NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.halifaxlive.com/artman/publish/boycott_220605_12345.shtml

Basically, this story is about why Canadians should boycott the Live 8 concert. Frankly, I agree.

I'm very tired of these people (like Bono, Bob Geldof, et al) always saying "give more to Africa, give more to Africa" over and over. Ok, I can understand if you want to spend every penny you have on that. That's your hard-earned money. But it really annoys me when they're constantly campaigning for public tax dollars to go to the third world. Yes, I know it's a worthy cause and all, but we have starving and homeless people right here in our own country. Wouldn't our tax dollars be better spent at home to fix our own country?

But anyways, what do you think of this issue?

Yeah, I always thought charity started at home? It looks pretty bad when we are willing to donate millions to African Aid, but can't solve our own homeless problem.

Not just Canadians. USians as well.

People want the US to stay out of the worlds' business, let's start.

I just hate the whole idea that celebrities think that we should listen to them because they acknowledge Canada exists. Really, who do you take us for?? Also, why don't they actually look at why there is poverty there, instead of just throwing money at it and hoping it will go away? I know that works with celebrities, but not with nations.

Ha my question with this stupid concert is why don't they have ANY black performers on the main stage. Closest there getting is mariah carey....

Just to comment, I'm also refering to the US as well. The Western world in general.

"You know, as we were driving out these 800 miles to bring you your food it occurred to me that ther wouldn't BE world hunger if you just lived where the FOOD IS! THIS IS A DESERT! NOTHING GROWS HERE! You see this? This is sand! You know what it's going to be in 100 years? It'd gonna be FUCKING SAND! We have deserts in America. We just don't live in em, ASSHOLE!" -Sam Kinison. :)

I totally understand where you're coming from. Yeah, Ok, if you want to donate money, that's fine, it's your choice, but you can't force other people to donate. It's the same as how you can't force someone to join your religion, or to like strawberries or whatever. i mean, it's cool, you know, when people organise something to help raise money for third world countries. Think of the 40 hour famine, for example. It's good, because they advertise and stuff, but it's not in your face or anything. And it's fun, cos you feel proud of yourself when you're finished, cos you've helped someone, and you've made the choice and all that. But when you feel obliged to donate money, it just doesn't have that same sense of satisfaction when you do it.

"You know, as we were driving out these 800 miles to bring you your food it occurred to me that ther wouldn't BE world hunger if you just lived where the FOOD IS! THIS IS A DESERT! NOTHING GROWS HERE! You see this? This is sand! You know what it's going to be in 100 years? It'd gonna be FUCKING SAND! We have deserts in America. We just don't live in em, ASSHOLE!" -Sam Kinison. :)


LOL, you lunatic!

The west can't do anything for sub-saharan africa. It is FUBAR.

Give money, don't give money. It won't make any difference. I predict a major famine there very shortly anyway.

It reminds me of telemarketers or mail solicitations for charity that say "you may donate $25.00, $50.00 or $100.00, or more". Erm, I will donate exactly as much or as little as I am able. Bob Geldof apparently has decided what percentage of Canada's G.D.P. shall be given to Africa, and if we are not prepared to do as he wishes we should not bother to come. Alrighty then, so be it, Bob. We will do our thing, you do yours.

I got a laugh when I saw Claudia Schiffer posing in front of a picture of Canada's finance minister for a "fashion demands justice for 3rd world nations" spread, sort of brow beating him to agree to cancel the debt. I guess nobody told her that it was Canada who has been pushing for third world debt to the World Bank be cancelled, for the past TEN YEARS. It was our freaking idea, woman.

http://www.halifaxlive.com/artman/publish/boycott_220605_12345.shtml

Basically, this story is about why Canadians should boycott the Live 8 concert. Frankly, I agree.

I'm very tired of these people (like Bono, Bob Geldof, et al) always saying "give more to Africa, give more to Africa" over and over. Ok, I can understand if you want to spend every penny you have on that. That's your hard-earned money. But it really annoys me when they're constantly campaigning for public tax dollars to go to the third world. Yes, I know it's a worthy cause and all, but we have starving and homeless people right here in our own country. Wouldn't our tax dollars be better spent at home to fix our own country?

But anyways, what do you think of this issue?

Why are people in our own nation more important? Is there any reason to think this? No, they're not more important. At all. Every human being has the same rights. Frankly, saying our homeless and starvation problem is equal to that of Africa's is laughable. I applaud Bono and Geldof for their effort to help people who are starving and dying of easily preventable diseases in the millions. It seems to me that people come up with baseless, backasswards moralities to justify their own selfishness.

Why are people in our own nation more important? Is there any reason to think this? No, they're not more important. At all. Every human being has the same rights. Frankly, saying our homeless and starvation problem is equal to that of Africa's is laughable. I applaud Bono and Geldof for their effort to help people who are starving and dying of easily preventable diseases in the millions. It seems to me that people come up with baseless, backasswards moralities to justify their own selfishness.

Other than they are enfranchised and have a say in where tax dollars should go and Bob Geldof does not?

Also, you have to be practical. Spending money in Canada might actually do some good. Sending it to africa will have no effect on the problem whatsoever.

Other than they are enfranchised and have a say in where tax dollars should go and Bob Geldof does not?

Also, you have to be practical. Spending money in Canada might actually do some good. Sending it to africa will have no effect on the problem whatsoever.

Um...We're not sending the money to starving Bob Geldofs.

No effect? It has an effect on the people there. It doesn't have to get rid of starvation to be worthy. It has to save individuals. Preferably on a grand scale, yes, but there's nothing about solving the whole problem that makes saving individuals worthless.

http://www.halifaxlive.com/artman/publish/boycott_220605_12345.shtml

Basically, this story is about why Canadians should boycott the Live 8 concert. Frankly, I agree.

I'm very tired of these people (like Bono, Bob Geldof, et al) always saying "give more to Africa, give more to Africa" over and over. Ok, I can understand if you want to spend every penny you have on that. That's your hard-earned money. But it really annoys me when they're constantly campaigning for public tax dollars to go to the third world. Yes, I know it's a worthy cause and all, but we have starving and homeless people right here in our own country. Wouldn't our tax dollars be better spent at home to fix our own country?

But anyways, what do you think of this issue?

I couldn't agree with you more. Why should we send our money over there when we should be using it at home? Let's solve our problems first and then work on others. Besides, they want our money but not our help. Whenever we help, we're meddlesome. To hell with that.

Um...We're not sending the money to starving Bob Geldofs.

You might as well be. Judging by his pretensions as a musician, he needs all the help he can get. And what do you think he gets out of this anyway?

The point is though, the government's duty is to its own people before Bob Geldof or his pet causes.


No effect? It has an effect on the people there. It doesn't have to get rid of starvation to be worthy. It has to save individuals. Preferably on a grand scale, yes, but there's nothing about solving the whole problem that makes saving individuals worthless.

It saves no-one. All it does is prolong the suffering. Africa doesn't need charity, it needs a boot in the arse. But as nobody can be bothered with it anymore, ignoring it is the next best option.

You might as well be. Judging by his pretensions as a musician, he needs all the help he can get. And what do you think he gets out of this anyway?

The point is though, the government's duty is to its own people before Bob Geldof or his pet causes.




It saves no-one. All it does is prolong the suffering. Africa doesn't need charity, it needs a boot in the arse. But as nobody can be bothered with it anymore, ignoring it is the next best option.

A whole continent is a pet cause?

What Africa needs is enough money so that it's workers can build infrastructure instead of spending all of their money (which is hardly anything) on enough food to keep from starving. They also need to stop having loan sharks collecting several times the amount of the loan on interest, which means debt needs to be canceled. That way they can actually build the infrastructure without having to pay for it several times over: hence charity.

A whole continent is a pet cause?

Not a whole continent. Just the sub-saharan bit. Honestly I wish his comeback attempts had worked, because now we'd be spared this semi-regular idiocy.

What Africa needs is enough money so that it's workers can build infrastructure instead of spending all of their money (which is hardly anything) on enough food to keep from starving. They also need to stop having loan sharks collecting several times the amount of the loan on interest, which means debt needs to be canceled. That way they can actually build the infrastructure without having to pay for it several times over: hence charity.

First, these regions have recieved large grants in the past in order to build infra-structure. They didn't then, so why would they now? In fact the main objective of governments in that part of the world seems to be destroying existing infrastructure, crippling domestic agriculture and buying german cars. Usually funded with foreign aid.

Secondly, the fact that what was once a net food exporting region now has to buy food speaks volumes. If they were still growing their own food, then they wouldn't need to borrow more money to buy food. But that didn't fit in with the destroy everything plan, so it wasn't an option for them.

Thirdly, famine relief only finishes the job that they started by wiping out the last remnants of productive agriculture in any particular region.

Fourthly, they don't have to pay those loans back, they could default. The governments choose not to however, because they need more money to buy more german cars. In any case, they are not at loan shark rates, and historically have been adjusted many times for "humanitarian" reasons.

Fifthly, even if they did have a change of heart and decided to actually build the infra-structure (and on the off chance they were given the money to do it) they don't have the workers for that type of capital intensive project anymore. That was taken care of after independence, when they decided to embark upon the infra-structure wrecking project. There is no-one left with the technical acumen.

Sixthly, having no domestic industy to speak of, any wish to expand domestic agriculture, or any wish to reverse the general decline, I don't see what good new infra-structure would do anyway.

Give them a trillion dollars. And it will only be spent on a new airforce, more german cars and large palaces. It won't change a thing.

Nothing can be done until they make sweeping structural changes to the way their governments operate. And nothing I have seen shows any desire to do that. So it's a waste of time.

A whole continent is a pet cause?

What Africa needs is enough money so that it's workers can build infrastructure instead of spending all of their money (which is hardly anything) on enough food to keep from starving. They also need to stop having loan sharks collecting several times the amount of the loan on interest, which means debt needs to be canceled. That way they can actually build the infrastructure without having to pay for it several times over: hence charity.

You are obviously rather young and naive; I had family friends who went over to Africa, brand new tractors were given, latest and greatest irrigation system setup; everything was going well for three years, whilst they were there; training people to use the equipment, teaching new farming methods.

12 months after they left, the whole thing went tits up, and all there is now is a heap of equipment unused, and people whining about being poor and in a famine.

Solution; relieve the debt, don't give them any cash, and don't allow them to borrow any money ever again, and simply ignore them; let flood, fire, famine and a disease or two sort out the problem.

Africa is a bottomless pit of a basket case; had they got their shit together, they would make Asia look like a cake stall in regards to wealth, but because no one on that continent can be figged getting their shit together, the problems continue to this day.

Something seems a bit inconsistent when millionaire celebrities who go home to luxurious mansions tell us about starvation in Africa. Not to say it isn't a good cause, but it just stikes me as a little odd. Oh well. I'm not perfect either.