12 ms·

In 2011, as a condition for joining, the World Trade Organization ordered Samoa to eliminate the ban within a year. Eliminate a policy designed for the betterm

• pjc50 10y ago
  And people wonder why there's an anti-globalisation backlash.
  • realusername 10y ago
    Last time I've tried to argue for the French ban of unlimited soda refills, I was called a "Stalinist" so I probably won't say much on this one. I hope it will help to reduce their obesity rates.
    • StavrosK 10y ago
      The free refills policy strikes me as very American as well. The other day I paid $3.50 for a 250ml coke at a restaurant when the main course cost $4 :(
    • pjc50 10y ago
      Having only one soda is definitely as bad as being in the gulag, I'm sure.
      • urda 10y ago
        Can we drop the hyperbole, and no you don't definitely need to exaggerate.
        • krisroadruck 10y ago
          He wasn't exaggerating he was being sarcastic. He was in fact poking fun at the notion that defending a soda ban was compared to stalinism. Your outrage is misplaced.
          • pjc50 10y ago
            Yes. I'd forgotten there is no level of sarcasm, no matter how obvious, that HN commentators can fail to spot.
    • gydfi 10y ago
      The "Stalinism" isn't so much about the actual soda, but more about the attitude that the government should have the power to just step in and ban whatever the hell someone has decided is a bad idea this week. Once you move from the presumption of freedom to the presumption that anything that might have negative consequences should be banned, it's hard to get back. Personally I believe that whatever consenting adults get up to is none of the government's business, whether it's weird butt stuff or selling each other unlimited quantities of sugary water. If you're going to ban one, why not ban the other? They're both enjoyable to certain people and both have negative public health consequences.
      • nradov 10y ago
        The French haven't banned soda. Consenting adults can still buy as much as they want (or can afford).
      • Noos 10y ago
        "This is what I gathered. That in that country if a man falls into ill health, or catches any disorder, or fails bodily in any way before he is seventy years old, he is tried before a jury of his countrymen, and if convicted is held up to public scorn and sentenced more or less severely as the case may be. There are subdivisions of illnesses into crimes and misdemeanours as with offences amongst ourselves—a man being punished very heavily for serious illness, while failure of eyes or hearing in one over sixty-five, who has had good health hitherto, is dealt with by fine only, or imprisonment in default of payment. But if a man forges a cheque, or sets his house on fire, or robs with violence from the person, or does any other such things as are criminal in our own country, he is either taken to a hospital and most carefully tended at the public expense, or if he is in good circumstances, he lets it be known to all his friends that he is suffering from a severe fit of immorality, just as we do when we are ill, and they come and visit him with great solicitude, and inquire with interest how it all came about, what symptoms first showed themselves, and so forth,—questions which he will answer with perfect unreserve; for bad conduct, though considered no less deplorable than illness with ourselves, and as unquestionably indicating something seriously wrong with the individual who misbehaves, is nevertheless held to be the result of either pre-natal or post-natal misfortune." -Samuel Butler, Erewhon. Not satire as much these days, sadly.
  • rdtsc 10y ago
    Anti-globalization was always a hot topic for the left. Read Chomsky on NAFTA for example and free trade: https://chomsky.info/secrets03/ https://chomsky.info/secrets03/ Here is Bernie Sanders being visibly upset at raising immigration levels and instituting "open borders" policy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0 I am kind of interested how the current liberals become pro-globalization all of the sudden. They went from organizing large anti-globalization riots, and getting tear gased fighting it, to "What do you mean? We love globalization!". I want to see a more specific analysis in how the shift happened, and maybe a more detailed timeline. Certainly an interesting topic. Here is of course Zuckerberg with his letter worrying that people are not buying the globalization shtick very well anymore: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38998884 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38998884 If you squint enough to not notice the liberal veneer he puts on you might think he is one of the Koch brothers.
    • Drumlin 10y ago
      I suggest you read 'The Technological Society' by Jacques Ellul. It's not an easy read, the sort of book where you take lots of notes and then learn from the notes: https://www.amazon.com/Technological-Society-Jacques-Ellul/dp/0394703901/ https://www.amazon.com/Technological-Society-Jacques-Ellul/d... Recent generations have been conditioned by society to accept globalisation - amongst other things. The book, which I only recently read myself, describes what has been happening for hundreds of years and it's to do with progress - technical progress, of which technology is just the pinnacle. Those people who were against globalisation on the left were the old guard, the people who were strong supporters of trade unions and were proud of their local communities. Sanders is an example in the US, Corbyn or Skinner are examples in the UK.
      • rdtsc 10y ago
        Thanks for the tip. I just ordered it. Heard of it before but never got to reading it.
        • Drumlin 10y ago
• tomjen3 10y ago
  WTO gets a lot of flack for that, but they exist to provide international trade and that requires removing local obstacles, and each obstacle will have some good reason behind it. Countries are free to join the WTO, if they don't feel the package is worth it, they are free to opt out. What they can't do is get it piece-meal.
  • vosper 10y ago
    > WTO gets a lot of flack for that, but they exist to provide international trade and that requires removing local obstacles, and each obstacle will have some good reason behind it. In this case a good reason, but I can just as equally imagine that (eg) some subsidy or tariff is there primarily to protect a powerful voting bloc, or friends of whichever government put the rule in place.
• xom 10y ago
  The [WTO] said in a statement that it would allow a 300 percent import duty on turkey tail imports and a domestic prohibition on sales during the transition period to allow the country to “develop and implement a nationwide program promoting healthier diet and lifestyle choices.” Reminds me of the planet Norstrilia in Cordwainer Smith's fiction, which exports an astronomically precious immortality drug, yet maintains its archaic culture (resembling Australian ranchers with a British cultural inheritance) with import taxes of over 20000000%.
• richdougherty 10y ago
  I'm asking because I genuinely don't know: did Samoa apply bans to unhealthy locally produced food too or just to unhealthy imported food?
  • finid 10y ago
    did Samoa apply bans to unhealthy locally produced food too or just to unhealthy imported food? In general, countries like that don't have unhealthy, locally-produced food. And the article agrees with that assertion. We have a patent on junk food.
    • metaphor 10y ago
      > In general, countries like that don't have unhealthy, locally-produced food. And the article agrees with that assertion. Patently false assertion. I'm ethnically a pacific islander who grew up on a small island in Micronesia and I can assure you that local island dishes are quite unhealthy.
      • rangibaby 10y ago
        Samoan traditional food isn't unhealthy. Fish and taro isn't going to make anyone fat in a hurry. About 15 years ago we would joke that Samoans only got fat when they came to New Zealand and discovered KFC.
        • metaphor 10y ago
          > Fish and taro isn't going to make anyone fat in a hurry. It's easy to attribute dishes as healthy when just considering fish and taro, but this fails to acknowledge its traditional preparation with high amounts of coconut milk, salt, and sugar. Seriously, when was the last time you saw a nutritional facts label for any traditional dish? I can only speak anecdotally in that traditional Samoan dishes are not unlike Micronesia to the degree that Georgia Southern foods are clearly distinct from Alabama's flavor (that is to say they're not). I think one of the biggest problems is the dependence of poorer remote islands in the Pacific on less perishable foods: think canned goods like Spanish sausage, Spam, sardines, Palm corned beef (from NZ), etc. or cheap frozen meats by the box, e.g. ribs, chicken, turkey legs, etc. When I was growing up, my father would make the ocassional business trip to the FSM (specifically Palau). He'd bring boxes of frozen ribs and chicken with him and exchange for coolers of fresh lobster with his local contacts. Throw in a few cases of canned Budweiser and those business negotiations always turned out great. This might sound crazy to people who grew up in 1st-world countries, but it's a thing, and if you grew up on the islands as I did, then you know precisely what's up.
• forrestthewoods 10y ago
  What other decisions would you like the government to make for you? For your own good, of course.
  • TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
    Seat belts, air bags, crumple zones. Fire exists, wheelchair ramps, smoke alarms, fire rated building materials. Emission targets, waste control. Air traffic, RF spectrum, earth orbit satellites. Minimum wages, social security, health care, school. Defence, police, emergence services. We are not savages. In fact, it could be argued that the system we have is a result of having anarchy in our distant past. We rather like being governed and having institutions and civil society.
    • forrestthewoods 10y ago
      I'm sorry. My computer locked me out. I need to run 3 miles before I'm allowed to use it again.
      • sctb 10y ago
        Please don't post snark like this on Hacker News. We're trying to have thoughtful discussions.
• olalonde 10y ago
  > Eliminate a policy designed for the betterment of the population! Depends who you ask. Some people understand the risks of junk food but still want it (same as with alcohol and tobacco). Junk food also tends to be cheaper per calorie.
  • TuringNYC 10y ago
    Where does one draw the line? Hard drugs?
    • z92 10y ago
      > Where does one draw the line? Hard drugs? Not bellow junk food.
      • stouset 10y ago
        And the same can't be said of drugs? Many people take psychoactive substances responsibly, and only a small percent develop problems with dependency and abuse. Hell, I'd be willing to bet that more people who eat junk food become effective "junk food addicts" and develop resultant health problesm as a percentage than do people who use LSD, MDMA, or even cocaine.
      • jodrellblank 10y ago
        Have you ever known anyone to overeat on cauliflower until they get obese and diabetic? Let alone a population of three million people doing it? The food is designed to be a hyperstimulus, moreish beyond anything humans would find to eat in the wild. How is the food not the problem?
        • iopq 10y ago
          cauliflower is low in calories, so it would just be physically difficult to eat that much cauliflower but bananas? Yes, some people get fat eating too many fruits
          • 10y ago
• gydfi 10y ago
  It's funny because the people most likely to trust the government with the power to ban junk food are the ones least likely to trust the government to can mind-altering drugs.
• coliveira 10y ago
  This is the whole purpose of the WTO. Last year India tried to invest on the development of solar energy and was hit by the WTO, as India cannot provide subsidies to their own companies due to the globalization rules they had to accept. Now India is trying to sue back the USA due to their own national subsidies for solar power. The expected defense of the USA: "our companies are global, yours aren't".
  • derefr 10y ago
    Why not have a subsidy that applies to companies from any country willing to do X in your country, rather than only companies headquartered in your country?