The world needs at least somewhere where you can opt-out from Western neoliberalism and socialism.
This applies only to "global companies with at least a 10% profit margin". By definition, you're already playing ball with all of these actors if you're a global company.
Because otherwise everything becomes a race to the bottom.
https://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230114319_3
> Compared to those that were less free, countries with higher economic freedom ratings during 1980–2005 had lower rates of both extreme and moderate poverty in 2005. More importantly, countries with higher levels of economic freedom in 1980 and larger increases in economic freedom during the 1980s and 1990s achieved larger poverty rate reductions than economies that were less free. These relationships were true even after adjustment for geographic and locational factors and foreign assistance as a share of income. The positive relations between the level and change in economic freedom and reductions in poverty were both statistically significant and robust across alternative specifications.
> Some fear that growth propelled by economic freedom will leave the poor behind. This was not the case during 1980–2005. During this quarter of a century, the developing countries that moved the most toward economic freedom achieved both strong economic growth and substantial reductions in poverty. This indicates that an institutional and policy environment consistent with economic freedom is an important ingredient for progress against poverty.
https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/en/article/the-relationship-betw...
> We study the relationship between economic freedom and poverty rates in 151 countries over a twenty-year period. Using the World Bank's poverty headcounts of those living on less than $1.90 per day, $3.20 per day, and $5.50 per day, we find evidence that economic freedom, measured by the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom, is associated with lower poverty rates. We also test the effect of various components of the Index of Economic Freedom. We find that a government's integrity and a country's trade freedom are associated with lower poverty rates. We check the robustness of our results using alternative freedom indices.
See also https://cei.org/blog/why-economic-freedom-is-the-best-weapon...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heritage_Foundation
Anyway we aren't really talking about removing peoples economic freedoms, you can have a strong economy whilst retaining workers rights, social support and environmental controls. It's the poorest parts of the world that don't have a handle on this stuff.
1. The data is freely available and you can check the methodology yourself: https://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2016/book/methodology.pdf
2. "We check the robustness of our results using alternative freedom indices."
The charitable interpretation of this agreement is that this is to be achieved by coordinating taxes of multinational corporations.
It seems reasonable to me, strategically speaking. I have political reservations (to say the least) towards high concentration of power though, since we’re talking large corporations, G7 and so on.
For some reason, people from “western neoliberal and socialist” countries generally don’t move to them, though.
Maybe some could argue that pre Soviet Afghanistan (in the ‘60) was such a place. But today?
Scientific and logical principles of "evidence" to not apply to human political systems, b/c the method of inquiry are too compromised by the power the system wields over them. Even information about Afghanistan comes through via the government. But today? There is us nothing modern the government wants you to know about.
But now the United States and Canada and whoever else is the G7 are trying to shut them down and force everyone to follow their hellish tax laws.
Because that's a very, uh, unique idea. Also weird to jump from implying escape from western influence doesn't exist to listing western countries as a way to escape from the west.
Welcome to Iran...