<!--QuoteBegin-Dubbilex+Jul 3 2005, 01:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dubbilex @ Jul 3 2005, 01:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Raising awareness is an important first step and, for that, I admire Geldof. I just don't admire the fact that he isn't yet taking the logical second step that is completely within his means. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The whole point of Live8 was to simply raise awareness, though. Over here we have comic relief every two years (which raises a boat load of money for 3rd world countries and the homeless in britain) and he raised a load of money at Live Aid. Getting aid from people is not really the problem (There are so many charities over here, and i would say that the majority of people give something). We can throw as much money at Africa as we want, but the system will remain fundanmentally unfair unless we do something about it.
The main reason why they did not raise anything, i feel, was that they wanted to focus on raising awareness and putting pressure on the G8 leaders.
I cant remember exactly, but the US donates the most value in aid although as a % of GDP it donates the least or is near the bottom. But yeh, i think a good 85%+ of people i know knew about G8 before Live8 was advertised.
One of the most troubling things is that Central America is much the same way, minus the AIDS. So what does the United States do? It tightens the screws on the Central American people and pushes CAFTA (a trade agreement, ratified by Congress on Thursday, that will eliminate most trade restrictions between the United States and six Latin American countries: Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Honduras, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador.)
Essentially, this does to these nations what the United States did to Mexico in 1994 with NAFTA; American businesses, freed from those tariffs, ship car manufacturing plants (in this case, textile plants) down South where they can pay sweatshop wages and make a killing because nobody has the means to say it should be any different.
United States involvement in 1994 saw the value of the peso plummet and furthered the distance between the disproportionately large upper class and even larger peasant class. 'Course, the PRI (decadent Mexican politicos who had engineered an unopposed reign over Mexico for seventy-one years) didn't help; each successive President, as their six-year term ended, poured on the coal and squeezed the country dry before abandoning ship. This is why every Mexican election has historically been met with widespread economic depression.
Still, NAFTA has changed Mexico forever. It has polluted it with factory waste, increased illegal immigration (where else is a worker supposed to go for a humane wage?), and changed Mexico's chiefly agricultural economy into that of an exporter and manufacturer, utterly dependent on America.
Point is, I don't want this kind of governmental aid for Africa. As Medhead's article mentions, debt relief will likely change very little, as many countries have buried any intention of ever paying it off in the first place. Raising a billion dollars and dividing it up among the leaders would, likewise, be a move with disasterous consequences. It is likely that no amount of money given, even with the best of intentions, would pull Africa out of the rut they've been in.
Way I see it, Africa can either be crippled by foreign governments or it can tear itself apart from the inside. I just can't think of a happy medium.
And that's the worst <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Unless Bob Geldof personally flies out to Africa and distributes the AIDS medicine, tools and crops out to the people who need it, that is EXACTLY where it will end up.
"Woot, more aid! Now I can buy that Learjet and a 3rd Mercades!"
Oh man, ive already forgotten live8 and its marketing fake "raise awareness" ploy. All i will remember, was the reunion of Pink Floyd! So great to see Waters with them again, i got tear in my eye, and wished i was there.
I roffled when Bill Gates came on stage. He made a good speach though. Did you know he pour more millions than any toher single person into aid than any other person? (out of their own pocket?)
Mandela also spoke and gave his full blessing to Geldof, so did Kofi Anan. This is political pressure, and if the G8 choose to ignore it, many of their careres will be tainted. <span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>(if they arent already)</span>
<!--QuoteBegin-Steel Troll+Jul 4 2005, 01:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll @ Jul 4 2005, 01:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I roffled when Bill Gates came on stage. He made a good speach though. Did you know he pour more millions than any toher single person into aid than any other person? (out of their own pocket?) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> So would I if I were the richest man on earth. He can't conceivably spend all the money anyway, so why not give it away to worthwhile causes?
We can of course yell "yeah, but how many PERCENT of his money did he give away?", but he can even show us on that account. He could give away 90% of his money and he'd still be stinking rich and he'd STILL have more money than he can spend.
<!--QuoteBegin-lolfighter+Jul 4 2005, 10:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (lolfighter @ Jul 4 2005, 10:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> We can of course yell "yeah, but how many PERCENT of his money did he give away?", but he can even show us on that account. He could give away 90% of his money and he'd still be stinking rich and he'd STILL have more money than he can spend. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> From what i have heard, he is giving 0.01% to each of his children and the rest to charity when he passes away.
They're still putting a lot of money into aid. It would be nice if other extremely rich people donated as much money; it doesn't really matter that they can afford to give so much away.
If I were bill gates I'd buy africa and all its countries, and use the dead people as meat for hamburgers for a hamburger food chain I'd open up in the countries.
Well, I'm not saying "lol you can afford it so your donation means nothing," I'm just saying that he can afford it. It doesn't cut into his budget, as it would do if I were to give my money away, which is why I don't. So I don't think he's making me look bad by giving lots of money away because he can.
<!--QuoteBegin-lolfighter+Jul 4 2005, 12:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (lolfighter @ Jul 4 2005, 12:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well, I'm not saying "lol you can afford it so your donation means nothing," I'm just saying that he can afford it. It doesn't cut into his budget, as it would do if I were to give my money away, which is why I don't. So I don't think he's making me look bad by giving lots of money away because he can. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Fair do's.
Comments
The whole point of Live8 was to simply raise awareness, though. Over here we have comic relief every two years (which raises a boat load of money for 3rd world countries and the homeless in britain) and he raised a load of money at Live Aid. Getting aid from people is not really the problem (There are so many charities over here, and i would say that the majority of people give something). We can throw as much money at Africa as we want, but the system will remain fundanmentally unfair unless we do something about it.
The main reason why they did not raise anything, i feel, was that they wanted to focus on raising awareness and putting pressure on the G8 leaders.
Essentially, this does to these nations what the United States did to Mexico in 1994 with NAFTA; American businesses, freed from those tariffs, ship car manufacturing plants (in this case, textile plants) down South where they can pay sweatshop wages and make a killing because nobody has the means to say it should be any different.
United States involvement in 1994 saw the value of the peso plummet and furthered the distance between the disproportionately large upper class and even larger peasant class. 'Course, the PRI (decadent Mexican politicos who had engineered an unopposed reign over Mexico for seventy-one years) didn't help; each successive President, as their six-year term ended, poured on the coal and squeezed the country dry before abandoning ship. This is why every Mexican election has historically been met with widespread economic depression.
Still, NAFTA has changed Mexico forever. It has polluted it with factory waste, increased illegal immigration (where else is a worker supposed to go for a humane wage?), and changed Mexico's chiefly agricultural economy into that of an exporter and manufacturer, utterly dependent on America.
Point is, I don't want this kind of governmental aid for Africa. As Medhead's article mentions, debt relief will likely change very little, as many countries have buried any intention of ever paying it off in the first place. Raising a billion dollars and dividing it up among the leaders would, likewise, be a move with disasterous consequences. It is likely that no amount of money given, even with the best of intentions, would pull Africa out of the rut they've been in.
Way I see it, Africa can either be crippled by foreign governments or it can tear itself apart from the inside. I just can't think of a happy medium.
And that's the worst <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Mugabe'd <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
QFT.
Unless Bob Geldof personally flies out to Africa and distributes the AIDS medicine, tools and crops out to the people who need it, that is EXACTLY where it will end up.
"Woot, more aid! Now I can buy that Learjet and a 3rd Mercades!"
Mandela also spoke and gave his full blessing to Geldof, so did Kofi Anan. This is political pressure, and if the G8 choose to ignore it, many of their careres will be tainted. <span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>(if they arent already)</span>
So would I if I were the richest man on earth. He can't conceivably spend all the money anyway, so why not give it away to worthwhile causes?
We can of course yell "yeah, but how many PERCENT of his money did he give away?", but he can even show us on that account. He could give away 90% of his money and he'd still be stinking rich and he'd STILL have more money than he can spend.
From what i have heard, he is giving 0.01% to each of his children and the rest to charity when he passes away.
Fair do's.