Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Interesting diary up on Daily Kos about trade.

<blockqoute>Forget what the pundits and some of the elements of the Democratic corporate establishment think: John Edwards is reflecting the sentiment of Iowans when he points out the dangerous effects of globalization.</blockqoute>

Trade is shaping up to be a huge issue in the 2008 Democratic primary.  You guys should be paying attention, the way that things are going on the continent, you could be having these discussion with the same intensity in 10 or 15 years.  

Sarkozy looks a lot like Reagan, provoking a confrontation with labor in order to crush them.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 01:39:28 PM EST
It is significant that these discussion are even happening in the US, 25-years later than they needed to happen.  What will save Europe from our mistakes is the ability to discuss the issues in the open.  Do not back down on intelligent, open discourse and you will succeed.

That said, the "candidates" have discussed "tearing up NAFTA" et al but still are not saying publicly what Sego dared to say, that we need to not go backwards but rather continue moving forward onto a second step of our global trade agreements, where we globalize workers rights and environmental protections.

It is absolutely reasonable to open trade fully, provided the other countries also agree to pay their workers fair wages and not pollute their entire ecosystem.

by paving on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 01:48:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
provided the other countries also agree to pay their workers fair wages and not pollute their entire ecosystem.

And each country is beholden to the people who live within its borders--wherever they may say they be--to

pay their workers fair wages

and

not pollute their entire ecosystem

If Europe can solve those two, it can be an exemplar, first among many, or next up, that's the direction...

heh...  I enjoyed your comment very much.

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 06:51:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
FT.com / Companies / Financial services - The pitfalls of financial globalisation grow clearer
Conventional wisdom has it that globalisation and the spread of deregulation have been an economic boon for the English-speaking countries. Having run down their manufacturing as a percentage of gross domestic product in the 1980s and 1990s, the US and the UK have been less vulnerable to Chinese competition in this cycle than the big economies of continental Europe. And with disproportionately large financial sectors, these two countries have also enjoyed a financial windfall from the rise of China and other emerging markets.
As long as the Angloamericansthe West™ could reap the profits of globalised capital, all was fine and dandy. But when others reap profits or the Anglo disease starts to bite, the FT discovers the "pitfalls of globalization".
A more fundamental point is that China and other emerging market countries are unilaterally rolling back the high tide of liberalisation. Thanks to their rise, more of the world economy operates under mercantilist pegged exchange rate regimes. By investing their official reserves in developed world government debt, they reduce the cost of public sector borrowing, making a return of big government easier. As co-conspirators with the US Federal Reserve in creating the credit bubble, the same countries have contributed to a boom and bust cycle in housing and finance which will lead to a political backlash, soon to be followed by cumbersome regulation. Meanwhile, sovereign wealth funds are indirectly reversing the privatisation trend that began in the 1980s through a re-expansion of state ownership, but on a cross-border basis. That in turn will spawn an illiberal political reaction that will inhibit global capital flows. On the face of it, continental Europe ought now to be better placed to cope. Yet this is no time for schadenfreude . Two German banks that dabbled in subprime structured products have had to be rescued. The dabbling arose from an urgent need to raise returns in an over-politicised, over-regulated, but under-profitable German banking system.
The point of globalization and liberalization was to hollow out the public sector, but with global access to capital markets, those countries that still allow their government to invest on a large scale are buying our privatised assets. That cannot be! This was supposed to be for the benefit of the Angloamerican oligarchyWestern™ private interests, not anyone else!
There is no question that smart, global finance has been a good thing. Without the recycling of capital, excess savings in Asia would have been profoundly deflationary. Yet from today's global vantage point, we have undoubtedly all had too much of this good thing. Whether it is ever possible to have just the right amount is another question.
Now that we've captured all the wealth we could and the wheel is turning against us, it is time to denounce globalization. We have to protect our spoils from the inferior peoples!

The whole self-serving article warrants a deconstruction.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 03:02:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's the US!  It's Germany!  It's China!

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 03:30:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Speaking of money, almost every bank has his secrets:
In Belgium, there's an ongoing campaign: My money, clear conscience?



The struggle of man against tyranny is the struggle of memory against forgetting.(Kundera)

by Elco B (elcob at scarlet dot be) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 03:35:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This is good:

FT.com / Companies / Financial services - The pitfalls of financial globalisation grow clearer

Two German banks that dabbled in subprime structured products have had to be rescued. The dabbling arose from an urgent need to raise returns in an over-politicised, over-regulated, but under-profitable German banking system.

The unpoliticised, not over-regulated, and uber-profitable Anglo banking system was under no urgent pressure to raise returns and therefore did no dabbling in subprime, right?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 04:23:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
over-politicised, over-regulated, but under-profitable

There's a real negative swing in that, where "un-profitable" is the determinant, the heavy factor that decides.  I agree with over-politicised, I think "over-regulated" is the wrong angle--the angle is "wrongly regulated", so I see the base tone as "you're too political, and you're telling us what to do, and we're still not making money...with money as some strange talisman, not what it can buy but what....protection money....protection from "less", so the huge meme: "less is more"--

Less tax is more investment!

Less profits are more investment!

Less money is more time!

Less energy is more symbiosis!

Less pain is less pain!

Heh....cough!

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 07:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
John Plender is an FT columnist and chairman of Quintain

And Quintain is... you guessed it, a property firm...

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Wed Nov 21st, 2007 at 05:08:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series