Live 8

[YogsVR4]

I see you haven't read all my posts about this topic (in multiple threads). I've often stated the biggest problem with helping Africa is that the money doesn't get to those that need it.

Secondly, the author was a whining hack. I don't need any other source then the article itself to justify that.

The political structure in African countries bar a couple like Egypt, do nothing to help the people who need it the most. Pissing and moaning about conglomerates is pointing in the wrong direction. Taking money out of my pocket to line the pockets of someone else always ticks me off. Its worse when its to someone outside my community. Its worse yet when its to someone outside my community and they do nothing constructive with it. Since the money is going to waste - don't waste my money.

The sick and starving need help from someone. Handing money over to their dictators isn't the way to go. The UN stands aside as hundreds of thousands are slaughtered - so they're of no use. Its pretty much down to the people there need to make a stand for themselves since the rest of the world can only hold staged events and throw money down a bottomless pit.

[T4 Primera]

Agreed, conglomerates do what conglomerates do - make money (often at the expense of human suffering). Such is the case for ethical investing. example: http://www.ethicalinvestors.co.uk/why.htm

What I have a real problem with is the way the G8/IMF/World Bank (and yes I'll even include the UN) is used as a tool to make this possible.

The money doesn't get to those that need it by design at this G8/IMF/WB/UN level. Hardly surprising then, that if the money trail is followed (our money btw), corruption is found running parallel to it - all the way to the pockets of the very capitalists who decided what to do with our tax in the first place.

Attaching conditions like the privatisation of a country's resources/utilities to aid/debt relief effectively delivers into foreign ownership the very things a country needs to get itself out of the red.

[CountDrac]

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

stuff that makes sense

I agree, untill those nations have a nice stable political climate it's useless to send shitloads of money. Even when they have a stable government, I think it would be wiser to spend the gross of the money on education and teach them how to be able to sustain themselves.

[T4 Primera]

So does this "make sense" when your tax dollars needs to get to those who need it?

Link: Haiti: U.S. Subcommittee passes bill to recruit and deploy U.S. citizens in support of Dictatorship

It's not Africa admittedly, but the M.O. is the same as ever.

[CountDrac]

Originally Posted by T4 Primera

So does this "make sense" when your tax dollars needs to get to those who need it?

Link: Haiti: U.S. Subcommittee passes bill to recruit and deploy U.S. citizens in support of Dictatorship

It's not Africa admittedly, but the M.O. is the same as ever.

I think miss Lee's amendment would make this bill less ambigious as it is now. I'm afraid the current Haitian government is likely to have other definitions of "economic and infrastructure reconstruction and development assistance".

Originally Posted by Jeb Sprague

Burton explained that this bill would help bring forward the electoral cycle, registering campaigns, and providing security for disarmament.

This part is pretty naive, even if economy is improved by the U.S. aid, I doubt Latortue would just resign and allow fair elections. Dictator's are funny that way.

The general idea of sending recruits to third world countries to help them out, would be a large part of a structural solution to poverty in such countries.
I'm under the impression that most of the money we (first world countries) send is only fighting the effects of the larger problems of the the third world. The causes like deforresting, lack of agricultural skills and the like, seem to be ignored.

[T4 Primera]

Originally Posted by CountDrac

I think miss Lee's amendment would make this bill less ambigious as it is now.

Unfortunately her amendment was voted down....

In a 7 to 6 vote, all of the Republican Congressmen that were present voted against Lee’s amendment, alluding that the return of democracy to Haiti was not of importance in regards to U.S funding for the Haitian government or the recruitment of American citizens to work in league with the coup government. Does Haiti’s future teeter on the edge of a Republican majority in the U.S. congress?