The myths we have been promoting about population growth and control may well advance our economic and social decline.
The term demographic-economic paradox refers to the inverse relationship between economic progress and birth rates. Education and wealth go up at the cost of birth rates. This has been observed in almost all developed and developing nations. Although countries like China and India have government-sponsored programs to restrict their populations, unbiased population metrics from the Western countries and industrialized Asian nations like Japan and South Korea confirm this.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Glenn Contrarian
Mark -
You're a poor jobless man in a third-world country. Choose one:
1 - A factory opens up. You'll sweat your butt off working long, hard hours in fairly unsafe conditions for a boss who could care less if you live or die, or
2 - A factory opens up. You don't want to work in a sweatshop, so you stay unemployed and your children still don't eat.
Choose one.
27 - Mark
3. I join the rebels in the mountains.
28 - Vijai
Mark, not if the returns are compelling enough. It is fallacious to assume that all emerging nations are unfair uniformly in paying wages. I mentioned before that one of the reasons investment doesn't take place in some countries could cimply be corruption. I would the rule of law to the list of reasons. Many insurance companies are reluctant to invest in Russia for this reason.
Paying low wages is not always the reason why a company invests abroad; it could be that the country's domestic market can absorb the price of a product or service even if with fair wages.
That said, if fair wages are a detriment to foreign investment, then such investment is simply not the kind of emancipation I talked about in the article. It doesn't empower people, rather it reduces them to precisely the kind of commodities the family planners considered them.
29 - Vijai
Mark, my reply (#28) was in response to your post #24.
To your post #27- there are many in India who rebel against the government from the mountains- they are an outlawed group which calls itself the 'Communist Part of India-Marxist, Leninist' which called 'Maoists' by the rest in India. They are an internationally connected group in India with ties to subversive political elemtns in China, Nepal, the Philippines and other countries. Their methods are pretty brutal against both Indian soldiers and civilians.
I think I can safely assume that these are not the kind of rebels you would join, but rather those of a justice-seeking, perhaps even non-violent, civil-disobedient variety.
In such a situation I would certainly join you in such a group, but I would work to make my ends meet as well. In a stratified society that is unjust by passivity and indifference; and not by any conscious slavery, I may still have a chance to right the wrongs if the rule of law exists.
30 - roger nowosielski
Thanks, Glenn.
Of course we're not living in a perfect world, and historically, no question all if not most economic systems have been based on exploitation. But I'm certain you're not going to argue that's right.
Question: Why can't cooperation be adopted as the organizing principle? Why not pay the workers and laborers fair wages?
I do disagree with STM on lots of issues - mostly, his blind belief in Anglo-Saxon law as the protector of our way of life - but I will give him one thing, He is adamant about workers getting their fair share. They're the indispensable element of the production process. Human labor is just as important, if not more, than capital.
I'm certain you don't disagree with any of the above. Nonetheless, I do appreciate your distinction, the same distinction Vijai may have had in mind, as regards the treatment of the outcast.
But after all is said and done, I simply refuse to honor arguments on behalf of comparative advantages and disadvantages. I refuse to pat myself on the back simply because we're doing better than our neighbors or the rest of the world.
As far as I am concerned, human dignity is on the line, and exploitation has no legitimate part to play in any such schema. It's not to be relativized or sugar-coated in the interest of "the greater good," or any instrumental purpose one may think of.
It's simply wrong - morally wrong, I should add - and my position is it ought not be condoned in the interest of "greater utility."
Let's just disavow ourselves of the practice, in the same way that usury once was, condemned as it should have been by the Catholic church.
Wrong is wrong, Glenn. I simply refuse to console myself with arguments to the contrary.
31 - Glenn Contrarian
Mark -
If you run to the mountains, you can't feed your children. How do you feed your children?
32 - Mark
That said, if fair wages are a detriment to foreign investment, then such investment is simply not the kind of emancipation I talked about in the article. It doesn't empower people, rather it reduces them to precisely the kind of commodities the family planners considered them.
Vijai, we agree on this, and on our choice of 'rebels'.
33 - Mark
Actually, Glenn, my children might well fare better with the rebels. See the Zapatista's in Mexico for an example.
34 - Glenn Contrarian
Roger -
Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not condoning exploitation - of course not! But nations and cultures are as they are...and we have to deal with them - and with people - as best we can.
I think a wonderful example is China, perhaps the single most exploited nation of the past two centuries (between the Opium Wars and the Japanese and the 'friendship' they had with the Soviet Union...and a little someone named Mao). Their working conditions for so long were deplorable at best...but they're getting better - and in some places, a LOT better.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that you yourself are imposing your morality (that you share with millions of other good people)...but hundreds of millions of equally good people face the same dilemma I presented to Mark, and so willingly allow themselves to be exploited in the hope that sooner or later they can rise above their station...
...as so many millions in China have done - and also in the Philippines where I will be retiring later this year.
You can't impose your morality, Roger...but you CAN help to improve their station by doing business with them.
I'll never forget last year when we went to Baguio, a mountain resort in the Philippines. My wife and I were eating at a restaurant, and a young woman was working hard to serve us. We left a 200-piso (four-dollar) tip and walked to the door. Behind us we heard a loud squeal and looked back, and the young woman was jumping up and down in glee, saying "Akin na! Akin na!" (It's mine now!). The next day we paid thirty dollars for a three-hour, 100-mile cab ride to the beach. He honestly didn't expect the ten-dollar tip, and would've been happy with the thirty dollars.
So while you and I might call paying lower wages 'exploitation', those who are being exploited might actually be calling it an opportunity to someday rise above their present station. But I'll be the first to say that it should be their call, not yours or mine.
35 - roger nowosielski
"That said, if fair wages are a detriment to foreign investment, then such investment is simply not the kind of emancipation I talked about in the article. It doesn't empower people, rather it reduces them to precisely the kind of commodities the family planners considered them."
That is a fair statement.
It's a whole another thing, however, to argue that companies investing overseas are motivated only by the domestic markets. They'll do what they can and what they can get away with.
It's not an ideal world, Vijai, get it through your head. And even though India, or whatever country you may be from, may benefit as a result, exploitation is exploitation.
I doesn't matter how nicely you're trying to dress it up. It's still ugly to the core.
36 - Glenn Contrarian
Mark -
Actually, Glenn, my children might well fare better with the rebels. See the Zapatista's in Mexico for an example.
And maybe not - see the drug war going on in Mexico right now.
But let's play your game for a moment. New choice:
1 - Be exploited by working long, hard hours for little money at the factory.
2 - Stay unemployed and have no way to feed your children.
3 - Head up to the mountains and join the rebels...with the full knowledge that you've no assurance that your children will be fed, and a strong likelihood that they'll receive FAR less education being so far away from the city (and I can cite you many, many examples of this just off the top of my head). And don't forget - you're with the rebels, which means you might be trying to raise your kids in a war zone.
What will a responsible parent do?
P.S. I'll be living in Metro Manila later this year - and it's FAR safer there than in the mountains...and safer than in many parts of America. Compared to most Americans, I do have somewhat of a clue when it comes to third-world countries (but there are BC writers (like Dave, Clavos, Vijai, and several others) whose experience matches or far exceeds my own).
37 - Cindy
The places where trade has brought the most benefit are those where it has been allowed to be free and relatively unhindered by government.
Which places would these be, Dave?
38 - Vijai
Glenn-
While I agree with your last comment, there is another dilemma that I have not been able to resolve. China, India and many other countries employ workers at wages which may be low by their own standards. There are certain points at which it very clearly becomes indentured labor and we simply cannot keep from protesting. Other examples- child labor, prostitution, etc. In the Philippines an organization called the International Justice Mission which I deeply respect works with government agencies and the local police force to expose such instances of modern slavery, especially sexual slavery. On one occasion reported in the US media, however, when a local 'whorehouse' in the country was reported, raided and the girls there were told that they were finally free, one of them asked an IJM worker 'Why are you doing this to us?' This was their only means of income. IJM does provide rehabilitation services as well. These rehabilitation services include providing decent employment which would still not meet the First World's criteria of being paid fairly, but it is not dehumanizing as prostitution is.
Another example. I was en route to India from the US last summer on a flight which stopped in Dubai for a day's layover. Some friends took me around the city. Dubai is a clean, gleaming, rich city that looks a lot like some US cities. Of course it is common knowledge though that over 46 percent of the city's residents do not live in conditions anywhere close to what you see in Dubai. They- mostly immirgants from South Asia, South Eas Asia and China- live in squalid conditions in a towen 2 hours awawy from downtown called Sonapu- literally the 'City of Gold' in Hindi. The workers live 10 to a room, with no air conditioning in temperatures touching 120 F, paid poorly- but enough to send some meagre savings to relatives (after sharing a small apartment with several others). Many are badly treated, work nearly 18 hours a day in appaling conditions.
Dubai's citizens get angry when their plight is mentioned. They are outraged that a foreigner (especially if she happens to be a Westerner) can raise such topics when her own history is full of exploitation. Besides, they say, the workers are free to leave. Why don't they? They do not because they would rather live as slaves and earn their meager pay than live freely with their families and in extreme poverty in their countries.
Noone in their right mind could call this ethical, morally right or anything near it. But there is a crazy logic to the Dubai-ite's argument. Perhaps the better question to ask is: if Dubai can call itself a First World country, then what business does it have exploiting people in their own soil?
Or perhaps we should ask ourselves, what business do we have supporting such countries with our business or political allegiences? I think you and I know that these will remain rhetorical questions. Human interactions in business and politics are often very pragmatic. In that sense I can agree with Roger when he says 'Wrong is Wrong'. But I also think we have to engage the powers that be in changing laws. No change happens in the blink of an eye.
39 - roger nowosielski
Glenn,
I happen to think that we've come to the point, all humanity in fact, that we can help and fend for one another without the usual guise. Let's just do it.
Capitalism is a disease, soon to be proven an anachronism. It had never improved the quality of people's lives beyond providing them with material goods - refrigerators, color TVs, all that nonsense.
Believe you me. I wasn't born here. I am Russian and Polish, though I have long lost touch. These people are happier, without all the amenities that America provides to all its citizens and all wanna-bees than the poor folk who have none of this. Their spirit is unmatched; ours, perhaps because we tend to value everything by what's material in life, sucks.
I don't count material progress as progress, not always and not necessarily. That's a peculiarly American idea, and I have great reservations about it. It's dumbing our population, making it into robots. Is this what you want?
Fuck consumer goods, fuck WalMart and all the amenities. Human spirit is far more important to me than creature comforts, never mind opulence. We're more like an Animal Farm than a human society.
And you're trying to sell this program to the rest of the world?
40 - Cindy
26 - What is the point Glenn? Let's say I toss you into a walled ghetto prison and the choice is:
A) Kill and eat rats
B) Starve
41 - Vijai
Roger, your comment: "It's a whole another thing, however, to argue that companies investing overseas are motivated only by the domestic markets. They'll do what they can and what they can get away with."
I don't disagree. But to say that they are motivated only by low wages is also equally a fallacy.
I think you are influenced by a lot of similar debates with several others that you think I imply something when I do not. I'm really unable to understand some of your points which are out of line with what I have been talking about. It may be perhaps that as an Indian I'm completely clueless and obtuse about your superior comprehension and logical acbility.
42 - roger nowosielski
$37
Great point, Cindy.
But I've long given up on being a careful reader on some of our contributors.
43 - Cindy
Question: Why can't cooperation be adopted as the organizing principle? Why not pay the workers and laborers fair wages?
Because the entire model is based on competition. It is counter-productive. Also, in order to manufacture consumers one needs to brainwash people into attending to insignificant trivial and judge each other and themselves based on superficial qualities.
The whole idea of cooperation would be based on actually thinking of people as human beings, instead of objects. If people started to do that, the system of Capitalism would not work.
44 - Mark
Vijai #41, I don't think anyone is arguing for 'only'. But from this side of the pond(s) it looks like low wages are a pretty important motivation.
45 - Cindy
43 - More: Profit markets require predatory practices.
46 - Cindy
I have a lot to say to #34 Glenn. I might need until tomorrow. I have to look something up. So check back, for an eventual response.
47 - Dave Nalle
Mark. Now, 200 years after the heydey of slavery, who is better off, the black African or the black American?
I rest my case.
Dave
48 - roger nowosielski
No need to get on a defensive, Vijai. As a matter of fact, I respect your reasoning powers. In fact, it's quite refreshing to be discussing matter with such as yourself than the average American and his or her dull mentality.
But to get to the point, Vijai.
I simply don't believe that the raison d'être, the main motivation behind foreign investment is anything like you are proposing. To spell it out, it's just a version of colonialism, pure and simple. And again, dress it as you like, I simply won't buy it.
I am truly sorry that for some inexplicable reason you feel obligated to kowtow to the powers that be - American imperialism, Western kind of benevolence, the Manifest Destiny or the White Man's Burden.
For myself, I'm happy to say that I have been liberated from these rather oppressive concepts.
But what I do regret, however, is that you're still somehow beholden by the West.
See, Vijai. I am more critical of my own country than you can ever imagine. But you, on the other hand, are trying to valorize it.
And for what reason? Simply because India, or whatever country you're from, is likely to benefit from America's stupidity?
I would say, Vijai, that what you're expressing thus far, your principled stand on behalf of capitalism and free markets, even if it involves exploitation, is a poor excuse indeed for pure selfishness and fending for yourself, your countrymen and all.
I will not say it improper motivation. We all should care for all who are dear to us.
Still, you're being disingenuous. You espouse the goodness that is likely to incur to your own county, any country in fact, even it comes as a result of injustice.
49 - Dave Nalle
The places where trade has brought the most benefit are those where it has been allowed to be free and relatively unhindered by government.
Which places would these be, Dave?
Hong Kong would be an excellent example. Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, plenty of others. You can look at the developing world and see a direct relationship between the level of free trade, the level of government corruption and the rate of economic development.
Dave
50 - Vijai
You presume more than needed, Roger.
Help me undestand- what do you suggest poor communities do to enhance their lives?
I'm not rooting for India or any particular country. What is your solution? You are against free trade, capitalism, money (or maybe even people) crossing national boundaries, fine. I could not care less if these communities did not have Western lifestyles. I do however see peace, education, health, community, and other enhancements to life as essential.
So please enlighten me. How does one achieve this ina society?
51 - roger nowosielski
I am not against cooperation, Vijai. We all should benefit from and share all our resources.
I just don't see the capitalist model you espouse is the one that's going to bring happiness to us all.
In fact, it's failing, and more than miserably, with respect to its own citizens.
So the question is, why would you want to adopt and valorize a system that's obviously nothing but abject failure.
And lest you disagree, yes, I do view it as an abject failure.
I should think that India can do and is doing better, with or without America.
So please, don't pattern yourself after us. It's a road to disaster.
52 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
The three examples you give of small-government countries are chock-full of holes.
Hong Kong is part of China and will lose its 'special' status in 2047. If you'll recall, Hong Kong's riches were built upon what the modern world would call the exploited labor of untold millions of coolies and opium addicts.
Costa Rica is a small country that - IIRC - doesn't even have a military...and all those taxes that would otherwise go to the military enables their government to do what they need to do for a lot lower cost.
And much the same for the DR and I gotta go the wife just came home BYE!
53 - Vijai
I'm no ideologue. I have no special love for any political or economic system, but to achieve the essentials of life I mentioned above I think certain elements of capitalism are- as far as I can see- irreplacable. This involves the freedom to choose one's avenues of investment within the laws of the land, to employ people at fair remuneration, to innovate so that you can sustain your business in an environment that has competing products and services.
My dad worked for a "development bank" in India which was formed by a special charter of the Government in the 1960s to foster industrial growth. It required the bank to look for avenues of investment for uniform, balanced development rather than profit motive. And so it did. The bank helped many business to grow in an environment in which we had very lkittle foreign investment- the socialistic India of the 1950s through the 80s. Eventually the bank was saddled with what we called NPAs- non performing assets- meaning businesses which could not repay the debt. Almost all of this was written off by the bank due to the charter of the bank which did not allow it to draw any profits from it.
You see, the way I see investment (within rules of fair play) is this: capital is invested into a business which employs a community of people. As they produce a good or service and this is sold, wealth is created. While the investor keeps his profit margin as a reward for such wealth creation, the government notices that the production and consumption as well as employment have increased and hencer increases the amount of money in the market, serving to increase national income in the future by increasing purchasing power for future production and consumption.
This is a pretty inescapable economic cycle. In the old socialistic model the investment was limited because returns were limited. Besides most commodities lacked innovation and companies lacked the icentive to innovate. As a result we had 1940s model cars running on Indian roads in the 1980s- called 'Ambassadors''- they can still be seen in India. Noone had any other choice. Were we better off with it? To me, it doesn't make any difference whether you drive an Ambassador or a BMW. But the fact is that growth rates were low and the population rates were high due to high dependedence on farming which suffered from many ills of its own. As a result we all suffered from declining per capita income.
Austerity rather than consumerism was prized in India and personally, I find this a good thing. Noone used to flaunt their wealth; people were modest. However, disease, infant mortality, lack of education, lack of ambition, corruption were all rampant.
Today's India cannot be more different. People flaunt their new wealth. It is disgusting to see the greed and pride that typifies the upwardly mobile in India. And yes, I have to whoeheartedly agree with you that this is an inevitable consequence of considering capitalism to be God.
What capitalism does is give us a choice to manage our finances, nothing more. So when you save money in Walmart and use your savings to buy a home that you cannot afford at low interest rates meant to be offset by a future promise of capital gains, you are essentially being greedy.
But capitalism also has a nasty habit- unlike the socialism that my dad's employer practised- of letting people suffer consequences. Greed cannot be sustained, and therefore you had the housing bubble. When a correction like this happens, some of us go back to basics, others just trash capitalism.
I can fully support your views in bringing stringent checks and balances into the system, abolilshing unfair wages, etc. But I would very much like to understand your views of an economic or political system that is fair and sustainable.
54 - roger nowosielski
OK, Vijai. I hear you.
I'll respond tomorrow.
Take care.
55 - El Bicho
If slavery is such a positive, why not submit yourself and your family to benefit your ancestors, Dave?
56 - roger nowosielski
You're darn right that that my understanding of the capitalist system is superior to yours, Vijai. You see, I am not on the receiving but the giving end. I am the imperialist while you are the colonialist. And as a colonialist, Vijai, you're a greatest disservice to your county women and men. None could he worst.
You see, I'm well aware of the fact that we exploit you. Yet, you seem quite comfy with the fact and consider this a privilege. And why, because some of your class or class-status reap the benefits of Western exploitation? Don't say now that you represent the views of all Indians, because if that were so, you would all be despicable. Gandhi for certain did not share such a rosy picture of Western Imperialism, and I will surely take his view of the Indian conscience, anytime, over yours.
You see, the way I see you thus far as just another patsy, saying whatever you are saying simply because, and for no other reason, because it suits your interest.
Well, fuck your interest, Vijai, and the interest of all you want to represent. What we're dealing here is ideas -ideas of what's right and wrong, not with what's good for your or my country but with what's good for humanity at large, human dignity, human respect, and all of the above.
Yet, you talk of exploitation as a way of attaining prosperity, welfare, and happiness,
Shame on you. You are a discredit to your countrymen. You're nothing but a sellout a sellout to the highest bidder.
You still haven't answered my question - concerning your willingness to reduce human relations to biological/symbiotic relations.
Don't bother, because you know there is no ready-made answer. It's not surprising, however, because the Hindu philosophy is rather noncommittal when it comes to morality. We are all supposed to eat shit, and like it - being one with the Universe, the exploiter and the exploited, in full harmony. Happy times.
Well, we in the West don't exactly buy it, Vijai. So don't try to sell us a bill of goods.
57 - Arch Conservative
You might do well to differentiate capitalism to corporate cronyism which is what we have in America at the moment roger.
And while I agree with you that we have devolved into a state of crass materialism you seem to have overlooked that capitalism has in fact helped to save or improve the lives of many. just think of all the life saving medicines and medical devices that have been spawned from the capitalist system. Can't a person or a company be simultaneously motivated by both the profit motive and the desire to help others? Why must it be one or the other? Do you really expect everyone to walk around nude and barefoot singing kum bay yah Roger?
58 - roger nowosielski
I don't deny that, Archie. Think however of the pharmaceuticals that are currently in deep trouble for knowingly pushing anti-diabetic drugs which caused a great many heart failures. And that's just a drop in a bucket.
Anyway, I was only objecting to Vijai's version of capitalism as necessarily based on exploitation. It's that idea, of exploitation, that I found objectionable.
59 - Clavos
Careful you don't fall off that high horse, Roger.
You'll bust your ass and all your brains will run out.
60 - roger nowosielski
I may bruise my ass, but my brains will surely measure up to most.
61 - roger nowosielski
I hope you understand, Clav, I was being provocative for a reason,
So if I was riding a high horse, it was only part of the rodeo.
Happy trails.
62 - roger nowosielski
Can't anyone play a dumb American anymore in the lang of gringos?
63 - Vijai
Roger: you really want to know my sacred cows don't you? I'm a Christian. I do think the Hindu scriptures have a lot to say about the human condition which come pretty close to the Christian view at times, but truth is exclusive so I do not fully agree with them. But I call myself a Christian with no denominational preference. I acknowledge and respect the challenges to Christianity that other worldviews, including Hinduism, agnosticism, etc bring- but yes, my faith remains in Christianity. Having said that, I emphatically do not
think that Christianity is equivalent to capitalism, democracy or for that matter socialism. If there are similarities they are skin deep and no more.
The biological/moral symbiosis that you keep talking about was aphrase you came up with when Dave who mentioned that exploitation and wealth creation are in a symbiotic relationship. If you'd like to know my own views, please read my article and the comments. There is nothing more that I can say that will convince you.
FYI, now that Dave has been posting responses to your questions on slavery, I can now say that I cannot agree with him on those views. Slavery is never the reason why a community prospers or has ever prospered.
I do not claim to be a representative of Indians- after all there are a billion of us; and least of all of Gandhi who I admire as well, but who I'm aware I'm hardly qualified to equate myself with.
Again and again you accuse me of "buying into" Western imperialism, colonialism, capitalism, etc. As I said I'm no ideologue. I clearly mentioned the process of economic growth in my posts. I also wanted to know how you'd envision the emancipation of a society. I still do not have the answer.
Gandhi himself envisioned a domestic cooperative society as an alternative for a joint stock company or other private sector business entities, but he did not see any objection to this cooperative investing capital, employing people and competing in the marketplace as in any free market society.
I just realized why this discussion has gone on so long without actually creating a single positive, creative solution from you or anyone else who supports you. You are here simply to protest and nothing else. Malcolm Muggeridge once said it is far easier to stand out there in the streets holding a placard of protest than actually do something trully morally righteous. The reason why I can debate without sounding so furious as you do is because I'm not an ideologue. I just cannot see- in terms of economics or logic- how a system based on socialism can work. If you'd care to explain rationally I'd love to listen, because believe me, I'd love to be able to embrace such a system without the rate race, greed and other evils of the laissez faire system.
So--- Forget everything I said, Lay off the hyperbole and personal accusations- although I'm sure your next step would be to slaughter my sacred cow- namely the Christian faith (after you found out you couldn't do it by denigrating Hinduism and India)- But please enunciate for me how you imagine a economy works in creating a community whose wealth, the essentials of life can be sustainable and fairly distributed.
64 - Ruvy
It's been interesting watching you all chasing after Vijai's sacred cows - it's been a merry chase - only to discover that the cow wore a cross and you'd only be crucifying yet another cow on the altar of ideas.
I notice that none of you has mentioned the kibbutz as an organizing mechanism - I wouldn't expect it of Cindy - the kibbutz has the stink of "Zionism" and "exploiting the poor Arabs" (who usually benefited from the presence of a kibbutz, something they are only beginning to admit now). But Roger, you lived in this country for a while when the kibbutzniks were gods.
Vijai, the kibbutz, properly managed, is probably the "community whose wealth, the essentials of life can be sustainable and fairly distributed". Improperly managed, the kibbutz will become like that bank your father worked for that wrote off its non-performing assets. This happened to the majority of kibbutzim in this country, and they have de-collectivized themselves. But some have been properly managed and have become quite prosperous.
65 - jeannie danna
Ruvy,
I couldn't help but notice your lack of, any sort, of a response to Christopher Rose's comment for you.
It's still there towards the bottom of my newest thread. Perhaps you just didn't see it?
66 - Vijai
Hi Ruvy,
Many thanks for your comments. I'm not intimately familiar with the kibbutz model, but I think Gandhi may have very well had the same idea in mind. Gandhi was very focused on traditional low-tech businesses in his co-op model; but later this was espoused by highly patriotic Indian businessmen, among them JRD Tata whose great granddad fouded the Tata group of companies. This is a $70 bn company, almost 90 percent of whose stock is owned by various charities, NGOs, etc in India. Many of their businesses- such as an airline, whish is incidentally now India's national airline- were nationalized by the government a long time ago, but they had no bitterness about it.
I'm not sure how this model would work in high-tech industries though. I take it that the kibbutz model too has been primarily agrarian. Israel is a very technologically advanced country- how does this work in those sectors?
The bank my dad worked for once supported an Indian businessman who wanted to grow tulips in the Himalayan foothills. He had a joint venture with a large family in Israel which had succeeded in doing this in the middle of the desert. That business too wasn't very suuccessful simply because of faulty distribution- the flowers tended to sweat when carried over long distances- and the journey from the Himalayas to Southern India is pretty long. Ultimately they turned out to be another NDA.
I have no axe to grind against Roger or anyone else. I wish I could say that they were right- after all such incandescent righteous anger sounds pretty exciting. I wish that I could at least say that they were wrong! But we have simply been wasting our time.
67 - Vijai
In my previous post, I meant NPA (non performing asset) not NDA
68 - Mark
Vijai, I assume that the NPA's came as no surprise to your father's bank and had been planned for. Entrepreneurial failure and 'wasted' investment are hallmarks of capitalism. IIRC, about 40% of startups survive their first five years in the US.
69 - Ruvy
Vijai,
I have no axe to grind against Roger or anyone else. I wish I could say that they were right- after all such incandescent righteous anger sounds pretty exciting. I wish that I could at least say that they were wrong! But we have simply been wasting our time.
No such discussion is truly a waste of time. You and Roger both learned something, and the two of you will use that knowledge to profit in the future. The time invested in sharpening your views was not wasted at all.
I'm sure the basic kibbutz model can be adjusted to any kind of venture that needs a base (or a campus). In other words, a factory, a farm, a high tech operation like Microsoft, etc. etc. The key element in the success of such an operation is not trying to live beyond one's means - which was the downfall of most of the kibbutzim in Israel. But one needs to be aware that 20/20 hindsight is a tricky thing, and not necessarily a good guide in future endeavours.
I'm not sure how this model would work in high-tech industries though. I take it that the kibbutz model too has been primarily agrarian. Israel is a very technologically advanced country- how does this work in those sectors?
In fact, thinking of campus based high tech operations, I suspect the kibbutz co-op model may be a better working model than the "start-up" model presently in use. The reason is that the salaries paid to keep the workers get translated into housing and food (obtained on a barter basis with a kibbutz that provides housing and food). This cuts down a lot of the money needed to start up the business.
With the "start-up" model, you have the basic problem that the investors usually do not comprehend the nature of the information product being produced - or the incubation time it takes to show a real profit. In the mean-time, they blow up the bubble of their dreams, and then they get impatient, and sell out in a panic, or on a rumor. This is what basically occurred in the dot.com bust in 2000.
Had these start-ups a decade ago had the secure seed money they needed, instead of the "money à go-go" provided by IPO's and hot-to-profit investors, they'd still be around. The American economy would be a whole lot more stable for it, too.
But crying over spilt milk, like guarding sacred cows, is a useless venture. And in addition, I've discovered that every time somebody gets the chance to "make it didn't happen", he fucks things up worse than when it did happen originally.
70 - Vijai
Hi Mark,
The NPAs were not foreseen. The bank usually sanctioned loans for large industries, and hence the need for better fiscal responsibility. Clearly the capitalistic model is no role model for banks either- one only has to look at the US mortgage crisis to figure that out.
71 - Ruvy
Vijai,
If you want to see an example of a successful kibbutz, check out Yotvata. Also check out this site to see how Yotvata distributes its products in Israel, and this site about yotváta ba'Ãr to see how Kibbutz Yotvata keeps itself constantly in the eyes and stomachs of Israelis.
Now, use your imagination, Vijai, and see how this model could be made to work for a high tech business.
72 - Ruvy
Vijai,
The site for marketing Yotvata products was found here. I must have messed up the HTML link in the last comment and missed the error when I previewed the comment. My bad.
73 - Vijai
Thanks again, Ruvy- Will certainly do some reading on this. I'm not qualified to comment on it at present.
74 - roger nowosielski
For claiming to be no ideologue, Vijai, you sure sound like one. You approved of Dave's characterization of exploitation as symbiotic relationship, even if you didn't say it. You had gone along to defend Barionius's rather dubious complain that the capitalist system doesn't go far enough in exploiting native populations in so far as it leaves great many unexploited and behind.
You speak of exploitation of wind, rivers, other natural resources in #19, and then you’re defending the extension of the term when it comes to relationships between people, even if they are economic.
Well, the first thing you’ve got to learn Vijai is to become somewhat more sensitive to English language so as to not be throwing such terms carelessly.
Yes, we can and do exploit our natural resources, but these are, shall we say, inanimate objects.
Note however that even with respect to our use of animals, whether for food or work, we no longer use that term because it’s inappropriate. Here, we speak of cultivation, as of a flock. Indeed, even with respect to land we show greater respect when we say we cultivate it.
Now, you are exporting this term to describe economic relationships between men. And that’s essentially what I’m objecting to. Remember Kant’s dictum , to treat human beings as ends, never as means.
Get rid of the exploitation term from your vocabulary, and we can have beginnings of a conversation. Infuse moral component into economic relations between humans, and that’s another step in the right direction. Stop justifying economic relations and processes, whether historically â€"grounded or yet to evolve, in terms of practical benefits alone, again whether for most or just the few, because that’s a utilitarian type of calculus; the merits of any economic system can’t be discussed in terms of strict utility but from the vantage points of the morality accompanying it (or lack thereof) and overarching sense of justice. Lastly, rid yourself of the biological model which appears to inform your thinking and allows you to keep on justifying economic systems regardless of the accompanying morality. Even in the animal kingdom, exploitation relations do not exist: true, we have an ecological balance and food chain, and a lion or tiger will hunt their prey for sheer survival, but that’s just the kill; there’s no exploitation involved. Yet, you are willing to import it to human relationships in order to justify economic systems that in some respects work. An odd move indeed.
So these aren’t ideological points, Vijai, but rather serious philosophical points which you fail to consider and which constitute the basis of my objections to your thus far rather unexamined view of the economic systems and processes. If you choose to call these objections as protests, fine with me. If you regard them as not being constructive, I’ll live with that to. But whatever you think, these are serious objections, and it would behoove you to consider them in order for this discussion to proceed in a non-ideological manner.
I’m sorry if I can’t be more constructive.
75 - Ruvy
Vijai,
I should mention that the folks who produced this DVD, which is based on children's tapes from the '90s, produced by Michal Hazan and Nurit Hirsch, was the language tape I used to learn a lot of Hebrew in the States before we moved to live in Israel. It was filmed at Kibbutz Yotvata and neighboring locations, including Eilat. And, it mentioned Strauss products (with whom Kibbutz Yotvata partners), as well as Yotvata dairy products. In other words, every mechanism has been used to advertise Kibbutz Yotvata and its products, including this childrens' tape of songs.
For me it has borne much fruit; its songs about pigeons, helicopters, onions marching about like soldiers etc., taught me a great deal of Hebrew, and taught me to read a difficult syllabic alphabet as well.
Nurit Hirsh has been a prolific songwriter, producing, amongst many others, this song as a background for an El 'Al commercial almost 40 years ago - turning it into a hit nationwide and among the Jewish community world-wide.