Live data from Hacker News

“The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

committees.parliament.uk

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#71
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rig worker in the arctic explained it succinctly to me, I don’t care how many people it’s lifted out of poverty I care whether it’s better for me and my friends and family and right now it isn’t. For software engineers globalization is wonderful for many in the economy it isn’t.

[flagged]

> ? I would give up every bit of cheap plastic junk in a heartbeat if it meant my great grandchildren will have a homeland to live in peace

that's exactly what globalization did for billions of people once oppressed by colonialists Countries, such as the UK.

You could stop buying cheap plastic, but you'll never get the empire back.

Because people want their great grandchildren to have a homeland to live in peace

But you can have a poorer Country as in richer than 90% of the World, but not as rich as in the past when they exploited the poorest Countries for their own advantage, and call it homeland. You can be sure nobody wants it, you can keep it.

You also seem to believe that the point of it all is just lower prices, but the actual reality is that UK doesn't even have enough people to operate their own homeland's hospitals. [1]

You should blame your own political choices, not globalization.

[1] https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/-nhs-nurses-recruited-overs...

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#72
post #67

My take on globalization is that it appears to make sense from a global stability and business perspective. Most of this is uneducated opinion but based on experiences with the local auto industry and some personal thought on the impact: 1. Having inter- and co-dependence between nations decreases the likelihood of global (potentially nuclear) war. It is difficult to decimate another country when all of your aluminum…

> It is difficult to decimate another country when all of your aluminum, cars, wheat or salt were coming from that country.

Conversely if the supplier of salt and aluminium has a government that is acting in an immoral or oppressive way, then the dependence of other nations upon that supplier would seem to reduce the likelihood and magnitude of coercive action that might be taken by those nations.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> ? I would give up every bit of cheap plastic junk in a heartbeat if it meant my great grandchildren will have a homeland to live in peace that's exactly what globalization did for billions of people once oppressed by colonialists Countries, such as the UK. You could stop buying cheap plastic, but you'll never get the empire back. Because people want their great grandchildren to have a homeland to live in peace But…

[dead]

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#74
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many domestic problems in developed countries are the result of income inequality? Probably most of them. Poor education, poor wages, poor health(care)...these exist because of the billionaire class extracting wealth from the economy. Those problems aren't going to be solved by going to war.

Income inequality is downstream from globalism (middle class jobs get exported), so I think you’re making his point?

Income inequality is downstream from unregulated capitalism.

How many big anti-monopoly moves were actually done in the last 20 years compared to pre-Reagan or pre-Thatcher times?

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#75
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rig worker in the arctic explained it succinctly to me, I don’t care how many people it’s lifted out of poverty I care whether it’s better for me and my friends and family and right now it isn’t. For software engineers globalization is wonderful for many in the economy it isn’t.

> I don’t care how many people it’s lifted out of poverty I care whether it’s better for me and my friends and family and right now it isn’t. Except that: - the same rig worker will gladly buy consumer products cheaply manufactured in some developing or non-free Country thanks to globalization and will immediately stop buying them if the prices go up due to un-globalization (it's actually happening in UK, newspapers…

He was driving a Ford and I was driving a Toyota. All of his tools as far as I could tell were top quality stuff that if not still made in the US / Canada were at one point. (He was helping me change out a wheel bearing)

I’d say for the most part this guy walked the talk as far as I could tell.

My point was not to validate / invalidate his point of view but to show what the POV is for anyone who hopes to get more people on the globalization train.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#76
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood it actually. What does the author mean when using "proves the rule", is it somehow proving it by it being a clear exception with special circumstances (somehow that rarely seems the case) or are they just acknowledging the incorrectness of the rule in a joke-y manner?

The original usage would be to describe something like a sign that says "No Parking on Sundays" as being proof that parking is allowed on other days. Typically when it is used now it means "I'm wrong but I'm still right".

Oh! That actually makes a lot of sense now. Thanks :)

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ever visited China 20 years ago and now, you may have noticed the change in openness, though. The first time I went, I was confined to limited areas, and had to be followed by a state appointed guide for my entire trip. I couldn't kiss my girlfriend in the street, it was considered bad behavior. Now, I can just go alone, and where I please, and demonstrations of affection are not as frown upon. Women also seem…

Waning traditional norms happened all cover the world, including in the west. I don’t think globalization was the driver.

I would think that something happening all over the world would hint that globalization may be a factor.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ? I would give up every bit of cheap plastic junk in a heartbeat if it meant my great grandchildren will have a homeland to live in peace that's exactly what globalization did for billions of people once oppressed by colonialists Countries, such as the UK. You could stop buying cheap plastic, but you'll never get the empire back. Because people want their great grandchildren to have a homeland to live in peace But…

[dead]

> None of this was our choice. Nobody wants this. Nobody likes this.

Billions of people do.

Don't confuse what you don't like with what nobody likes.

You had the freedom to vote, you voted, you elected people from your Country to govern your own Country, can't blame anyone else.

> Those hospitals are understaffed because of extraordinary levels of foreign immigration (globalism);

citation needed

> extremely high rates of reproduction among foreigners in Britain, many of whom add a disproportionate burden to the system (globalism );

citation needed, again.

But it's the opposite.

extremely low birth rates in the west are sinking the economy.

Come to visit my country where there are 18 million retired people on a population of 60 million and very low birth rates.

Besides, Ukraine has one of the lowest birth rates we know of, didn't help them much, did it?

Anyway, you had your Brexit, didn't you?

So, now that it's only you "indigenous" things are improving over there, right? It worked, am I right?

> an indigenous population displaced and demoralised in their own ancestral homeland,

You mean when you colonized other countries and brought them to your country to be slaves?

Ever heard of the windrush generation?

> indigenous Brits discriminated against in admissions and applications due to policies favouring foreigners in pursuit of diversity (globalism);

citation needed, again

> plummeting birth rates among indigenous Brits due to a prevailing sense of existential insecurity

citation needed (at this point do you understand that your motivations reek of bullshit, do you?)

UK has a birth rate of 1.7, in Hungary where there are virtually no immigrants, birth rate is 1.5.

Can you guess China's birth rate?

It's 1.7, exactly like UK.

I think something does not add up in your theory.

BTW, birth rates in the west are all very similar, but the economic outcomes of the single Countries are vastly different. For many reasons. One of them is that my Country cannot rely on former colonies to hire nurses and pay them less than the average "indigenous brits", as you call them.

Because we have no former colonies to exploit and the few we acquired during fascism, we left them be, because it's wrong to treat people like that.

Like, for example, what your German Saxe-Coburg and Gotha Kings and Queens later renamed Windsor to hide the fact that they are German, not English, together with their relative Lepold I of Belgium did to Africa.

> It's little wonder there is such resentment towards globalism and diversity among ethnic Europeans worldwide

We agree on this.

It's no wonder, when western people had to actually compete they found out that they are not as good as they thought, without their armies protecting them they were just average.

Unfortunately for you, your dream of being a pure blooded race having ancestral rights over the promise land have been shuttered by reality.

You can deal with it or keep crying in the corner, blaming some poor folks brought by force to your country.

Are these "indigenous brits" just a bunch of whiny spoiled brats that can't take their faith in their own hands, without external help?

This sentence attributed to Luiss CK sums it

"Of course foreigners steal your job, but maybe, if someone without contacts, money, or speaking the language steals your job, maybe, you're shit."

~ Louis C. K..

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#79
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t care how many people it’s lifted out of poverty I care whether it’s better for me and my friends and family and right now it isn’t. Except that: - the same rig worker will gladly buy consumer products cheaply manufactured in some developing or non-free Country thanks to globalization and will immediately stop buying them if the prices go up due to un-globalization (it's actually happening in UK, newspapers…

He was driving a Ford and I was driving a Toyota. All of his tools as far as I could tell were top quality stuff that if not still made in the US / Canada were at one point. (He was helping me change out a wheel bearing) I’d say for the most part this guy walked the talk as far as I could tell. My point was not to validate / invalidate his point of view but to show what the POV is for anyone who hopes to get more peo…

> but to show what the POV is for anyone who hopes to get more people on the globalization train.

It's impossible to get more people on the globalization train, because we all are on it already.

It's like saying "we should get more people on board with climate change"

It is happening, whether we like it or not, whether we agree or disagree about it.

What we should and can do, is to ask better questions.

instead of asking ourselves what is the cause of some personal condition, pat ourselves in the back and blame the foreigners (it's always the foreigners, of course) why don't we ask who left the rig workers of the story in the dust?

Was it a worker coming from the Philippines trying to have a better life for their children and great children, or was it the same corporations than now blame globalization because they are finding harder and harder to exploit developing countries that also stolen their job and have become as good as them to produce the same stuff?

How much of the wealth that Apple generated exploiting cheap Chinese labour, bowing to China just to enter their 1.5 billion people market, have come back to the US economy and actually helped the working class and our friend the rig worker (not the tech class)?

It's not globalization the problem, it's this capitalism.

The point is: corporations have to start giving back to the people in the form of very high taxes, that's the solution to the issues (some of them are real) of the globalization. Privatize the profits and socialize the costs is not a good idea, we see it, we all agree that it's not working, paradoxically it's been worse in richer countries, because social programs are shit there, they have always relied on having a lot more money to spend than the others. Still we avoid to give the right name to the problem. We have to even if in many Countries they prefer to die than talk about social welfare state, but it's a red pill, blue pill, situation.

But if we don't and corps wanna keep looking for workers everywhere in the World, we also have to let people do the same, in the opposite direction.

Tertium non datur.

Because tertium means we try'n'stop them and they will come anyway, but this time without asking.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#80
post #59
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, bad idea to go to war unless your shit at home is already together. Wars are expensive. I think a lot of the domestic turmoil in the US can be linked to our useless wars in the ME. Could have used all that steel and those men to build stuff here: hospitals, schools, trains and so on. Bush & cheney did enormously more damage to the US than Trump. Not that I liked Trump at all.

>"Yeah, bad idea to go to war unless your shit at home is already together." So if your country doing fine and all "shit is together" it is ok to start a war? What is fucking wrong with people.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN