Talk:UN Human Development Index - Revision history

142.177.97.12 at 18:45, 11 July 2003

2003-07-11T18:45:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 11 July 2003
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I'm sure this is an interesting index in some manner, but could you point out some examples how to utilise this information in grading [[product]]s or [[companies]].		I'm sure this is an interesting index in some manner, but could you point out some examples how to utilise this information in grading [[product]]s or [[companies]].

	:It's indirect but important. A [[nation-state]] provides [[human development]] services, the same as [[product]]s are purchased for their [[implied services]], some of which come from the nation-state, e.g. [[food inspection]], [[implied warranty enforcement]], [[mandatory labelling]]. You can't really understand the implication of dealing with a product or company unless you assess how the nation-states involved are supporting them with services. For instance, expenditures on roads for logging might be understandable in some regions that are very poor, but, you might consider them unthinkable in richer nations. So position on the Index actually establishes what you will [[forgive]], and it establishes higher standards for those nations that can afford it. Most directly, products or companies that have interfered with politics in poor countries can be punished if that has led to low positions on the Index. It all makes sense once you break the [[product]] down to the [[services]] it includes and implies - then the nation-states are just providing more such services, with their own implications. A [[flag]] is just a [[brand]] for these services...		:It's indirect but important. A [[nation-state]] provides [[human development]] services, the same as [[product]]s are purchased for their [[implied services]], some of which come from the nation-state, e.g. [[food inspection]], [[implied warranty enforcement]], [[mandatory labelling]]. You can't really understand the implication of dealing with a product or company unless you assess how the nation-states involved are supporting them with services. For instance, expenditures on roads for logging might be understandable in some regions that are very poor, but, you might consider them unthinkable in richer nations. So position on the Index actually establishes what you will [[forgive]], and it establishes higher standards for those nations that can afford it. Most directly, products or companies that have interfered with politics in poor countries can be punished if that has led to low positions on the Index. It all makes sense once you break the [[product]] down to the [[services]] it includes and implies - then the nation-states are just providing more such services, with their own implications. A [[flag]] is just a [[brand]] for these services...in purchasing you must consider [[flag]], [[brand]] and [[label]] all as implying different services and guarantees, many of which overlap (like if you buy fruit from a country that doesn't allow GMOs even though it has no label guranteeing that).
	in purchasing you must consider [[flag]], [[brand]] and [[label]] all as implying different services and guarantees, many of which overlap (like if you buy fruit from a country that doesn't allow GMOs even though it has no label guranteeing that).
	::You are making sense. I have had this trouble of figuring out should if one should [[boycott]] or [[endorsement\|endorse]] an product from countries with low living standards. In the long run boycotting might produce and good overall effect, but endorsing might help the shape up the trade/economy (talking poor countries here) and thus the living standards of the people... etc etc....problem, problem....		::You are making sense. I have had this trouble of figuring out should if one should [[boycott]] or [[endorsement\|endorse]] an product from countries with low living standards. In the long run boycotting might produce and good overall effect, but endorsing might help the shape up the trade/economy (talking poor countries here) and thus the living standards of the people... etc etc....problem, problem....

			:::For more on this see [http://textbook.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookbook Wikipedia (textbook) cookbook]. Note it mentions [[Consumerium]] cooperation, so getting a lot of crossover is very important. Obviously seeing "grown in Chile" on your grapes is important.

Jukeboksi at 01:12, 10 July 2003

2003-07-10T01:12:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:12, 10 July 2003
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:It's indirect but important. A [[nation-state]] provides [[human development]] services, the same as [[product]]s are purchased for their [[implied services]], some of which come from the nation-state, e.g. [[food inspection]], [[implied warranty enforcement]], [[mandatory labelling]]. You can't really understand the implication of dealing with a product or company unless you assess how the nation-states involved are supporting them with services. For instance, expenditures on roads for logging might be understandable in some regions that are very poor, but, you might consider them unthinkable in richer nations. So position on the Index actually establishes what you will [[forgive]], and it establishes higher standards for those nations that can afford it. Most directly, products or companies that have interfered with politics in poor countries can be punished if that has led to low positions on the Index. It all makes sense once you break the [[product]] down to the [[services]] it includes and implies - then the nation-states are just providing more such services, with their own implications. A [[flag]] is just a [[brand]] for these services...		:It's indirect but important. A [[nation-state]] provides [[human development]] services, the same as [[product]]s are purchased for their [[implied services]], some of which come from the nation-state, e.g. [[food inspection]], [[implied warranty enforcement]], [[mandatory labelling]]. You can't really understand the implication of dealing with a product or company unless you assess how the nation-states involved are supporting them with services. For instance, expenditures on roads for logging might be understandable in some regions that are very poor, but, you might consider them unthinkable in richer nations. So position on the Index actually establishes what you will [[forgive]], and it establishes higher standards for those nations that can afford it. Most directly, products or companies that have interfered with politics in poor countries can be punished if that has led to low positions on the Index. It all makes sense once you break the [[product]] down to the [[services]] it includes and implies - then the nation-states are just providing more such services, with their own implications. A [[flag]] is just a [[brand]] for these services...
	in purchasing you must consider [[flag]], [[brand]] and [[label]] all as implying different services and guarantees, many of which overlap (like if you buy fruit from a country that doesn't allow GMOs even though it has no label guranteeing that).		in purchasing you must consider [[flag]], [[brand]] and [[label]] all as implying different services and guarantees, many of which overlap (like if you buy fruit from a country that doesn't allow GMOs even though it has no label guranteeing that).
			::You are making sense. I have had this trouble of figuring out should if one should [[boycott]] or [[endorsement\|endorse]] an product from countries with low living standards. In the long run boycotting might produce and good overall effect, but endorsing might help the shape up the trade/economy (talking poor countries here) and thus the living standards of the people... etc etc....problem, problem....

142.177.81.30 at 00:02, 10 July 2003

2003-07-10T00:02:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:02, 10 July 2003
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I'm sure this is an interesting index in some manner, but could you point out some examples how to utilise this information in grading [[product]]s or [[companies]].		I'm sure this is an interesting index in some manner, but could you point out some examples how to utilise this information in grading [[product]]s or [[companies]].

			:It's indirect but important. A [[nation-state]] provides [[human development]] services, the same as [[product]]s are purchased for their [[implied services]], some of which come from the nation-state, e.g. [[food inspection]], [[implied warranty enforcement]], [[mandatory labelling]]. You can't really understand the implication of dealing with a product or company unless you assess how the nation-states involved are supporting them with services. For instance, expenditures on roads for logging might be understandable in some regions that are very poor, but, you might consider them unthinkable in richer nations. So position on the Index actually establishes what you will [[forgive]], and it establishes higher standards for those nations that can afford it. Most directly, products or companies that have interfered with politics in poor countries can be punished if that has led to low positions on the Index. It all makes sense once you break the [[product]] down to the [[services]] it includes and implies - then the nation-states are just providing more such services, with their own implications. A [[flag]] is just a [[brand]] for these services...
			in purchasing you must consider [[flag]], [[brand]] and [[label]] all as implying different services and guarantees, many of which overlap (like if you buy fruit from a country that doesn't allow GMOs even though it has no label guranteeing that).

Jukeboksi: what can we make of this?

2003-07-06T17:15:40Z

what can we make of this?

New page

I'm sure this is an interesting index in some manner, but could you point out some examples how to utilise this information in grading [[product]]s or [[companies]].