[ regarding the World Trade Federation, written during the
demonstrations in Seattle against WTF. ]
I've been reading the pros & cons of WTF to see if I could figure
out what all the fuss is. Unions are agin it, which is always a
red flag. On the other hand, that bastion of yellow journalism,
the SF Comical, printed 4 op-ed pieces: 2 pro, 2 con. The con
articles were the expected pieces of overblown rhetoric with some
think points in the noise; but somehow, the only person they could
find to write a pro article (he wrote both) was a guy at Hewlett
Packard who is himself knee-deep in the WTF.
So. Unions hate it, as do left-leaning history professors. Big
surprise. But the Chron can't find anyone who likes it, who
isn't part of it? Something rings a bit strange there. The
only people who like our candidate are his family and campaign
workers. Hmm.
For my own part, I think I'm pro (I think I'm pro) because WTF
membership throws out a lot of government proscriptions about who
one may and may not trade with. Even though I wouldn't do
business with dictatorships, I think that's my choice to make,
not Berkeley's. I advocate information, not legislation. The
danger is, though, that it could turn into a trend back toward
the robber-baronries of the past, where corporations buy their
labor in really poor countries and sell in rich ones, rather than
buying in the same markets where they sell.
...On the other hand, that could achieve the liberal dream of
equalizing income worldwide, couldn't it? If folks here in the
USA can't get jobs because the labor is being shipped to Bangladesh,
US citizens will have to accept Bangladeshi wages to compete. Yes?
-- Elton