| BookTalk.org News |
| • Thank you for supporting BookTalk.org with your generous donation, Grim! |
| • Regular casual chats are back on the menu! Check out the calendar for the schedule. |
| BookTalk.org Store |
All store merchandise is sold with no markup. BookTalk.org doesn't earn a profit. These items are sold for fun and to promote our community.
|
| Show us where you live! |
 |
|
| Do you think choosing Sarah Palin was a mistake for McCain? |
| Yes. She is way too inexperienced to potentially serve as President |
|
59% |
[ 13 ] |
| Yes, she may be inexperienced, but she has charm...and thats what counts. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| She has enough appeal to the masses to make her choice acceptable. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| No. She lives next to Russia, so has enough experience for me. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| Is it too late to get Tina Fey on the ticket? |
|
22% |
[ 5 ] |
| I think she was an excellent choice. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 22 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Ophelia 
Embodiment of Reason
Gold Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 1436
Thanks
Given: 2
Received: 12 in 12 Posts
Gender: 
Location: France
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:45 am Post subject:
|
 |
|
Thanks, gentle Reader, I had seen the document you give in the link but i didn't know what to do with it.
This is interesting, but unfortunatley I can't copy the chart here, you'll need to look for a green and red chart in the middle of the document GR provided.
It shows that in proportion to their GID the top donors are Norway (0.95 % of GNI), Sweden, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands (Ireland comes just next), and that the US comes last with only 0.16 of GNI.)
Source: OECD Development Statistics Online last accessed Sunday, April 27, 2008
They say later that the reluctance of the US government to help is not due to stinginess but to the belief that you actually harm the individual by helping him directly, that he must learn to stand on his own two feet... so from that point of view they are just as wise or just as harsh as they are about their own needy citizens at home.
Another part of the document says that US citizens are more generous than their government, which I'm ready to believe, but I couldn't see any clear figures.
If one of you could find such comparative figures, I'd be interested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic
Professor
Silver Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 3530
Thanks
Given: 6
Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 8:05 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Ophelia wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Americans give more than any other people on this planet and they do it voluntarily. |
I believe you, I've tried to look up figures but couldn't find anything clear.
America has 300 million inhabitants (or more) and the biggest GNP in the world. It's only natural that they should be the biggest giver. |
There are also numbers that show that as a percentage of GDP, we do not give as much as other nations. I do not have any reference to give on this, but I do remember reading about this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pessimistic
Professor
Silver Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 3530
Thanks
Given: 6
Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender:
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 8:06 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Ophelia wrote: |
| Quote: |
Quote:
Americans give more than any other people on this planet and they do it voluntarily.
|
I was going to take this on faith, but I've just heard from a reliable source on TV that, in proportion to their GNP, the US give five times less to developing countries than European countries do. |
Oops! Looks like you already pointed this out Ophelia!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GentleReader9
Sophomore
Silver Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 07 Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Thanks
Given: 15
Received: 17 in 17 Posts
Gender:
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA, Earth.
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 2:38 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Ophelia wrote:
| Quote: |
| They say later that the reluctance of the US government to give more is not due to stinginess but to the belief that you actually harm the individual by helping him directly. |
There was a quote (translated into English from French, I suppose) from the remarks of a French politician commenting on what had gone wrong with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in one of the history books I was reading about it which I really liked. It was something like: "Somewhere amidst all the debate about giving them fish versus teaching them to fish, the practice of leasing them costly and fragile fishing rods seems to have crept in."  Unfortunately, that sounds just about true to form. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ophelia
Embodiment of Reason
Gold Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 1436
Thanks
Given: 2
Received: 12 in 12 Posts
Gender:
Location: France
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 3:28 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
""Somewhere amidst all the debate about giving them fish versus teaching them to fish, the practice of leasing them costly and fragile fishing rods seems to have crept in."
Yes, that's a good quote 
At least it's better than what probably happens some of the time, ie: it's against our philosophy to give them fish and we can't make a decision about how to teach them how to fish so we'll all go home! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Tulip
Masters
Usergroups: None
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 451
Thanks
Given: 17
Received: 6 in 5 Posts
Gender:
Location: Canberra
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 6:51 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| Ophelia wrote: |
| ..top donors are Norway (0.95 % of GNI), Sweden, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands (Ireland comes just next), ...US comes last with only 0.16 of GNI.) |
Yes, this is true. Aid is a big policy difference between the USA and Europe. Supporters of aid can argue that the partnerships that are built through development actually contribute more to human security than weapon systems and wars. If the US lifted its official development assistance to one percent of gross national income, matching the Nordics, it could transform the planet into a place of peace and prosperity.
| Quote: |
| ... reluctance of the US government to help is not due to stinginess |
Well, I think the comparatively low level of American help to the rest of the world is due to stinginess. If Americans were more generous people would like them a lot more. Again, aid policy has wider impacts. US security would be better enhanced by supporting global economic development than by putting up barriers to dialogue. As well, official development assistance is a main tool to reverse global climate change.
| Quote: |
| but to the belief that you actually harm the individual by helping him directly |
there is something to the argument about direct help having corrosive effects. That is why it is better to find ways to invest for profit than to support charity, except in emergencies. There are a lot of profitable opportunities in areas that benefit the poor. Functioning markets are the main tool to reduce poverty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GentleReader9
Sophomore
Silver Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 07 Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Thanks
Given: 15
Received: 17 in 17 Posts
Gender:
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA, Earth.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 8:11 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Robert Tulip wrote:
| Quote: |
| If the US lifted its official development assistance to one percent of gross national income, matching the Nordics, it could transform the planet into a place of peace and prosperity. |
Oh phooey. I wasn't going to open this can of worms, but just try to stop me now. Our strings-attached development "assistance" is what has nearly destroyed the Third World. Who says Europe or the US knows better than the Third World does how to live in the latters' own countries? They were doing just fine on their own before the people with the polluting, obtuse, destructive, exploitative, elder-disrespecting, not-thoroughly-tested, toxic methods for doing everything came and started telling them to do it all differently.
| Quote: |
Quote:
... reluctance of the US government to help is not due to stinginess
Well, I think the comparatively low level of American help to the rest of the world is due to stinginess. If Americans were more generous people would like them a lot more. Again, aid policy has wider impacts. US security would be better enhanced by supporting global economic development than by putting up barriers to dialogue. As well, official development assistance is a main tool to reverse global climate change. |
Well, much as I like information about how to win friends and influence people, and much as I am in favor of enhanced dialogue rather than barriers to it, I balk at the assumptions underlying your conclusion: "official development assistance is a main tool to reverse global climate change." "Development" is what is causing global climate change. And what makes the "developed" countries exporting their over-polluting, over-consuming methods to places with populations too huge to sustain them "official"-ly better than smaller-scale, clearer, more direct exchanges among people?
Right here, right now, we need to be transforming and shifting our infrastructure, transportation and energy grids so that they function more like those of the Third World's traditional, sustainable methods did before we started to mess them up. If you don't have the right answer in effective practice, you can't model it or teach it to others.
| Quote: |
but to the belief that you actually harm the individual by helping him directly
there is something to the argument about direct help having corrosive effects. That is why it is better to find ways to invest for profit than to support charity, except in emergencies. There are a lot of profitable opportunities in areas that benefit the poor. Functioning markets are the main tool to reduce poverty. |
If I am in a position to give someone something they need, I hope I can give it without any strings, allowing that person or group an opportunity for empowerment through exercising their choice, their creativity, their intelligence with their unfettered use of it to navigate their world, with which they are more familiar than I am, and in which they, not I, have to live with the results. Look at what the greed of so-called lenders has done to our economy recently. It was doing that and worse to the Third World for decades.
If I trusted that the governments here and there were using the money to benefit the people and the countries as a whole, rather than to profit some dangerously powerful money-addicts, I would be more for it. As it is, I like groups like the ones where you support women's small businesses, help people who need to get eye surgery, buy fair trade products which are made in environmentally clean ways by well-compensated, independent people -- individuals helping at a small, clear, manageable level. Other than that it is better for everyone if I just consume less, use the most conscientious patterns of consumption and transportation I can, buy local and organic, and reuse, recycle. I want them to teach us as much as we teach them. They are not such dummies, you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Tulip
Masters
Usergroups: None
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 451
Thanks
Given: 17
Received: 6 in 5 Posts
Gender:
Location: Canberra
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:25 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| GentleReader9 wrote: |
| Our strings-attached development "assistance" is what has nearly destroyed the Third World. Who says Europe or the US knows better than the Third World does how to live in the latters' own countries? They were doing just fine on their own before the people with the polluting, obtuse, destructive, exploitative, elder-disrespecting, not-thoroughly-tested, toxic methods for doing everything came and started telling them to do it all differently. |
Hi GR9, you should have a look at the outcomes of the Accra Forum on Aid Effectiveness. Increasing the volume of aid assistance can meet millennium development goals. You are right that western technical expertise has not always found best development results, but there is much room to expand aid spending in ways that will be good for poor people.
| GentleReader9 wrote: |
| I balk at the assumptions underlying your conclusion: "official development assistance is a main tool to reverse global climate change." "Development" is what is causing global climate change. And what makes the "developed" countries exporting their over-polluting, over-consuming methods to places with populations too huge to sustain them "official"-ly better than smaller-scale, clearer, more direct exchanges among people? Right here, right now, we need to be transforming and shifting our infrastructure, transportation and energy grids so that they function more like those of the Third World's traditional, sustainable methods did before we started to mess them up. If you don't have the right answer in effective practice, you can't model it or teach it to others. |
Unfortunately, traditional methods are not sufficient for the large population of the world. The task is to find new global methods that will function in a sustainable way. In this regard, technologies with much promise include ocean algae farms to remove carbon from the air, and use of the currents of the oceans as arteries for transport of fresh water in fabric sacks.
| Quote: |
| If I am in a position to give someone something they need, I hope I can give it without any strings, allowing that person or group an opportunity for empowerment through exercising their choice, their creativity, their intelligence with their unfettered use of it to navigate their world, with which they are more familiar than I am, and in which they, not I, have to live with the results. Look at what the greed of so-called lenders has done to our economy recently. It was doing that and worse to the Third World for decades. If I trusted that the governments here and there were using the money to benefit the people and the countries as a whole, rather than to profit some dangerously powerful money-addicts, I would be more for it. As it is, I like groups like the ones where you support women's small businesses, help people who need to get eye surgery, buy fair trade products which are made in environmentally clean ways by well-compensated, independent people -- individuals helping at a small, clear, manageable level. Other than that it is better for everyone if I just consume less, use the most conscientious patterns of consumption and transportation I can, buy local and organic, and reuse, recycle. I want them to teach us as much as we teach them. They are not such dummies, you know. |
Good comment, but it is possible to use market instruments to support the basic development goals you suggest. A key to improved health and education is getting more money to parents and families so they can pay for services when they need them. So, for the MDGs, supporting private enterprise and improved transport and communication help lay a foundation for social objectives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pessimistic
Professor
Silver Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 3530
Thanks
Given: 6
Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender:
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject: McCain-Palin Civil War?
|
|
|
Internal Strife in the Republican ticket
| Quote: |
The tensions and their increasingly public airing provide a revealing coda to the ill-fated McCain-Palin ticket, hinting at the mounting turmoil of a campaign that was described even by many Republicans as incoherent, negative and badly run.
For her part, Ms. Palin told reporters in Arizona on Wednesday morning that “there is absolutely no diva in me.”
Later in the day, she refused to address the strife within the campaigns. “I have absolutely no intention of engaging in any of the negativity because this has been all positive for me,” she said, adding that it was time to savor President-elect Barack Obama’s victory and “not let the pettiness or maybe internal workings of a campaign erode any of the recognition of this historic moment.”
|
hmmm...she is just such a vacuous person I cannot even believe that she is being CONSIDERED as the new face of the party. The Repubs better figure this out quick. Not 4 years ago they were saying the Dems lost their way and identity...seems to be a huge reversal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sweisser
Getting comfortable
Usergroups: None
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 6
Thanks
Given: 2
Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender: 
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: Palin v Obama
|
|
|
| Chris OConnor wrote: |
| I voted that she is too inexperienced to lead this country. But she has far more experience than Obama and therefore Obama is also too inexperienced to lead our nation. |
I agree, but now we shall see if he can hack it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sweisser
Getting comfortable
Usergroups: None
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 6
Thanks
Given: 2
Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender:
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 8:30 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| GentleReader9 wrote: |
I meant that the general tenor of the race has been impacted by speculations in the media along the lines of "Is America ready for it's First Black President?" or pitting the supposed appeal/drawback of supporting women in the person of Hillary Clinton against the supposed appeal/drawback of supporting people of color in the person of Obama. This framing shows our society is still racist enough to seriously ask these questions. In a non-racist, non-sexist society candidates would be assessed according to their stand on issues and whether or not they had the skills and experience that make a person a good president. Period. |
As a historian I have always wondered which America would be ready for first, a black person or a female person. We may know that answer now, but we did have a lot of people voting based on bias. I recall a news anchor asking people about the race issue and a man replied that he wasn't racist but he wasn't voting for a balck man. Yeah, my husband and I sat with our mouths ajar. I also heard many say that they would not voter for a woman, so racism and sexism are still alive an kicking in America.
I wonder how much racism figured into the results of our election. Remember, racism is not just whites against all others - it works both ways. In my county the population is approximately 98% white - McCain won the local election, but in the state of Virginia the numbers are much lower (67% white non-hispanic in 2006) and Obama won the state. The US percentage was also lower in 2006 - 64%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Recent Topics |
|
|
|
