We still love you Abook. Even though the "We love you Abook" chant did not get picked up by my co-workers or go over that well. Fools, I must work with fools.
I love you guys, too. I know we are all just coming from different perspectives.
Geez, don't they know? What's your co-workers problem? Haha!
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
i don't think you should post whenever you donate. and i don't mean to imply that you don't. i'm sure you do.
when the government started telling me how to spend my money; it went off-shore so they can't touch it. what doesn't go off-shore is invested in land. as the coasts evacuate the rising waters i'll make a killing selling them somewhere to live. even if that doesn't happen; the population grows every second. i used to share your opinion; but when the world started doing me wrong; i became selfish and greedy.
I understand your concern. I hate the government the way we have it now. It's been bought out from under us and doesn't serve the majority of it's people. I also don't trust the private sector to do any better because they are the one's lobbying to have things the way they are now. They are already pretty much in control. It's a shitty situation.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
The tsunami and katrina were all over the news. So many of the world's impoverished are left out of the headlines.
nobody helped me. we were born dirt farmers in northern wisconsin. poor as church mice. instead of looking for a hand out we looked for work. now i see people posting that illegals do the work americans refuse to do. if these americans are refusing work; they deserve to starve. i recall eating potatoes for weeks because that's all we had. i've been there so don't paint this picture that they are poor and can't change it. i'm sure you're where you are because you worked for it. i doubt that someone handed you a check after graduation. you hit the streets and built your life.
I understand your concern. I hate the government the way we have it now. It's been bought out from under us and doesn't serve the majority of it's people. I also don't trust the private sector to do any better because they are the one's lobbying to have things the way they are now. They are already pretty much in control. It's a shitty situation.
and here's where we agree. you can't fix a problem by throwing money at a bad situation. this goes back to what i said earlier. produce a viable plan or organization and people will donate. hell; if bill gates was only allowed to make say 1 million a year and had to distribute the rest; i'd be there too. why work when there's free money being handed out. i'd pocket the money and go fishing.
nobody helped me. we were born dirt farmers in northern wisconsin. poor as church mice. instead of looking for a hand out we looked for work. now i see people posting that illegals do the work americans refuse to do. if these americans are refusing work; they deserve to starve. i recall eating potatoes for weeks because that's all we had. i've been there so don't paint this picture that they are poor and can't change it. i'm sure you're where you are because you worked for it. i doubt that someone handed you a check after graduation. you hit the streets and built your life.
You're right, I've worked for what I have. But I don't think it's the case of laziness when it comes to global poverty and hunger. I also know that circumstances we know nothing about play into everyone's lives. I don't think most of the less fortunate are just too sorry to try do better for themselves or are looking for an easy handout. Often the opportunities just aren't there. Sure there are bad apples, but I believe most people want to make a good life for themselves.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
To me it makes no sense to have a 10 million dollar mansion.
7 high dollar vehicales.
Why not have a decent low-key nice home?
Why not have fewer down to earth priced vehicales?
I personally would not be able to sleep @ night
if I lived in a mansion on a hill.
I personally would not be able to sleep @ night
with my precious collection of vehicales in my
high dollar garage.
What is the point to having so much, while so many suffer?
Good for you. But then I seriously doubt you take the risks necessary or put in the long hours and hard work necessary to change the world. When I look at what Bill Gates is doing to positively change the world and what your guilty conscious is stopping you from doing I can only think that the world needs more people like Bill Gates and less like you (and I).
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
if everyone gave the percentage I do or others like hippiemom does then the problem wouldn't be anywhere close to as large as it is now.
Hi Abook
Just a little sidenote, speaking from a developing country point of view, even if Argentina is much more developed than Africa or most Latin American countries. I'm not so sure if the issue at stake is the actual amount of money being donated, but more how such money is being used. For example, during the 90's Argentina received via soft loans (very low interes rates and generous payment terms) the equivalent of approx. 6 Marshall Plans. What happened? Leaving plenty of other things that went totally wrong during such decade aside (mainly the Convertibility Law) our Government spent most of that money in current spending: political favors, thousands of consultants with huge salaries, their own personal benefit and the list is endless. Only a tiny portion was actually invested in things that could improve people's lives.
The same could be said for Africa, the Continent receives billions of dollars par year, yet a huge share of it does not get to those who actually need it. In order to increase the efficiency of money donations corruption has to be seriously tackled, that's one of the reasons that many philantropists are increasingly doing things directly via Foundations and NGO's.
Hey, I'm all for donating money, but I believe that poverty, hunger and such could be greatly aleviated if those in charge of third world countries would actually spend properly the money instead of keeping it.
and here's where we agree. you can't fix a problem by throwing money at a bad situation. this goes back to what i said earlier. produce a viable plan or organization and people will donate. hell; if bill gates was only allowed to make say 1 million a year and had to distribute the rest; i'd be there too. why work when there's free money being handed out. i'd pocket the money and go fishing.
I'd want to continue to make the world a better place to live for us all. If I had the money I'd love to start a free daycare here in my small town so that these families could go to work and make a better life for themselves. And also the children would be in a better place than being left alone or not cared for properly. I've had this idea for the longest time. It has nothing to do with personal gain...it has to do with wanting to give and help out where I've noticed a problem. Surely this world isn't filled with people who only do great things for personal gain.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Just a little sidenote, speaking from a developing country point of view, even if Argentina is much more developed than Africa or most Latin American countries. I'm not so sure if the issue at stake is the actual amount of money being donated, but more how such money is being used. For example, during the 90's Argentina received via soft loans (very low interes rates and generous payment terms) the equivalent of approx. 6 Marshall Plans. What happened? Leaving plenty of other things that went totally wrong during such decade aside (mainly the Convertibility Law) our Government spent most of that money in current spending: political favors, thousands of consultants with huge salaries, their own personal benefit and the list is endless. Only a tiny portion was actually invested in things that could improve people's lives.
The same could be said for Africa, the Continent receives billions of dollars par year, yet a huge share of it does not get to those who actually need it. In order to increase the efficiency of money donations corruption has to be seriously tackled, that's one of the reasons that many philantropists are increasingly doing things directly via Foundations and NGO's.
Hey, I'm all for donating money, but I believe that poverty, hunger and such could be greatly aleviated if those in charge of third world countries would actually spend properly the money instead of keeping it.
Just my 2cts.
Caterina
I completely agree with you.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
There has to be some way we could use our resources to come up with something that actually works. If our government would put pressure on these countries to do right by their people instead of putting so much of our resources into power struggles, wars and pandering to the rich only maybe it could be solved.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I'd want to continue to make the world a better place to live for us all. If I had the money I'd love to start a free daycare here in my small town so that these families could go to work and make a better life for themselves. And also the children would be in a better place than being left alone or not cared for properly. I've had this idea for the longest time. It has nothing to do with personal gain...it has to do with wanting to give and help out where I've noticed a problem. Surely this world isn't filled with people who only do great things for personal gain.
i thought about this and i feel i not only left you with the wrong impression; but the wrong mindset. i set up research to find a cure for cancer. i fight insane government rules constantly and every penny comes out of my pocket. i can't get squat because i'm not a bloody minority. IF (and i stress if) i'm right; it would be a huge contribution to humanity. so instead of throwing money at a problem and feeling all grand because i did something good; i started a business who's contribution would be greater than money thrown at the problem.
i thought about this and i feel i not only left you with the wrong impression; but the wrong mindset. i set up research to find a cure for cancer. i fight insane government rules constantly and every penny comes out of my pocket. i can't get squat because i'm not a bloody minority. IF (and i stress if) i'm right; it would be a huge contribution to humanity. so instead of throwing money at a problem and feeling all grand because i did something good; i started a business who's contribution would be greater than money thrown at the problem.
I agree that you just can't throw money at problems. We have to make sure these donations are or whatever way we contribute are actually part of a solution.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
There has to be some way we could use our resources to come up with something that actually works. If our government would put pressure on these countries to do right by their people instead of putting so much of our resources into power struggles, wars and pandering to the rich only maybe it could be solved.
Yes of course, but I believe the OECD countries (developed ones, including the US of course) are making efforts in that direction. And the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) is investing a lot of time and resources into strenghtening democratic processes. There are lots of UNDP programs related to accountability, capacity building and governance, where they teach how to govern in an effective manner. From the most simple things, like how to operate a computer, how to manage a budget, how to use accounting programs, to how to be a leader and how to increase citizen's involvement in the decision-making process. Also how to gather accurate data and how to use to make the right decisions. These kind of programs, along with those related to fighting poverty, have become increasingly important in UNDP. Unfortunately this is a long process and it is a long term effort, so we won't be seeing the results soon. You have to take into consideration that most of these countries (those who are in the more vulnerable situation) also have serious lack of human resources.
I did not want to sound overtly optimistic, there's much work to be done and we're very far from the desired results, but I see some trends in the right direction...
Good for you. But then I seriously doubt you take the risks necessary or put in the long hours and hard work necessary to change the world. When I look at what Bill Gates is doing to positively change the world and what your guilty conscious is stopping you from doing I can only think that the world needs more people like Bill Gates and less like you (and I).
Interesting point.
I am much like Chadwick in that I would not feel comfortable living in what we know as extravagance. More to the point, I do not have the desire. And because I do not have the desire, because living upper-middle-class is good enough for me, I do not create the wealth to be a true difference maker in the world. Not only do the rich create jobs, but they can (and I emphasize CAN) do good things with their money.
It's not my guilt that prevents me from being Bill Gates, it's my lack of motivation of the almighty buck. I chose to get education that would lead to to comfort, but never to being filthy rich (and doing a job I like). I don't want to be rich. I have never wanted to be rich. Therefore, the only way I was going to be rich would have been if I could have developed a good change up to go with that 98 mph fastball (ha ha).
All of this does not mean, however, that it is not too bad that there are people that choose to huddle around their money like misers, choose not to acknowledge that much of their wealth is made possible by the masses and do not feel that their good fortune (regardless of risk and work ethic, nobody get super rich without some good fortune) should lead them to "give something back." I really have no problem with people taking what they earned and having a nicer car and house than I (and I sure the hell have no class envy). I do think that you can have all of these things and more and still be charitable. I cannot even imagine being worth eight figures and dedicating my life to being worth nine--but I guess that's what separates "them" from "me".
There are always anecdotes, but they are not all Bill Gates. Some people would treat their employees like shit if they thought they'd make a half a percent more revenue per year.
I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
Yes of course, but I believe the OECD countries (developed ones, including the US of course) are making efforts in that direction. And the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) is investing a lot of time and resources into strenghtening democratic processes. There are lots of UNDP programs related to accountability, capacity building and governance, where they teach how to govern in an effective manner. From the most simple things, like how to operate a computer, how to manage a budget, how to use accounting programs, to how to be a leader and how to increase citizen's involvement in the decision-making process. Also how to gather accurate data and how to use to make the right decisions. These kind of programs, along with those related to fighting poverty, have become increasingly important in UNDP. Unfortunately this is a long process and it is a long term effort, so we won't be seeing the results soon. You have to take into consideration that most of these countries (those who are in the more vulnerable situation) also have serious lack of human resources.
I did not want to sound overtly optimistic, there's much work to be done and we're very far from the desired results, but I see some trends in the right direction...
I also see our govenments propping up The World Bank, IMF, NAFTA etc that are exploiting these countries and making matter much worse.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I also see our govenments propping up The World Bank, IMF, NAFTA etc that are exploiting these countries and making matter much worse.
OK, yes the IMF totally lost its focus a long time ago. When it was founded after WWII its purpose was to be a last resource lender for countries in trouble, not to be a policy-maker. Same goes for the World Bank, when it was created (along with the IMF, that's why they're known as Bretton Woods institutionss) with the goal of provide cheap money to developing countries to build infrastructure and such. Both institutions need reforming, however I have to say that the WB has significantly changed its positions in the last five years regarding what to do to fight poverty and inequality. If you read their latest publications you'll see they're actually tackling both issues in serious manner. I am more forgiving towards the WB because not all they do is wrong (and I have to admit it I have good friends who are great people working there). The WB has been fundamental for statistics creation and training in plenty of developing countries, which is extremely important to design and execute public policy.
About NAFTA (free trade agreement between USA, Canada and Mexico), well it has had positive effects too; for example, it has helped to create over a million jobs in Mexico since it started, it really gave a boost to Mexico's economy. I've even heard very-left wing Mexican economists and intellectuals saying so.
I guess this is the part where we won't agree that much, see I'm not anti-trade, 'cause if trade agreements are properly designed and carried out they can actually benefit a country, the clearest examples are the countries from South Asia and Chile in Latin America.
OK, yes the IMF totally lost its focus a long time ago. When it was founded after WWII its purpose was to be a last resource lender for countries in trouble, not to be a policy-maker. Same goes for the World Bank, when it was created (along with the IMF, that's why they're known as Bretton Woods institutionss) with the goal of provide cheap money to developing countries to build infrastructure and such. Both institutions need reforming, however I have to say that the WB has significantly changed its positions in the last five years regarding what to do to fight poverty and inequality. If you read their latest publications you'll see they're actually tackling both issues in serious manner. I am more forgiving towards the WB because not all they do is wrong (and I have to admit it I have good friends who are great people working there). The WB has been fundamental for statistics creation and training in plenty of developing countries, which is extremely important to design and execute public policy.
About NAFTA (free trade agreement between USA, Canada and Mexico), well it has had positive effects too; for example, it has helped to create over a million jobs in Mexico since it started, it really gave a boost to Mexico's economy. I've even heard very-left wing Mexican economists and intellectuals saying so.
I guess this is the part where we won't agree that much, see I'm not anti-trade, 'cause if trade agreements are properly designed and carried out they can actually benefit a country, the clearest examples are the countries from South Asia and Chile in Latin America.
I've seen a lot on the net and read also that these countries just aren't doing better off since NAFTA and the poor are still living in slums. I'm not anti-trade either, I'm pro-fair trade.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I've seen a lot on the net and read also that these countries just aren't doing better off since NAFTA and the poor are still living in slums. I'm not anti-trade either, I'm pro-fair trade.
Yes, there's plenty of Mexicans living of slums still, but I don't think it like that due to NAFTA. There's plenty of bad politics involved in that; Mexico has serious corruption issues. However if you look at statistics you'll see that Mexico's poverty rate has decreased in the past decade. Population in poverty situation for 1989 was: 47.7% while for 2005 was: 35.5%. Of course it is a lot, but there's been improvement. (Source: http://www.eclac.cl/publicaciones/xml/0/27480/PSE2006_Cap1_Pobreza.pdf)
However, I'm confused 'cause NAFTA only includes Mexico, USA and canada. Perhaps, you're thinking about CAFTA, which is the trade agreement between USA and Central America, that has not entered into effect yet and I'm not sure if it will, 'cause if I'm not mistaken Bush's Fastrack powers to pass such legislation are about to expire, or have already expired, and with a Democratic Congress I don't see the Fastrack being renovated... Anyways, CAFTA is very tricky 'cause it could be either the salvation or the final shot for Central America.
Yes, there's plenty of Mexicans living of slums still, but I don't think it like that due to NAFTA. There's plenty of bad politics involved in that; Mexico has serious corruption issues. However if you look at statistics you'll see that Mexico's poverty rate has decreased in the past decade. Population in poverty situation for 1989 was: 47.7% while for 2005 was: 35.5%. Of course it is a lot, but there's been improvement. (Source: http://www.eclac.cl/publicaciones/xml/0/27480/PSE2006_Cap1_Pobreza.pdf)
However, I'm confused 'cause NAFTA only includes Mexico, USA and canada. Perhaps, you're thinking about CAFTA, which is the trade agreement between USA and Central America, that has not entered into effect yet and I'm not sure if it will, 'cause if I'm not mistaken Bush's Fastrack powers to pass such legislation are about to expire, or have already expired, and with a Democratic Congress I don't see the Fastrack being renovated... Anyways, CAFTA is very tricky 'cause it could be either the salvation or the final shot for Central America.
I'm bringing up NAFTA in regards to the slums in mexico. I'm talking about the free trade practices we've used in the past with nations in central america.
I cannot even imagine being worth eight figures and dedicating my life to being worth nine--but I guess that's what separates "them" from "me".
One other thing that seperates "them" from "me", I doubt they spend much time telling others that they should be giving away more of their money and wealth.
They've decided what's important to them and they've worked for that. Now you tell them they should give it away. How would you feel if others were telling you to part with what you feel is important and have worked for. "Spouse and kids, give 'em to those who don't have any. If not you're greedy. You've had years of being surrounded by love, it's time to buck up and give it to the less fortunate."
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I'm bringing up NAFTA in regards to the slums in mexico. I'm talking about the free trade practices we've used in the past with nations in central america.
OK, OK. I thought for a second you were saying that NAFTA was also involved other Central American countries. I'm reading the article about Mexico...
What I fail to see is what the article about Chile has to do with it. Anyways I'll have to say that the person who wrote that article should really check his facts, 'cause there are very few Chileans that will agree with his statements about Allende and especially about his economic achievements. The man's single success was to bankrupt a country in a less than three years. In Chile he's almost as hated as Pinochet...
One other thing that seperates "them" from "me", I doubt they spend much time telling others that they should be giving away more of their money and wealth.
They've decided what's important to them and they've worked for that. Now you tell them they should give it away. How would you feel if others were telling you to part with what you feel is important and have worked for. "Spouse and kids, give 'em to those who don't have any. If not you're greedy. You've had years of being surrounded by love, it's time to buck up and give it to the less fortunate."
that's quite a jump there evel knievel.......how does one equate giving away superfluous wealth with giving away your children?....
I'm bringing up NAFTA in regards to the slums in mexico. I'm talking about the free trade practices we've used in the past with nations in central america.
Well, the article is a little old (from 2001). Anyways, the thing with Mexico is there are huge disparities inside the country and I believe that some areas have improved more than others. Some of the border towns are still the poorest of the country. So, it is very likely that if you disagregate the poverty rate by cities there will be differences.
Anyways, there's been an increase in Mexico's social expenditure, especially in social programs for the more vulnerable groups, and considering the trend of the poverty rate they may be paying off. Although I'll admit it's been more than a year since I last studied Mexico's data in public policy in detail so I would really need to study to give you what I'd feel would be a responsible opinion on the issue .
that's quite a jump there evel knievel.......how does one equate giving away superfluous wealth with giving away your children?....
It's being told to give away something that is important to you, and if you don't you're jealous and don't care for others. To you it's superfluous wealth, I'm sure they don't view it that way.
I have way more empathy, compassion and caring for the person living without love than without money.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Good for you. But then I seriously doubt you take the risks necessary or put in the long hours and hard work necessary to change the world. When I look at what Bill Gates is doing to positively change the world and what your guilty conscious is stopping you from doing I can only think that the world needs more people like Bill Gates and less like you (and I).
Hours worked, hardly ever have I worked a 40 hour week.
This is a fact, I could not tell you about working a 40 hr week.
I could not tell you about a 9-5 time clock gig.
My job wont change the entire world.
But I and the rest of us affect it hugely.
As a truck-driver I can tell you about a double 40 hour week.
Yes, 80-100 hrs a week is what I have done for a long, long-time.
Legally 70 hours a week is the limit.
Also, my newset gig, I am a first time author.
My book is due out in like 6-8 weeks.
People can change the world without having extravagance.
Some ppl do not do a fuckin thing for the better of mankind
and they are extravagant.
Doesn't mean they are liable because of wealth.
It does mean they are gluttonous.
Comments
Geez, don't they know? What's your co-workers problem? Haha!
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I understand your concern. I hate the government the way we have it now. It's been bought out from under us and doesn't serve the majority of it's people. I also don't trust the private sector to do any better because they are the one's lobbying to have things the way they are now. They are already pretty much in control. It's a shitty situation.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
nobody helped me. we were born dirt farmers in northern wisconsin. poor as church mice. instead of looking for a hand out we looked for work. now i see people posting that illegals do the work americans refuse to do. if these americans are refusing work; they deserve to starve. i recall eating potatoes for weeks because that's all we had. i've been there so don't paint this picture that they are poor and can't change it. i'm sure you're where you are because you worked for it. i doubt that someone handed you a check after graduation. you hit the streets and built your life.
and here's where we agree. you can't fix a problem by throwing money at a bad situation. this goes back to what i said earlier. produce a viable plan or organization and people will donate. hell; if bill gates was only allowed to make say 1 million a year and had to distribute the rest; i'd be there too. why work when there's free money being handed out. i'd pocket the money and go fishing.
You're right, I've worked for what I have. But I don't think it's the case of laziness when it comes to global poverty and hunger. I also know that circumstances we know nothing about play into everyone's lives. I don't think most of the less fortunate are just too sorry to try do better for themselves or are looking for an easy handout. Often the opportunities just aren't there. Sure there are bad apples, but I believe most people want to make a good life for themselves.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Hi Abook
Just a little sidenote, speaking from a developing country point of view, even if Argentina is much more developed than Africa or most Latin American countries. I'm not so sure if the issue at stake is the actual amount of money being donated, but more how such money is being used. For example, during the 90's Argentina received via soft loans (very low interes rates and generous payment terms) the equivalent of approx. 6 Marshall Plans. What happened? Leaving plenty of other things that went totally wrong during such decade aside (mainly the Convertibility Law) our Government spent most of that money in current spending: political favors, thousands of consultants with huge salaries, their own personal benefit and the list is endless. Only a tiny portion was actually invested in things that could improve people's lives.
The same could be said for Africa, the Continent receives billions of dollars par year, yet a huge share of it does not get to those who actually need it. In order to increase the efficiency of money donations corruption has to be seriously tackled, that's one of the reasons that many philantropists are increasingly doing things directly via Foundations and NGO's.
Hey, I'm all for donating money, but I believe that poverty, hunger and such could be greatly aleviated if those in charge of third world countries would actually spend properly the money instead of keeping it.
Just my 2cts.
Caterina
I'd want to continue to make the world a better place to live for us all. If I had the money I'd love to start a free daycare here in my small town so that these families could go to work and make a better life for themselves. And also the children would be in a better place than being left alone or not cared for properly. I've had this idea for the longest time. It has nothing to do with personal gain...it has to do with wanting to give and help out where I've noticed a problem. Surely this world isn't filled with people who only do great things for personal gain.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I completely agree with you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Does that 1% include our taxes that go to social issues and the $ that goes to Social Security that I'll never see?
Well, thank you
There has to be some way we could use our resources to come up with something that actually works. If our government would put pressure on these countries to do right by their people instead of putting so much of our resources into power struggles, wars and pandering to the rich only maybe it could be solved.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I personally think you should give much more than that. You don't?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
i thought about this and i feel i not only left you with the wrong impression; but the wrong mindset. i set up research to find a cure for cancer. i fight insane government rules constantly and every penny comes out of my pocket. i can't get squat because i'm not a bloody minority. IF (and i stress if) i'm right; it would be a huge contribution to humanity. so instead of throwing money at a problem and feeling all grand because i did something good; i started a business who's contribution would be greater than money thrown at the problem.
I was merely asking for clarification on what you were including in that 1% minimum.
I know you were. I was just wondering what your thoughts were.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I agree that you just can't throw money at problems. We have to make sure these donations are or whatever way we contribute are actually part of a solution.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Yes of course, but I believe the OECD countries (developed ones, including the US of course) are making efforts in that direction. And the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) is investing a lot of time and resources into strenghtening democratic processes. There are lots of UNDP programs related to accountability, capacity building and governance, where they teach how to govern in an effective manner. From the most simple things, like how to operate a computer, how to manage a budget, how to use accounting programs, to how to be a leader and how to increase citizen's involvement in the decision-making process. Also how to gather accurate data and how to use to make the right decisions. These kind of programs, along with those related to fighting poverty, have become increasingly important in UNDP. Unfortunately this is a long process and it is a long term effort, so we won't be seeing the results soon. You have to take into consideration that most of these countries (those who are in the more vulnerable situation) also have serious lack of human resources.
I did not want to sound overtly optimistic, there's much work to be done and we're very far from the desired results, but I see some trends in the right direction...
Interesting point.
I am much like Chadwick in that I would not feel comfortable living in what we know as extravagance. More to the point, I do not have the desire. And because I do not have the desire, because living upper-middle-class is good enough for me, I do not create the wealth to be a true difference maker in the world. Not only do the rich create jobs, but they can (and I emphasize CAN) do good things with their money.
It's not my guilt that prevents me from being Bill Gates, it's my lack of motivation of the almighty buck. I chose to get education that would lead to to comfort, but never to being filthy rich (and doing a job I like). I don't want to be rich. I have never wanted to be rich. Therefore, the only way I was going to be rich would have been if I could have developed a good change up to go with that 98 mph fastball (ha ha).
All of this does not mean, however, that it is not too bad that there are people that choose to huddle around their money like misers, choose not to acknowledge that much of their wealth is made possible by the masses and do not feel that their good fortune (regardless of risk and work ethic, nobody get super rich without some good fortune) should lead them to "give something back." I really have no problem with people taking what they earned and having a nicer car and house than I (and I sure the hell have no class envy). I do think that you can have all of these things and more and still be charitable. I cannot even imagine being worth eight figures and dedicating my life to being worth nine--but I guess that's what separates "them" from "me".
There are always anecdotes, but they are not all Bill Gates. Some people would treat their employees like shit if they thought they'd make a half a percent more revenue per year.
I also see our govenments propping up The World Bank, IMF, NAFTA etc that are exploiting these countries and making matter much worse.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
OK, yes the IMF totally lost its focus a long time ago. When it was founded after WWII its purpose was to be a last resource lender for countries in trouble, not to be a policy-maker. Same goes for the World Bank, when it was created (along with the IMF, that's why they're known as Bretton Woods institutionss) with the goal of provide cheap money to developing countries to build infrastructure and such. Both institutions need reforming, however I have to say that the WB has significantly changed its positions in the last five years regarding what to do to fight poverty and inequality. If you read their latest publications you'll see they're actually tackling both issues in serious manner. I am more forgiving towards the WB because not all they do is wrong (and I have to admit it I have good friends who are great people working there). The WB has been fundamental for statistics creation and training in plenty of developing countries, which is extremely important to design and execute public policy.
About NAFTA (free trade agreement between USA, Canada and Mexico), well it has had positive effects too; for example, it has helped to create over a million jobs in Mexico since it started, it really gave a boost to Mexico's economy. I've even heard very-left wing Mexican economists and intellectuals saying so.
I guess this is the part where we won't agree that much, see I'm not anti-trade, 'cause if trade agreements are properly designed and carried out they can actually benefit a country, the clearest examples are the countries from South Asia and Chile in Latin America.
I'll read up on that. Thanks.
I've seen a lot on the net and read also that these countries just aren't doing better off since NAFTA and the poor are still living in slums. I'm not anti-trade either, I'm pro-fair trade.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Here's a couple of links
http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/LAC/LAC.nsf/ECADocByUnid/4112F1114F594B4B85256DB3005DB262?Opendocument
Yes, there's plenty of Mexicans living of slums still, but I don't think it like that due to NAFTA. There's plenty of bad politics involved in that; Mexico has serious corruption issues. However if you look at statistics you'll see that Mexico's poverty rate has decreased in the past decade. Population in poverty situation for 1989 was: 47.7% while for 2005 was: 35.5%. Of course it is a lot, but there's been improvement. (Source: http://www.eclac.cl/publicaciones/xml/0/27480/PSE2006_Cap1_Pobreza.pdf)
However, I'm confused 'cause NAFTA only includes Mexico, USA and canada. Perhaps, you're thinking about CAFTA, which is the trade agreement between USA and Central America, that has not entered into effect yet and I'm not sure if it will, 'cause if I'm not mistaken Bush's Fastrack powers to pass such legislation are about to expire, or have already expired, and with a Democratic Congress I don't see the Fastrack being renovated... Anyways, CAFTA is very tricky 'cause it could be either the salvation or the final shot for Central America.
I'm bringing up NAFTA in regards to the slums in mexico. I'm talking about the free trade practices we've used in the past with nations in central america.
http://www.gregpalast.com/tinker-bell-pinochet-and-the-fairy-tale-miracle-of-chile-2
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0415-01.htm
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
They've decided what's important to them and they've worked for that. Now you tell them they should give it away. How would you feel if others were telling you to part with what you feel is important and have worked for. "Spouse and kids, give 'em to those who don't have any. If not you're greedy. You've had years of being surrounded by love, it's time to buck up and give it to the less fortunate."
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
OK, OK. I thought for a second you were saying that NAFTA was also involved other Central American countries. I'm reading the article about Mexico...
What I fail to see is what the article about Chile has to do with it. Anyways I'll have to say that the person who wrote that article should really check his facts, 'cause there are very few Chileans that will agree with his statements about Allende and especially about his economic achievements. The man's single success was to bankrupt a country in a less than three years. In Chile he's almost as hated as Pinochet...
that's quite a jump there evel knievel.......how does one equate giving away superfluous wealth with giving away your children?....
Well, the article is a little old (from 2001). Anyways, the thing with Mexico is there are huge disparities inside the country and I believe that some areas have improved more than others. Some of the border towns are still the poorest of the country. So, it is very likely that if you disagregate the poverty rate by cities there will be differences.
Anyways, there's been an increase in Mexico's social expenditure, especially in social programs for the more vulnerable groups, and considering the trend of the poverty rate they may be paying off. Although I'll admit it's been more than a year since I last studied Mexico's data in public policy in detail so I would really need to study to give you what I'd feel would be a responsible opinion on the issue
Caterina
I have way more empathy, compassion and caring for the person living without love than without money.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Hours worked, hardly ever have I worked a 40 hour week.
This is a fact, I could not tell you about working a 40 hr week.
I could not tell you about a 9-5 time clock gig.
My job wont change the entire world.
But I and the rest of us affect it hugely.
As a truck-driver I can tell you about a double 40 hour week.
Yes, 80-100 hrs a week is what I have done for a long, long-time.
Legally 70 hours a week is the limit.
Also, my newset gig, I am a first time author.
My book is due out in like 6-8 weeks.
People can change the world without having extravagance.
Some ppl do not do a fuckin thing for the better of mankind
and they are extravagant.
Doesn't mean they are liable because of wealth.
It does mean they are gluttonous.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce