and all this made in China stuff is shite Quality

if it was just shite quality it have been ok, we had to invent a new bottom of the scale just for chinesium crap

speaking of shitty Chinese stuff

I don't think Globalism was supposed to end poverty, I don't anyone saw it like that, at least not in the Western developed economies. Globalisation was meant to interconnect the world and bring new and cheaper products to the market and enable freer markets

https://www.theepochtimes.com/professor-blames-chinese-counterfeits-for-causing-3-1-trillion-loss-for-global-wine-industry_2773271.html

except cheep shit for upper classes I have not seen any thing good about Globalisation at this point that we did not have a solution to before we did start going down that rute

Well the clothes you wear, the computers and phones you use, the food you eat, it's all most likely imported and or manufactured abroad. Some of the services you use such as banking and air lines etc... all have either their headquarters, call centres or assets abroad and are merged with foreign businesses etc.

use local banking, except some fruits most food is produced in Norway as we have high tax wall to safe guard local food industries.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/388053892950130720/536917132060131338/50306287_1195544673934514_3383703556526702592_n.png

Fair enough, but regardless globalisation is not something one can forcibly stop on a large scale, because companies and businesses will inevitably seek the cheapest production costs, and if it happens to be abroad then they will go abroad. It's also greatly to do with consumer demand as well. If people want certain off season products they can still buy them as their flown from the other side of the planet. People want cheaper and more accessible goods so they purchase cheaply foreign goods etc...
Yes there are measures to avoid companies going abroad, but are tricky and can harm the economy in the short and long run by raising prices limiting consumer choice and creating a non competitive business environment.

As I said before, globalisation was never seen as a remedy do combat poverty, rather an way to create more opportunity for business and commerce. It's seen as a way to both satisfy consumer demand as well as cheaper manufacturing costs, and offering the potential to create economic growth

but if you produce shite, who will buy it?

and dont come yelling about social justice for people if you are standing in cloths made by a child that get 1p a week

supporting your local manufacturing and stores will cost you more sure. but it money you put back in your local economy.

Yes these are some of the problems with Globalisation, there's no denying it. The tragedy is that even if you force these companies to pay fairly, they're going to find a shady way to still get it done as cheaply. Though everyone is entitled and should have a fair pay and proper working standards, it's tough to enforce this on companies. There are methods of doing this, by supporting and purchasing products with the 'Fair Trade' Logo, or companies that you know treat workers fine. At the end of the day it's the combination of consumer demand and cheap manufacturing, and the only one we can truly impact is the demand side.

You can always support local manufacturing, but then you could take away the potential 'Fair Trade' job of another person in a Third World country and help to start up their economy. And personally I'd rather have the people in such countries that need that job more have it, and instead get more skilled jobs into the local economy such as heavy manufacturing, processing and refining jobs which creates factories and industry, but isn't low skilled or expendable.

fair trade is just marketing bullshit that don't benefit the people in the bottom, it a well crafted lie of selling you a lie of helping people
https://peacenews.info/node/7750/ndongo-samba-sylla-fair-trade-scandal-marketing-poverty-benefit-rich

Is the Spaniard confusing globalization and globalism?

It's related though

Instead of having the economy localised to a country, it becomes transnational spanning the entire globe. Your small start-up company is now at the reach of the entire world rather than your small town

That's globalization

And globalism is a loss of sovereignty to internationalism

Bretton-Woods system

Yes

Bretton Woods system foster globalisation. The EU free movement of goods, services and capital allows for globalisation within the EU, and for foreign businesses that want to work within the EU

Nothing about it says to create a psuedo governmental body to impose unwanted legislation from the top down

Well the unwanted part I don't agree with.

Joining the EU is optional, not mandatory. Countries hold national referendums to enter, knowing what it is and what it offers. Joining the EU isn't a walk in the park either, it requires certain macroeconomic and political goals which are not easy to achieve, and which is why most of the Ex Yugoslav states and Turkey are still on the waiting line

States which have asked to join as well

unless you have Goldman Sachs helping you out, Right, Greece?

And besides I got it wrong, I confused the Bretton Woods agreement with the Treaty of Rome

Regardless the Bretton Woods agreement was more so to install neoliberal based organisations such as the World Bank and the IMF and to peg the US dollar to gold and as the international currency

though the US did abandon it in the 70s under Nixon because of the oil crisis

@Nordhand Hmm, I've been looking at the article and looking into Fair Trade again, and I see the problem. I agree and understand with what Sylla says about the organisation. However, personally I would rather say that the objectives ought to be not to end poverty, but to lift the people they are trying to help *out* of poverty, and to more importantly pay them what they deserve

Ending poverty is the ambitious goal of many philanthropists and altruists, however it's an impossible task simply because poverty can never be eradicated

Thing is, *they know that.*

they don't want to end it. if they did end it. they loose there jobs that pays them millions

Tim explains a lot about the scam that is charity in this video from his own experience in the charity industry https://youtu.be/flodqE3sJew

The thing about poverty, is that it never ends.

So now they can forever be seen as the virtuous philanthropists helping the little people

and speak out about climate change as they fly around in their private jets

https://youtu.be/QAXPIhnQocM