191–200 of 258 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably a really bad idea but what about chemical treatment to prevent rot.
That would negate the advantage of not requiring extra effort/energy. And decomposition of organic material is required for the rainforest ecosystem to work. And I'd go with radiation or heating for sterilization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is those suicides at Foxconn are for one reason only, working conditions. Meanwhile the general suicide rate in China is for any number of reasons. Playing a pure numbers game with peoples lives is distasteful.
Is there any reason to believe, Foxconn employees don't have any other personal/environmental problem causing them to suicide. While I am all for improving conditions of employees, it should be in context to the environment. If the whole country is working on 1$/day, expecting few companies to got 5$ just because they have global visibility is not feasible. It is not good for the company, economy and social dynamics…
It seems #1 reason for sucide is mental illness or chronic pain/disease severely impacting their quality of life.
You need to ask can mentally ill people get employed at foxconn? They would be having interviews like for every other job, and probably the workers are selected based on their efficiency which can exclude a lot of mentally ill people.
If not, then we've to remove the number of people who commit suicide due to chronic health issue or mental illness then compare the data again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This assumes that the colonialists countries didn't trade with non colonialist countries in Europe. Look at the US and Mexico: Despite having a lot of trade and migration, the two countries significantly differ economically. So it plainly does not hold that trade and migration entirely eliminates differences.
>Look at the US and Mexico: Despite having a lot of trade and migration, the two countries significantly differ economically. Back then labor was in more demand. Evidence is the salves were imported often at great cost and risk. There were fewer commodities in market. Germany had coal, French needed it. There was no limit on immigration. People from Germany and France were more equal in education and social status th…
> People from Germany and France were more equal in education and social status than the difference you've between Americans and Mexicans.
Good way to disqualify any counter-examples to your theory. If they're more equal in status (i.e. have more equal economies), then they don't count.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Europe's industrialization as well as other Western countries heavily depended on the exploitation of third world countries in Asia and Africa, especially after WW2. If colonialism was necessary for industrialisation the European powers with no or smaller colonial empires would have had lower growth. Germany would have been behind the U.K. and France. Austria would have been obviously suffering compared to Germany.…
> If colonialism was necessary for industrialisation the European powers with no or smaller colonial empires would have had lower growth. Which countries are you referring to? First of all borders in Europe were not the way they are right now 150 or 200 years ago. Second, an example for a tiny country that was exploiting an african nation well into the 20th century is Belgium [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bel…
- What is now Belgium was one of the wealthiest parts of Europe in the Middle Ages, long before any colonization.
- Belgium was the second European country to industrialize. This caused the economy to boom and Belgium had the 4th highest GDP in 1900. Congo was only a colony since 1908.
- In 1918 the whole economy was destroyed because of the war. The Germans had plundered the country. Whole factories were dismantled and shipped to Germany.
- In 1945 the economy was once again destroyed because of the Germans.
- In 1956, at the heigh of colonial exploitation, Congo was 3,3 % of Belgian GDP and 75000 direct and indirect jobs. Not nothing but hardly the base of all wealth. It was much lower in the preceding decades.
- Congo became independent in 1960. Annual GDP growth rates were much higher during the 60's than during the whole colonial period.
I would say Belgium is currently wealthy because of the Marshall plan.
source: https://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/history/twent...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It took suicide-level conditions in places like Foxconn to get us our gadget at Not that I disagree with the rest of the post, but it's time the suicides at Foxconn story dies a fiery death. https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/07/10/apples-c... The juicy quote: At the time of that spate of suicides Foxconn had nearly 1 million workers in its plants. There were up to 14 suicides (it depends whose count you w…
This is probably the thirtieth time I've seen this debunking over the last several years. The first was not long after the original Foxconn suicides news cycle. This is widely available enough information that if somebody references the Foxconn suicides and doesn't know the figures you mention by now, they have no interest in understanding the reality of the situation. I say this as someone who's considerably more ne…
So, it's not a waste of breath at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If colonialism was necessary for industrialisation the European powers with no or smaller colonial empires would have had lower growth. This assumes that the colonialists countries didn't trade with non colonialist countries in Europe. Prussia initiated the concept of a common market in 1818 and in 1833 a treaty extended the Zollverein to the larger states of Germany, although Austria, by Prussian design was exclude…
> This assumes that the colonialists countries didn't trade with non colonialist countries in Europe. Look at the US and Mexico: Despite having a lot of trade and migration, the two countries significantly differ economically. So it plainly does not hold that trade and migration entirely eliminates differences.
Brahmins in India had high social status but less money/assets in past. So I am not talking about economic status.
I wish them luck. I'm a sort of history buff and Ethiopia has an amazing history. It's been a state (in various forms and with different names) for more than 2000 years, in a part of the world where such stability has been scarce. It has its own ancient alphabet. It was the only country in Africa to resist the Scramble for Africa and was only occupied by Italy for less than 10 years (after putting the Italian Army to…
(Italy and Germany had a dispute over Austria, which seemingly manifested in this way.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if we're talking geopolitically yes of course, if we're talking culturally yes of course. The other leaders at some point like Portugal, Netherlands, UK, Spain, all had their time in the sun. Now it is the U.S's, I'm not making the claim this will remain in perpetuity.
>geopolitically yes of course Currently your international relations with most countries are in shambles. You've got a nearly 20 year war going with Afganistan over a terrorist attack that wasn't sponsored by the country, and it doesn't look like the Taliban is going to actually disapear. Your other misadventure into Iraq completely destabilized the area, and resulted in creation of ISIS. >culturally yes of course Go…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My assumption is making sure they get enough water.
Perhaps also not get eaten by herbivores, not damaged by bigger animals, humans and vehicles and protected from insects.