Who needs traffic lights.
- Thread starter Bootie
- Start date
That is some scary shit -- just goes to show, anarchy DOES work for some people...
Scary to say the least
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Breakthrough!
And yet their population is expanding! Go figure. LOL
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Perhaps they're war re-enactors staging the Operation Cobra breakout
M
Michael Clarke
Guest
Ya, population growth is a fascinating phenomenon, and totally counter intuitive. It runs out of control in exactly the places LEAST able to absorb the increase... and here's why:
In Europe, North America, UK etc, population increase is low-moderate because child mortality is low, and parents EXPECT their children to survive. They have fewer children, investing more into education and health for each child.
High Technology increases individual productivity to a staggering extent... Western or European farmers don't need 10 children anymore, because technology has so drastically increase farming efficiency that he can basically do it alone. So, Health Systems, Accessible Higher education, and High Technology allow for the Western/European individual to EXPECT himself to live a long, rich, PRODUCTIVE life.
But what about the BOTTOM BILLION, the 1/6, the billion people on planet Earth who had the simple misfortune of been born into a subsistence existence?
In subsaharan Africa particularly, and India to a lesser extent, but still appalling, child mortality is high. Parents EXPECT some of their children to die. What does this mean? It means that families have more children, so that at least if some die, the family will survive. The vision and perspective is limited to their own family... This family can't see beyond themselves, they're just trying to survive, to perpetuate themselves... They don't have the basic, $1 medications that would save their lives... They don't have the $1 bednets that would stop malaria... TB, malaria, river blindness, a whole host of archaic diseases run rampant where in the West their nonexistent....
Also, because technology is so poor in such areas, the only way to increase their LABOR EFFICIENCY is to have more feet in the field so to speak... Compared to the mighty tractors that comb western fields, the African farmer maintains his livelihood with this most primitive of instruments, the wooden hand hoe:
Tragically, the fields they farm have been so over farmed, that the soil is barren of Nitrogen... They can't buy the fertilizers needed to replenish it, so crops are PHYSICALLY unable to grow there... No matter how much blood, sweat and tears the farmer puts into his backbreaking, unending labor, his nitrogen deficient crops will never grow satisfactorily to even sustain his own life, not to mention his family.
So, the bottom billion are stuck in a "Poverty Trap". Their technology is so poor that they need more children to increase their production efficiency, but this means more mouths to feed... Their crops are so poor due to a lack of nitrogen in the soil, and they cant afford the fertilizers to replenish it...
The only humane way out of this is for foreign direct investment, infusion of foreign assistance for the purpose of raising these peoples to technological sustainable levels, to where their efficiency increases their revenue such that they can afford to eat everyday, buy the fertilizers they need, to where they can start saving, to where they can start buying weather indexed crop insurance, or drought resistant seeds... Once their on the first rung of the ladder, making enough money to survive, they begin their own climb, economically independent, and without need for anymore foreign assistance.
Wanna help? Best place I've found is "Kiva"... Basically when signed up, you can give out 0% loans over varying terms to individuals or collectives all over the world... So, if you give $50 to a farmer in Uganda for example, he would use that money to buy nitrogen fertilizers for this years crop, and replace his worn tools...He would then PAY BACK THAT LOAN to you, in a little bit every month, over 6, 12, 24 months... After the term, you get your $50 back, but he gets a full crop for his family. No charity here.
http://kiva.org Uses paypal.
In Europe, North America, UK etc, population increase is low-moderate because child mortality is low, and parents EXPECT their children to survive. They have fewer children, investing more into education and health for each child.
High Technology increases individual productivity to a staggering extent... Western or European farmers don't need 10 children anymore, because technology has so drastically increase farming efficiency that he can basically do it alone. So, Health Systems, Accessible Higher education, and High Technology allow for the Western/European individual to EXPECT himself to live a long, rich, PRODUCTIVE life.
But what about the BOTTOM BILLION, the 1/6, the billion people on planet Earth who had the simple misfortune of been born into a subsistence existence?
In subsaharan Africa particularly, and India to a lesser extent, but still appalling, child mortality is high. Parents EXPECT some of their children to die. What does this mean? It means that families have more children, so that at least if some die, the family will survive. The vision and perspective is limited to their own family... This family can't see beyond themselves, they're just trying to survive, to perpetuate themselves... They don't have the basic, $1 medications that would save their lives... They don't have the $1 bednets that would stop malaria... TB, malaria, river blindness, a whole host of archaic diseases run rampant where in the West their nonexistent....
Also, because technology is so poor in such areas, the only way to increase their LABOR EFFICIENCY is to have more feet in the field so to speak... Compared to the mighty tractors that comb western fields, the African farmer maintains his livelihood with this most primitive of instruments, the wooden hand hoe:
Tragically, the fields they farm have been so over farmed, that the soil is barren of Nitrogen... They can't buy the fertilizers needed to replenish it, so crops are PHYSICALLY unable to grow there... No matter how much blood, sweat and tears the farmer puts into his backbreaking, unending labor, his nitrogen deficient crops will never grow satisfactorily to even sustain his own life, not to mention his family.
So, the bottom billion are stuck in a "Poverty Trap". Their technology is so poor that they need more children to increase their production efficiency, but this means more mouths to feed... Their crops are so poor due to a lack of nitrogen in the soil, and they cant afford the fertilizers to replenish it...
The only humane way out of this is for foreign direct investment, infusion of foreign assistance for the purpose of raising these peoples to technological sustainable levels, to where their efficiency increases their revenue such that they can afford to eat everyday, buy the fertilizers they need, to where they can start saving, to where they can start buying weather indexed crop insurance, or drought resistant seeds... Once their on the first rung of the ladder, making enough money to survive, they begin their own climb, economically independent, and without need for anymore foreign assistance.
Wanna help? Best place I've found is "Kiva"... Basically when signed up, you can give out 0% loans over varying terms to individuals or collectives all over the world... So, if you give $50 to a farmer in Uganda for example, he would use that money to buy nitrogen fertilizers for this years crop, and replace his worn tools...He would then PAY BACK THAT LOAN to you, in a little bit every month, over 6, 12, 24 months... After the term, you get your $50 back, but he gets a full crop for his family. No charity here.
http://kiva.org Uses paypal.
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Biker in 'invulnerable' mode
A
ACSpectre
Guest
I've been donating to Kiva for several years now, it is a great organization. Like you said Mikey, not a handout but a hand up for people who desperately need it. Kiva's loan repayment rate runs at around 98% and in the several years that I've been lending, Ive never had a loan go into default. When I get repaid I just make another loan with the money. Go to the site and check it out, it's well worth the visit and why not make a loan. Even a loan as small as $10 could make a major difference in someone's life.
M
Michael Clarke
Guest
Well said, I like that.
Smallest loan you can make is $25, but your point is still valid... What to us is an incidental sum can be LEVERAGED into staggering improvement of impoverished circumstance... I consider it investment in Earth's human capital...
B
Bert Blitzkrieg
Guest
What is the problem with charity ? Why should it be less desirable to GIVE that farmer $ 50,- so that he can buy the fertilizer and use the profit of his crop for new fertilizer etc ? Gives him a real headstart.
M
Michael Clarke
Guest
Nothing wrong with Charity. I myself give what I can through NGO charity organizations. For sudden calamities, like the Haiti Earthquake, instant charitable contributions is what was, and remains urgently needed... That's a solution for that kind of problem.
But when thinking of the long term, as a developmental economist might do, a possible pitfall of charity is of it becoming an open ended commitment, one without end... When one is expecting to be paid, regardless of condition or progress towards economic independence, the impetus for action diminishes... Sort of a "free rent breeds idleness" phenomenon...
Also, since loaners are expected to be repaid, much more people might be willing to help. $110 million so far loaned with Kiva, I really doubt that would be the case if the loaners were just givers...
2
2054172
Guest
I usally give through the Salvation Army...I know that the biggest bang for the buck gets to the people that need it. The Red Cross here in Canada screwwed up big time blood and their money system, they would be on the bottom of my list. Kiva and other direct loan ideas are a great benefit to the people, the big banks did not think much of this idea, most likely because they don't get a cut(filty crooks).
Like the old joke;
What is the difference between a dead skunk in the the middle of the road and a dead banker in the middle of the road?
There are skid marks up to the skunk.
Like the old joke;
What is the difference between a dead skunk in the the middle of the road and a dead banker in the middle of the road?
There are skid marks up to the skunk.
M
Michael Clarke
Guest
For all its faults, the Canadian government did do one thing right with Haiti though... They're matching all individual contributions, up to $50 million...
The Government of Canada will match dollar for dollar the contributions of individual Canadians to registered charities in support of humanitarian, recovery, and reconstruction efforts in response to the earthquake in Haiti. Taken from CIDA website
B
Bert Blitzkrieg
Guest
The Netherlands has a strong history in charity and/or development aid. Relatively speaking (in percentage of BNP), we're one of the largest spenders in foreign aid in the world (http://www.cgdev.org/ and http://www.cgdev.org/section/initiatives/_active/cdi/). Maybe it is a remnant of our (once) christian heritage: as the bible tells us you should donate 10% of your income.
For me personally: if I'm prepared to lend somebody money on a 0% rate without any certainty whatsoever to get it paid back, I might as well give it away as a donation.
True, in many cases the problems of a nation are a consequence of the policy of that nation present or past. But I don't think I should hold that against its population.
What I basically am trying to say is this: if you decide to contribute in helping the lesser fortunate you should do so without any agenda's like "will it be spend well" or "will I get anything back for it". You should do it the way the bible tells us "don't let your lefthand know what your righthand does" (btw, this is in my words the translation from Dutch).
For me personally: if I'm prepared to lend somebody money on a 0% rate without any certainty whatsoever to get it paid back, I might as well give it away as a donation.
True, in many cases the problems of a nation are a consequence of the policy of that nation present or past. But I don't think I should hold that against its population.
What I basically am trying to say is this: if you decide to contribute in helping the lesser fortunate you should do so without any agenda's like "will it be spend well" or "will I get anything back for it". You should do it the way the bible tells us "don't let your lefthand know what your righthand does" (btw, this is in my words the translation from Dutch).
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
I'm one of those people who never give to any charity until i've thoroughly checked it out first so that i'm fully satisfied they'll use my money properly in a way I fully agree with.
Sadly, many charities are incompetent and they won't get a penny out of me; for example i stopped giving to a so-called Christian charity last year because i found out they disgracefully waste our money.
And last year I paid to join a small political party, but then found out they're completely incompetent at handling money, so i won't be renewing my membership again.
Incidentally, over the years I've helped as a volunteer at many charities- BTCV (conservation), Shelter (homeless), Age Concern (elderly), Scope(cerebral palsy), PDSA (animals), British Heart Foundation, WRVS (hospitals), Imperial Cancer, St. Lukes (hospice), Oxfam (famine relief)
and know for a fact that most are absolutely incompetent and wasteful, I could write a book..
Sadly, many charities are incompetent and they won't get a penny out of me; for example i stopped giving to a so-called Christian charity last year because i found out they disgracefully waste our money.
And last year I paid to join a small political party, but then found out they're completely incompetent at handling money, so i won't be renewing my membership again.
Incidentally, over the years I've helped as a volunteer at many charities- BTCV (conservation), Shelter (homeless), Age Concern (elderly), Scope(cerebral palsy), PDSA (animals), British Heart Foundation, WRVS (hospitals), Imperial Cancer, St. Lukes (hospice), Oxfam (famine relief)
and know for a fact that most are absolutely incompetent and wasteful, I could write a book..
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Incidentally, earthquakes kill almost nobody, it's buildings collapsing on top of them that kill them.
The answer therefore is to build earthquake-proof buildings.
As for houses, they could be built from lightweight wooden materials, it's not rocket science.
Regarding famine, Kenyan natives were over-fishing Lake Naivashu and fish stocks were dwindling rapidly, so their government imposed strict fishing limits but poachers are still plundering the lake and there'll be no fish left soon.
British conservationist Joan Root spoke out against it, so the poachers killed her.
Elsewhere, overpopulation is causing famine.
The moral? if natives won't help themselves, why should we?
The answer therefore is to build earthquake-proof buildings.
As for houses, they could be built from lightweight wooden materials, it's not rocket science.
Regarding famine, Kenyan natives were over-fishing Lake Naivashu and fish stocks were dwindling rapidly, so their government imposed strict fishing limits but poachers are still plundering the lake and there'll be no fish left soon.
British conservationist Joan Root spoke out against it, so the poachers killed her.
Elsewhere, overpopulation is causing famine.
The moral? if natives won't help themselves, why should we?