Helping the World's Poor

[lastchance]

So, what about the logistics and real cost of the operation?

[andyfox]

"It's not that hard to get food. Millenia before our ancestors discovered fire, they managed to eat."

It wasn't hard them because government didn't get in the way. We produce more than enough as it is for all the people in the world to eat. The problem is not production, it's politics.

To me, that's the point of the original post. We and other countries spend trillions on defense (a certain portion of it for "defense" rather than defense) but don't have the political will to address food issues which are, as you correctly point out, not a production problem.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"It's not that hard to get food. Millenia before our ancestors discovered fire, they managed to eat."

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasn't hard them because government didn't get in the way. We produce more than enough as it is for all the people in the world to eat. The problem is not production, it's politics.

[/ QUOTE ]

A shining example of why less government is better.

[evil_twin]

[ QUOTE ]
If people aren't willing to do what it takes to earn and pay that amount themselves, why should I be giving it away?

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be a joke, surely?

[Matty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If people aren't willing to do what it takes to earn and pay that amount themselves, why should I be giving it away?

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be a joke, surely?

[/ QUOTE ]No, it is not. People in this country really are that ignorant. Believe the hype.

[lastchance]

It is that hard to make $5-20 a day. Maybe you don't get that, but in a third world a country, it is that hard.

1/5 of the world's population subsists on $1 a day, and they're all working. Just had to make that point again, because it's very important.

We should all thank our lucky stars we were born in a first-world country. That is probably the single most important event in our lives.

[MMMMMM]

Are those figures supposed to be for just one year?

Anyway, that paints a grossly oversimplified picture.

The pure dollar cost of aid is not the same as actually getting the aid to those who need it.

Often aid is stolen by the military/government of the country to which it is sent. It doesn't always reach the intended citizens. It is sometimes used to consolidate the ruling junta's power, or is sold at a profit by the regime.

Heck, even without political thievery, much of the tsunami aid has not reached the victims but is rather just sitting in crates. Logistics can be a big obstacle even without corrupt governments interfering.

The aid the US gave North Korea some years ago did not stop Kim Jong-il from stockpiling two years' worth of food and fuel for his military whilst over a million people of his people were actually starving to death and trying to survive by eating insects in the streets. Somewhere between one and two million starved. Kim Jong-il had other priorities.

The real problem is how to effect reform in some governments and economic systems, so that they can produce enough food and vital services themselves. And that is NOT going to happen by just sending them aid.

Another problem is that in some impoverished regions, the population is exploding due to a high birth rate. What is the use of a band-aid type solution where that's the case? What about a place like, say, where AIDS is rampant AND the population is exploding AND people are lacking nutrition and medical services? Is merely saving some lives going to solve the problem there? No, it isn't. The problems are a lot deeper than that.

I'm not saying aid is always useless, but it can be in some cases. And the picture painted by the figures you cited is vastly oversimplified--as are the minds of those who latch onto such things and consider them worthy causes, without considering the larger picture or any of the details or problems of implementation.

It's a damned complicated scenario with no easy or cheap solutions. And just throwing money at it to provide food and services is, in many cases, no solution at all. Those countries/regions have to get to where they can provide for themselves in a sustainable fashion. That generally will require: 1) a reasonably free political system, 2) a reasonably free enterprise system, 3) more education, 4) in some areas a much lower birthrate.

[theBruiser500]

Okay good post and point taken MMM. Your post isn't an argument against aid though it's against inefficient aid which you you seem to think a lot of aid is. And maybe so (and it's hard for me to say much here because I don't know much about this situation, the quote I posted really struck me though), but I don't think we're making any great efforts to help other countries out where our aid really would be effective.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
And maybe so (and it's hard for me to say much here because I don't know much about this situation, the quote I posted really struck me though), but I don't think we're making any great efforts to help other countries out where our aid really would be effective.

[/ QUOTE ]



Maybe, maybe not. That of course is presuming that there ARE places where our aid would do a lot of good (and hopefully, in more than just the palliative sense).

Do you have a basis for your opinion that we're not making any great efforts to help other countries where the aid would be effective, or is it just some kind of a hunch?

[Matty]

A hunch that 178 Billion could do better than get 1700 U.S. soldiers and up to 100,000 civilians killed? I have that "hunch".

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L26226818.htm

[ QUOTE ]
The U.N. World Food Programme said on Tuesday it was falling behind in its appeal for southern and eastern Sudan, saying it needed $302 million to feed 3.2 million people in the two regions but had managed to raise only $78 million.

...

Young women on Thursday crushed foliage torn from trees then boiled it over fires outside their huts, draining the green-tinged water before their children devoured their sole meal for the day with their hands.

"I'll get diarrhoea from eating this, but there's nothing else," said Nyankir Malek, 35, chomping on bitter leaves used as food of last resort in southern Sudan.

[/ QUOTE ]