boomerintown wrote:
Sure, there is no question that we were a big help to Germany during WW2. I just dont think allowing german trains through Sweden to Norway during the 1940s is what people usually call western imperialism.
No -- ?
How about 'collaboration with Western imperialism' -- ?
Collaborationism is cooperation with the enemy against one's country of citizenship in wartime.[1] The term is most often used to describe the cooperation of civilians with the occupying Axis Powers, especially Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan, during World War II. Motivations for collaboration by citizens and organizations included nationalism, ethnic hatred, anti-communism, antisemitism, opportunism, self-defense, or often a combination of these factors. Some collaborators in World War II committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, or atrocities such as the Holocaust.[2] More often collaborators simply "went along to get along," attempting to benefit from the occupation or simply survive. The definition of collaborationism is imprecise and subject to interpretation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborationism
---
boomerintown wrote:
Regarding the free market, I have no idea what you are talking about. Everything is heavily regulated, and especially the EU market. We essentially set the world standards for global trade with the regulations of the EU market. As I wrote somewhere else, from GDPR in USA to japanese cars sold in Mexico and Saudi Arabia. Virtually all global transactions follow EU regulations, which can be pretty good seeing as it raises the standard for quality and environmental concern everywhere.
So you're implying that trade regulations can be interpreted to disallow international economic participants from international labor markets?
boomerintown wrote:
There is not a market for all kinds of jobs in a country where taxes are high, where salaries are high, where regulations regarding work security, vacation, parental leave and so on are high for "all kinds of jobs". The cost of labor is simply too high, which is the reason that there are extremly few job positions for unqualified labor.
I don't think you seem to understand how capitalist markets *work* -- if there is a *surplus* of something, say, labor, which happens to be currently *unemployed* / underutilized, then the market mechanism will tend to pay *low prices* for that commodity, since it can be had at a bargain due to its oversupply compared to economic demand.
This supply-and-demand dynamic operates for *all* commodities, including labor, so if the labor commodity happens to be in a state of *oversupply* that means that the market will -- theoretically -- create *buyers* for that labor commodity, at that lower cost.
boomerintown wrote:
And its not for me yo say this, the standards are set through negotations between trade unions and employer associates.
Okay, but the prevailing economic market conditions *themselves* are *independent* / outside-of whatever fixed-set of rules are established for a given situation / labor contract.
boomerintown wrote:
It is pretty funny that you say you dont advocate a free market doctrine and that you seem to be against imperialism, but seems to want to enforce this doctrine, as an american, on other countries.
No, as before, you *misunderstand* -- nowhere am I advocating for any enforcement of free-market economics. Imperialism is *political*, and I'm anti-imperialist as well as being anti-capitalist since the two go together, in our world of international bourgeois rule.
Political Spectrum, Simplified
---
boomerintown wrote:
Anyway, I think we will keep our model, why dont you focus on your own country?
Your 'model' -- ?
Self-sufficiency / domestic markets are inherently *limited*, as we're currently seeing in China:
Could Evergrande collapse topple China's economy _ DW News