World Government

[FBM]

It's a mistake to define poverty as lack of excessive material goods. Real poverty only kicks in when you don't have enough to survive on, or if you have to struggle mightily to get enough. I don't consider a person who leads a reasonably content lifestyle to be poor, no matter what their income level.

[JimC]

Government corruption.

Define that.
One man's corruption is another man's compensation package, or drilling rights for that matter...

It used to be illegal and corrupt in the US for a Peabody Coal Company or a BP to buy up every candidate in an election, it's totally "Free Speech" and protected now. If they can do it here, why not Angola until someone tells them different?

There can certainly be grey areas such as contributions to political parties, which in many cases are profoundly anti-democratic in nature.

However, there are also clear-cut examples, which can result in tragedies, such as direct payments made to officials to induce them to grant building permissions with no examination of the building's safety. Not unknown in western countries, but fairly rare, and a big stink happens if proven. Much more common in third world countries.

[Blind groper]

To piscator

When you are talking of government corruption in countries like the Philippines, there is no need for exact definitions, since the corruption is so blatant. When a president of a small country has personal Swiss bank accounts in the mega millions, from aid money diverted, or from taxes, there is no doubt of the corruption. For those nations, the corruption is not like some American senator accepting a donation to his campaign fund from a tobacco company, in return for a few 'favours'. (Though that is also corrupt).

[Seabass]

It's a mistake to define poverty as lack of excessive material goods. Real poverty only kicks in when you don't have enough to survive on, or if you have to struggle mightily to get enough. I don't consider a person who leads a reasonably content lifestyle to be poor, no matter what their income level.

What constitutes "excessive material goods"? I have tens of thousands of dollars worth of musical instruments, audio equipment, and recording equipment. Is that excessive? Is a zippy car that hugs corners excessive? Should a "point A to point B" car be enough? Or should public transit be enough? Is owning any car at all, excessive? Is two people living in a three bedroom house excessive? After all, two people only need one or two bedrooms. Is the third room excessive, wasteful luxury?

Who gets to decide what's excessive and what isn't? And who gets to define "reasonably content lifestyle"?

[Blind groper]

Seabass

You made a good point. I suspect that the concept of excessive material goods is mainly made by certain very left wing people who labour under the delusion that one person can have more only by taking it off someone else.

In fact, when it comes to dividing the cake, the best way of making sure everyone gets plenty, is to bake a bigger cake in the first place.

I see no reason why every single human on planet Earth, all 10 billion of them by the year 2100, cannot have an abundance of material goods.

[piscator]

@Blind groper -

Different cultures have different traditions and thresholds for "corruption". Moreover, it's difficult to humanely impose different standards on another society. It seems like at the end of the day, the ongoing level of "corruption" is a function of what a particular society will tolerate.

The Philippines are a mix of historically competitive societies arbitrarily thrown together for colonial convenience, a recipe for factionalism. Her Spanish Catholic tradition of wealth extraction includes a rich heritage of poverty, as well graft and bribery. Simple induction says The Philippines should be a veritable Perfect Storm of "corruption".

[FBM]

It's a mistake to define poverty as lack of excessive material goods. Real poverty only kicks in when you don't have enough to survive on, or if you have to struggle mightily to get enough. I don't consider a person who leads a reasonably content lifestyle to be poor, no matter what their income level.

What constitutes "excessive material goods"? I have tens of thousands of dollars worth of musical instruments, audio equipment, and recording equipment. Is that excessive? Is a zippy car that hugs corners excessive? Should a "point A to point B" car be enough? Or should public transit be enough? Is owning any car at all, excessive? Is two people living in a three bedroom house excessive? After all, two people only need one or two bedrooms. Is the third room excessive, wasteful luxury?

Who gets to decide what's excessive and what isn't? And who gets to define "reasonably content lifestyle"?

Ultimately, the individual makes his/her own value judgments. I, for one, don't feel so good about having too many luxury goods while people down the road a bit don't have basic food and shelter. I'm not out-and-out rich, so there's only so much I can donate without endangering my own future, but I do what I can. If I had more I would give proportionately more.

[FBM]

...
I see no reason why every single human on planet Earth, all 10 billion of them by the year 2100, cannot have an abundance of material goods.

Hoarding, maybe? By people who don't give a rat's ass about others' suffering, or who rationalize that they somehow deserve it?

[FBM]

Just to clarify: I wouldn't presume to project my values on others. I'm just expressing mine, and I fully expect others to differ.

[JimC]

@Blind groper -

Different cultures have different traditions and thresholds for "corruption". Moreover, it's difficult to humanely impose different standards on another society. It seems like at the end of the day, the ongoing level of "corruption" is a function of what a particular society will tolerate.

The Philippines are a mix of historically competitive societies arbitrarily thrown together for colonial convenience, a recipe for factionalism. Her Spanish Catholic tradition of wealth extraction includes a rich heritage of poverty, as well graft and bribery. Simple induction says The Philippines should be a veritable Perfect Storm of "corruption".

That a given society has historically abundant factors predisposing it to corruption may well be true, but that does not change the appalling cumulative effects it has on the well-being of its people.

[Hermit]

Excessive material goods as well as poverty are both relative to social surroundings. If you potter around in a ten year old BMW 180i while most of your neighbours, friends, acquaintances and work colleagues are trading their two year old Porsche GT3s and Mercedes CLK Kompressors for new models, your car does not qualify as excessive material goods. It does though if you are surrounded by people who have no running water, electricity, basic health facilities and the local schools consist of straw huts with dirt floors and the only teachers are volunteers who are only prepared to do the job because it allows them to brandish their Bibles or Korans.

[FBM]

With a caveat that given globalization, we're practically neighbors with everybody these days.

[Hermit]

With a caveat that given globalization, we're practically neighbors with everybody these days.

Yes, there's that. We are certainly heaps more aware of the wider world than we were before the advent of mass media, but it doesn't impinge on our existence much in our day to day lives. It gets quarantined to times when we read the papers and watch the news, and even then most of that is about traffic accidents, sport and suchlike. Most of our day's consciousness focuses on our local environment - our family, our work and so on.

Ohh, ahhh, a quarter million Asians died in a tsunami, 50,000 killed in some African country the name of which I cannot now recall, and a million children have died of starvation last year. Too bad. So sad. Barry told me today that I didn't get the supervisor's job. Gary did. We'll have to choose between going away for our next holidays and getting braces for Sophie's teeth. And look at the electricity bill. If we don't cut down on the air conditioning we'll have a problem paying for the registration renewal of the car in June. Did you remember to get the netball uniform for Jen today? Season starts on Saturday. Yes, I know you have an appointment with the hairdresser tomorrow afternoon. I'll take Jason to his karate lesson after school. Don't bitch, please. When was it the last time you mowed the lawn? Or given Andrew a driving lesson?

Children! Go and play outside. Mum and I have something to talk about.

[Audley Strange]

I quite agree. Much anger was expressed in the Australian media over the recent collapse of a clothes factory in Bangladesh that killed many. Some Australian companies employed the Bangladesh firm to make clothing. The anger was entirely addressed at the Australian companies, and none whatsoever to the corrupt, inefficient and utterly incompetent Bangladesh government, who wouldn't know a building regulation if it bit them on the arse...

While that was a somewhat blinkered view, it had good results. Major Australian retailers, such as Coles/Target, have committed themselves to no longer buying goods from manufacturers that use unconscionable methods of production.

So do you think those were good results for the children in the factories who may be the only wage earner for their families or good results for the businesses because if forced them to work more "ethically" cut profits and drop workers or good results for the poor in Aus who are now going to pay more for their clothes or good results for a bunch of middle class tutters who probably never purchased such but think they are helping? Good for who?

Well I think you are putting the cart before the horse. We do not allow child labour, other countries do.

Ever heard of the concept called "chain of responsibility"? Some countries allow child labour. Some companies exploit child labour. We buy the goods that are the result of child labour. We all share responsibility for child labour.[/quote]

Yes we all do. However some of us seem so absolute in condemning it that we forget that as ugly as it is (and I'm not denying that) it can have a positive effect for those children and their families in comparison to the other forms of child labour that were and are traditional in places like Bangladesh Pakistan and India. Also the ultimate responsibility lies with their governments. We could not easily exploit that which they disallowed.

[Audley Strange]

I quite agree. Much anger was expressed in the Australian media over the recent collapse of a clothes factory in Bangladesh that killed many. Some Australian companies employed the Bangladesh firm to make clothing. The anger was entirely addressed at the Australian companies, and none whatsoever to the corrupt, inefficient and utterly incompetent Bangladesh government, who wouldn't know a building regulation if it bit them on the arse...

While that was a somewhat blinkered view, it had good results. Major Australian retailers, such as Coles/Target, have committed themselves to no longer buying goods from manufacturers that use unconscionable methods of production.

So do you think those were good results for the children in the factories who may be the only wage earner for their families or good results for the businesses because if forced them to work more "ethically" cut profits and drop workers or good results for the poor in Aus who are now going to pay more for their clothes or good results for a bunch of middle class tutters who probably never purchased such but think they are helping? Good for who?

Well I think you are putting the cart before the horse. We do not allow child labour, other countries do.

Ever heard of the concept called "chain of responsibility"? Some countries allow child labour. Some companies exploit child labour. We buy the goods that are the result of child labour. We all share responsibility for child labour.[/quote]

Yes we all do. However some of us seem so absolute in condemning it that we forget that as ugly as it is (and I'm not denying that) it can have a positive effect for those children and their families in comparison to the other forms of child labour that were and are traditional in places like Bangladesh Pakistan and India. Also the ultimate responsibility lies with their governments. We could not easily exploit that which they disallowed.