Comments on Why they're wrong | The Economist - 0 views
-
There have been some real gains in middle-class jobs by giving tax incentives to multinationals to set up headquarters here, but those can go quite quickly if somebody gives a better incentive somewhere else. This is the situation at the peak, when Panama has absorbed tons of capital from Venezuela's collapse, and just finished going through a gigantic real-estate boom. Things are starting to go downhill now - and of course, that means going back to the status quo which is considerably more precarious to the original one before the boom. Basically, there were beneficiaries, but in the end, everything "inneficient" (read: not owned by multinationals or national champions) got axed. In conclusion, the world is being enslaved by multinationals and whoever benefits is at their mercy.
-
kurt stavenhagen on 09 Oct 16Seems truth; multinationals rule.
-
-
It is hard to imagine, 173 years later, a leading Western newspaper discussing globalization without a mere mention of its ecological implications. Are humans better off in the short term pillaging every last acre of rainforest and sapping every last drip of oil from under the earth rather than living more modestly and sustainably? YES. Is that ordained avariciousness hurtling us towards ecological catastrophe? This newspaper is not qualified to say, and shouldn't stake claims to anything but its unapologetic defence of the dismal science. Critical thinkers should halt abruptly the comforting lullaby that prompts (apparently) the likes of Larry Ellison to say "I used to think, now I read the Economist". They should look up from their chequebooks long enough to see the impact of the ecological warfare that this newspaper has championed for generations. We must improve globalization, but not before we rebalance capitalism. Natural capital MUST be taken into the equation for our species (and particularly those in fragile economies) to have a chance of flourishing beyond the quarterly reports, annual bonuses and election cycles that keep us chained to our myopic greed.
-
I am really surprised the economist allowed such a generic article in favour of free trade to be published.