(no subject)

[somefantastic10.livejournal.com]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6837045/


i know this isnt a political cartoon but it pertains to a lot of the discussion we were having in this community before the great outage..

Comments

[beretta.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't it be great if that were true. But throwing money at a problem rarely if ever works in a situation like that. What these so called experts did not seem to take into account is even the richest nations in the world have problems with poverty.

[somefantastic10.livejournal.com]

it is my belief that a person with the position of "head of the U.N. anti-poverty effort" would know a thing or two as to whats possible.

furthermore, they seemed to be focused on what they called "extreme poverty," or the example they use, where people make less than $1 a day.

although yes, obviously, there's plenty of poverty in the US and Japan and Germany too.

[supersaiyanjing.livejournal.com]

The experts probably didn't take into account how much aid is wasted by governments or even outright stolen, either. If a problem really were so easy to solve, I think it would've been solved already.

I don't like to think of myself as being a cynic, but I have little faith in foreign aid. The reason is because so many countries that need the aid are unstable or have corrupt governments. The UN was pouring tons of food into Somalia back in 1991 or so, but famine remained because warlords kept stealing the food and using it as leverage. I sort of feel foreign aid in general runs into the same problem.

It's also unfortunate that often the "experts" really DON'T know much. They may have all the facts in their head, but if experts really knew so much, then dictatorships should be flourishing since experts, if they're listened to there, have a much greater chance of implementing their full ideas.

[beretta.livejournal.com]

Regardless of position or authority that person has, they can still make mistakes. And this is one of those things that would appear good on paper, but how it works in the real world is another thing.

I'm sure the money would help, but I think the claim that poverty or extreme poverty would end is an extremely bold and maybe outrageous claim.

They try to say that the US contributes the lowest percentage of money, but paradoxically in the US we still contribute the highest dollar amount.

Historically foreign aid costs us more but gains us little. Since WWII in adjusted dollars we've spent over a trillion in aid to other countries. All this has done is create a dependence on US funds and increase our debt.

Ending poverty would be great, but there is another side to that.

[the-call-up.livejournal.com]

it is my belief that a person with the position of "head of the U.N. anti-poverty effort" would know a thing or two as to whats possible.


Then I submit that you probably have a lot more faith in the UN than a lot of people in America. Didn't they appoint Libya and Iraq to the Human Rights Commission?

[chrisfrap.livejournal.com]

as a model un-er I know a thing or two about how the committes are put together

i hate to tell you this my friend....but the HRC is rather...shall we say "inclusive"...almost everyone is represented on it.
also, remember the food for oil exchange....between some of the g-5 countries and IRAQ

lets put this equation together

Food For Oil Program = UN Security council veto powers (russia, France, Britain,)
Security Council Veto Powers = Strong Voice Through out the UN
Strong Voice = They put together the committees

IF you had a lucrative contract with a country, wouldn't you like to keep them happy... i.e putting them on a bull shit committee that looks good on their "record"

and yes the HRC is a bunch of bull, they are thinking about reducing its power even further as well