On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, nada wrote:
>...
> But John, all imperialist investment does the *exact same thing*.
> Certainly you are not for *imperialist* investment that contorts local
> economies around ex****t capitalism are you? What *difference* is there
> between Chinese investments and Imperialist ones, pray tell? Does the
> local victims, the working class and farmers, see a difference?
>
> David
>
These are very good questions, to which the Northites do not supply
any real answers in their piece, other than assertions.
The very fact that the Chinese are investing nine billion dollars in
of all places the Congo seems to imply to me that this is not quite
like the reality of the Marshall Plan, although it may correspond to
the *imagery* put forth to embellish it by the American government.
I do not, personally or politically, have any investment in what the
answer to these very good questions are. I would like to know. I don't
consider the Northites' assertions to be adequate answers.
I don't think all nine billion of those dollars are going solely to
get the mines up and running and fixing up railcars and track to
trans****t precious metals out of the Congo to China. If so, that
sounds like a poor investment choice and bad business. Too much
overhead for too little return.
Sure, a billion dollars ain't what it used to be, but a billion here
and a billion there, sooner or later it adds up to real money.
-jh-
|
