google

[djtoast]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIuNxy6i1o0

is the link to the video, paste into url bar i guess

[UncleDave]

There isnt a set amount of money in the world, banks print new money all the time. There is a limited amount of RESOURCES in the world, and thats all that is really important. The money itself is just cotton paper, it's what that money represents that has actual value. I don't buy that developing countries NEED to take from rich countries in order to grow, although that view is so widespread that it's probably self-fulfilling. Sustainable growth worldwide is possible, but it would require a level of co-operation that human beings, being generally dicks, are for the most part incapable.

Cheers!

[Crazy Ian]

Originally Posted by TSR

Back in 1588, the English navy wasn’t much to speak of, and when the first Spanish armada launched against England, a large number of merchant ships went out to meet them. Private entrepreneurs who saw the chance of a profit (through capturing ships). Could this form of capitalism be used in todays world? Minus the killing, of course. Companies who decide that they will do business wherever they want simply because there is a demand there: farmers making superfarms in starving communities.

Hate to be pedantic... but the first Spanish Armada was destroyed a few years before 1588 (Drake launched a harbour raid that set them back a few years) And the second one in 1588 was obliterated with Fireships (Old sailships that were set fire too and kamikazied into the enemy) "Prize money" from capturing Ships only really came into practice in Nelsons day, hence a unhealthy obsession with boarding your opponent.

What your referring too were the Privateers (Legalised pirates) that raided the Spanish/Portugese treasure ships on their way back from the New World. Likewise Spanish and Portugese privateers did the same to us as well as themselves. Basically they were provided a letter of mark by their patron soverign to rape, loot and pillage all in the name of the King/Queen/Parliment (In the case of the Dutch)

[TSR]

Originally Posted by UncleDave

There isnt a set amount of money in the world, banks print new money all the time. There is a limited amount of RESOURCES in the world, and thats all that is really important. The money itself is just cotton paper, it's what that money represents that has actual value.

i meant 'money' in that sense. it was a poor word choice on my part

I don't buy that developing countries NEED to take from rich countries in order to grow

might not need to take, but if they're not giving it to the rich contries (for example: by buying guns) then the rich countries won't get richer...or they'll find it much harder, at least

Sustainable growth worldwide is possible, but it would require a level of co-operation that human beings, being generally dicks, are for the most part incapable.

Originally Posted by Crazy Ian

Hate to be pedantic... but the first Spanish Armada was destroyed a few years before 1588 (Drake launched a harbour raid that set them back a few years) And the second one in 1588 was obliterated with Fireships (Old sailships that were set fire too and kamikazied into the enemy) "Prize money" from capturing Ships only really came into practice in Nelsons day, hence a unhealthy obsession with boarding your opponent.

i pulled that part off Discovery channel, too

[poprock]

Originally Posted by TSR

In days gone by, we also had “Gentleman Capitalists,” who donated buildings such as churches. Is it time we started to encourage this form of behaviour again? “I am going to do business in your region, employ your locals, make a fortune, and I will also donate this sports center/school.”

Not everything is about profit.

This still happens. I have clients who work that way.

Besides the humanitarian (and PR) value of it, the workforce over there are an asset—enriching their lives can only be good for your business. Happier workers, greater loyalty, etc.

[Crazy Ian]

Originally Posted by TSR

i pulled that part off Discovery channel, too

I wish I had... would have saved all those wasted years being obsessed with Ships and naval battles as a kid

[TSR]

pffft - that's not a waste

[erithromycin]

There isn't a finite amount of money, nor, arguably, a finite amount of resources, just a near-finite (in that the edges are fuzzy) quantity of physical things that can be paid for that are 'raw'. Nonetheless, the quantity of money is always increasing, as a result of economic growth, efficiencies, and things like inflation. So there is more money in the system all the time, though some of that money is 'unbacked' in a physical sense, being a product of debt.

Also, this is imaginary money. African debt is insignificant in international terms.

As of 11 Oct 2007 at 02:44:13 PM GMT
Total Debt Africa: $   300,000,000,000    [approx]
Total Debt U.S.A.: $ 9,056,621,324,805    [approx]

[UncleDave]

Time is a resource. In fact there is a school of economic thought that says the only resource that matters is human time and effort.

Cheers!

[PrincessGarnet]

The IMF and World Bank (i believe europe gets to choose leader of IMF and america World bank - an agreement they have) have a lot to do with keeping poorer countries down, as they demand that the economies of poorer countries should open completely. The idea (neo-liberal) is that capital will follow to the most productive places, but then the problem is that rich countries have protective poliicies, and have great subsides on food that make it cheaper than locally produced products in poorer countries, therefore local people buy the cheaper european/american things and therefore are putting farmers and workers in that country out of business, thus leaving them totally dependant on rich countries, just the way we like it - then they get in so much debt they are more reliant and we get cheap cotton etc

Also world bank and IMF cause problems to countries by making the state get rid of welfare and limit public spending.

Bad leadership is also a problem in many countries. But then in the case of Africa, the France actively support some dictators and send troops to fend off any groups trying to get democracy. This is a very interesting article if anyone is interested :http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle3030349.ece

[Dec]

Should have never given you niggas money, you don't appreciate shit.