Capitalism, once again improving quality of life the world over.

[Ace42X]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/4341494.stm

in children, anything around 10 micrograms per decilitre can bring down the IQ.

"Half of children in a city like Bangalore already have blood lead levels at about 10 micrograms per decilitre, which has resulted in a reduction in their intelligence quotient. We are seeing more and more cases now because more and more electronic waste is being handled by our people."

But, at least there are materials flowing towards the third world...

"These multi-national companies are dumping these electronic goods in the name of charity work," said Ramapati Kumar, a toxics campaigner for Greenpeace.

Because big fat profits mean a company is better able to do "charity" work...

[EN[i]GMA]

Certainly there should be laws against pollution.

But compare Bangalore's (And India's) standard of living now to what it was under the protectionist, socialist governments of the last 50 years.

Are you honestly saying you would wish to undue the market reforms of the last 20 years and return to the economic immiseration brought about by government control/planning in India?

[Ace42X]

GMA']
Are you honestly saying you would wish to undue the market reforms of the last 20 years and return to the economic immiseration brought about by government control/planning in India?

As opposed to a generation of thalidomide babies and the severely retarded? you don't think having them hanging around might be an economic drag-factor? Or does their plight not count, simply truncate them out of the "quality of life" statistics?

[EN[i]GMA]

As opposed to a generation of thalidomide babies and the severely retarded? you don't think having them hanging around might be an economic drag-factor? Or does their plight not count, simply truncate them out of the "quality of life" statistics?

How about we remove the false dichotomy, fix the environmental/medical problems and move on.

Can we really do a cost-benefit analysis here? No, all we can do is slander each other's position and make emotional appeals and unsubstantiated declarations.

Do you have any I proof that capitalism, in this case, is ultimately more harmful than alternatives?

Do I have any likewise?

Are you honestly saying modern capitalism, in the area of Bangalore, or in all of India for that matter, is ultimately harmful?

Look at India's economic record from it's independance to the early 80's; compare that with it's record since.

[Ace42X]

GMA']Do you have any I proof that capitalism, in this case, is ultimately more harmful than alternatives?

The companies "charitably" dumping these hazardous materials are multi-national corporations, the epitome of globalised capitalism, for starters.

Secondly, the people most effected by this are the poorest. As they will end up with their IQ being hampered, they (and their offspring) are going to be in a weaker position to care for themselves and each other, keeping them poor. This not only makes them MORE vulnerable and open to exploitation, but also less able to field their resources and thus escape from "the poverty trap."

As the companies doing the "dumping" are multi-national, it is insane to suggest that when they have "exploited these people enough" they will stop and see about making it all better. There is NO incentive for them to do so. It is in their best interests to maximise profitability.

Under a different, more egalitarian system, there would be no financial benefit to a group of people for poisoning a substantial body of people.

[yeahwho]

This reminds me of the ship graveyard in Alang (http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,12559,1244396,00.html),

Shipbreaking is one of India's economic success stories, a £270m business that provides steel for the country's booming industry and much-needed jobs.

Sounds great but,

Around the ships swarm 40,000 migrant workers, prepared to toil in the 190 "plots" that line the coast. The work is dangerous, backbreaking and by western standards cheap - a 10-hour shift pays as little as £1.

Mr Chauhan, 38, says he earns a little more as he is a "gas cutter", a person who slices ships up with an oxyacetylene torch.

Eight years of inhaling hot paint fumes have left him with persistent coughing and frequent bouts of breathlessness. "The doctors have told me that I have gases and poisons inside me," he says.

The article goes on to explain about the fact that they are actually in an enviromental business, 'recycling these ships"....mitigating factor is the ships come in full of toxic waste (paint, plastic by products, almost every job requires the use of carcinogenic compounds or worse, immediate physical danger from the sheer intensity of a ship...ripped to shreds).

The sad part is many ships reflag before entering India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alang) for their final voyage. This exempts them from enviromental regulations of whichever country they originated from.

Capitalism or not, they willingly expose fellow humans to death. To save a buck.

And now that the enviromentalists' have begun to expose the human and enviromental cost, shipowners are adjusting and looking for and easier country and it's people to exploit.

Greenpeace links, photos (http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/exposing-toxic-trade-in-disgui)

[EN[i]GMA]

The companies "charitably" dumping these hazardous materials are multi-national corporations, the epitome of globalised capitalism, for starters.

And government's kill people all the time.

Does that invalidate the concept of 'government'?


Secondly, the people most effected by this are the poorest. As they will end up with their IQ being hampered, they (and their offspring) are going to be in a weaker position to care for themselves and each other, keeping them poor. This not only makes them MORE vulnerable and open to exploitation, but also less able to field their resources and thus escape from "the poverty trap."

So they'll be in a weaker position than if capitalism had never arrived and they were still immiseratingly poor?


As the companies doing the "dumping" are multi-national, it is insane to suggest that when they have "exploited these people enough" they will stop and see about making it all better. There is NO incentive for them to do so. It is in their best interests to maximise profitability.

Remember Adam Smith, the baker, the brewer, the butcher? That whole bit? Invisible hand and all that?

They don't need an incentive.

Is your grocer's incentive to help you, personally, eat tonite?


Under a different, more egalitarian system, there would be no financial benefit to a group of people for poisoning a substantial body of people.

There was little financial benefit for the extreme waste and pollution of the Soviet Union, and yet there it was.

There may not be a monetary incentive, but there will be an incentive of some sort.

[Ace42X]

GMA']And government's kill people all the time.
Does that invalidate the concept of 'government'?

Non-sequiter. This dumping occurs because it increases a company's profits. In a non-capitalist system this drive for profit is not the goal of entities, and thus is less likely to occur (if at all.)

Governments have nothing to do with it.

And don't try and tell me that these huge multi-nationals are "not good examples of capitalism" - as I said, they are the epitome. Their wealth and power should tell you that. And if the epitome of capitalist success is doing this, then how can you try to divide the two? It's just a coincidence that all of the biggest companies in the world embark on these shenanigans to a greater or lesser extent? While I could accept the logic of this, I very much doubt you'd accept it if the tables were turned.

So they'll be in a weaker position than if capitalism had never arrived and they were still immiseratingly poor?

Yes - because these people are STILL poor, despite having platinum and gold to get out of old PCs cases *and* they'd not be posioned, retarded and genetically damaged so as to have retarded children.

Invisible hand and all that?

The bit where the mentally retarded Indian poor buy their equipment from other multi-nationals to "stick one in the eye" to those nasty companies? With their shiney 50c a week, minus living costs?

I'm sure the companies will be hurting from that, what with the billions of dollars they save a day from dumping their materials on spastics.

There was little financial benefit for the extreme waste and pollution of the Soviet Union, and yet there it was.

There may not be a monetary incentive, but there will be an incentive of some sort.

Yes, you are so right. Except you are talking shit again. Firstly you are confusing this with the other thread. Secondly, I wasn't arguing that a totalitarian regime run by a load of zealous crack-pots and genocidal madmen was somehow "eco-friendly" - nor that these tyrants were above victimising arbitrary sections of their population whenever it met their needs.

HOWEVER, these were government officials doing these things in the name of the people. Having the local authorities say your house is on the site of the new city rubbish dump is one thing, having a private citizen start dumping loads and loads of garbage, while turning a quick buck, on your doorstep is quite another. And if he says "yeah, you can keep any shit you find there" doesn't change a thing.

Thirdly, I don't recall the USSR exporting its waste products to India under the guise of "charity" in order to save them the hassle of abiding by their own laws. And the "wastage" in the USSR is debatable too. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the often hungry citizenry of the USSR consumed more than you yanks do? "If the world was filled with starving russians living in dilapidated dated housing, wearing thread-bare clothes and living on rations - we'd need more than jsut five of them!"

Pull the other one.

[sam i am]

Thirdly, I don't recall the USSR exporting its waste products to India under the guise of "charity" in order to save them the hassle of abiding by their own laws. And the "wastage" in the USSR is debatable too. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the often hungry citizenry of the USSR consumed more than you yanks do? "If the world was filled with starving russians living in dilapidated dated housing, wearing thread-bare clothes and living on rations - we'd need more than jsut five of them!"

No. Instead they just dumped it in the hugely environmentally sensitive Arctic Sea :

http://www.american.edu/TED/arctic.htm
http://www.ecobridge.org/content/n_wst.htm (also has lots of other nuclear dumping, including some French!)
http://www-ns.iaea.org/appraisals/west-kara.htm
http://www.davistownmuseum.org/cbm/Rad8e.html
http://www.ce-review.org/99/21/szyszlo21.html
http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/AI14Ag01.html
http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/393/3828.html

Now, oh King Ace, before you accuse me of inability in the area of history, I want to note, FOR THE RECORD, that I remembered these events from my own study of history and current events and provided the links so as to preclude yourself and others on this board from accusing me, falsely, of not having the knowledge or solid facts to back up my assertions.

[Ali]

Union Carbide (http://www.bhopal.net/oldsite/oldwebsite/shakeel.html) anybody?

[sam i am]

Union Carbide (http://www.bhopal.net/oldsite/oldwebsite/shakeel.html) anybody?

Union Carbide was run by a bunch of sadomasochists and they got what they deserved, plus undying enmity and a blot on their names for all of history.

I completey agree that Union Carbide was among the worst in history...hands down.