los_angeles

No one is celebrating child labor. But the question is how that compares to what these kids would be doing otherwise (ie, starving, dying of preventable disease, etc).

If the overall trend is to bring prosperity and increased standards of living to an area (which it generally appears to be), then globalization is a net win.

That doesn't mean it's a win for everyone all the time.

But over time, these sorts of humanitarian concerns melt away as countries grow richer and start behaving more humanely because they can afford to.

Rich nations tend not to have child labor. It's not because they're more moral, per se. It's just that they can afford a reasonable standard of living without child labor.

GDP per capita in DRC is $500 per year, so, yeah, parents are going to do what they have to to survive.

Africa also has lots of special problems like corruption that don't result from globalization and capitalism.

Yes there are all sorts of evils associated with capitalism, such as the concentration of wealth and environmental destruction we're seeing.

The optimistic narrative that I adopt hopes/assumes that we'll somehow become more sensible on these issues as time goes on.

It is a big claim.

It's probably the biggest, most important claim of the millennium. And it is really, really good for hundreds of millions (maybe billions).

These two are pretty good start points. [1] [2]

In short, globalization converted hundreds of millions of would-be Chinese farmers into middle class urbanites in about one generation.

It is the most massive improvement of quality of life in world history. It is staggering to consider how much life has improved for so many people in such a short amount of time.

This is basically step one of "how do we save the world". First get everyone to a baseline standard of living, then instill ideas of sustainability and environmentalism, then try to boost everyone to a more than bearable standard of living sustainably.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-sto...

[2] https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/how-has-globalization...

Yes, the consumer brand (HSBC in this one for example) is printed and advertised heavily on the money:

https://www.leftovercurrency.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/...

Actual quote from the source article, literally by Michael Scott:

>Pure Flix films managing partner Michael Scott told AAP in Chiang Rai, “I see this as a major Hollywood film with A-list stars”.

Basically buying stuff made in poor countries.

This (more than literally anything else) has made a staggering improvement in the lives of hundreds of millions of people over the last few decades.

So it was $3M paid for by a rich guy? Was he going to donate the money to charity if he didn't spend it on this?

I read he died in a flash flood. Might not have been a mistake so much as an unexpected turn of events in a dangerous, dynamic environment.

Well, sure, but the people having 8 kids in Sudan probably aren't checking the comments on HN for family planning advice.

So they are probably (well, not probably)... they ARE going to have more kids whether you like it or not.

The question becomes how do we (Western society, which has more resources than we know what to do with) address the issue and try to do good in the world.

But a lower percentage are in poverty every year.

>Yet who shows up for the 3.1 million children who die of malnutrition every year?

Bill Gates and tens of thousands of aid workers globally. The Chinese Communist Party and businessmen who outsource labor from the overfed first world to the underfed third world are by far the biggest help. Also your aunt who volunteers at the soup kitchen. Often these efforts funded by donations or aid grants (tax money, paid by you and me) from our democratically elected governments.

>We can comprehend 13 people and the struggle against nature, while the scope of world hunger is far too complex and emotionally incomprehensible to mobilize enough people.

Most of us can comprehend two (or more!) things at once. People are extremely mobilized about ending hunger and we have made strides against this in the last century: https://slides.ourworldindata.org/hunger-and-food-provision/

A few hundred people showed up to the cave for a few weeks. Tens of thousands show up to fight hunger every day.

In Hong Kong paper money is designed and issued by private banks. Works fine.

>>When they prize their own intelligence, they have false confidence about areas they have zero expertise in, purely because they feel they can figure it out.

I wonder how this squares with the Dunning-Kruger effect. Are domain-stupid generally intelligent people more susceptible than domain-stupid generally stupid people if they are equally cocky?

Which makes complete sense. He is the most powerful individual in a country of 300+ million people. If he needs a certain thing to keep him operating at peak efficiency and focus, he gets that thing. Period. Unless it violates national security.

Being elected president is not the time to learn a new technology suite. Hopefully most presidents have better things to do with their time than that.

At that level your people have people who have people to deal with that kind of minutiae.