I know what the phrase means and it means basically nothing.

Wages in Haiti are low. I guess that means Haitians are better off without jobs.

Please proceed.


edit-

...

this post is such a hot mess of garbage, jfc

i wanted to bold the most ludicrous parts and then i realized i bolded every single ****ing sentence in it

I DONT REALLY KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT GUYS BUT THEY SHOULD BE IN JAIL FOR CRIMES THAT I WONT BOTHER TO DETAIL BECAUSE I'M ****ING CLUELESS

this. how utterly ****ing pathetic.

they may not be child trafficking or scamming people through their foundation, but as an overall statement 'the Clintons are scum' should not be controversial.

lol what are these links supposed to show? the first one basically points the finger at the state department and the clinton foundation for what amounts to leading an inefficient recovery effort in the wake of the haitian earthquake.

the second one projects a lot of blame on hillary for what seems to be pretty routine/standard US foreign policy (however misguided and ineffective) of backing a preferred haitian presidential candidate who is friendly to foreign enterprise, and makes some questionable judgments about the ripple effect onto the 2012 american presidential election from the recent election in haiti and attributes that as a motive for some kind of PR campaign. none of which is even remotely illegal, and again, mind-numbingly standard US foreign policy.

your third link references an IRS investigation into the foundation, but you were apparently shocked when we told you already that it uncovered nothing criminal. the article then goes on to point out that, SHOCKER, many of the clinton foundation donors are democrats and not right wingers, and that any donations made to the clinton foundation by foreign governments were made when neither hillary nor bill were public officials. spoiler alert, saudi arabia has been our ally for a long time and they dont need to give money to the clinton foundation to benefit from US foreign policy.

when multinational corporations take part in a disaster recovery effort in a 3rd world country, yes, they are usually positioned to profit from it. such is the way of capitalism and american foreign intervention- it didn't start with hillary and it doesn't end with her either. providing these links as some kind of basis for your comments that she "should be in jail" and that the clinton foundation is likely engaged in criminal activity (when you didn't even know that the investigation mentioned in one of the links turned up nothing) is a shameful display of posting and critical analysis.



meanwhile the trump organization literally admitted to breaking laws about self-dealing in its IRS disclosures wherein donald trump used hundreds of thousands of dollars of charity funds to settle personal lawsuits against him/his businesses and was forced by a court judgment to pay it back and shut down the organization. oh, they also stole money from a golf fundraising event for children's cancer treatment in order to settle yet another lawsuit against one of trump's businesses from a dude who hit a hole in one at that event and was scammed out of his prize for it.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalex.../#2441ba186b4a

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/unite...-rules-reports

^take note- next time you allege criminality and provide links to support those claims in an air of triumph and defiance, make sure they actually demonstrate that laws were in fact broken. otherwise you just look dumb.

Arguing about Hillary ****ing Clinton. Seriously? Movie's over, bad guys won.

well, I think MD's point was that when a natural disaster completely ravages an entire country and people who were barely subsisting are now left with absolutely no way to even exist, ie food, water, shelter, roads, comunication then the charity that arrives to ostensibly rebuild the society should focus on providing the necessities for the people rather than building a massive sweatshop and company town for corporate bigwigs on former farmland.

while this is a valid criticism, it's a pretty narrow insight to what is a complex reconstruction situation involving multiple parties.

what if the red cross and other reputable organizations are handling the distribution of basic necessities?

where/how are the destitute inhabitants going to earn a living after having their basic needs met?

note that i'm not going to bat for whatever mistakes/oversights the CF made in their effort to save haiti, just pointing out that none of us, including resident haitian michael davis, are privy to all the details.

in the context of his claims about corruption and criminal dealings, this stuff about the haitian rescue/reconstruction effort falls woefully short.

and its ****ing stupid to begin with. this most recent effort spearheaded by FBI/DOJ to investigate the clinton foundation is just one of many examples of how this country is sliding closer and closer to fascism every day, as the sitting president repeatedly calls for his political opponents to be federally investigated on matters/alleged crimes for which there is extremely scant evidence (or none at all), in an attempt to derail/distract from the ongoing investigation into him and his own people- an investigation that has already yielded numerous guilty pleas and witnesses who are alleged to be cooperating against him.

this is a witch hunt, plain and simple, and it's obvious to anybody who has been paying attention, something michael davis clearly hasn't been doing.

since he was living there, I can certainly understand his frustration. it looks like the foundation just arrived simply to exploit the opportunity created by the earthquake. that looks scummy.

but then there is plenty of other information indicating that haiti is like the most corrupt place on earth and that working with their govt was futile.

Amazing that you could come up with a specific allegation, but that it applies to the Trump administration.

Of course, a private foundation giving out contracts is totally different from steering government money to one's friends, especially one's friends who have a company with one employee. It's all right, we KNOW that Clinton is corrupt because pantsuit.

But let me break down the "crime" you're alleging here. The Clintons approach their friends and ask for donations. Their friends donate. Then, the Clinton's give their friends contracts paid for by the charity that the friends just donated to. This is an elite money making scheme that you've uncovered here.

I'm not a fan of the Clintons, but this kind of smearing in the name of "both sides do it" is dangerous and disingenuous.

how did they exploit it/to what end? you think that CF had no intention of doing any good there?

Some people are privy to some of the details anyway. Michael Davis is unfairly characterizing things, but the relief efforts did quite a bit of harm. It wasn't just corruption. There were very significant unintended consequences from well meaning people, hence Bill Clinton's mea culpas. Poverty, inc. is a good documentary on this.

The suppression of wages and building of factories is pretty separate from this I think, though HRC was involved as SoS. The State Department has always functioned as tool for American business, which sounds good but often involves pressuring governments to lower labor, political and environmental standards.

Clinton: Being investigated since 1998.

For the love of God Hillary Clinton isn't running for anything and has no political power. Arguing about her means they already won. It would be like getting the right to have a never-ending debate about Roy Moore, who holds the same amount of power and unquestionably did rip off his own "charities." And actually did molest kids. Jesus this ****ing country never learns.

I have no position regarding the Clinton Foundation and Haiti. I'm aware that they were heavily involved there and that there's been some controversy.

My whole point was that its hard for me to take seriously what might otherwise be well-founded criticisms when they include lines about exploiting local workers when that translates to hiring workers at local wages.

Well, in Haiti's case the persistent supply of aid, especially rice aid, destroyed their local agriculture (and owning a small farm is way way better than being low paid labor in a 3rd world factory), so working in a factory for $0.27/hr (the minimum wage that the US State Department lobbied to keep Haiti from raising) became the only choice for many people.

That's similar to the way NAFTA killed small family farms in Mexico by allowing in cheap subsidized corn along with US owned mega-farms which literally hold farm workers prisoner during the harvest and how many of the newly unemployed had little option other than to move to near the US border to work in factory towns.

The supposition that the only options for rural Chinese are pig farming in the same fashion it was done 100 years ago with no benefit of improved technology or working at FOXCONN or worse is one of those false dichotomies. But China is not really the issue here. The discussion started about Haiti, which has the 3rd highest level of income inequality in the world and a median income of $350/year. Why is Haiti so poor and China getting rich? It's not because of Econ 101 theory. It's because China has managed to be somewhat independent of the West and has protected itself, while Haiti has been kept under the power of developed countries and used as a source of cheap resources and labor. The rural Chinese have had more of a choice than the rural Haitians.

I refer economists here to the works of Ha-Joon Chang, notably Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism .

the shadow presidency of hillary clinton

thanks for the international labor discussion..so illuminating and is no doubt bringing joy to the idiot Clinton foundation troll.

Finally, a thread where we can get to the bottom of this President H. Clinton!

Thank you President Trump! MAGA!

Am I doing it right?

Rural Chinese have much better options than pig farming, therefore what? Why are they en masse deciding against taking advantage of these options?

It's really sad that these poor people--particularly the women--haven't had the opportunity to hear you western-splain to them all the great options they had back in their home village and how sad it is that they would move to a city and earn a wage.

Sorry but this is still blowing me away.

this ****ing pretentious illiterate over here

Did this dude just try to triple-reverse it with 'western-splain' right after he got done explaining that, no, Third World Denizen, three pennies and a suicide net is not exploitation, it is The Local Wage.