120
PM says Australia has 'ideological disagreement' with US after it reveals anti-slavery tariff (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/world@lemmy.world
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The United States is planning to impose a 12.5 per cent tariff on goods from Australia, alleging the country has failed to take action to prevent slavery and forced labour.

Anthony Albanese says any tariff on Australian exports to the US is "unjustified and inconsistent" with the free trade agreements between the two allies.

Former Australian ambassador to the US Joe Hockey says Donald Trump is convinced that tariffs are beneficial to the US.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 47 points 5 months ago (8 children)

Ironic that one of the worst "first world" countries for worker protections is accusing others of not preventing forced labor.

Every fucking day people are forced to work in the US, essentially slaves to the corporation. As a decision between work for a pittance or starve is no decision.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    And if they aren't paying slave prison workers in our own country, we're importing goods from all over the world, built with slave labor. Having a tariff on those goods is simply forcing the company to give the American government the money they should have paid their workers, but it doesn't help the workers at all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    America is not first world. Never has been without universal health care, which is only reserved for first world countries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    It is by the very definition of the term. It is just that "first world" doesn't mean what people think it does and isn't necessarily even good.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Yes originally 1st world was US/nato aligned, while 2nd was the USSR aligned, third world unaffiliated. It hasn't been used like that for the longest time though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    I mean, it never really officially changed, the term just started broadly bring used as "first world" == good and modern and "third world" == shitty and backwards by people that didn't know what it actually meant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I always wondered what 2nd World was, I didn't know it had a Soviet connection. I speculated that first world was basically nuclear countries, and second world was non-nuclear countries, and third world are all the poor countries.

    Pretty simplistic, I know.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •