When will we learn? (1 Viewer)

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
#21
I think it's still possible to do it today but everyone would have to change their mentality. The rich and well off states would have to ensure that there are no strings attached and the receiving party would have to come to terms with that and let their guard down. Much of the reason why there are corrupt leaders in poor nations is because they know that everyone is only looking out for themselves so why not pocket some of this and some of that.
Riiiight. Do you even hear yourself? It's one thing to exert a certain influence on people in a family, on a forum, in some place where you have at least some amount of leverage on them. And that's hard enough to do.

But you propose "why doesn't everyone just change on their own". I wouldn't have figured you for a hippie. If you want people to change you have to put them in a position where either a) they have no choice or b) of the options they have it's the most profitable one. So stop dreaming and put some concrete economical incentives in place. First you have to figure out what those have to be to meet your goals.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Ford Prefect

Senior Member
May 28, 2009
10,557
#26
Another problem with the world, for the world to work there needs to be a clear line between rich and poor and the rich need to able to live with the idea that it will be impossible for the poor to become rich.
 
OP
Zé Tahir

Zé Tahir

JhoolayLaaaal!
Moderator
Dec 10, 2004
29,280
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #27
    Riiiight. Do you even hear yourself? It's one thing to exert a certain influence on people in a family, on a forum, in some place where you have at least some amount of leverage on them. And that's hard enough to do.

    But you propose "why doesn't everyone just change on their own". I wouldn't have figured you for a hippie. If you want people to change you have to put them in a position where either a) they have no choice or b) of the options they have it's the most profitable one. So stop dreaming and put some concrete economical incentives in place. First you have to figure out what those have to be to meet your goals.
    :wallbang:

    Why should I share? serious question.
    I just gave a bunch of reasons...you tell why you shouldn't share.
     

    Dragon

    Senior Member
    Apr 24, 2003
    27,407
    #28
    Another problem with the world, for the world to work there needs to be a clear line between rich and poor and the rich need to able to live with the idea that it will be impossible for the poor to become rich.
    Huh?? It's not impossible for the poor to become rich
     

    Eddy

    The Maestro
    Aug 20, 2005
    12,645
    #29
    I realize this might come off as a bit corny but when will we learn as humans that we need to share? We're all connected to each other, more so today than ever before. What we do effects everyone in some way, shape or form.

    The wealthy nations have turned a blind eye to the poor. Only willing to help when there's an opportunity to gain something out of it; out of selfish intentions. While the people of their own countries enjoy the comforts of life beyond the minimum necessities others are going a day without a drop of water. You get my point.

    What happened in Mogadishu, Kandahar, or Sana'a didn't affect what happened back home but now everything is changing. Masked under various things it's hitting closer and closer to home. You've got Somali pirates are plundering the seas, "Islamic" terrorists from Virginia to Bali are terrorizing innocent people.

    Maybe, just maybe...if these wealthy nations took care and looked after those that were poor like a better off sibling would do to another sibling then what we're facing today (and it's only going to get worse) would not be happening. Help that would have no strings attached, no self interest...just out of sheer good intentions.

    I'm not saying any of this is right, it's just a thought and I'm opening this up for discussion so...


    What you think
    Please discuss.
    Excuse me Ze, are you asking why the States for example doesn't give any money to any of the poorer nations ? What about Foreign Aid ? If you are referring to other wealthy nations then I don't know but I know the States sends foreign aid to all the poorer ones. Even if they do send foreign aid, it's not the wealthier nations fault, it's the poorer ones, sorry but it's true. All the poorer nations receive their aid yet they don't build on education at all. Who's to blame ? Plus we talked about this in the Israeli-Palestinian thread ages ago. My opinion was that no education kills children and turns them blind sighted which then leads to extremism.
     

    Ahmed

    Principino
    Sep 3, 2006
    47,928
    #30
    the foreign aid that is given has so many strings attached that the nation that does receive it eventually cannot repay it, and so the cycle of foreign dependency keeps going on and on
     

    Alen

    Ѕenior Аdmin
    Apr 2, 2007
    54,117
    #31
    Nice post is right, E.



    I think you also have to be careful here when you talk of rich states helping poor states. It quickly becomes construed as international socialism, and there are some people -- particularly those who think they've earned their status -- who think socialism is a bad idea at the family level, an atrocity at the national level, and the end of the world at a global level.
    Well it's not like certain experiments from the past haven't proved them right. Take communism in eastern Europe.

    I'm a wealthy man and I've worked hard for that. I worked while my neighbors were drinking and moaning how they have no money. Communists come, take most of my wealth and share it equally to 10 parts. 1 for me and 9 for those neighbors of mine.
    And ok, I have no choice so I must accept it. Then all 10 of us start working in the same state company. I work hard, I smartly spend and save my money. They come at work late, drink coffee and beer at work for 3/4 of the working time. The company is not making any profit, the state is taking loans to pay our wages (which are equal). Then after 10 years I again have lots of money while my neighbors and co-workers splashed most of them in bars.
    Shall I share everything again?

    In Yugoslavia, Slovenia (had 1/10 of Yugoslavia's population and 1/10 of its territory) was contributing with 47% in the budget, but it had to be shared equally and the Slovenians were getting 10% for them. Macedonia was contributing with 6% and they also got 10% for them (same population and territory as Slovenia).
    No wonder the Slovenians wanted out of Yugoslavia, were the first ones who went out of Yugoslavia and are now among the richest European countries and only ex-Yu state in the EU.
    Those guys work, they're disciplined, while the southerns want to drink and sing while the Slovenians work.
     

    Eddy

    The Maestro
    Aug 20, 2005
    12,645
    #32
    Nice post is right, E.



    I think you also have to be careful here when you talk of rich states helping poor states. It quickly becomes construed as international socialism, and there are some people -- particularly those who think they've earned their status -- who think socialism is a bad idea at the family level, an atrocity at the national level, and the end of the world at a global level.
    Only in America I have come across where people think Socialism is the end of the world. I once had to explain to a Russian American Jew that Socialism and Communism are not the same thing at all...
     

    Dostoevsky

    Tzu
    Administrator
    May 27, 2007
    89,201
    #33
    No wonder the Slovenians wanted out of Yugoslavia, were the first ones who went out of Yugoslavia and are now among the richest European countries and only ex-Yu state in the EU.
    Those guys work, they're disciplined, while the southerns want to drink and sing while the Slovenians work.
    Funny but true. :p
     

    Bianconero_Aus

    Beppe Marotta Is My God
    May 26, 2009
    81,640
    #34
    Well it's not like certain experiments from the past haven't proved them right. Take communism in eastern Europe.

    I'm a wealthy man and I've worked hard for that. I worked while my neighbors were drinking and moaning how they have no money. Communists come, take most of my wealth and share it equally to 10 parts. 1 for me and 9 for those neighbors of mine.
    And ok, I have no choice so I must accept it. Then all 10 of us start working in the same state company. I work hard, I smartly spend and save my money. They come at work late, drink coffee and beer at work for 3/4 of the working time. The company is not making any profit, the state is taking loans to pay our wages (which are equal). Then after 10 years I again have lots of money while my neighbors and co-workers splashed most of them in bars.
    Shall I share everything again?

    In Yugoslavia, Slovenia (had 1/10 of Yugoslavia's population and 1/10 of its territory) was contributing with 47% in the budget, but it had to be shared equally and the Slovenians were getting 10% for them. Macedonia was contributing with 6% and they also got 10% for them (same population and territory as Slovenia).
    No wonder the Slovenians wanted out of Yugoslavia, were the first ones who went out of Yugoslavia and are now among the richest European countries and only ex-Yu state in the EU.
    Those guys work, they're disciplined, while the southerns want to drink and sing while the Slovenians work.
    Hehe, theres shitloads of ex-Yu immigrants in Australia (Mainly Croatian/Serbian/Bosnian/Maco) and many of them work in the building industry -- mainly in the plasterboard business and I find them to be extremely hard-working people.

    But fuck me, can they drink and argue. Good people, but dont get on their bad side!
     

    IrishZebra

    Western Imperialist
    Jun 18, 2006
    23,327
    #35
    • when will we learn as humans that we need to share? We're all connected to each other, more so today than ever before. What we do effects everyone in some way, shape or form.

    • The wealthy nations have turned a blind eye to the poor. Only willing to help when there's an opportunity to gain something out of it; out of selfish intentions. While the people of their own countries enjoy the comforts of life beyond the minimum necessities others are going a day without a drop of water. You get my point.

    • What happened in Mogadishu, Kandahar, or Sana'a didn't affect what happened back home but now everything is changing. Masked under various things it's hitting closer and closer to home. You've got Somali pirates are plundering the seas, "Islamic" terrorists from Virginia to Bali are terrorizing innocent people.
    • Maybe, just maybe...if these wealthy nations took care and looked after those that were poor like a better off sibling would do to another sibling then what we're facing today (and it's only going to get worse) would not be happening. Help that would have no strings attached, no self interest...just out of sheer good intentions.
    .
    • Firstly as for an inherent need to share, that does not exist partialy because humans are by nature selfish but also one would surmise because some people, now I stress people, not nation religions etc. deserve neither sharing nor caring.
    • You woefully underestimate the role of NGOs in poverty alleviation and development,not the mention multilateral institution. One example would be the Irish NGO concern that in the past decade has donated over 2Billion euro from Ireland alone, obivously not game changing but that is a huge ammount of money for a country of 4.5million people to give.
    • If the west intervenes in situations we're neo-imperialists, if we don't we callous, what you want us to help countries of their terms?
    • Aid with no strings attached is the biggest mistake made in development since the colonisation of the countries themselves. The conditions may need to change but their removal only leads to corruption. the ammount of money spent of Africa for example since the 1970s would have completely solved the food/disease problems several times over if it weren't for corruption and power politics by the US and USSR and now China.

    Then theres the declining terms of trade and comparative advantage bullshit that US economists say is key to development. Our tech gets more expensive while poor peoples primary commodities get cheapers which is a sad state of affairs yes but South Korea managed to prosper under these conditions, dictatorship asside.

    Anyway that is why I shouldn't share. You tell me why I should.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)