The fight for global poverty

24 posts / 0 new
Last post
Thom Hartmann A...
Thom Hartmann Administrator's picture

The United Nations is accusing the world’s wealthiest countries of not doing enough to fight global poverty.  Citing that the average billionaires’ wealth could double over the next 18 years, the UN called for a wealth tax on the world’s super rich, in an effort to raise $400 billion a year for help to poor countries.

The UN is also calling for a tax on carbon emissions and a tax on financial transactions to raise money.  As the author of the UN report, Rob Vos, said “In short, such new financing mechanisms will help donor countries overcome their record of broken promises.”  Unfortunately, none of these recommendations from the UN are likely to be enacted.

Comments

WorkerBee
WorkerBee's picture
Why are poor countries poor?

Why are poor countries poor?

tayl44
tayl44's picture
The UN is the "1%"!

The UN is the "1%"!

anonymous green
NO, the UN is not the 1%. The

NO, the UN is not the 1%.

The 1% are the super wealthy aholes who suck a country dry. Of food. Of oil. Of Gold, diamonds, copper, rare earth, water, and of money.

This is why countries are poor:

Either they let the 1% take everything they had, so they could have 'jobs', or they fought against the 1% and were crushed by the World Bank, like Zimbabwe was after 1990.

douglaslee
douglaslee's picture
anonymous green wrote: NO,

anonymous green wrote:

NO, the UN is not the 1%.

The 1% are the super wealthy aholes who suck a country dry. Of food. Of oil. Of Gold, diamonds, copper, rare earth, water, and of money.

This is why countries are poor:

Either they let the 1% take everything they had, so they could have 'jobs', or they fought against the 1% and were crushed by the World Bank, like Zimbabwe was after 1990.

Don't forget the central American massacre's. Guatemala is now charging the Reagan supported dictator of genocide.

The Reagan supported slaughter of Priests and Nuns in El Salvador, the terrorists in Nicaragua trained in Georgia, death squads in Honduras, and the GHW Panamanian slaughter are heralded as successes.

But they hate us for our freedoms.

douglaslee
douglaslee's picture
The Jack Lemmon, Sissy Spacek

The Jack Lemmon, Sissy Spacek 1982 movie 'Missing' is worth seeing if you haven't already.  I have been to all of these countries, beautiful countries, beautiful people. Tanks in the streets and soldiers on the beat were a little disconcerting. 

I plan on spending retirement years in south and central America for months at a time, great food, great beaches, great weather. Haven't been to Belize yet. [formerly East Honduras]

anonymous green
I can't forget Guatemala, my

I can't forget Guatemala, my Grandfather, Stuart Hedden, a great American fascist, planned the 'police action' that casued the deaths of 200,000 human beings when he was IG of CIA in 1952. His pal Tommy the Cork was the 'lawyer' representing United Fruit when the deal was struck. The text of their conversation is online, or used to be.

Every human being who died since 1951 in our 'Cold War' is now a ghost, reading this from right behind me. When you read it, they gather around you as well. Don't worry, they are ghosts and can't hurt you. They just want you to know why they died.

Belize is great.

I recommend the mountains near the Guatemalan border, where pine forests compete with jungle and the Rio Frio is alive with freshwater crabs. The squad of soldiers I met there was a bit disconcerting, but they let us pass that day.

Remember... it wasn't really Americans who fuched the world in the ass, it was fascists.

They just happened to rise to power here in America, where waving the flag and marching off behind a cross to an Eternal Crusade is a National Pastime.

 

Commonsense461
How bout the fact that you

How bout the fact that you will allways have poor people now granted not Africa poor but 1st world poor. You know why, some people don't make good choices and it hurtsthem.

anonymous green
Common sense says we'll

Common sense says we'll always have poor people so who gives a sh(t?

Poor people choose to be poor. It's a choice, like being a homo?

hey Common Sense. this would mean that you've chosen to be a common fool.

Commonsense461
No I said that poverty is

No I said that poverty is relative and even if we raised the 3rd world up to the 1st world  poor you would still consider us  to have a poverty problem

 

Phaedrus76
Phaedrus76's picture
First off, that some will be

First off, that some will be poor is a given, but how bad the deprivation, the lack of decent housing, and lack of food are matter of government policy or the lack thereof/

Second, we cannot raise the 3rd world poor up the same living standard of the US poor. We only have enough resources globally for us. China becoming as "wealthy" as poor Americans will requrie something like 1.5 more Earths of tin, copper, iron, oil, etc etc. Add in India, and it goes up to 2.5 Earths. The whole 3rd world will require something like 4 Earths of raw materials. 

What we can do, however, is promote policies that help raise the standard of living up as far as plentiful food, clean water, clean air, energy production, and access to healthcare for everyone. 

PS, hold onto any old computer flat screens you may have. Rare earth metals are always going to be rare. 

anonymous green
Hey, maybe we can ship all

Hey, maybe we can ship all those old flat screens to the poor in Africa and let their children poison themselves smashing them up for pennies.

Why mine the Earth when you can mine the poor?

They don't mind, they're so poor they'll do anything to survive.

 

tayl44
tayl44's picture
I see no difference between

I see no difference between the 1% and its "representives". The UN represent the 1%.

douglaslee
douglaslee's picture
Quote:hey Common Sense. this

Quote:
hey Common Sense. this would mean that you've chosen to be a common fool.
I think you underestimate Common Sense, I think he's chosen to be an exceptional fool.

Commonsense461
Sorry for being reasonable.

Sorry for being reasonable.

anonymous green
Bring us flowers before you

Bring us flowers before you hit us again.

Phaedrus76
Phaedrus76's picture
anonymous green wrote: Hey,

anonymous green wrote:

Hey, maybe we can ship all those old flat screens to the poor in Africa and let their children poison themselves smashing them up for pennies.

Why mine the Earth when you can mine the poor?

They don't mind, they're so poor they'll do anything to survive.

 

Actually China already has that market.

anonymous green
But it's Americans mining the

But it's Americans mining the poor in China now, since China has sold them down the American River.

 

drc2
Gee. I guess that if we made

Gee. I guess that if we made sure that people were housed, fed and had access to education and medicine on the basis of their humanity, that the gap between the wealthy and the poor would still make the effort futile.  Could we try the experiment?

Similarly, while I am far more impressed with the science and the problem global finitude presents to the "salvation through growth" crowd, I wonder how well we can share these loaves and fishes?  Could we go far enough down that path to have a better metric than our own fears and doubts?

The problem with the Reason Machine is both the imput and the program, not the idea that facts can be added up and a decent representative of truth deduced.  I am shocked to learn that some people make bad choices that hurt them.  No kidding.  I think a lot of them live in a bad narrative that many of them did not "choose," but it is hurting them, and through them, us.  Still, what really bothers me are less the bad decisions people make that harm themselves, it is the rancid consciencless choices made by the powerful that hurt so many people while making themselves eligible for the Midas Cocktail.

How reasonable is fiduciary moral thinking?  I think it is rigorously "rational" as it equates money and speech and gives the organized commercial "corporation" the legal rights of persons.  It makes banksters believe that they are doing "God's work" while they rape and pillage.  Unless it connects to the heart and sees the moral order as something other than its own "rationalism," this epistemology is pure sociopathology.

So, when you introduce a little reason, try not to be blinded by the light you think you are seeing.  Check the connections, particularly with human reality where love and compassion have some badges you might want to become aware of.

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Drc2,you really know how to

Drc2,you really know how to express how insane the rulers are and at the same time,they thinking how sane they`re. You think you can get some of them on a "couch for analyzing", or they beyond any help?(half joke) 

WorkerBee
WorkerBee's picture
From my point of view it is a

From my point of view it is a political problem. Poverty is driven by corrupt "governments" and local strongmen, not the operations of corporations or because someone in the US consumes too much.

The question of how to deal with it is a tricky one, we need look no further then the American mission in Somalia to understand that it is not simply a question of sending goods poor areas.

humanitys team
humanitys team's picture
All poverty could be

All poverty could be eliminated tomorrow ,just take the 1 trillion spent on weapons of offence and defence and use it for all the worlds poor people and lift them out of poverty ,everyone could have food ,decent housing ,clean water ,education and good affordable health care.and there is enough to go around its just in western society everybody is educated to have there own copy of everything I.e lawn mowers ,washing machines,cars everything really.This model is absurd how can you grow the economy so everyone on the planet lives like this .5 planets would be nessescary .

The solution would be to have a new economic model that worked for the highest good of all.Jack Reed in his book the Next Evolution  was inspired to write about a use and access model over an ownership model .But the West would have to start this off not do as I say but lead by example ,so the world would follow.

The purpose of the economy would be to create wealth ,so people could have use of things that they feel they need for there happiness and  switch from a possession and power economy to a cooperation economy.

Two thirds of the world be so grateful to have use of the stuff that all of us collect ,vacuum cleaners ,mowers ,cars all the rest of the stuff.The time has come to set a new standard .An economy based on such a model means stuff that is not being used ,or sitting idle 95 percent of the time would be used for the common good and would be shared and shared alike .Swithing to this model also means fewer manufactured items per person and how good is that for our ecology fewer things tossed into land fills etc.Lets convert from our current disposable society to a maximum use community of humans sharing resources .

We need vision and a new understanding that we are all one and that the only way life will work is if we all work for the highest good of all not the little self but the big self ,all people deserve survival ,indeed life now calls out to make this adaption so we can serve life to preserve life we preserve life when we pre-serve life that is serve it first in everything that we do ,the mistake that we make is that we stand separate from life but life is prime value ,all life is connected and unified now I,am being esoteric but the elimination of all poverty is possible and so is a new economic reality greed is a disease of fear.

WorkerBee
WorkerBee's picture
humanitys team wrote: All

humanitys team wrote:

All poverty could be eliminated tomorrow ,just take the 1 trillion spent on weapons of offence and defence and use it for all the worlds poor people and lift them out of poverty

How do you deal with situations like we faced in Somalia where warlords stole much of the aid?

chilidog
We let more people come to

We let more people come to the U.S. The number of calories we produce can support many more millions.