[001]
Fanra
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
This is an interesting point. The USA \
to:
This is an interesting point. The USA \\\"stealing\\\" from poorer countries.
Interesting, because one of the reasons the USA revolted against the UK and became a nation (one almost never mentioned in popular history books) was that the UK demanded that the USA produce raw materials for them and buy manufactured products, they prevented the USA from creating their own manufactured products.
It\\\'s not mentioned often in school history books that American greed was a reason for TheAmericanRevolution :). Although, one could say that it was simple economic justice.
However, it is only \\\"stealing\\\" if the terms are inequitable. If all a nation has is raw materials, and they are purchased at market prices, with an open market (the UK prevented the USA from trading with other nations, as well as making it illegal to manufacture items in the Colonies), then it is not stealing to buy them.
It is \\\"stealing\\\" if illegal or immoral methods are used. If a contract is made with corrupt dictators, that is legal but immoral. The dictator usually (but not always) will cheat the people of his nation, thus stealing the wealth of the nation from them.
Although the USA has stolen from poorer countries, they have also greatly helped them. China right now is been seen (fairly or unfairly) as stealing jobs from the USA, so the accusation is on the other foot. Both nations have benefited from the actions of the USA, although they have also suffered.
Nothing is simple :)
Interesting, because one of the reasons the USA revolted against the UK and became a nation (one almost never mentioned in popular history books) was that the UK demanded that the USA produce raw materials for them and buy manufactured products, they prevented the USA from creating their own manufactured products.
It\\\'s not mentioned often in school history books that American greed was a reason for TheAmericanRevolution :). Although, one could say that it was simple economic justice.
However, it is only \\\"stealing\\\" if the terms are inequitable. If all a nation has is raw materials, and they are purchased at market prices, with an open market (the UK prevented the USA from trading with other nations, as well as making it illegal to manufacture items in the Colonies), then it is not stealing to buy them.
It is \\\"stealing\\\" if illegal or immoral methods are used. If a contract is made with corrupt dictators, that is legal but immoral. The dictator usually (but not always) will cheat the people of his nation, thus stealing the wealth of the nation from them.
Although the USA has stolen from poorer countries, they have also greatly helped them. China right now is been seen (fairly or unfairly) as stealing jobs from the USA, so the accusation is on the other foot. Both nations have benefited from the actions of the USA, although they have also suffered.
Nothing is simple :)
