Music3 mins ago
Making Poverty History
Answers
No best answer has yet been selected by Birchy. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Hi Birchy dont feel lonely I'll answer your post - although not really with an answer.....
For this to occur you need a profligate corrupt govt (who runs up the debts) to be replaced by a wonderful 'good' govt who likes bankers and does not think reconstruction comes first. Erm some hope.
Wht about corrupt govts being replaced by wonderful govts who say we cant repay debts because of reconstruction. And dont reconstruct, and are later caught with their hands up to their elbows in the till as well? yeah thousands - whole of Africa.....
Good luck in your search......
1)
Effects of debt
Many developing countries borrowed heavily in the late 1970's anticipating the continuance of low real interest rates on loans. Some of these countries now, in an effort to service their debt, spend more money on repayments than health and education. For example, Tanzania continues to spend as much on servicing its debt than it does on education, while under half its primary school aged children are enrolled at school and one third of them are malnourished. Bolivia pays $240 million annually in debt repayments while 60% of the population have no access to basic sanitation and one third have no access to safe drinking water. Meanwhile UNICEF estimates that 13 children die each minute as a result of the impact of Third World debt.
In 2003, the eleven countries repaid a total of 68 billion dollars to their foreign creditors, as compared to 60 billion the preceding year. Their governments alone repaid 38 billion dollars [3]. It is an enormous drain on their resources: between 1980 and 2003, repayments totalled eleven times the amount owed in 1980, while at the same time, that original debt had increased fivefold [4].
So you really think that by not servicing their debts the people of these countries will be better off as a result ?
how naive can you get ?
All these hundreds of thousands of people that Geldorf is saving in these countries, in years to come how are they going to feed their burgeoning populations.
Let me guess, lets have another concert to raise awareness about over population
Yikes! Emotive topic OBVIOUSLY, but I'm really quite surprised by Baz's comments. Birth control/education is a big deal here, but are you suggesting that the people who are now alive are consequences rather than human beings? Future generations will be shaped by control of famine/disease and the knowledge/experience gained from it. Surely this isn't about saving lives and then giving carte blanche to them continuing down the same road? Sir Bob - like millions of the rest of us - watched people starving on TV and couldn't bear it. Sitting back and allowing them to die forever more wasn't an option. It's not about burgeoning populations in the future. It's about stopping people from dying NOW, and giving human beings the tools to give themselves, and their fellow humans, better futures. Isn't it?
Its very simple, you put your own house in order first.
I for one am getting sick and tired of money that i earn being used to sort out other countries. I want my money to be spent on my country so my family benefit
Gordon Brown is very good at promising money he does'nt have "i know I'll just take some more out of the publics pockets, I'll impose another tax, no problem !"
he treats us with contempt
I dont see the rich arab countries queing up with funds
When i hear that all our social problems and needs have been sorted fine.
Most of the African govt.'s must be rubbing their hands with glee, debts cancelled and billions coming in.
Dont you find it just a little bit puzzling that since gaining independence from us the countries concerned have gone to pot, ask yourself why.
Lovely to feed, clothe and educate all the poor ordinary people but as usual the rich get richer; the poor will still get only the crumbs. I saw a lot of t.v.progs. about Africans in widely differing countries on that Continent. Some charming folk spoke, ones who could teach us much about happiness/social structure and doing OK. Other countries showed people who are clearly in abysmal conditions. Will our "aid" put them on the same treadmill as we are on? Importing, say, cash crops from them "steals" their land. Minerals wanted for IT output means that middle-men in one African country I saw grossly exploit their own people. If only a fair price could go direct to workers. As for the U.K., who will cancel our debt? And there's a lot of it. To pay, we must keep working, consuming and paying taxes. We are this year paying off WW2 debt to America. No cancelling of that! America itself is in debt and probably Russia is, now that resources have been hived off by a greedy few. Arms and drugs trades are left in place, even though all are agreed that those trades exacerbate problems for the world's poor. A couple of decades ago massive South American debt was written off. Has that made a difference to the poor on that Continent? Debt problems cannot easily be solved if everyone wants the same level of consumer goods, the same standard of living. We should all do with less but only some people in some countries have much to start with. In answer to Birchy, to my knowledge it is the U.K. which has made inroads into its overdraft, so far, but we can't afford many "no growth" years.
Got another Planet Earth, anyone?
Some african countries do not have enough left in their budgets to spend on health and education programmes because they have to service their debts. Forgiving the debt is only a small step to help these countries.
A far bigger issue is trade subsidies, which rich nations pay their farmers to produce more. Last month there was a ruling by the WTO against the US deeming its cotton subsidies illegal, and the recent row in the EU between France and Britain was about reforming the agricultural policy.
The subsidies mean that farmers produce more, the markets are flooded and the price drops, resulting in some farmers in poorer countries not being able to cover their production costs. The subsidy problem is not confined to cotton, there are also subsidies on sugar, barley, corn, butter and tobacco, to name but a few.
The problem nowadays is that history isn't taught in school. Or let's say the truth about British history. Have you forgotten the hundreds of years of British colonialism? India and Africa were both thriving countries that were self sufficient. The peoples of those countries had all that they needed to survive happily, until the colonialists turned up and screwed both the economies and their people, literally. Both India and Africa grew their indigenous crops and were self sufficient until colonialists changed the whole crop system by growing plants( ie tea) not suitable for their environment or their survival. This has had a lasting effect on agriculture in those countries. Also let's not forget the slave trade! Enslaving young men, women and children and exporting them to foreign shores also effected both the economies and the structure of the population. We're not talking a few years here, this happened over hundreds of years so the damage runs deep.
So Bazwillrun, I think that we as BRITISH citizens have not only a moral obligation to help these people but also a socio-political one too!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.