BF2S Forums World Poverty

Bubbalo wrote:

nlsme wrote:

How does the west keep them down exactly? Maybe the arguement could be made for a few, but is that really the problem? Or is the problem that they live where there is no natural wealth, no fertile land to grow food, no water to drink? THEIR governments have mismanaged aid FROM THE WEST? Or there has never been a satisfactry infrastructure (schools,jobs,waste removal)?

Is it really the west fault that they cannot support themselves, and have nothing to offer to anybody else? Should it be expected of the west to totally support them? If every rich man gave half his money to a poor man, money would be worthless.

You do know the vast amounts of resources required to industrialise?  And that the West did this by taking resources by force from other nations?

Typical.

I guess we toss personal responsibility out the window again and just blame blame blame.

Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-07-26 09:36:03)

Bubbalo wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Just a side question what happened to the 2nd world? Is that the moon or something? I would have to say that poverty is often and affect of people who for the most part are not willing to help themselves, if they had managed to help themselves originally they wouldn't be in the situation they are now, that and tribe wars.

So, the Imperial age had nothing to do with it?  And the fact that they don't have teachers is their own fault?  Are you serious?

We are talking about modern times are we not? Besides, the fact that they cannot band together to get something done in their country is their own fault and no-one elses. Also consider China, China has poverty yet it was not controlled by any outsiders during the Imperial age, except for a slight episode with Japan in the early 20th century.

nlsme wrote:

Havok wrote:

nlsme wrote:

The "west" is a modern idea (usually associated with the U.S.). Again I ask for links.

The "West" is not modern at all.  A philosophy known as Westernization began in Europe after the start of the Industrial Revolution.  The original term "Western" basically meant "Industrialized" because the Industrial Revolution started in the Western Hemisphere.  This is why some modern European nations (UK, France, Spain, etc.) are also referred to Western.

Note: "Western" nations/people are typically connected with a Christian religion.

Modern meaning IT WASNT A THOUGHT DURING THE IMPERIAL AGE, nor more then 200 years ago.

You couldn't be more wrong.  Imperialism existed all the way through WW1.  What do you think started World War 1?  Imperialism did.  The division of Africa happened during the 1800's if I'm not mistaken.  That's after the start of the Industrial Revolution.

jonsimon wrote:

Silly question. Null vote.

A silly question must have an easy answer.

Mitch wrote:

None of the above. Most of it is fate, if you happen to be born in a shitty country then your gunna have a shitty life. I was lucky to be born in America and have had a very good life so far. If you need to blame someone, blame the countries government. You know the USA would help anybody who asked for assistance.

So, your choice should be Corrupted Politicans, why none of the above?

jonsimon wrote:

Pug wrote:

No offense but poverty is not CREATED by capitalism.

One could easily argue a portion of poverty is created through capitalism, or that capitalism perpetuates poverty. Besides, there aren't really any capitalist societies that focus on more than just financial capital.

Let's see the argument then.

You can't blame Capitalism for poverty.  Were people in the Soviet Union rich?  Maybe the members of the Kremlin.  Are people in Cuba rich?  No, if they were they wouldn't be risking their life to get to Miami. 
You can't blame Colonialism.  Most countries in Africa got their independence more than 50 years ago, and Tbh they are worse now than before.  Of course, Colonialism didn't help at the time, but now it's past story. 
Maybe poverty is the product of a combination of factors, being the main one corrupted politicians. 
If you send aid to let's say Zimbabwe, Somalia or Sudan, but that aid never gets to the poor's hands, you can't say it's lack of aid. 
The UN should be more effective when dealing with dictators like "Mucusgabe".  This kind of politician are the main reason of poverty.  They should get shot in the face.
What we can't do is saying that poor people are to blame for poverty coz they aren't willing to help themselves.  If you think poor people don't want to improve read these stories from Zimbabwe, specially the first one from a teacher.

Last edited by sergeriver (2007-07-26 10:41:40)

Pug wrote:

I honestly believe we could stop starvation...but...how exactly pretty much an issue.

No corrupted politicians = aid getting to poor people = poor people improving their conditions = poor people getting to better education = poor people voting smartly = no poor people.  It sounds easy, but it is not.  It's kinda a circle.

I'll talk about only Africa for now:
I think the fact that guns made it to Africa before advanced technologies did definitely makes a huge difference. Had they had time to get used to other modern technology, and distribute it amongst the people, they would be able to do much more. The west definitely profits a lot more from their wars than peace times though, so it's kept that way.

As for the rest of the world:
It's how the economy works. There is always a loser (the guy working the low wage job). If minimum wages rise, the guys at the top lose.

-konfusion

Corruption. Plain and simple.

That's why Africa is the most fucked, they have the biggest problems with corruption.

There are other factors, but corruption is the biggest and most central of them.

So let me get this straight, it is the rich persons duty to take care of the poor. Why is it always the producers responsibility to raise up everyone that chooses not to produce. The rich have done their job in my eyes as they have raised the standard of living for the whole world, i.e. created time saving devices so that we can concentrate on other things other that just getting by daily. Yet the first people we sacrifice or blame is the rich for not doing enough?! We curse them for their ability & talent all the while coveting what they have. Then after they get done blaming the rich they (the poor) blame capitalism for its evils , no it's not capitalism that has done this to the world but the failed governments & corrupt leaders that their people support while having a gun jabbed into their sides.

SenorToenails wrote:

Has anyone in here read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond?

Wikipedia wrote:

According to the author, an alternative title would be A short history about everyone for the last 13,000 years. But the book is not merely an account of the past; it attempts to explain why Eurasian civilizations, as a whole, have survived and conquered others, while refuting the belief that Eurasian hegemony is due to any form of Eurasian intellectual, genetic or moral superiority. Diamond argues that the gaps in power and technology between human societies do not reflect cultural or racial differences, but rather originate in environmental differences powerfully amplified by various positive feedback loops. He also, most explicitly in the epilogue, argues that societies with food surpluses and high-to-moderate degrees of interaction with outsiders are more likely to encourage great people to realize their full potential and to adopt new inventions.

Synopsis

Places like Africa, areas of Central America and others where poverty is quite common fit into his theory pretty well.  Europeans throughout history have dominated those that they encounter, and he attempts to explain that.  You can't blame any one factor.

I have.  It's interesting, but like all witch doctor books it has flaws.  I thought it was a good read though.

I love how people declare that because the age of raping foreign nations is (officially) over, any country that is poor is poor because it's crappy.  They just completely ignore causality.