Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

There are two big problems with the Alternet article regarding "5 Wikileaks Revelations..."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 02:56 PM
Original message
There are two big problems with the Alternet article regarding "5 Wikileaks Revelations..."
Problem #1 - When you read at least one of the 5 supposed Wikileaks revelations, the one on Haiti and the minimum wage, it doesnt say what the folks at Alternet says that it does. It does not contain any suggestion that the US is meddling in the minimum wage laws.

Problem #2 - The # 1 function of every embassy and consulate of every country in the world is to promote the businesses of that country. So, right away, the article is a non issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cid_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. I suppose the real question is...
... why do you bother clicking on any link that leads to alternet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It was an OP here on DU. While I have the OP author on ignore, it showed up in latest posts.
I thought it important to address the topic and counter the lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. The article is a huge issue if certain companies are favored.
I had no idea that promotion of corporate interests was the primary purpose of the diplomatic corps.

That concept is inconsistent with the idea that we have free enterprise in which our government has no proprietary interest.

And indeed, there is a flaw in our diplomatic corps' involvement in selling the products of our corporations.

The taxpayers fund the diplomatic corps, wouldn't you agree?

Look at this:

The sale of Boeings to Saudi Arabia and other countries including Turkey has taken a big investment of taxpayer money and diplomatic efforts.

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/11/1122_company_tax/index_01.htm?campaign_id=msn

So, taxpayers subsidize Boeing in this way.

But what about Boeing? Does it pay a reasonable amount of taxes in return?

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/CompaniesWithTheFattestTaxBreaks.aspx

Sorry. I don't have the date on the article, so it may be no longer the case that Boeing pays no or extremely low taxes. But I think our deficit problems are explained by this sort of government give-away.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. It is the primary function of every embassy and consulate of every country in the world. You can do
Edited on Sat Jun-25-11 08:07 AM by stevenleser
your own experiment. Call the embassy or consulate of any country and ask about the length of stay allowance on a typical visa. Call back two days later and tell them you want to start a business in that country and invest about 10 million dollars and employ 500 people. See which of those calls gets more attention from that embassy or consulate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yes. There would be nothing wrong with it provided the corporations
Edited on Sat Jun-25-11 01:03 PM by JDPriestly
that get these special services would pay their share of the taxes.


But promoting specific corporations' deals is not a part of the diplomat's job. What if we had two airplane manufacturers competing for the same purchase? Would it be appropriate for the diplomats to favor the company that gave the biggest kick-backs or the biggest campaign contribution to the diplomat's boss?

So, you see, we get into a nasty tangle of ethical and financial issues here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC