Can poverty be eradicated? (1 Viewer)

[zstar]

You're a fucking idiot.
Those people rely on foreign aid to survive. They literally can't grow enough food to feed themselves. And you want to take their lifeline away?
What the hell do you think would happen? They'd all cheer? Or they'd go "well, i guess we better do something now. Cos i've just been fucking around up til now. I was just having some fun, you know, being on the verge of starvation and all. But now i'm going to have to actually work."
Again: You're a fucking idiot.

I can tell you from now foreign aid is not a lifeline.


Most of that money props up the corrupt government which prolongs human suffering in those countries.


For example when they give aid money to North Koea who do you think it goes to? It goes to Kim Jong Il and his military and so as long as foreign aid continues to flow then the North Korean regime still can keep their army happy enough to repress the people. If he has no food to feed his army he would eventually be overthrown by his own people and his whole system and regime tumbling with him.


That's what true peoples power is.

 

[moll.]

I can tell you from now foreign aid is not a lifeline.


Most of that money props up the corrupt government which prolongs human suffering in those countries.


For example when they give aid money to North Koea who do you think it goes to? It goes to Kim Jong Il and his military and so as long as foreign aid continues to flow then the North Korean regime still can keep their army happy enough to repress the people. If he has no food to feed his army he would eventually be overthrown by his own people and his whole system and regime tumbling with him.


That's what true peoples power is.

No, if he has no food to feed his army, he simply takes it off the peasants and they starve instead. It doesn't matter whether we give the government food or not, the army will still take top priority. So why not give them more food then the army needs, so that he'll be forced to give some to the peasants?

And as for your supposed "people's uprising", it simply wouldn't happen. Most of these governments have a highly effect propaganda machine with which to call upon and lay the blame upon some other event or country. The people wouldn't know any different. Why would you blame the government if you're uneducated and you're told by everyone that the reason you're starving is that America has cut off all food aid to your country?

Yes, some or most of the governments are corrupt, but don't think that all the people are corrupt as well.

You're being an idiot.

 

[Captain Hero]

Thanks for playing? ... I wan't aware this was a game.



Ok well I live in china and I'm pretty sure I know that the one child policy hasn't existed in 10 years

That's great please explain to me how a bunch of now 10 year old kids are going to do anything to deal with the problem of a top-heavy society, other than bear the burden of it?

 

[staticsiscool]

prove that gravity isn't just a theory

 

[zstar]

No, if he has no food to feed his army, he simply takes it off the peasants and they starve instead. It doesn't matter whether we give the government food or not, the army will still take top priority. So why not give them more food then the army needs, so that he'll be forced to give some to the peasants?

And as for your supposed "people's uprising", it simply wouldn't happen. Most of these governments have a highly effect propaganda machine with which to call upon and lay the blame upon some other event or country. The people wouldn't know any different. Why would you blame the government if you're uneducated and you're told by everyone that the reason you're starving is that America has cut off all food aid to your country?

Yes, some or most of the governments are corrupt, but don't think that all the people are corrupt as well.

You're being an idiot.

You're very clueless, If they have nothing to eat then where the hell are they going to get the food from? People who are starved and repressed enough will uprise.


All you do when handing money is create more dependency, poverty and misery.


A country that wants to survive has to stand on its own feed and not on handouts.

 

[moll.]

You're very clueless, If they have nothing to eat then where the hell are they going to get the food from? People who are starved and repressed enough will uprise.

All you do when handing money is create more dependency, poverty and misery.

A country that wants to survive has to stand on its own feed and not on handouts.

And all you do when taking away foreign aid is create death and suffering.
Maybe they would rise up. Maybe they wouldn't. But if they did, it would only be after thousands had died of famine. Possibly millions. Let's look back on history:
Russia 1930-33: Stalin forces collectivisation upon the population. Due to dislocation and resentment, there is massive crop failure. Millions of peasants die in the ensuing famine. The proletariat, bureaucracy, military and Party members are fine, as they have taken enough food for themselves from what little the countryside is producing. The peasants do not rise up, despite the famine, because Stalin kills any who try.
China 1958-60: Mao pushes forward with industrialisation and collectivisation, similar to Russia 30 years prior. Again, millions die. Again, the top tiers of society are unaffected and the peasants do not rise up.
The dictatorship in North Korea is based upon the exact same ideas as China and Russia. You think the same thing wouldn't happen? Granted, it would be a different cause for the famine, but it wouldn't change the outcome too much. After all, it would just be another shock to their society, much like the collectivisation pushes.
You would kill millions of Koreans, or Africans, or Latinos. And for what? Nothing would happen, except an increase in the funeral business.
Your idea is idiotic and murderous.
Yes, countries should be taught to stand on their own feet. But you don't do that by starving them. You do it by feeding them and simultaneously teaching them. As they grow and begin to pull themselves out of poverty, you can decrease the amount of aid given so as to continue to gently encourage their dependancy, whilst also looking after the lives of their citizens.
You don't cut off their food source and then yell at them for being lazy whilst they roll around on the ground, starving.

 

[Will Shakespear]

capitalism = feudalism

lol

 

[Captain Hero]

the powers that be rely on keeping the poor effectively enslaved in order to keep the global financial machine running smoothly...think about it it doesn't require any long stretch of the imagination

capitalism = feudalism

Yeah but it doesn't matter because Jesus is coming back omg and then who'll need money because Jesus is coming back yay!

 

[DownInFlames]

DIF's contributions are always funny.

naw I try

Yeah but it doesn't matter because Jesus is coming back omg and then who'll need money because Jesus is coming back yay!

Yay Jesus!

 

[random-nobody23]

the world has the material resources to eradicate poverty, what we lack is the will.

If enough people wanted it, it could happen but I don't think that it will because of the selfish and proud nature of the human race.

 

[Captain Hero]

the world has the material resources to eradicate poverty, what we lack is the will.

If enough people wanted it, it could happen but I don't think that it will because of the selfish and proud nature of the human race.

Wow, a profoundly retarded comment! About par for the thread.

HINT: We don't have the resources to give the entire world our standard of living.

 

[Silver Persian]

Wow, a profoundly retarded comment! About par for the thread.

HINT: We don't have the resources to give the entire world our standard of living.

He/She said to eliminate poverty, not give everybody a Western standard of living

 

[zstar]

And all you do when taking away foreign aid is create death and suffering.
Maybe they would rise up. Maybe they wouldn't. But if they did, it would only be after thousands had died of famine. Possibly millions. Let's look back on history:
Russia 1930-33: Stalin forces collectivisation upon the population. Due to dislocation and resentment, there is massive crop failure. Millions of peasants die in the ensuing famine. The proletariat, bureaucracy, military and Party members are fine, as they have taken enough food for themselves from what little the countryside is producing. The peasants do not rise up, despite the famine, because Stalin kills any who try.
China 1958-60: Mao pushes forward with industrialisation and collectivisation, similar to Russia 30 years prior. Again, millions die. Again, the top tiers of society are unaffected and the peasants do not rise up.
The dictatorship in North Korea is based upon the exact same ideas as China and Russia. You think the same thing wouldn't happen? Granted, it would be a different cause for the famine, but it wouldn't change the outcome too much. After all, it would just be another shock to their society, much like the collectivisation pushes.
You would kill millions of Koreans, or Africans, or Latinos. And for what? Nothing would happen, except an increase in the funeral business.
Your idea is idiotic and murderous.
Yes, countries should be taught to stand on their own feet. But you don't do that by starving them. You do it by feeding them and simultaneously teaching them. As they grow and begin to pull themselves out of poverty, you can decrease the amount of aid given so as to continue to gently encourage their dependancy, whilst also looking after the lives of their citizens.
You don't cut off their food source and then yell at them for being lazy whilst they roll around on the ground, starving.

Doesn't work that way. Billions of dollars have been flushed in Africa and the continent is poorer now than 30 years ago.

The answer is not give them aid but instead investment in those nations is a better idea. It's like the government giving you $250 a week even though you have no job. All that money does is make you rely on welfare and you continue to live on the fringes of society, If one was to threaten to take that away from you then you would finally discipline yourself and start working or making your own money. The same can be said about a country, They're kept alive but suffering through these handouts but because of no investment or jobs in those nations those people will forever rely on handouts prolonging their suffering.

the world has the material resources to eradicate poverty, what we lack is the will.

If enough people wanted it, it could happen but I don't think that it will because of the selfish and proud nature of the human race.

And who is "we"?

Whenever westerners have interfered in poor countries they have done nothing but made things worse.

"We" don't do anything. It is up to the citizens of those nations to take action into their own hands and help themselves.

 

[moll.]

Doesn't work that way. Billions of dollars have been flushed in Africa and the continent is poorer now than 30 years ago.

The answer is not give them aid but instead investment in those nations is a better idea. It's like the government giving you $250 a week even though you have no job. All that money does is make you rely on welfare and you continue to live on the fringes of society, If one was to threaten to take that away from you then you would finally discipline yourself and start working or making your own money. The same can be said about a country, They're kept alive but suffering through these handouts but because of no investment or jobs in those nations those people will forever rely on handouts prolonging their suffering.

And you say I'm clueless.
Cutting off someone's welfare payments isn't going to make them get a job, it's just going to make them hungry. You say that they'd could then just go and get a job, as if there are hundreds of jobs, just waiting for them out there. You do realise that there's a reason they're unemployed? It's cos most of the time they can't find a job.
Yes, there are a few slackers who don't even try to find and one and just rely on welfare. But that's why we have clauses attached to the payments, such as the "work-for-the-dole" scheme and the requirement to be providing proof that you're still searching for a job.
Evidently your view of society and the situation in Africa and elsewhere is warped.
As for the investment idea, that's what education is, an investment. And i've already stated that it should come along with the aid.
Besides which, what company would want to invest in a country where the workforce is untrained, unskilled, uneducated and in a constant state of hunger?

 

[Captain Hero]

He/She said to eliminate poverty, not give everybody a Western standard of living

But aren't they still in relative poverty if they don't have a flat screen TV and a holden?

 

[moll.]

But aren't they still in relative poverty if they don't have a flat screen TV and a holden?

Relative poverty will never be destroyed.
Absolute poverty and the ways to deal with it are what most of us here are discussing.

 

[inasero]

lol

View attachment 17297

 

[zstar]

And you say I'm clueless.
Cutting off someone's welfare payments isn't going to make them get a job, it's just going to make them hungry. You say that they'd could then just go and get a job, as if there are hundreds of jobs, just waiting for them out there. You do realise that there's a reason they're unemployed? It's cos most of the time they can't find a job.
Yes, there are a few slackers who don't even try to find and one and just rely on welfare. But that's why we have clauses attached to the payments, such as the "work-for-the-dole" scheme and the requirement to be providing proof that you're still searching for a job.
Evidently your view of society and the situation in Africa and elsewhere is warped.
As for the investment idea, that's what education is, an investment. And i've already stated that it should come along with the aid.
Besides which, what company would want to invest in a country where the workforce is untrained, unskilled, uneducated and in a constant state of hunger?

The same way the Western nations, Japan, South Korea, China, India, Brazil and Russia etc have done.

Most of these nation started out as feudal societies that had a majority of people who were poor and ignorant. When you look at the Asian tigers for instance you see how they used the labour in those nations to mine and sell resources and sell farm produce, Then when the factories moved in the started to produce goods and as foreign now how and experience started to trickle in these economies began to move from low value and cheap goods and started producing cars and electronics and these people of these nations became more affluent and better educated.

That is how you solve extreme poverty not with some welfare cheque that produces more suffering, You got to think about the long term instead of worrying about the short term. They will suffer short term but this is nothing more than withdrawl symptoms that one must go through in order to better themselves and escape the trap of dependence.

 

[Captain Hero]

Relative poverty will never be destroyed.
Absolute poverty and the ways to deal with it are what most of us here are discussing.

Relative poverty is a social invention. How do we deal with the fact that most people don't give a shit and donate to charity based on nationalism.

Oh and that aid to africa and other poor countries doesn't work and exacerbates the problem?

 

[moll.]

Relative poverty is a social invention. How do we deal with the fact that most people don't give a shit and donate to charity based on nationalism.

Oh and that aid to africa and other poor countries doesn't work and exacerbates the problem?

Trick them into donating overseas? I don't know, it's a social issue. The easy response is to educate people. But that takes too much time and political effort in a country like ours.

It doesn't exacerbate the problem, it just doesn't solve the underlying causes.
And we solve it by increasing the level of aid, so that we're not just feeding the hungry, but also have enough money to educate them too.
Either that, or we go with zstar's solution to just cut off the aid and yell at them for not being lazy as they die of starvation.