$1:
ALBA appeals to the egalitarian principles of justice and equality that are innate in human beings, the well-being of the most dispossessed sectors of society, and a reinvigorated sense of solidarity toward the underdeveloped countries of the western hemisphere, so that with the required assistance, they can enter into trade negotiations on more favorable terms than has been the case under the dictates of developed countries.
It's always been something of my mantra to say that trade should be a LUXURY, not a necessity. Even if you were to live on the poorest, most isolated most resource-deficient island in the world, it should really be expected that you can sustain yourself if you want the privilege of being called an "inhabitant". Otherwise, I'd strongly reconsider you current disposition: "How did you get there?", " Why are you still there?" and "What are you doing about it?"
$1:
By employing more effective mechanisms to eradicate poverty, ALBA—as proposed by the Venezuelan government—provides a counterweight to the policies and goals of the FTAA. This alternative model also identifies the most crucial impediments to achieve a genuine regional integration that transcends the prerogatives of the transnational corporations. One of the obstacles to confront is the deep disparity that exists in development between the countries of the hemisphere, whereby poor countries such as Haiti or Bolivia are compelled to compete with the world’s leading economic power. In order to help overcome trade disadvantages, ALBA pushes for solidarity with the economically weakest countries, with the aim of achieving a free trade area in which all of its members benefit (a win-win alliance).
It should be noted that ALBA is meant to be set up specifically as an
alternative rather than a direct afront to Free Trade Area of the Americas (or ALCA, "Área de Libre Comercio de las Américas, or ZLEA, " Zone de libre-échange des Amériques"). Perhaps a nod to the fact that FTAA may have its benefit (perhaps at least to developed nations with well-instituted oligarchs).
Reading this passage reminds me of the predicament of the quintessential "Main Street USA". MS USA shops re generally mom-pop, long-standing, localized, and specialized, and may include some chains interspersed throughout. For whatever reason, a hypermart is opened nearby despite local opposition. Some consumers flock there, but most generally stay away out of a "Buy Local" sense of pride and/or a disdain of the hypermart. Trend continues for a while, but always underlying the fact that these smaller MS USA shops are competing against a multi-billion dollar giant with ample sway in wholesale prices. Eventually, economic attrition (brought about partially by the theme of your thread, "falling real wages") wins out and nearly all consumers are forced to buy from the hypermart or any alterative cheap source. MS USA shops, which generally are
not cheap, are forced to close. And either Main Street ends up being privatized and converted to a sleek but hollow plaza riddled with infinitely-repeating chain stores; or it stays closed and turns into a brown area, the decayed remnants of a time of greater economic equality.
Would it be too simplistic to compare this microcosm of economic attrition to the greater disadvantages faced by developing countries. And on the flip side of the coin, how would we visualize the ALBA equivalent at the local level?
$1:
Venezuela has voiced the need for identifying the economies with the greatest deficiencies and their principle requirements, arguing for a transfer of resources to the most underdeveloped countries so that these may develop the economic infrastructure they require to compete on more favorable terms with more developed economies. In order to do this, the corner stone in the design of the ALBA is the proposal for a “Compensatory Fund for Structural Convergence,” which would manage and distribute financial aid to the most economically vulnerable countries.
Hopefully the CFSC doesn't accidentally turn into another IMF. In any case, this paragraph respresents the first flash point topic in the ALBA discussion. In a sense providing aid to developing countries is already policy, but hardly action. As i conjectured before, to "cooperate" [honestly] in order to "compete" [honestly] is too alien a concept -- the temptation to take advantage and secure your country's lead over another is far too great. While such a socialist program is meant to 'shift' the existing culture, it's not meant to be an easy ride even for a powerful nation. Cuba and Venezuela happen to be too small economically and militarily, and too villified, to carry much convincive sway in the West. Instead, any sway that WOULD result from even a moderately successful trade and social union of South, Central and Carribean countries would likely be towards greater hostility. Perhaps in line with the Red Scares of the early 20th.
....
I'd continue with the rest of the article, but stamina is at absolute 0 and [increasingly] so is coherence. X_x
Hopefully next time I show up, I'll bring links to more reference material on ALBA. ^_^
CKA Moderator 
