Are wealthy countries in anyway responsible to lift poor countries out of poverty?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rozellelily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
DENNYINMI said:
40.png
HarryStotle:
So are you advocating for home and car insurance to be government run and taxpayer funded?
Click to expand...
My God, smh…
Click to expand...
A further point, if you think the government will do a better job providing health care insurance than the private sector can, why wouldn’t it also do a better job with home insurance and car insurance? By implication, your position argues for that, does it not? At least, given your concern with corporate bean counters?
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle said:
A further point, if you think the government will do a better job providing health care insurance than the private sector can, why wouldn’t it also do a better job with home insurance and car insurance? By implication, your position argues for that, does it not? At least, given your concern with corporate bean counters?
Click to expand...
The government has already stipulated law on home and car insurance Harry, by mandating it. I have no problem with that, it’s a safety net we all need. I wouldn’t want to owe on a car or home Harry after it’s been totaled or burned to the ground now, would you? Granted the insurance is regulated via the private sector I can still maintain the right to shop Harry…to find the lowest rate with the greatest amount of coverage. Once my car reaches a certain age…I may find the most fundamental plan fits me best and down scale myself from full coverage to a no-fault. All of this points to a plan such as I was attempting to illustrate via a model currently used in Israel…Insurance is compulsory (as is car and home) and is overseen by a department of Health Ministry. I encouraged persons to look at the plan they utilize and see no one needs to re-invent the wheel. We can do better.
Now, one thing on a private note. I’ve noticed you following me around with little video’s (other threads) that require tin foil hat attire, perhaps spawned from Faux News propaganda and as a cheery fella, from one to the next, I must tell you I don’t watch them. I’m careful of what I read, watch, and believe in the adage of birds of a feather and guard against garbage content in my home which includes books and media content. However, I would highly recommend the United States Bishops letter to congress on Universal Health Care.
I find it superb. Perhaps we will find a way to ensure Americans have health care one day without one catastrophe wiping out a retirement. ciao’ Harry
 
DENNYINMI said:
Now, one thing on a private note. I’ve noticed you following me around with little video’s (other threads) that require tin foil hat attire, perhaps spawned from Faux News propaganda and as a cheery fella, from one to the next, I must tell you I don’t watch them. I’m careful of what I read, watch, and believe in the adage of birds of a feather and guard against garbage content in my home which includes books and media content.
Click to expand...
Sounds like your tin foil hat to protect you from requiring “tin foil hat attire” is perfectly positioned and protects you well against the news “propaganda” that your flock chooses to avoid or ignore that would only cause it perplexity or concern.
 
Personally I am very much for taxes for the reasons you provided and would also like to see the very wealthiest taxed a higher level.

At the same time,it would be good if there was a system where people could vote where their taxes are used as they are often misused.

Some examples of where the Australian government has misused taxes are $850,784 spent for a study of Italy’s Catherine de Medici (King Henry 2’s consort) through her correspondence promising an “exciting new analysis” and Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moores loves to use $2 million publics taxes to pay for exclusive invite only New Years Eve parties.
Also she used tax money to campaign for Gay marriage laws and also for funding the 11.3 million dollar “impressive” Cloud Arch artwork.

 
Last edited:
DENNYINMI said:
I could care less what investors want, The world has been changed more with charity than with science, and I am shocked at the wave of gladiators on this site that need to dissect whether giving a beggar a piece of bread is a good thing…When you can charge for an epinephrine pen that saves lives in the case of anaphylactic shock 300 % over the usual cost there is plenty to investigate. Might I suggest we begin with moral conscience
Click to expand...
It might take you ten years to do the research for one drug.

[And by saying “you”, I mean a whole laboratory full of bio-chemists and computer people …]

And if someone else at another laboratory beats you to it … then all that time and money is a complete waste.

All those trials monitored by the FDA.

All wasted.

And that goes on all the time.

All kinds of research for endocrine problems, coronary diseases, cancers, organ failures, bone diseases, … no end to the ailments being researched.

Your company may be researching 20 ailments simultaneously.

You can apply for a patent, but by the time your drug gets approved, you might only have a very few years left … and when the patent expires everyone in the world can pirate your drug.

Where are YOU going to get the money?
 
Last edited:
Ridgerunner said:
Never in my life have I eaten fried squirrel. Had it offered, but it looks too much like a cooked cat to me. Put me off my appetite.

Among country people at the time, it was extremely common to eat wild game, including some things one might question as “wild game” like groundhogs and snapping turtles.
Click to expand...
I did once, it was a bit tough if you ask me. I prefer rabbit myself.
 
Rozellelily said:
Personally I am very much for taxes for the reasons you provided and would also like to see the very wealthiest taxed a higher level.

At the same time,it would be good if there was a system where people could vote where their taxes are used as they are often misused.

Some examples of where the Australian government has misused taxes are $850,784 spent for a study of Italy’s Catherine de Medici (King Henry 2’s consort) through her correspondence promising an “exciting new analysis” and Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moores loves to use $2 million publics taxes to pay for exclusive invite only New Years Eve parties.
Also she used tax money to campaign for Gay marriage laws and also for funding the 11.3 million dollar “impressive” Cloud Arch artwork.

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/r...n/news-story/5695c704534778854cc26b81c453c0d3
Click to expand...
You might also add to that between $80 million and $180 million to the Clinton Foundation for it isn’t very clear what.

 
$255,000.00 US isn’t all that much over the course of a year. You could spend that money to feed more children, who grow up to become adults who irresponsibly overpopulate the areas they live in, so that you wind up with 5-6x more people to try to feed.

Some countries will never be more than third-world messes because they lack natural resources and/or access to the same. Paraguay is a good example of a land-locked country without that much to offer the rest of the world. Other countries remain third-world messes thanks to the “revolution of the month club” wherein stability is non-existent because one warlord is squabbling with another warlord. Places like much of India are the way they are because nobody has learned to “keep it zipped,” same goes for the massive AIDS epidemics in Africa. China actually had a very good idea in trying to keep population down, at least as far as they could manage it.

Between the US and Russia, we could probably provide enough food to cover the current world’s population. The questions are: 1) who provides the military escort to not only deliver it to the countries, but to make sure that ye olde warlord doesn’t steal it; 2) how do you provide for the next generation of people caused by the irresponsible reproduction of the people you just fed? Seriously, nature is self-pruning of things such as population
 
Seeksadvice said:
Between the US and Russia, we could probably provide enough food to cover the current world’s population. The questions are: 1) who provides the military escort to not only deliver it to the countries, but to make sure that ye olde warlord doesn’t steal it; 2) how do you provide for the next generation of people caused by the irresponsible reproduction of the people you just fed? Seriously, nature is self-pruning of things such as population
Click to expand...
Yes, yes…ah the questions that must be asked before we dream the dream of feeding the world…What is the definitive solution to the questions that must be asked and answered before we assist any poverty ridden nation, God forbid they reproduce their species…

Let the Samaritan be our guide, look at the numerous questions he asked before he helped the injured and beaten stranger…

Unbelievably cold. Are you well? May I ask if you are a Christian?
 
I am a Christian, but I am also a pragmatist. Starry-eyed hopes are great and all that, but sometimes the real-world needs to be examined.

If we assume that God made the world, and we know the world has mechanisms in it that curb explosive population growth(disease, food shortages, etc.), then who are we to assume that the application of such mechanisms to the human population are not also God’s will? Is it not human hubris that keeps us from reaching that conclusion?
 
The hot mess countries you mentioned are primarily agricultural and agricultural societies encourage having large families to help work the farm.

In countries like India, children, especially sons are a form of social security. Hence the large population with a gender imbalance. This encourages a high birth rate.

China was in the same boat as India with children, especially sons, seen as a form of Social Security. China is beginning to implement its form of Social Security which plays its own role in curbing the birth rate.

Is a large population a cause of poverty or is it a symptom? This should be discussed.
 
Last edited:
My point is that nature has solutions to untenable population levels. Nature is God’s creation. Should we not respect God’s creation and allow nature to work its course?

Humans were instructed to go forth and multiply. They were not instructed to go out and cover the Earth with an unsustainable carpet of people.
 
Seeksadvice said:
I am a Christian, but I am also a pragmatist. Starry-eyed hopes are great and all that, but sometimes the real-world needs to be examined.
Click to expand...
Through who’s lens? We are called to give through our own poverty and as Dorothy Day described it we then “escape the condescending tone of charity which reifies social class distinction”.
Most devastation is manufactured by the exploitation of others, not from God.
 
Why do people keep pushing this lie of mass starvation around the world?

Except in times of crisis, even the poorest of countries are able to produce or purchase what they need to feed their population. There are also many aid programs in place to push out agricultural knowledge and expertise to help them in this fundamental mission. Sharing this basic knowledge is not a burden, financially or otherwise.

The exception is during times of war, famine, or natural disaster. During these ‘event’ situations, the richer neighbors have an obligation to provide food and other resources. This requirement is also not a burden and wealthy countries already provide such aid as it is needed.

Pushing the image of starving children is nothing more than a fund raising technique by marketers trying to increase the income in their respective non-profits.
 
Last edited:
The answer is a very simple and resounding YES. It is a Christian responsibility of the strong and those who have much to help and care for the weak and those who need.

Hoarding more than one needs is hard to defend for Catholics.
 
Economics is not a science. Knowing about the in and outs of economics is like counting cards in a card game. Those who know how to count get ahead those who don’t fall by the wayside and lose. Economics has its theories and formulas but it can never take into account the fickleness of humans or manmade or natural disasters. It can’t see what hiccups can occur each day, each hour, each moment. Its kind of like the meteorologist predicting the number of hurricanes each year and how many hurricanes will be severe, And we know how those turn out every year.
Also, helping people out trumps any economic systems results. Pope John Paul II said capitalism is the better of the three big economic systems (capitalism, socialism, and communism) but capitalism still has its many flaws including too much money is made for those at the top and the lower workers sometimes don’t even have enough money to make a living. So please stop waving the economics flag in everybody’s face, economists may understand the some of the ups and downs of the economy but they have no idea how to understand the ups and downs of life.
 
Yes but isn’t much of the world basically living on substance level; that doesn’t seem to conducive to self actualization and the fulfillment of human potential. I can concede that the US probably can’t solve all the world’s problems but if we had the political will (as well as possibly focus since one can only be stretched so thin), I believe we can make a substantial dent. I know this is a fantastical dreaming but imagine if NGOs and the like were treated similarly to our Department of Defense? I do think considering the many peoples benefiting from USAID (thanks in part due to generous exchange rates), our foreign aid dollars do provide a bang for our buck.
 
You make some really good points here. I too worry about increasing inequality, within countries as well as rich vs poor nations, 1st world vs. 3rd world. I agree that there is some irony in the so-called 1st world when you have these dramatic arguments for migration, etc. when much of the lower classes or certain marginalized groups (elderly, drugs, blue collar unemployed) within the country’s own population are totally neglected in terms of resource allocation/awareness. Ditto outsourcing of whole industries to other countries, globalization. (and not a peep from the RCC either; why? the victims of this are not in the pews in big enough numbers to matter) I support progressive taxes for the same reason I support environmental regulations; a lot of wealthy people are no doubt genuinely good, charitable folk but not all. Trickle down needs a little regulatory help as do the lakes and air. If I were at the top of the income scale, I could handle higher tax rates as just. Internationally wealthy countries should provide resources and support to poor countries through policy and charity - this is not just justice, it provides for the common good, political stability for the 1st world too. At some point we have to make the 3rd world stop being a ‘3rd world.’ We can’t just move everyone to the US or Europe or Australia. Look at Latin America. Why is it so corrupt? Spain settled it much like Britain/France, etc. settled North America. What’s up? After all these years.
 
I think it depends on who gets the money from the fund raising techniques.
Ie:if the vast majority of the money does go to the poor then that’s a good thing,but if it goes to the executives/board of directors of the non profits then that’s immoral.

Regarding farming I think there are more complications than simply trying to teach poor people farming practices.
Eg:in areas in India a lot of their rivers and soil have much neurotoxic heavy metal pollution.
Another example would be in some Asian countries farmers are being pushed of their lands to make way for skyscrapers or residential urban jungles etc…

Poverty is real though.My parents grew up in villages/farms and they had no toilet paper,no TV,not even a Radio etc…and of course no electricity.
Some “wealthy” people (by those standards) in the village who sold homemade liquor did have a Radio but they were the rarity.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top