PDA

View Full Version : Feckin' Debt Relief for Africa!!!



SupremeSpod
8th June 2005, 13:49
Why?

How come so much of the money collected in taxes in the UK will go toward this bottomless bucket?

Oh FFS, I'm going for a lie down!

DimPrawn
8th June 2005, 14:21
It's only "fair".

stackpole
8th June 2005, 14:29
A waste of my money. This is another Blair ego trip.

Plus those idiots Bono and Chris Martin. Pop singers should stick to pop singing, and not get involved in things they don't understand.

Spod, you are a b@stard for bringing this up. I need a lie down as well, now.

ZitMeister
8th June 2005, 14:43
At least 22 Ethiopians have been shot dead as police clashed with protesters accusing the ruling party of fraud in last month's elections.
Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is a member of the UK-led Commission for Africa, which promises to improve governance and respect for human rights in Africa, in return for more western aid, debt relief and better terms of trade.

Will aid help the poor in Zimbabwe ? ( they need an iraq style invasion)

All this is only to ease the consciences of the pinko progressive liberal types and make them feel better They think that paternalism and condescension are the only ways to deal with Africa.

One quarter of all the tsunami aid sent to Sri Lanka has been sitting on the dock at Colombo since January, unclaimed and/or unprocessed.

fiddleabout
8th June 2005, 15:10
One thing puzzles me though - if life is so shite in Africa why don't they move?

n3il1234
8th June 2005, 15:33
At least 22 Ethiopians have been shot dead

so they can afford guns and bullets... but not food? :rolleyes

might try that with barclaycard I can't pay your bill this month... cos I spent all my money on Guiness... :hat can see that one working :(

mailmannz
8th June 2005, 15:39
What I find funny is people accusing America of being tight bastards...never mind the fact they give more than $10billion dollars a year to Africa! :rollin

Now what gets my t1ts is the guilt people try to heap upon the west! Its about time that Africa stood up and took responsility for its own problems. As long as countries like South Africa support people like Roberto Mugatu then Africa will never change!

If it was me I wouldnt spend any more money on Africa. If they increase spending they are only going to be giving all the dictators in that continent more money to syphon off in to their French bank accounts!

Mailman

clownio
8th June 2005, 15:51
Roberto Mugatu

Who's he ?

ZitMeister
8th June 2005, 15:54
Post colonial Ghana was well educated and everybody spoke english so why haven't they emulated India - outsourcing etc.

Dictators corruption ............

fiddleabout
8th June 2005, 15:59
> Who's he ?

probably the bloke who runs all those dodgy French banks :)

TonyEnglish
8th June 2005, 16:01
I like the way they are having a concert about poverty involving Elton John, who admits to spending £2k per per week on flowers. What next - Bernard Manning on race relations.

Also, Geldof is not doing all this out of the goodness of his heart. Looking at it cynically, if he had not done the live aid thing and kept harping on about the third world, he would simply have been yet another forgotten 80's pop star. Instead he has managed to keep himself in the public eye and so remain very rich.

NumptyCorner
8th June 2005, 16:02
Who's he ?

Don't expect to understand what Mailman writes, all sense gets 'lost in the post'. (geddit?)

clownio
8th June 2005, 16:09
It's OK everyone. He meant ROBERT MUGABE !

see www.zimbabwesituation.com/jun8a_2005.html#link7 (http://www.zimbabwesituation.com/jun8a_2005.html#link7)

and scroll to "Mugabe's Terror campaign" for more details

....if you can be arsed !

sasguru
8th June 2005, 16:37
Here is my solution to the Africa problem:

1. Pay fair prices for their goods.
2. African countries should provide a list of infrastructure projects that would help them to develop like schools, hospitals and roads. Private sector Western companies could then bid for these projects to the Western government aid donors. No money at all should be given directly to corrupt African Governments.
3. Stop all arms sales to Africa.

ZitMeister
8th June 2005, 16:49
Here is my solution to the Africa problem:
1. Pay fair prices for their goods.

the problem is the EU dumping our highly subsidised goods on them destroying their local economies. Try telling the French to reform the CAP

2. no way do I want my taxes building roads in Africa when they should be building them here. Blair and Brown should concentrate on sorting this country out before trying to solve the worlds problems.

3. Guns will end up to whoever wants them

DodgyAgent
8th June 2005, 17:19
Although I accept to a degree that Geldof, Bono , midge Ure et al do to a certain extaent care about Africa I am convinced that it is their own guilt that they are having to face rather than solving Africas probblems.

Since Live Aid Ethiopia's population gas grown significantly. It is yet again facing famine and all the other problems that go with a dodgy government and poverty. Has the population grown because of Geldof's Live Aid? maybe maybe not. What seems to be certain though is that the country is no better off than it was when Live Aid went to its assistance.

My view is that all these rich stars are so guilt ridden that they have become fanatical about their cause without giving the blindest notice to serious questions about their policies.
They are also unashamadly bullying the rest of us into their guilt zone.
Message to Sir Bob, Bono and the rest of the self righteous, priviliged knob ends:

If you feel so guilty then give up your own vast amounts of wealth instead of heaping your guilt on the rest of us?

mailmannz
8th June 2005, 17:27
It's OK everyone. He meant ROBERT MUGABE !

see www.zimbabwesituation.com/jun8a_2005.html#link7

and scroll to "Mugabe's Terror campaign" for more details

....if you can be arsed !

I was probably expecting a bit much for people to be able to work out who I was talking about.

Mugatu = big boss clown from Zoolander
Mugabe = big boss clown from zimbabwe

Mailman

snaw
8th June 2005, 18:54
Although I accept to a degree that Geldof, Bono , midge Ure et al do to a certain extaent care about Africa I am convinced that it is their own guilt that they are having to face rather than solving Africas probblems.

Is that your sole answer to everything? Anyone, with money, who gives a sh!t about anything only does so because they are guilt ridden?

Anyone who gives a sh!t about anything, without money, only does so cause they're jealous ...

Jaysus you live in a limited world. You sit and pontificate, and presume to know everyone else's reason's for every action but apparently you never bother to analyse yourself and question why is it you presume to believe you know everything about anyone else.

You take patronising to a whole new level.

AtW
8th June 2005, 19:23
> Anyone, with money, who gives a sh!t about anything only does so because they are guilt ridden?

I did not hear about those musicians giving their own millions to the cause. Not charging for the gig is not a big sacrifice because that gig would not have paid them anyway, so in effect they did not lose opportunity to make money, in fact they gain by making the press to talk about them.

Cynical explotation of the cause is more like it.

A real solution to the problem is to fund creation of an army that will topple corrupt regimes in African countries and establish democracy there.

DodgyAgent
8th June 2005, 19:40
snaw, the reason why you are a propeller head is because you have little or no understanding of human nature. Very few people do things unless there is a reason for them to do it that affects THEM. Few people have statemanlike "qualities" (it is arguable that statesmanlike is a quality). People are driven by self interest; greed, envy whatever. I hope you understand that "self interest" manifest itself in many many different ways, not just a desire for material world.

I manage people and I understand tha in order to manage them one has to appeal to their self interest (not always money) in a way that makes their interests the same as your interests.

This guilt thing is a logical part of human nature. It shows that these people are genuinly kind and caring. However they are (in my opinion) being less than honest with themselves. There are too many cracks in their arguments that they simply refuse to look at. Those that question would their motives refrain from doing so because they have caprtured the moral high ground "We are doing this for Africa how dare you question us"

Bob Geldof's career has prospered as a result of irony whether you like it or not the question remains about his true intentions. Like many others I believe Geldof to be well intentioned but he is no saint, and he is in no position to preach to me; If he wants to give to Africa that is his business.

Guilt is a funny thing. People overcome guilt in many ways. One such way is for victims of crime to be tormented more and more by those who hurt them. They deal with their guilt by humiliating their victims, making their victims inhuman or lowering their esteem in their own eyes and those of others accordingly. Thye de humanise their victims... bullies do this all the time. "He is a nobody, he is a nothing a loser let us all bully him.

You see snaw in your case you have totally given up contesting my points. You have resorted to abuse. You for some reason think of self interest as money... I never said anything of the sort.

The problem with guilt is that it makes people behave in destructive ways.. if that was not the case then socialism would die

allfinished
8th June 2005, 21:13
why?

Because gordon and tony have such pig ugly wives the only way they can get hard-ons is by p1ssing away our cash on right PC black causes.

Debt relief = jumped up bannana republic dictor needs a new jet


If it were just cash sir bob 'mad as a hatter' geldoff would have solved this problem 20 years ago.

Nice to see gb and tb p1ss our money away, I think i'd have preferred lower taxes!!!!

xoggoth
8th June 2005, 21:31
I did see a yank Bush apologist on the TV news last night mention that over the last 20 years the US had donated x trillion dollars to Africa but that no adequate analysis had been made on how that money had been spent. Not a "caring" comment no doubt, but a very valid one.

One of the few occasions I would agree with the Bush camp. No point throwing money at Africa out of guilt. It has to be carefully targetted and monitored to make sure it acheives at least an acceptable proportion of the intended benefit.

Where I certainly do not agree with the Bush camp, ie the US Christian right. Without pressure for population control any money donated is largely wasted, more money=more mouths to feed=more need for money.

4Contractors
8th June 2005, 22:25
I have a limited understanding of the 3rd world and limited patience.

If there is limited food and disease, why do they have so many children......even animals and birds know how to restrict their numbers to suit the territory and available food.

....bit of a hopeless cause IMO......unfortunately

AtW
8th June 2005, 22:30
> why do they have so many children......even animals and birds
> know how to restrict their numbers to suit the territory and available food.

High ratio of AIDS and lots of children is in many respects due to Catholic Church's activities that do not allow for abortions and condoms.

xoggoth
8th June 2005, 22:58
Quite agree atW. RC church, Christian right generally - plague upon the world. The much maligned Islam is quite harmless by comparison.

hattra
8th June 2005, 23:13
why do they have so many children
Because they have high infant mortality and no social security system - few of their children survive to maturity, but those that do will provide for them in old age - we used to do it in this country.

snaw
9th June 2005, 00:21
snaw, the reason why you are a propeller head is because you have little or no understanding of human nature. Very few people do things unless there is a reason for them to do it that affects THEM. Few people have statemanlike "qualities" (it is arguable that statesmanlike is a quality). People are driven by self interest; greed, envy whatever. I hope you understand that "self interest" manifest itself in many many different ways, not just a desire for material world.

There you go again with the assumptions. I'm in IT, therefore I must be a propeller head?


I manage people and I understand tha in order to manage them one has to appeal to their self interest (not always money) in a way that makes their interests the same as your interests.

And yet more assumptions. I've managed a team, successfully, for a major bank for a number of years before I contracted.


You see snaw in your case you have totally given up contesting my points.

And assumptions once again.


You for some reason think of self interest as money... I never said anything of the sort.

You implied it in the post I replied too; guilty RICH stars with vast amounts of wealth heaping their guilt on the rest of us. Sorry, did I miss some deeper meaning to your assumptions on their motives?


You have resorted to abuse.

Umm, not that I can see, unless you take critisism as abuse. Abuse would be something completely different if I was dishing it out.

Best way I can put it DA, I'm pretty sure that if I went for a beer with most of the posters on this board, even the ones whose politics I don't agree with, we'd still have a laugh, talk crap for a while and not take it all too seriously. I'm pretty certain I'd walk away from meeting you thinking you were a patronising, arrogant bellend.

You see your politics I can get past, I've good mates who're more extreme than you. It's your absolute failure to comprehend that in actual fact you don't know everything about what drives other people, or why they believe what they believe. You don't have a feckin clue but you keep assuming, time and again, that you are right when it comes to other people's views, based on nothing else but your firm belief in your own infallability.

DodgyAgent
9th June 2005, 08:03
There you go again with the assumptions. I'm in IT, therefore I must be a propeller head?

:D :D

SupremeSpod
9th June 2005, 08:47
I'm pretty certain I'd walk away from meeting you thinking you were a patronising, arrogant bellend.

You might be surprised...

Joe Bloggs
9th June 2005, 21:47
"There you go again with the assumptions. I'm in IT, therefore I must be a propeller head?"

The brightest people in IT are the ones trying to find a way out...

4Contractors
9th June 2005, 23:40
The brightest people in IT are the ones trying to find a way out

I'm way out but unfortunately still working in IT :)

DimPrawn
10th June 2005, 09:40
www.cgdev.org/rankingtherich/aid.html (http://www.cgdev.org/rankingtherich/aid.html)

All rich countries give development assistance to poorer countries. But the design of development assistance programs means that some dollars or euros are more effective than others are. So, the index development assistance component rewards countries not only for the quantity of their development assistance, but also for the quality. It subtracts development assistance that comes right back to donors as debt payments. It penalizes donors for "tying" development assistance-requiring that it be spent only on goods and services from the donor country-or funding many small projects that can overload the staff of poor-country governments. It rewards selectivity-giving development assistance to countries that are particularly poor and particularly well governed. New in 2004, the index rewards tax incentives for charitable donations.

Sweden ranks first with Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway following closely behind. Not only are these countries among the world's most generous for their size, but each also ties a very small proportion of their development assistance. Japan and the United States sit near the bottom. The Japanese development assistance score suffers because Japan takes in heavy interest payments on old loans. The United States gives little development assistance for its size, ties much of it to the purchase of U.S. goods and services, and allocates it to countries generally richer or more corrupt than recipients of development assistance from other donors. Small donors such as New Zealand, Greece and Ireland are pulled low for spreading their development assistance thinly across many small projects.


http://www.cgdev.org/rankingtherich/graphics/Results.gif

I think we're doing a lot more than many other countries. Tell Bob to piss off to Japan, Spain or one of the others at the bottom of the barrel.

Lucifer Box
10th June 2005, 09:57
Quite a bit of Yank bashing in the text, not borne out by the data in the table, which ranks the US higher than most and massively improved on last year.

SupremeSpod
10th June 2005, 09:59
Natural Selection anyone?

Bundaberg Bum
18th June 2005, 07:20
Jonathan Clayton, Times (London), June 8

Furious South African women have called for a controversial new anti-rape device, dubbed a “rat trap”, to be banned by the Government.

The tampon-like device, invented by a woman, supposedly protects women from rapists by cutting into a man’s penis.

It has sparked an empassioned debate over the high number of rapes committed each day in the country and the authorities’ apparent failure to tackle the issue.

Activists are outraged and want to stop it going on sale alongside tampons in chemists and supermarkets next month.

Charlene Smith, a leading anti-rape campaigner, said: “This is a medieval instrument, based on male-hating notions and fundamentally misunderstands the nature of rape and violence against women in this society. It is vengeful, horrible, and disgusting. The woman who invented this needs help.”

The device, which Sonette Ehlers, its inventor, has patented, is worn like a tampon but is hollow. In the event of a rape, she said that it would fold around the rapist’s penis and attach itself with microscopic hooks. It is impossible to remove the clamped device without medical intervention.

“We have to do something to protect ourselves. While this will not prevent rape, it will help identify attackers and secure convictions,” Ms Ehlers told the Johannesburg Star.

Women’s groups disputed her claims, which have reopened a debate over violence against women in South Africa. The country has been called the rape capital of the world. Lisa Vetten, of the Centre of Violence and Reconciliation, said: “This is like going back to the days when women were forced to wear chastity belts. It is a terrifying thought that women are being made to adapt to rape.”

The South African Law Commission recently estimated that 1.69 million women a year were raped in the country but that only 52,000 cases a year are reported. Other estimates put the rate even higher.

Ms Smith said: “More than 40 per cent of those raped are children and nationally more than 65 per cent are gang rapes. Whether this translates as a woman raped every 26 seconds or more is irrelevant. It is far too many and not enough is being done to tackle it. This is not a male-only problem, it is a societal problem.”

The activist’s views were echoed by Jenny Crwys—William, the host of a popular radio talk show, who described the device as a “profoundly disturbing” development that underlined how society was in danger of accepting rape as a reality of everyday life. “We need more police and more sensitive police responses to rape. When more rapists go behind bars, rape rates will go down,” she told listeners.

Many callers criticised the Government for a “head in the sand” approach similar to its well-known reluctance to accept the gravity of the HIV/Aids epidemic in the country.

“This will increase the danger to women, who are already in great danger during a rape. The Government must not allow this to go on sale,” one rape victim, who was stabbed twice during an attack, said.

(Posted on June 13, 2005)

xoggoth
18th June 2005, 11:03
To any CUK ladies interested in this device but unable to find one in Boots, I should point out that a cheesegrater is very serviceable for the purpose. Very handy too for those impromptu fondu parties, instant melted cheese.

Bundaberg Bum
18th June 2005, 15:18
I am not sure if any field testing has been done on the device, but I suspect that the rapist would be quite angry at having his manhood shredded into slivers of gristle and could react quite violently to the young lady wearing the device. Whatever tenderness there may have been in the tryst would be dispensed with.