A Step in the Right Direction

N8 v2.0 · Jan 6, 2005

fluff said:
A speech from Gordon Brown (who he? I hear to the echo) calling for debt relief for the poorest 3rd world nations:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4149679.stm

Quote:
"We have got to release the funds that are necessary - after all 30,000 children are dying every day unnecessarily each day [in Africa] because of hunger, because of a failure to deal with the problems of developing countries."

Too damn right!

So... you've already sent your more than generous contribution in to them... right..???

...right..???

HELLOOOOOOO!!!!!???!??

:rolleyes:

DRB · Jan 6, 2005

Forgive all the debt today and what happens tomorrow?

reflux · Jan 6, 2005

Really, who is Gordon Brown? Never heard of him before. As it stands, isn't there a trend of debt owed to the World Bank from 3rd world countries being forgiven? I don't think this guy really knows what he's talking about.

reflux · Jan 6, 2005

DRB said:
Forgive all the debt today and what happens tomorrow?

Simple bro, they cut up all their credit cards.

N8 v2.0 · Jan 6, 2005

fluff said:
Well, for clarification please explain who you are referring to as 'them', what you consider a 'more than generous contribution' and whether you consider continuing to hold third world countries to near unpayable debt is a moral stance given the figure of 30,000 children dying every day.

Or alternatively stfu until you have something worthwhile to say...

"them" = them that needs

'more than generous contribution' = 3% of your income

Charity starts at home...

ALEXIS_DH · Jan 6, 2005

IMO, the money owed to the g8 by 3rd world countries is hardly a "national debt". most likely a debt owned by corrupt politicians to 1st world elites, who "loaned" that money in exchange of privileges in privatizations, market oppenings, and other political favors.

so morally, the question here is.

who should pick up the bill now???

since most of those corrupt politicians are no longer alive, and which in most cases were not democratically elected.

the 3rd world people paying with 30k deaths a day (who in a lot of cases did not elect the governors who loaned the money, and whose only bad luck is to be born in X place).

or the 1st world elites who boworred the money knowing the conditions of who they borrowed to, and used this money to buy illegal favors, and to leverage markets, taxes and etc, etc, etc?

dan-o · Jan 6, 2005

ALEXIS_DH said:
IMO, the money owed to the g8 by 3rd world countries is hardly a "national debt". most likely a debt owned by corrupt politicians to 1st world elites, who "loaned" that money in exchange of privileges in privatizations, market oppenings, and other political favors.

so morally, the question here is.

who should pick up the bill now???

since most of those corrupt politicians are no longer alive, and which in most cases were not democratically elected.

the 3rd world people paying with 30k deaths a day (who in a lot of cases did not elect the governors who loaned the money, and whose only bad luck is to be born in X place).

or the 1st world elites who boworred the money knowing the conditions of who they borrowed to, and used this money to buy illegal favors, and to leverage markets, taxes and etc, etc, etc?

According to my Evil Capitalism 101 textbook the debts are to be repaid by the "wealthy, meterosexual, rally-racer class" and not the "picking bananas for Dole at $.05/hr class".

ALEXIS_DH · Jan 6, 2005

dan-o said:
According to my Evil Capitalism 101 textbook the debts are to be repaid by the "wealthy, meterosexual, rally-racer class" and not the "picking bananas for Dole at $.05/hr class".

well, we all been paying the debt. my family gets taxed at roughly 60% of our income. according to the gvmt budget, 30% of the national budget goes into debt.
that means 20% of my family income (roughly enough money to pay 100 yearly minimal wages here), goes directly to support the g8. so instead of hiring 100 people and expanding business, and helping the economy, we gotta pay a debt we never had a word on it, in exchange of a debt i got nothing to do with, and was in fact used against our best interests in the 70s.

southamerican upper, and upper middle classees also got stiffed in the 70s by the political class of the 3rd world, when they nationalized the banking, oil, and most industry.....

and guess who loaned the money for that????.....

guess who got a good deal again, when industries previously owned by Southamerican capitals got sold to foreign sharks paying cents on the dollar to buy monopolies in the 90s???...

its a constant in the 3rd world. :mad:

Changleen · Jan 7, 2005

fluff said:
Well, seeing as how you asked, I give far more than that...

'them = them that needs' really is N8's full understanding of the issue. Thats the problem. He couldn't identify a specific case of need if it flew a plane into his twin towers.

DRB · Jan 7, 2005

fluff said:
I'd plump for fair trade and redistribution of wealth.

But not free trade?

I guess I should just quit my job as you are going to take most salary and give it to someone else, and I can become a ward of the state. I think that's an excellent plan. I guess that would help my tax bill.

DRB · Jan 7, 2005

ALEXIS_DH said:
since most of those corrupt politicians are no longer alive, and which in most cases were not democratically elected.

Now I know why South Americans love dictatorships. They can disavow all responsibility for their governments when things go wrong.

southamerican upper, and upper middle classees also got stiffed in the 70s by the political class of the 3rd world, when they nationalized the banking, oil, and most industry.....

But isn't that what the people prefer? Nationalized industries run by with central planning and controlled market forces? Again their governments screwed it up by going against a free market economy.

guess who got a good deal again, when industries previously owned by Southamerican capitals got sold to foreign sharks paying cents on the dollar to buy monopolies in the 90s???...

What would have happened if those "foreign sharks" hadn't bailed out those industries? Would things have been any better? Especially now with debt relief sure to occur.

DRB · Jan 7, 2005

fluff said:
You assume too much, I don't believe in free lunches for those that have the ability to buy them. Have you been to Africa and seen how families live on less than a dollar a day?

First the whole dollar a day thing is lame. The question should be have you seen how folks are unable to feed themselves enough to live.

Yes my time in the military and my job have taken me all over East and South Africa. I've been to lots of Southeast Asia. Been to South America and Mexico. Its horrible what some of these people go thru to get by. I've seen it and smelled it.

You know what the biggest difference is between those places and the first world? Corrupt governments. Politicians that could careless what is happening to their people. I'm not a W fan by any stretch. But I do honestly believe that when he goes to work in the morning that his purpose is to make things better for this country. I am not agree with the way he is doing it but his intent is right. That's true all the way down the line. The truly corrupt politician is an aberration in the first world. In the third its the rule.

Debt relief isn't going to solve that. As long as governments whose sole purpose in life is to pad the pockets of those within them, it will never get better. But see that's all hands off. Its bad when someone tries to affect the politics of another nation. Their choice right? They should make those decisions. Its what the people prefer.

So we give them debt relief and the cycle starts all over with no real change.

ALEXIS_DH · Jan 7, 2005

DRB said:
First the whole dollar a day thing is lame. The question should be have you seen how folks are unable to feed themselves enough to live.

Yes my time in the military and my job have taken me all over East and South Africa. I've been to lots of Southeast Asia. Been to South America and Mexico. Its horrible what some of these people go thru to get by. I've seen it and smelled it.

You know what the biggest difference is between those places and the first world? Corrupt governments. Politicians that could careless what is happening to their people. I'm not a W fan by any stretch. But I do honestly believe that when he goes to work in the morning that his purpose is to make things better for this country. I am not agree with the way he is doing it but his intent is right. That's true all the way down the line. The truly corrupt politician is an aberration in the first world. In the third its the rule.

Debt relief isn't going to solve that. As long as governments whose sole purpose in life is to pad the pockets of those within them, it will never get better. But see that's all hands off. Its bad when someone tries to affect the politics of another nation. Their choice right? They should make those decisions. Its what the people prefer.

So we give them debt relief and the cycle starts all over with no real change.

corruption is huge around here. but IMO, its true responsability is overrated.
even if we had 1st world-like levels of corruption, there is little you can do with an economy the size it already is, with a system that allows for very little and isolated upward mobility.

the main cause is the system over us, of infinite capital value over labor and its artificial rules. this is, at least, as important as corruption as a reason of why things are so messed up.

ALEXIS_DH · Jan 7, 2005

DRB said:
Now I know why South Americans love dictatorships. They can disavow all responsibility for their governments when things go wrong.

But isn't that what the people prefer? Nationalized industries run by with central planning and controlled market forces? Again their governments screwed it up by going against a free market economy.

What would have happened if those "foreign sharks" hadn't bailed out those industries? Would things have been any better? Especially now with debt relief sure to occur.

well, i talk about from a upper middle class POV. of course things werent good. but thats the POV of 10% of the population.

for the other 90%, it was what they wanted i have to admit. and i have to admit to, like with chavez, and as much as i hate the guy, people in venezuela love him, and while macroeconomically venezuela isnt doing good, its quite obvious things in the ghettos are much better for the people in them. same thing in the 70s. upper classes were forced to emigrate, or stay poorer, while lower classes (the most by far), had a better living standard. so in way, those "upper classes" callled to pay the debt, have been hit as hard as everyone by the mess.

what would have happened if nobody bought those industries??.. well they should have not been nationalized, and then sold again in the first place...
dont you think that is a suspicious way to take stuff away from the real owners????

DRB · Jan 7, 2005

ALEXIS_DH said:
corruption is huge around here. but IMO, its true responsability is overrated.
even if we had 1st world-like levels of corruption, there is little you can do with an economy the size it already is, with a system that allows for very little and isolated upward mobility.

the main cause is the system over us, of infinite capital value over labor and its artificial rules. this is, at least, as important as corruption as a reason of why things are so messed up.

What exactly is your opinion? first you say

IMO the money owed to the g8 by 3rd world countries is hardly a "national debt". most likely a debt owned by corrupt politicians

Then you say

corruption is huge around here. but IMO, its true responsability is overrated.

Come on you don't get it both ways.

Since those corrupt politicians have been replaced by a new generation of corrupt politicians why would you expect a different outcome?

DRB · Jan 7, 2005

fluff said:
The folks who can't feed themselves enough to live don't hang around too long do they?

And whilst corrupt governments don't help the problem, ignoring the problems of crippling debt doesn't give any non-corrupt government much chance of survival.

I see your point - why help those who can't help themselves eh?

Never said that debt relief was wrong or shouldn't occur. I'm all for it. But ignoring the underlying problems of how things got to where they are is simply irresponsible. Why should people be surprised when you do the samething today as you did yesterday the samething that happened yesterday happens today?

And you should know that my point is far from "why help those who can't help yourself?"

My belief is that a government that can't take care of its citizens should be removed from power by whatever means necessary. But then it becomes empire building or land grabs or for oil or whatever folks want to spout off about.

ALEXIS_DH · Jan 7, 2005

DRB said:
What exactly is your opinion? first you say

...
Since those corrupt politicians have been replaced by a new generation of corrupt politicians why would you expect a different outcome?

my opinion, in the better words of fluff is

And whilst corrupt governments don't help the problem, ignoring the problems of crippling debt doesn't give any non-corrupt government much chance of survival.

while corruption is huge, the problems faced by the debt and the current system are so big, that even without corruption, chances for upward mobility for 3rd world nations are tiny.

so in a way, corruption is not exactly the worst of the diseases currently suffered by the 3rd world. there are others, like debt, or the free trade-restricted labor that make bigger dents.

clancy98 · Jan 7, 2005

alright! redistribution of wealth on a global scale! Sweet! That way every single country in the world can be just barely above the poverty line instead of having rich and poor countries, and all of our governments can be thrown into total instability.

If you all are so generous, maybe you should go above and beyond the 3%. Maybe you should find a family in Africa, and split your yearly income with them. Why not, its the right thing to do isn't it?

But unfortunately, its not the realistic thing to do. Rant all day about people living on a dollar a day, but I am selfishly not going to completely give up my lifestyle to make someone else's better, which makes me just like you, and every other person on this thread.

I work my butt off for MY money, and when you ask for our government to bail out one more 3rd world country, I am working a little bit harder for a little bit less. And while you can suggest that once they're bailed out, they are on the road to success, the truth is that the odds are not necessarily in favor of prosperity unless alot more money comes along to stimulate their economies. I don't think simple debt relief would be enough.

Silver · Jan 7, 2005

Here's the thing...

If I'm a bank, why should I be able to make a loan to a shady person (say a dictator, for example) or government and then expect the US government to enforce those loan provisions when said dictator dies or get tossed out of office?

Surely there is a difference to lending to a democracy and leading to Mugabe? When he goes, I'd have a hard time telling the people of Zimbabwe that they need to repay debts he ran up.

reflux · Jan 7, 2005

fluff said:
Really, who is reflux? That you know not who Gordon Brown is or that he is well qualified to talk about third world debt is a sign of your level of ignorance, not his.

He heh, nice one. Good thing I'm a relative idiot when it comes to global economics and politics; it was never my forte. A couple questions though for everyone:

1) Do you think there's a limit to the economic expansion that a 1st world country can experience? Is there a limit/ceiling to comparative advantage? At some point (assuming it hasn't happpened yet, well, widespread) will the largest countries' economies expand at the severe expense of the smallest?

2) Do you see it as an obligation of the US to improve the quality of life worldwide? I don't nearly have the experience or knowledge to say how it should or could be done, but I believe it is our duty.

Echo · Jan 11, 2005

Fluff and Changleen seem to think that the USA should stay out of everyone's business, unless that business involves giving away free money.

Actually I like that idea too. I wish nobody would ever bother me for anything unless it's to give me some money.

N8 v2.0 · Jan 11, 2005

A Step in the Right Direction

Monkey Turbo

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Monkey Turbo

unemployed bum

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Tirelessly Awesome

Turbo Monkey

Tirelessly Awesome

Monkey Turbo

Monkey Turbo

Paranoid Member

Monkey Turbo

unemployed bum

Monkey Turbo

unemployed bum

unemployed bum

Tirelessly Awesome

Tirelessly Awesome

Monkey Turbo

Monkey Turbo

unemployed bum

unemployed bum

Monkey Turbo

Tirelessly Awesome

Monkey

find me a tampon

Turbo Monkey

Monkey Turbo

crooked smile

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Monkey Turbo

Monkey Turbo