Xiaofan Chen wrote:

>> Brazil is not a rich country, IMO mainly because the rich Brazilians didn't
>> realize for centuries (and I'm not sure many of them do realize this now)
>> that being a bit less rich in a rich country provides for a much richer
>> life than being a bit richer in a poor country. That's not socialism,
>> that's realism.
>>
> 
> I do not quite agree with this. I agree with what Vitality said before.
>>>> Trade is not a zero-sum game. Everybody who plays the game, wins.
> 
> I tend to agree with this and I am for globalization and free trade. I
> do not think that the people in rich country need to be a bit less rich
> in order that the poor country can be a bit richer. 

What I said about Brazil has nothing (or little) to do with free trade, or
with anything international. It was not about a comparison between
countries. Read it again -- I think I wrote it as I meant it :)

It is about the fact that the rich Brazilians failed to spend even a little
of their wealth to develop the country, and rather wanted to keep the poor
as poor (and powerless) as possible, in an attempt to have as many first
real slaves and later de-facto slaves as possible. This behavior fails to
realize that living in a rich country with even a bit less wealth (which
has been spent developing the country as a whole) provides for a better
life than living in a poor country even when filthy rich. 

I've never seen as many rich people in Germany as I've seen in Brazil. 

This is of course a very short version, and is of course only my opinion. 

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist