Jump to content

live8


Phil VII
 Share

Recommended Posts

In the UK we have heard an awful lot about the upcoming G8 summit, and about one of the main targets of the nations there being about the level of Poverty in africa, and what the 8 most powerful nations in the world can do about it.

 

In the UK this whole Poverty in Africa appeal is a very big thing, and after the famous LiveAid concert 20 years ago it has been big ever since. This year Bob Geldof, the organiser of LiveAid last time, is organising more concerts next weekend worldwide to try and get the G8 to do somthing about it.

 

In the UK we have heard about this every other day on the news, but i've heard that this whole thing is no-where near as massive in other countries, has anyone else not from the UK even heard of Bob Geldof and the Live8 concerts? Is the African Aid thing anywhere as big as it is in the UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Waste of time. Waste of money. I subscribe to the "your misfortune is not my misfortune" philosophy. If things are tough over there, then they're tough. If some citizens of various countries want to help them, so be it. I'm afraid, however, that I have little sympathy for those nations that are floundering in largely preventable problems. A great many of the problems facing struggling african nations can be cured with a shift in the mentality of the populace and the government, realizing that specific actions breed specific consequences.

 

Specifically with the AIDS problem: Trillions (yes trillions) of US taxpayer money has gone into AIDS research and prevention (although some of the programs funded under the prevention category have been anything but... but that's another story) since 1985, with easily over one hundred billion going to africa for 'relief' purposes since y2k. However, AIDS is worse in africa than it ever has been, because there has been little to no action on the part of the governments so affected to strongly attempt at prevention, not to mention that nobody knows just how much has been tossed into the pockets of corrupt people.

 

I also do not support vanquishing their debts. If you have, say, a compulsive gambler brother that borrows money from everyone stupid enough to give it to him, how will forgiving his debts help him if he isn't genmuinely on the road to recovery? It will not. You cannot simply throw money at a problem like poverty and disease to alleviate it. If anything, it will be more harmful in the long run.

 

And yes, encolere9.gif ing Bono can go jump off a encolere9.gif ing bridge into a river of encolere9.gif, encolere9.gif ing him up the encolere9.gif for all encolere9.gif ing time. Thank you smilies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duh for the case of Southern Africa the money isn't going into the pockets of the government... Because they don't receive any aid.

 

South Africa has always, and still does, denied the problem of aids.

 

Because it has a good infrastructure, they will not accept the donation of funds to help them with prevention and such.

 

It's like Thailand after the tsunami, the south coast was shattered, but their government refused any financial aid, stating 'they were not a developing nation'...

 

Mya, watta ya gonna do about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the most important it?s the aid that the peoples richest, can give to poor. the important one, is not ' who makes, who organizes, the important one is that this aid arrives att time and hours to be able to save some lives human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Pirilao. The money the poor nations won't have to pay back, is slim compared to the budgets of the G8 nations. But for those nations, it's a really huge pile of money...

We (the G8 nations) won't suffer a bit, but the 3rd world nations may have a chance to improve their financial situation.

 

And, like Pirilao said, it's about human lifes. Money can be re-earned. Lifes are lost forever. And there's more than money to this world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although it is true that alot of the Governments of the african countries are corrupt, but just because their governments are corrupt doesnt mean the people don't deserve to be helped. Giving money to the corrupt governments will not help an awful lot, Geldof has said he is not intereste din the money this time around, he wants the G8 governments to actually give the african countries decent trade terms, currently the big US componies have most of the trade rights in these countries rather than the rights belonging to people in the countries themselves, this is half the problem, these african countries cannot pay back any of the debt, because there are massive western businesses draining the money put of the countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't heard anything about this Live8-thingy. I mean: I know what it's about, but I've been living in multimedia-exile these last few days. Hence, this is the first I read about it.

 

A couple of days ago I had a talk about it, with L. I told her that this action could raise a lot more money if all these rich folks who support the cause just donate a lot more. They're the superrich, they have the money in their pockets to change much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*shrugs*

 

Don?t know anything about any such concerts and really don?t care too. If I want to help I give some money to Red Cross because I suppose that is the surest way to make sure it really goes to the right destination.

 

Generally I think though that I will not help if the problem is self-inflicted like AIDS or hunger. If you know what you are doing you will NOT get hungry or having nasty diseases. Too many people think they know what they are doing when they don?t.

 

However when someone needs aid because of bad luck (like because of huge tsunami comes and destroys your life) then I will help. Personally if possible though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

blink.gif Hang on BN...i hear what yer saying, but you can't classify everyone who has AIDS as it being

problem is self-inflicted like AIDS or hunger.

 

 

One, a lot of AIDS cases in africa are down to the rape of women by various militias and the like. You say if they know what they're doing, they won't get raped?

 

Secondly, how is hunger self inflicted? You might be able to blame the government for that, but that's no reason to blame the sufferers as well. You can be very smart, but also very hungry because of famine or oppression.

 

You can't fob these problems off as being the fault of the people of the developing world, not unless you're some kind of fascist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually with the hunger thing being self inflicted in kinda true.

I did read somewhere at school that all these countries have more then enough grain to feed their populations, but choose to use it to feed livestock so they can re-pay debts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To clarify:

 

In the case of AIDS in Africa those who know not what they are doing are the militia guys and men generally. Women are the suffering part and I feel sorry for them but that?s all I will do because the problem will not be solved unless all men there are gunned down or educated and converted to "western" ideals. Other diseases spread for example through poor hygiene. Can you for example call it a good idea to dump your WC waste to the river where people get their drinking water?

 

Hunger then. Kant is right but there are other reasons too. Wars are one of the biggest reasons and just before comes overpopulation which is a problem that only can be delayed but not solved with for example GM food. Overpopulation is the result of obsolete thinking that you need as many children (preferably boys) as possible to ensure your own safety when old. If this would be understood the situation would not look as bad as it does now. Third reason is the one which Kant referred. Wrong way to use resources. Again I feel sorry for the kids that are hungry because of their parents? folly but there is nothing that I see useful to do short of direct "western" participation by abolishing all debts and giving free education and supplies to everyone in the poor countries. Not going to happen (at least soon).

 

Africa in particular is a mess that only one direction unless something major is done very soon. Most of the people will die because of AIDS, ebola and other diseases. Hunger and wars will wipe out the rest untill there is not much more people left than around 100-200 years ago. If western governments do not interfere directly there is no hope for them.

 

Uhm and and propably I am a fascist then because my view is that imperialists started the problems by leaving and not helping enough. Nowadays though they should have had enough time to figure out what to do and how by themselves. No money or other wealth is not an excuse for harmful and uneconomical/unecological old thinking patterns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...