[lossolo]

> The richer countries need to help the poorer ones

Of course they need, but I'm not arguing they shouldn't, I'm arguing that we will again exploit them in the process as we always did in our entire history, the only thing that change is the form of exploitation but the exploitation never ended. You have a lot of examples here[1]. We will throw them a few billions to feel good about ourselves so we can look into mirror and say that we are the good guys because we are helping them.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neocolonialism

[JoeAltmaier]

Lots of ways to criticize cooperation between countries in economic areas, call it exploitation. But for a working person needing a job, it's an armchair distinction. Got a job? Feeding your family? Better than the alternative.

I'm just saying, mutual benefit does not equal exploitation.

[lossolo]

I feel like there is a notion in your comment that I fit the stereotype of a radical left person, but I assure you I'm not. Of course, it's a good thing when people can find jobs instead of being unemployed.

> Lots of ways to criticize cooperation between countries in economic areas, call it exploitation

I'm referring to some of the examples on the Wiki page I linked. Many of them clearly involve one side exploiting the other.

> I'm just saying, mutual benefit does not equal exploitation.

Consider slavery. It may appear mutually beneficial on the surface, as one might argue that it's a choice between being a slave or starving or facing death. However, it's essential to acknowledge that such a relationship is deeply unjust and exploitative.

[JoeAltmaier]

All true.

Still, after the US Civil War, people existed who were loath to leave the plantation, strike out on their own. They had been essentially institutionalized all their lives, didn't have skills to survive independently.

Where am I going with this? Well, just that changes are difficult and the law of unintentional consequences looms large.