Viewing Thread:
"An eye for an eye.."

No, I’m not talking about that, I’m talking about fair trade.

It’s been bothering me for a long time just how unfair the world really is. I’m talking about the divide in wealth between western and 3rd world countries, you know, those places we occasionally donate a pound or two to at Christmas, then pretend we’ve done out bit and go off to eat roast chicken.

Without going into a rant about attitudes towards those countries, I’d like to say two words: Fair trade.

You all know what that is.

Paying a fair wage. As most of you know, products such as coffee, bananas, sugar cane etc. tend to be grown on large plantations in southern countries such as Brazil, Argentina and South Africa. Workers on such a plantations are generally underpaid and work in miserable conditions for long hours.

Smaller plantations, locally run also exist, but these are also exploited by the middleman, who buys stocks for low prices only to sell them at a much higher price in the West.

In both cases, the producer has virtually no choice in the price as, face it. If you’re a poor farmer, trying to keep your family alive, you’ll want to work for as much money as you can. Arguing may result in the lack of a job, because there are plenty of other poor farmers to trade with. Many just take the pitiful amount of money for stock and work, knowing they have no choice and that trying to negotiate a higher price would result in the purchasers finding another producer to trade with for cheaper.

Fair wage, is at least a wage which is the minimum wage of that country (If they have one, or if that wage is considered decent) Or a living wage, which covers the cost of shelter, food, education, medicine and basic living costs.


Another thing about fair trade, but possibly slightly off topic. Is working conditions. I think it was Goatboy who mentioned the gap working conditions were terrible. Basically, fair trade organisation try to ensure that the producers are not working in sweatshop conditions.

That isn’t all there is to fair trade, maintaining co-operation between the producer and consumer, giving employees equal opportunities.

Fair trade does make a huge difference and currently only 0.01% of World trade is fair trade. If you go into a supermarket, they’ll be a few fair trade items around, but not many. Fair trade is a method of helping to improve the standard of life in 3rd world countries in a way that works and doesn’t leave huge debts hanging over their heads.

The point of this post? I don’t actually know. To inform I guess, and maybe to get people to think about where the products they buy are coming from and who is really benefiting from them. The producers, or the middleman?

I managed to get through a post with rambling or ranting too much. I’m quite impressed with myself. I wonder if anyone actually read this..

Fair enough Mewtwo.

I wasn't arguing with you, more debating. I'm quite happy to swap ideas and see other viewpoints for hours, but times you just can't be bothered to put "Big Important Thinking Head" on and play smart.

I agree with that, I want to be dumb for a while now.
My head is full of big important things and I dont want that right now.

Goatboy wrote:
> So this topic is dead then?
Well done on the win Iguana, always nice to see
> positive, thought provoking topics being rewarded.

I saw you post last night but couldn't be bothered to reply.
A quick look round BBC.co.uk and I found quite a lot of information on Ethiopia. Quotes are below.

"Ethiopia is Africa's oldest independent country and, with the exception of a five-year occupation by Mussolini's Italy, has never been colonised. But it has become better known for its periodic droughts and famines, and for its long civil war and subsequent border war with Eritrea."

I would like to emphasize "for its long civil war and subsequent border war with Eritrea"

further to the above

"Also, the government spent millions of dollars on a two-and-a-half-year border war with Eritrea. As a result it lost millions more in aid from disapproving donors."

This is what I found out in 5 Minutes but reilrites what I have been saying.

Thanks Goatboy.

I completely agree with you about 3rd world debt. I also think it's strange how the attitude towards the 3rd world problems seems to be "give a few pounds at christmas and the problem goes away"

Stupid really.

I remember signing a petition about dropping the debt..

So this topic is dead then?
Well done on the win Iguana, always nice to see positive, thought provoking topics being rewarded.

Sorry for the typos in my previous post, it was written when I got back from a gig, very tired and hyper.

This whole thing about Third World Debt is wrong.
Thanks to the World Bank (IMF) lending money to leaders of regimes, the leaders spend as they see fit but the debt is socialised.
It is paid off by the populace, who usually find none of the money going towards them. It usually ends up in arms and defence contracts (See my Export Credit Guarantee Scheme post below)

Indonesia is a good example. Not only are they a brutal, torterous regime that is a main recepient of arms and money from the UK (funded and written off by you and me), but the IMF lent them substantial amounts.
What happened?
There was some capital export and some development, but the people who borrowed the money aren't held responsible for it.
So you are left with people living under crushing austerity programs, server poverty and suffering. In fact it's a hopeless task to pay off the debt they didn't borrow.
That's one of the main functions of the IMF - to provide free-risj insurance to people who invest and lend in risky loans.

But it goes even way beyond that.
There is a principle of international law devised by the USA over a hundred years ago when it "liberated" Cuba (which means conquered Cuba to prevent it liberating itself from Spain in 1898).
That that time, when the US took over Cuba, it canceled it's debt to Spain on the quite reasonable grounds that this debt was invalid since it had been imposed on the people of Cuba wtihout their consent.
That principle was later recognised in international law, again under US initiative, as the principle of what's called "Odious Debt".

The 3rd world debt is odious debt. That's even been recognised bt the US representative at the IMF, Karin Lissakers.
Lissakers pointed out a couple of years ago that if we were to apply the principles of "odious debt", most of the 3rd world debt would simply disappear.

That is an idealogical decision. Not an economic fact.
It is an economic fact that money was lent and somebody owes it, but who owes it and who takes the risk, those are power decisions, not economic facts.

Those in charge of the IMF (essentially USA) could make this debt disappear tomorrow and these developing countries could stand a chance of becoming something.
But then where would Nike go? Where would GAP go to exploit labour forces that have to work to pay off crippling debt?

This won't happen, as the well-being and prosperity of people in countries thousands of miles away means nothing when you can maximise profit and lower costs.

3rd World Debt = Good Business.

It's morally wrong and reprehensible, but only through direct action at things like the WCO in Seattle and the anti-capatalist marches here can we affect a change.

Ah, but we're kind enough to cut off a lot of the money they owe us altogether.

In exchange for giving us exclusive trade rights at hideously unfair prices.

Nice, aren't we?

Mewtwo wrote:
> If you are commenting on 3rd world debt, you have to ask why they are in debt,
> what did they do with the money in the first place and why carn't they afford to
> pay it back?

In the majoraty of case it can be summed up with one
> word,
WAR.


What?
What on earth are you talking about?
War?
Ethopia/Somalia/Afghanistan etc are in debt because of war?
No, they are in debt because of crippling interest rates maintained by the World Bank.
Operated by whom?
That's right, European nations who rely on, exploit and suffocate the 3rd world countries in order to keep them in poverty and working all the hours they can for a pittance.
So that we may have nice rugs, nice shoes, nice glass-ware from the indigineous tribes of wherever.

Drop the Debt/Jubliee 2000 is a campaign that is trying to get the European nations involved with the World Bank to release these countries from debt.
They gave the money to them to start industry, knowing that these countries are unable to pay it back.
These countries do not have labour laws or any protective legislate whatsoever.
So they take the money, start industry and then find they are unable to pay the money back.

Which prevents them from maintaining any kind of infrastructure, keeping them in debt in near-slavery conditions to produce goods for the West.

It's not any kind of financial burden that prevents us from writing off the debt, we do that all the time.
It's the fact that if we released these countries from their crippling burdens, who would make stuff for us?
You wouldn't, you have an education, no way would you make rugs and shoes for 18hrs a day.

So we need people that can't protest and refuse, because someone has to do the crap-work, so god-forbid we release them from the need to work for us.
As for the money owed, it means nothing to The West.
It certainly doesn't mean anything to the UK, because we ignore and forgive massive amounts of money owed to us by countries that buy our weapons.

Ever heard of "The Export Credit Gaurantee Scheme"?
It works like this:

Should a country default on it's payment to a UK company for the purchase of arms and associated items - Then the tax-payer will also pick up the bill for the remaining amount outstanding on the bill.
Nice huh? I thought so. Imagine that,a dictator regime that imprisons, tortures and kills it's own people ( back to Indonesia, East Timoor and Afghanistan here) , buys 2,000 tanks, 15,000 landmines and a few thousand hand-grenades, can't pay the rest of the bill and the British Public pick up the rest of the bill.
Lovely. So as well as providing One Billion pounds PER YEAR to help these companies make this stuff, they also get to foot the bill for anything left over if the buyer can't afford it anymore.

A Document "provided" by the DTI ( A UK Gov org that monitors business) gives the following information about what was paid by the public in 1998 ALONE:
Jordan - £214.4 million
Kenya - £27.3 million
Egypt - £52.5 million
Algeria - £97.3 million

Surprised? I was, they're not little Third-World countries that you've never heard of are they?
Nope. Major countries, International players with hideous civil rights records. Responsible for thousands of deaths, disappearences, beatings and tortures.

But we forget about that money and we, the tax-payer, foot the bill.
But we cant do that for countries that produce goods for us?
Only those that buy weapons???

Something smells here.

If you are commenting on 3rd world debt, you have to ask why they are in debt, what did they do with the money in the first place and why carn't they afford to pay it back?

In the majoraty of case it can be summed up with one word,
WAR.

It does seem slightly pointless having this debt for the 3rd world.

They're NEVER going to be able to pay it back anyway.

Unless you said, right, don't pay for 50 years - get yourselves up and running then when you actually have an income as a country, we'll start collecting again.