Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael M who wrote (51154)	8/15/1999 5:26:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I'm sure we could have a long exchange on what qualifies as "better off" in former "communist" countries. There is a case to be made for distribution of bread and vodka being a key determinant. Bread and vodka are doubtless key determinants, as they would be for us if we were suddenly deprived of them. Security and continuity are key determinants as well. There is also an issue of expectations here: many Russians were led to believe that a market economy would produce an instant paradise of Levis and rock & roll for all, and are a bit disconcerted at having ended up with gangster-driven anarchy. What would happen, I wonder, if all the evil light-skinned devils (including yourself?), retired completely from the third world so it could evolve without any interference whatsoever? In fact, to be fair, keep CNN and the Discovery Channel out as well. No access to foreign banking or medical treatment of the third world elite. No aid programs, no charitable missions, no off-shore religions, no immigration. Just let them be free. Maybe this would be better. You're on the ground. What do you think? I think they'd hardly miss me, except to the extent that I spend dollars. Aid programs could be reduced drastically without very many people noticing the difference; an awful lot of foreign aid boils down to a charitable sinecure for the vast and bloated world of consultants and specialists. The off-shore religions can stay where they are; most people have religions of their own, which are as good as any. Immigration has benefits on both sides; we don't take the ones we don't think will be useful. That said, total separation does not in any way equate to freedom, and there is no cause for total isolation. It would help if, when dealing with less developed nations, we treated them as we do developed nations, and avoided using our economic and military weight to shove them into placing our short-term interests ahead of their own. How would you feel if you found out that a wealthier country was paying key people in our government to dump our interests in favor of theirs. We do this all the time. I certainly believe the rest of the world should be allowed to pursue its self interest -- until it conflicts with U.S. self interest or runs counter to prevailing human rights standards. The key is how we react when the interests of others conflict with our interest. Do we acknowledge their interest and try to negotiate a win-win compromise, or do we muscle them to the mat and force them to see things our way? I don't mind saying "we goofed" It would be nice to learn from our inevitable goofs (everybody makes them), and put a little more effort into avoiding future ones.