As you have accepted, monetary speculation played a part in the situations you noted, and I will certainly agree only a small part.
I have not accepted such thing.
What I said was that the speculators TOOK ADVANTAGE of what was going to happen anyway DUE to other reasons already explained. Those reasons ARE the real cause to currency devaluations NOT the actions by the speculators, which is what you are pretending to use as justification for the existence of the Tobin TAX.
So do not put your thoughts as mine.
However I regard a great deal of the criticism of the UN as simply racist in origin, and promulgated by groups without the sense to actually identify administrative problems and suggest solutions.
What does racism has to do with demanding performance from jobs that have not accomplished a damned thing in reality?
Promulgated by groups without the sense to identify administrative problems? And what groups might those be?
Reality is these UN bureaucrats do not do a damn thing in practical terms and they never will as they are living in New York, far away from where the real problems exist.
The solutions need to come FROM those very places i.e. the third world countries and from the natives, not from bureaucratic talking heads with cushy jobs in New York City.
I see no racism in such demand. Your paranoia seems to be seeping out, or you are attempting to use a lame excuse for legitimate criticism against the UN.
The fact is, that given the increasing degree of internationalization of trade, and the push to reduce financial borders, the reality of an international authority to regulate and/or tax international trade is almost a given. Tax itself is neither left nor right in its politics. All governments utilize the method to reallocate resources. Tobin's proposals are simply farsighted, recognizing an area that may need to be regulated, and utilizing an accepted tool in such regulation. Its not politics its economics. In 20 years argument over this concept is likely to be mute, as the Authority and the tax will exist--along with a sophisticated framework of controls.
This is YOUR reality that you are attempting to make an established fact. It is however an established fact that in such infrastructure as the one you suggest there would be no accountability for the money that would be collected by yet another bureaucracy. You will use any and all excuses where money is transacted for legitimate business reasons to leach off the cut for the bureaucrats under the false pretensions of "reallocation of resources" in the interest of "equalizing" whatever differences you may determine that exist amongst the populace. In other words, unadulterated communism, i.e. bullshit. [Control of resources by a centralized band of autocrats]
For your interest, here is the definition of politics.
_______________________________
Main Entry: pol·i·tics
Pronunciation: 'pä-l&-"tiks
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
Etymology: Greek politika, from neuter plural of politikos political
Date: circa 1529
1 a : the art or science of government b : the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c : the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government
2 : political actions, practices, or policies
3 a : political affairs or business; especially : competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government) b : political life especially as a principal activity or profession c : political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices
4 : the political opinions or sympathies of a person
5 a : the total complex of relations between people living in society b : relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view <office politics>
m-w.com
_______________________________
Now... you pretend to tell me that a revenue source would not be politicized particularly where it would allow you to establish.... yet more controls over people?
Sure the mechanics would become set, but what drives the motives for the level of taxation, (which surely, once established the push to INCREASE them will be there), would be determined by specific purposes which will no doubt will be influenced by...(I quote): political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices
ROFLOL btw.... the words of the dictionary, not mine !!
With regard to your comments on the Middle East vs. Latin America. We both seem to agree that poverty and inequity has a tendency to provoke, within the middle classes, elements extremist behavior. I'm not interested in judging the political 'quality' of such behavior. I simply wish to point out that often reducing poverty can reduce the tendency of societies to produce radical elements.
You may not be interested in the political "quality" of such behavior, but the fact remains that blowing oneself up in the middle of innocent people has got to be the lowest possible criminal act and these fanatics pretend to be "making a political statement" by such act, cannot be dismissed.
Of course that reduced poverty yields less radical behavior, but once again, such is NOT a justification to commit criminal acts. Particularly killing innocent people.
Compared to the recent history of South America, the Arab/Moslem world is a safe place to visit and live. The fanatics are intent on killing others and have a general tendency to leave their brothers alone, and they are certainly less prone to killing the innocent than the fanatics of Latin America.
ROFLOL
You win the bullshit gold medal with this one !! “leaving their brother alone”…. Well, I suppose that when the human bombs blow up themselves up, they have no way of knowing that every single victim is not one of their own? Or should I accept that it is a given that if the victim (say a Palestinian) dies in the blast, along with the patriot, he/she is also happy to die? WHAT BULLSHIT !!
In the recent history of Latin America, I have NOT seen a single moron blowing himself/herself up in the middle of innocent people... Yes, they have kidnapped and even killed specific targets that they deem their enemies, but it is no different than any other criminal act that is perpetuated on ANY individual even in the so called "first world".
I have lived and or visited several cities in Latin America and NONE of them even remotely resembles Beirut or Jerusalem in terms of the present danger that exists by some maniac blowing himself up in the middle of a bus intersection. Or…. Getting terminated by a bazooka or an Israeli bomb
Even in the worst place, which arguably could be considered to be Colombia due to the drug lords, there is NO threat of Nuclear and/or chemical weapons used by some radical fanatic.
Nor... the most criminally oppressive tyrant, i.e. Somoza, Noriega or Galtieri or any of the sundry collection of egomaniacs that during the 60's and 70's Latin America suffered under in SOME countries (not all), would NOT use weapons of mass destruction against their OWN people.
Further...
Even the most radical macho in Latin America does not treat women to the point that they have to use veils to cover their own faces. While no question that injustices have been committed against women at large, (thanks to the influence of the Catholic church), today that entire picture is different and we certainly do not STONE women to death, nor pretend to live under rules more akin to the 12th century as they do in some of the countries of the Middle East/Moslem world. (at least by force due to the criminals in power).
Based on your comments above I have concluded you are delusional and in your own way a fanatic, pretending that blue is red and red is green, even if shown otherwise. AND... making misrepresentations of what I have expressed and passing such as "fact".
I suppose that living in the Middle East, under the treat of explosion by your neighbor must, at one point, be treated as "normal"... since I have never been under such an environment, I still think that living in LatAm is a far safer proposition than in any of the Middle Eastern/Moslem countries.
Ah not to mention the threat of being at war against Israel, a most effective and intelligent enemy... Luckily, these days in Latin America, (aside from the terrible poverty and overpopulation factor), the worst thing that can happen to you is having to go to a recently opened McDonalds where they sell something they insist in calling "food"... Ah yes... it is one of the Americanizations that unfortunately is not one of the best, but still, a LOT better than being blown to pieces by some ASS-RAT-FAT acolyte.
p.s. I do NOT condone the practices of most Latin American countries when it comes to use government power and resources... the possible exception for this is Costa Rica, which btw, did away with its military since the mid 1940's (a very intelligent decision where in stead of using stupid military budgets, they use the funds for education and/or environmental purposes). |
