Should the US leave the WTO, IMF, and World Bank

[DCal430]

And should they be disbanded?

The WTO has been used to as a tool to prevent environmental protection laws, these groups have worked tirelessly to keep poor countries poor as a mean of giving slave slab or to corporations in develop nations.

 

[rchiu]

Is your understanding of WTO from reading blogs and articles that served your bias or from actually working in WTO or other similar organization?

While those organizations aren't perfect and filled with political infighting and bureaucracy (just like any government agencies except 10x more complicated because different governments and interests are involved), they do actually work on some decent initiative. You'd know that if you actually spend one day in those organization, especially on the ground dealing with real world problems.

 

[DCal430]

Is your understanding of WTO from reading blogs and articles that served your bias or from actually working in WTO or other similar organization?

While those organizations aren't perfect and filled with political infighting and bureaucracy (just like any government agencies except 10x more complicated because different governments and interests are involved), they do actually work on some decent initiative. You'd know that if you actually spend one day in those organization, especially on the ground dealing with real world problems.

My understanding comes from my own research and college class work I have taken. There is a reason why every major environmental group opposes the WTO, and why so called trade meetings see so many protestors. It is because of the WTO that dolphins killed tuna can be sold in the U.S.

 

[halik]

My understanding comes from my own research and college class work I have taken. There is a reason why every major environmental group opposes the WTO, and why so called trade meetings see so many protestors. It is because of the WTO that dolphins killed tuna can be sold in the U.S.

That would be incorrect:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...g-in-mexico-dolphin-safe-tuna-dispute-1-.html

Edit:
You may be talking about the 91 GATT thing though:
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/edis04_e.htm

 

[DCal430]

That would be incorrect:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...g-in-mexico-dolphin-safe-tuna-dispute-1-.html

The WTO has ruled the Dolphin Killed tuna can be sold in the U.S, the U.S decided to start adding labels to Dolphin Safe Tuna, the WTO recently said the U.S cannot allow consumers to know which Tuna is dolphin safe and which is dolphin killed. The U.S is appealing the ruling that says we cannot allow consumers to know if Tuna is dolphin killed or not.

Dolphin killed tuna is not actually banned in the U.S, just that since consumers are told what tuna is dolphin killed, stores won't carry dolphin killed tuna.

 

[rchiu]

Oh well see that depends on whose perspective you are coming from. All the rich "environmentalists" from the west with their large house and cushy incomes (Mr. Gore for example) and their feeling for Dolphins of course can care less about Mexican fishermen and their right to feed their family.

 

[DCal430]

Read this about the WTO from the Sierra Club a non profit environmental protection group. They have no political alliance and are motivated by the desire to protect the earth and science.

http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/globalization/wto.aspx

 

[monovillage]

Read this about the WTO from the Sierra Club a non profit environmental protection group. They have no political alliance and are motivated by the desire to protect the earth and science.

http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/globalization/wto.aspx

The Sierra Club has no political alliance?

A product of our failed public school system, and he claims he's in college. It's enough to make a person weep.

 

[rchiu]

Read this about the WTO from the Sierra Club a non profit environmental protection group. They have no political alliance and are motivated by the desire to protect the earth and science.

http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/globalization/wto.aspx

Hmmm, an group focusing on environmental issues complaining about another group focusing on trade and economic......surprise surprise.

I mean seriously, would you rather have people in Sierra club make economic and financial decisions? I mean I respect their action to protect the environment, but not only they will favor environmental concerns over economic any day, but they are clueless when it comes to trade agreements and law.

Let's be realistic, you gotta balance economy and environment. That's why you have your WTO and your environmental groups, they will balance each other. Trust me, I work in an organization like world bank and environmental concern is on every project's agenda because of all these environmental groups. You disband trade organization and let environmental group run the show, the world will be bankrupt in no time.

 

[Infohawk]

And should they be disbanded?

The WTO has been used to as a tool to prevent environmental protection laws, these groups have worked tirelessly to keep poor countries poor as a mean of giving slave slab or to corporations in develop nations.

They should be replaced with institutions for developed democracies. If you have no labor or environmental protections, you shouldn't get to benefit from free trade agreements with the US.

 

[Anarchist420]

Yes they should be abolished. They're anti-market.

 

[JS80]

Yes they should be abolished. They're anti-market.

Since they are anti-market the US should have a huge presence and influence it so it's as least anti-market as possible.

 

[monovillage]

Just the 2012 Sierra Club political endorsements so far. There is so much information about the political involvement of the Sierra Club over the last 40 years or more I was just stunned to actually see someone claim they were not politically allied.

"Senate
State Candidate Party Seat Candidate's Committee
MD Cardin, Ben D I Ben Cardin for Senate
NM Heinrich, Martin D O Martin Heinrich for Senate


House of Representatives
State District Candidate Party Seat Candidate's Committee
CA 3 Garamendi, John D I Garamendi for Congress
CA 20 Farr, Sam D I Friends of Farr Committee
MD 2 Ruppersberger, Dutch D I Dutch Ruppersberger for Congress
MD 3 Sarbanes, John D I Friends of John Sarbanes
MD 4 Edwards, Donna D I Donna Edwards for Congress
MD 5 Hoyer, Steny D I Hoyer for Congress
MD 7 Cummings, Elijah D I Cummings for Congress Campaign Committee
MD 8 Van Hollen, Chris D I Van Hollen for Congress
NM 1 Griego, Eric D DP Griego for Congress
NM 3 Lujan, Ben Ray D I People for Ben
OR 1 Bonimici, Suzanne D SE Bonimici for Congress"

Sierra Club Super Pac anyone?
sorry, FEC glitch, no link

 

[Craig234]

Hmmm, an group focusing on environmental issues complaining about another group focusing on trade and economic......surprise surprise.

I mean seriously, would you rather have people in Sierra club make economic and financial decisions? I mean I respect their action to protect the environment, but not only they will favor environmental concerns over economic any day, but they are clueless when it comes to trade agreements and law.

Let's be realistic, you gotta balance economy and environment. That's why you have your WTO and your environmental groups, they will balance each other. Trust me, I work in an organization like world bank and environmental concern is on every project's agenda because of all these environmental groups. You disband trade organization and let environmental group run the show, the world will be bankrupt in no time.

Lot of nonsense. Some groups who do very bad things have lots of processes and talk around saying the don't - often to deflect the very problems.

"Oh, our police can't possibly be doing the things you suggest - we have processes to investigate and punish any such behavior! Their training says not to do them!"

What does make sense in your post is saying that whatever environmental concerns DO occur in your organization rely on proections like these groups (and the law).

Your comment about the horrors if the environmental groups - who are at a huge disadvantage, relying on goodwill for the environemnt to battle the people who stand to make huge amounts of money by being harmful to the environment - sounds just like what you'd expect from people who make money by opposing them and get warped views as a result.

It's not that you can't find legitimate points - I'm sure there are plenty of cases of problems with environmental groups your organization deals with - but I wouldn't look to someone in your situation for any fair statement aboutthe groups. It's like asking prosecutors to write the balanced plan for defendants' rights.

Prosecutors will correctly tell you they constantly respect defendants' rights, with defendants' rights groups playing an important role - but guess who also violates them?

The environment should not be a partisan issue. All parties should support the environment. It's only the financial corruption of interested parties who don't want to that changes that.

That results in all kinds of funding for propaganda to attack environmentalists - paint them as radicals, anti-business, and so on.

Forget the actual situation that the monied interests constantly win these battles and cause harm and environmentalists are barely reducing that. That things like rainforests are hugely disappearing from the world very quickly, that we're in the middle of the sixth 'great loss of species' in history where biological diversity is under great threat even before you consider climate change.

We could use a lot more influence from the environmental groups - people who generally want both environmental protection and development to do fine responsibly.

 

[Craig234]

Someone to listen to on the issue of reforming these institutions is Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winner for economics and former chief economist for the World Bank (see my sig).

 

[Rifter]

Read this about the WTO from the Sierra Club a non profit environmental protection group. They have no political alliance and are motivated by the desire to protect the earth and science.

http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/globalization/wto.aspx

You are insane of you believe that.

EDIT: monovilliage covered it, thank god. But i guess the chances of anyone with a brain buying that BS was slim anyways.

 

[DCal430]

Look at Chocolate. Over 50% of the Chocolate in the world is grown using slave labor, I don't mean low wage labor, I mean actual slavery.

Companies and these groups talk about ending the practice, but they have done nothing to help stop it. intact they seem to be helping to enable it. It is a horrible thing. Remember the next time you take a bite into non fair trade chocolate bar remember a child slave was used to produce it.

 

[rchiu]

Lot of nonsense. Some groups who do very bad things have lots of processes and talk around saying the don't - often to deflect the very problems.

"Oh, our police can't possibly be doing the things you suggest - we have processes to investigate and punish any such behavior! Their training says not to do them!"

What does make sense in your post is saying that whatever environmental concerns DO occur in your organization rely on proections like these groups (and the law).

Your comment about the horrors if the environmental groups - who are at a huge disadvantage, relying on goodwill for the environemnt to battle the people who stand to make huge amounts of money by being harmful to the environment - sounds just like what you'd expect from people who make money by opposing them and get warped views as a result.

It's not that you can't find legitimate points - I'm sure there are plenty of cases of problems with environmental groups your organization deals with - but I wouldn't look to someone in your situation for any fair statement aboutthe groups. It's like asking prosecutors to write the balanced plan for defendants' rights.

Prosecutors will correctly tell you they constantly respect defendants' rights, with defendants' rights groups playing an important role - but guess who also violates them?

The environment should not be a partisan issue. All parties should support the environment. It's only the financial corruption of interested parties who don't want to that changes that.

That results in all kinds of funding for propaganda to attack environmentalists - paint them as radicals, anti-business, and so on.

Forget the actual situation that the monied interests constantly win these battles and cause harm and environmentalists are barely reducing that. That things like rainforests are hugely disappearing from the world very quickly, that we're in the middle of the sixth 'great loss of species' in history where biological diversity is under great threat even before you consider climate change.

We could use a lot more influence from the environmental groups - people who generally want both environmental protection and development to do fine responsibly.

You gotta be joking right? Have you worked in government agencies or international organization such as world bank and similar? If you work on any projects or initiative, 2 things you MUST mention in the concept papers, 1) Impact on environment and 2) Impact on gender equity. I have seen projects with no relevance to those topics forced to come up with some BS just so it can be pushed through.

Disadvantage my @ss. Environmentalist don't rely on "good will", they have huge political and money machine behind them. It's a huge business from actual alternative energy products to consulting services. Democrats practically run on environment platform. To think those people are bunch of students and volunteers running behind some idea is quite naive.

I have no problem with people honestly balancing environmental and economic view. But I have seen too many westerners with their huge house and nice jobs having the luxury to worry about Dolphins and other lovely animals and questioning why dirt poor developing nations do certain things to survive in the expense of the environment. Sometime is so ridiculous and it's laughable.

Go travel to different part of world and you'd find what westerners call slave wage/slave condition/under age workers, are sometime the only way those people can provide for their family. They are already poor and suffering, and environmentalist/politicians solution is to take away their livelihood by not buying their product. I mean seriously, those environmentalist can sound so cool with their protecting the planets and love the animal speeches, but in reality, ugly/uncool businessman do far more for the poor and the human society than those environmentalist could ever deliver.

 

[SamurAchzar]

You gotta be joking right? Have you worked in government agencies or international organization such as world bank and similar? If you work on any projects or initiative, 2 things you MUST mention in the concept papers, 1) Impact on environment and 2) Impact on gender equity. I have seen projects with no relevance to those topics forced to come up with some BS just so it can be pushed through.

Disadvantage my @ss. Environmentalist don't rely on "good will", they have huge political and money machine behind them. It's a huge business from actual alternative energy products to consulting services. Democrats practically run on environment platform. To think those people are bunch of students and volunteers running behind some idea is quite naive.

I have no problem with people honestly balancing environmental and economic view. But I have seen too many westerners with their huge house and nice jobs having the luxury to worry about Dolphins and other lovely animals and questioning why dirt poor developing nations do certain things to survive in the expense of the environment. Sometime is so ridiculous and it's laughable.

Go travel to different part of world and you'd find what westerners call slave wage/slave condition/under age workers, are sometime the only way those people can provide for their family. They are already poor and suffering, and environmentalist/politicians solution is to take away their livelihood by not buying their product. I mean seriously, those environmentalist can sound so cool with their protecting the planets and love the animal speeches, but in reality, ugly/uncool businessman do far more for the poor and the human society than those environmentalist could ever deliver.

Hear, hear.

 

[Atreus21]

You gotta be joking right? Have you worked in government agencies or international organization such as world bank and similar? If you work on any projects or initiative, 2 things you MUST mention in the concept papers, 1) Impact on environment and 2) Impact on gender equity. I have seen projects with no relevance to those topics forced to come up with some BS just so it can be pushed through.

Disadvantage my @ss. Environmentalist don't rely on "good will", they have huge political and money machine behind them. It's a huge business from actual alternative energy products to consulting services. Democrats practically run on environment platform. To think those people are bunch of students and volunteers running behind some idea is quite naive.

I have no problem with people honestly balancing environmental and economic view. But I have seen too many westerners with their huge house and nice jobs having the luxury to worry about Dolphins and other lovely animals and questioning why dirt poor developing nations do certain things to survive in the expense of the environment. Sometime is so ridiculous and it's laughable.

Go travel to different part of world and you'd find what westerners call slave wage/slave condition/under age workers, are sometime the only way those people can provide for their family. They are already poor and suffering, and environmentalist/politicians solution is to take away their livelihood by not buying their product. I mean seriously, those environmentalist can sound so cool with their protecting the planets and love the animal speeches, but in reality, ugly/uncool businessman do far more for the poor and the human society than those environmentalist could ever deliver.

Wait, you read Craig's post?

 

[drebo]

The US should leave the WTO, the IMF, the World Bank, AND the UN.

 

[desertdweller]

You gotta be joking right? Have you worked in government agencies or international organization such as world bank and similar? If you work on any projects or initiative, 2 things you MUST mention in the concept papers, 1) Impact on environment and 2) Impact on gender equity. I have seen projects with no relevance to those topics forced to come up with some BS just so it can be pushed through.

Disadvantage my @ss. Environmentalist don't rely on "good will", they have huge political and money machine behind them. It's a huge business from actual alternative energy products to consulting services. Democrats practically run on environment platform. To think those people are bunch of students and volunteers running behind some idea is quite naive.

I have no problem with people honestly balancing environmental and economic view. But I have seen too many westerners with their huge house and nice jobs having the luxury to worry about Dolphins and other lovely animals and questioning why dirt poor developing nations do certain things to survive in the expense of the environment. Sometime is so ridiculous and it's laughable.

Go travel to different part of world and you'd find what westerners call slave wage/slave condition/under age workers, are sometime the only way those people can provide for their family. They are already poor and suffering, and environmentalist/politicians solution is to take away their livelihood by not buying their product. I mean seriously, those environmentalist can sound so cool with their protecting the planets and love the animal speeches, but in reality, ugly/uncool businessman do far more for the poor and the human society than those environmentalist could ever deliver.

The issue with the WTO is the same as with the World Court. I don't want any world authority telling the US what laws we can and can't write for our own people.

 

[Craig234]

You gotta be joking right? Have you worked in government agencies or international organization such as world bank and similar? If you work on any projects or initiative, 2 things you MUST mention in the concept papers, 1) Impact on environment and 2) Impact on gender equity. I have seen projects with no relevance to those topics forced to come up with some BS just so it can be pushed through.

Disadvantage my @ss. Environmentalist don't rely on "good will", they have huge political and money machine behind them. It's a huge business from actual alternative energy products to consulting services. Democrats practically run on environment platform. To think those people are bunch of students and volunteers running behind some idea is quite naive.

I have no problem with people honestly balancing environmental and economic view. But I have seen too many westerners with their huge house and nice jobs having the luxury to worry about Dolphins and other lovely animals and questioning why dirt poor developing nations do certain things to survive in the expense of the environment. Sometime is so ridiculous and it's laughable.

Go travel to different part of world and you'd find what westerners call slave wage/slave condition/under age workers, are sometime the only way those people can provide for their family. They are already poor and suffering, and environmentalist/politicians solution is to take away their livelihood by not buying their product. I mean seriously, those environmentalist can sound so cool with their protecting the planets and love the animal speeches, but in reality, ugly/uncool businessman do far more for the poor and the human society than those environmentalist could ever deliver.

You are clueless. What part of the finance industry making donations *BECAUSE THE PROFIT IMMENSELY BY THEIR AGENDA BEING IMPLEMENTED* as opposed to environmental interests *WHOSE DONORS GENERALLY DO NOT PROFIT FROM THEIR AGENDA BEING IMPLEMENTED* and who donate out of goodwill wanting to care for the environment as an EXPENSE can you not get?

You think environmental groups can match the finance industry in donating, eh?

 

[monovillage]

Wait, you read Craig's post?

What's even funnier is he asked him about actually working.

 

[rchiu]

The issue with the WTO is the same as with the World Court. I don't want any world authority telling the US what laws we can and can't write for our own people.

The question back to you is do you want US to engage in the world community or not?

You need to realize it's a give and take process in any international discussion and for US to take some, you have to give some. But make no mistake, if you have been in any international organization like I do, you'd know that US is always THE most powerful presence in most world organization, WTO, UN, WB, you name it. US and the western allies have much more says than countries like China, USSR, and few other non-US alliance countries.

And any laws in world court, WTO and others all need to go through their member countries approval, so the US representation already reviewed and approve most laws and proposal. Those US doesn't want to follow, there are clear out clause for the US. There is no such thing as "world authority", right now, US and the western allies are pretty much as close to "world authority" as there is. Anything US need to "give", that's because it's a compromise to "take" a bigger piece of pie. My suggest is US continue to join these entities and reap the benefit.