Live 8

[keys]

Is it just me, or is the premise of this concert a little hypocritical? Encouraging other countries to steal from their people to assist a country whose people are starving because THEIR government has been stealing from them. I think we’ve clearly seen over the years that nothing screws up charity like government – generosity doesn’t count if it’s with other people’s money. 

[TheHammer]

Generally, I would say Western countries should have a major interest in help Third World countries- our wealth today comes to a good end from colonization of these countries which now have to suffer. Also, in the end it turns out better to help these people, because you will have more stability, your own people will feel better, etc.


BUT, I completely agree with you, that giving the governments of these countries money (or  to abate their debts) is a bad idea, at least for those countries where dictatorship and corruption still rule. These will just strengthen the current situation, because the few mighty in these countries will put their pockets full of money, while their population is either starving or being fed by international aid organisation. The same time, people here feel so comfortable because they attended a concert, spent some bucks for a village in Somalia or lit a candle in a human chain...

As a commentator put it so nicely, these concerts should rather take place in the countries of the Third World to draw the public attention to the current political situation, rather then to ask us to support some African dictators with our money.

[BoliverAllmon]

oh yeah I am sure that everyone would get in their car and drive to these concerts.

[keys]

I think helping Africa should take precedence over projects like Kyoto – they actually have legitimate environmental concerns that are killing huge portions of their society. Environmental concerns that we’ve already found solutions to.  The fact that we have time to worry about contamination of our resources even though they are carefully monitored and safe shows how privileged we are. I don’t think these things should be the responsibility of the government though. Look at how much good the Red Cross has been able to accomplish using donated funds as opposed to extorted funds.  Government aid has the terrible tendency to cripple whoever it’s supposed to help.

I am admittedly a little bitter on the topic though; our Canadian government was just involved in a scandal that makes the political party currently in power the largest organized crime gang in the country.  And we are so far behind the United States as far as democracy goes. We don’t even have an elected senate, so all of the power rests in Ontario. To envision the present Canadian situation, Americans must imagine all U.S. senators being appointed by the White House with no requirement of congressional ratification or even review, and all serving until age 75. We should really clean up our own backyard. 

[6ft 4]

What's worse is the fact that all these millionaires (Elton John, Sting, Paul Mccartney etc etc) are talking about giving aid and trying to get ur average Joe to give some money to charity when they're living the life of riley in their millionaire houses with their 5 ferraris.

[BoliverAllmon]

What's worse is the fact that all these millionaires (Elton John, Sting, Paul Mccartney etc etc) are talking about giving aid and trying to get ur average Joe to give some money to charity when they're living the life of riley in their millionaire houses with their 5 ferraris.

yeah attitudes like this really peev me off. It is alot like John Kerry. He talked about making sure everyone had health insurance and the such. He was so loaded he could of helped alot of people out. He couldn't cure the problem, but he wasn't even helping it with his own money.

[mikeyg]

The fact that we are just getting rid of their debt is an atrocity to me.

I am all for private charities giving money to the people of Africa, but it is not the government's place to take my money and five it to some people 8000 miles away. W have our own problems at home that we need to address, we shouldn't be made to give to these people.  The government already wastes enough of my damned money on things like welfare and medicare and social security, things that are an individual's responsibility.  Just because Joe-Schmoe can't feed to his family, doesn't mean I should have to sacrifice anything for him.

And son't give me the "we're a global community" or "where's your compassion" bull, because that is no reason in my book.  If you feel bad for these people, and you want to send them money to feed them, then fine.  Whatever floats your boat.  People would be more able to donate money if taxes were lower.  But don't force me to sacrifice anything to help heal your guilt.

[keys]

The fact that we are just getting rid of their debt is an atrocity to me.

I am all for private charities giving money to the people of Africa, but it is not the government's place to take my money and five it to some people 8000 miles away. W have our own problems at home that we need to address, we shouldn't be made to give to these people. The government already wastes enough of my damned money on things like welfare and medicare and social security, things that are an individual's responsibility. Just because Joe-Schmoe can't feed to his family, doesn't mean I should have to sacrifice anything for him.

And son't give me the "we're a global community" or "where's your compassion" bull, because that is no reason in my book. If you feel bad for these people, and you want to send them money to feed them, then fine. Whatever floats your boat. People would be more able to donate money if taxes were lower. But don't force me to sacrifice anything to help heal your guilt.

I love you!

Seriously, since when is government the moral conscience of our world!? If they didn't provide welfare,  people wouldn't starve! If my neighbor were hungry I'd feed him! (haha Sam.) I think that tax is the slavery of our time: It is blatantly wrong, but viewed as a necessary evil, because people can't imagine life without it.

[mikeyg]

exactly.  We all know that the government cannot ever be as efficient as a privitized industry.  It is something too small looking over something too large.  They spend atleast twice as much as is necessary, as a normal person onn their own could do.

But, of course there is need for some goverment interaction, but it needs to be cut back massively.

[thalbergmad]

What's worse is the fact that all these millionaires (Elton John, Sting, Paul Mccartney etc etc) are talking about giving aid and trying to get ur average Joe to give some money to charity when they're living the life of riley in their millionaire houses with their 5 ferraris.

Well put Sir. The amount Elton John spends on flowers (about £3,000,000 per year), would feed an entire country.

[6ft 4]

Wow some right wingers!!!! The media is so left wing i got the impression us conservatives were going extinct.

<3 <3 <3

[mikeyg]

this concert ish helped me remember why I hate U-2 and especially Bono.

I'm not a conservative, I'm libertarian. 

[keys]

I'm a juris naturalist. But in terms of Canadian Political Parties, the Conservatives are definitely the best option. I honestly don't know who in their right mind would vote Liberal after the year we've had.

[BoliverAllmon]

I'm a juris naturalist. But in terms of Canadian Political Parties, the Conservatives are definitely the best option. I honestly don't know who in their right mind would vote Liberal after the year we've had.

I am sure many still will vote Liberal though. It is amazing the diferent views people have.

[mikeyg]

The stupid bi-party political system wil end up destroying these countries.

[Torp]

Wow some right wingers!!!! The media is so left wing i got the impression us conservatives were going extinct.

<3 <3 <3

I'd sure like to get ahold of some left-wing media.  Where I come from it's all right-wing.

[BoliverAllmon]

where do you live?

[Torp]

where do you live?

Idaho, pretty much as right wing as it gets.

[BoliverAllmon]

really? watch CNN and that is left wing for you. Fox is right wing. I live in a very conservative part of the country also, but can always rely on CNN to give me my pile of crap in the morning.

[Torp]

I don't watch either.  Actually, I don't watch tv at all.  But if I did, I would rely on Fox for the crap.

[BoliverAllmon]

I don't watch either.  Actually, I don't watch tv at all.  But if I did, I would rely on Fox for the crap.

I know of a psychologist who recommends people throwing out any form of news in their house when they have bad depression. Most of his patients have great turnarounds when they do this. I  therefore don't watch TV that much either.

[Torp]

I know of a psychologist who recommends people throwing out any form of news in their house when they have bad depression. Most of his patients have great turnarounds when they do this. I  therefore don't watch TV that much either.

That makes sense to me.  I find the media, whether liberal or conservative, to generally be equal in their ability to only focus on the negative.

[BoliverAllmon]

That makes sense to me.  I find the media, whether liberal or conservative, to generally be equal in their ability to only focus on the negative.

it is all about the ratings.

[Torp]

Yeah, I always love it when the pollsters call and I get to tell them that I don't even own a tv.

[mikeyg]

Yeah, I always love it when the pollsters call and I get to tell them that I don't even own a tv.

THAT SUX.  BUT YOU'RE NOT MISSING OUT ON MUCH, EXCEPT FO MAYBE SOME SPORTS AND 24.

[Torp]

Actually, it doesn't suck.  I rather enjoy not having a tv.

[greyrune]

I'm sorry i've not had internet for a while so i'm a bit late in barging in with a rant here, but i can't believe some of the things i've just read in this thread.  Mikeyg, i'll start with you.  First, healthcare and social welfare are individuals problems?  So if you weren't fortunate enopugh to be born into a rich white family, go to a decent school/university and get a good job you deserve to die?  Is that about what you're saying?  I seriously can't believe people actually think this, you should be willing to give up your money for those less fortunate.  I'm sure people work hard for their money sitting in an office stressing over a load of numbers or whatever, but why should they be paid 70,000 a year while some poor bastard works two hard labour jobs, sleeps about four hours a night and barely sees his wife and kids deserve about 20,000, no free health and no decent education for his children who will then be stuck in the same cycle.  You could help sort this out if you were willing to live without your third porche and your TV in every bedroom.

As for Keys, do you actually know what you're talking about?  Yes some (even most) governments in Africa are corrupt, do you really think the people who run our governments (while possibly corrupt too) don't know that?  You support giving to NGO's but they don't do as much good as they make out.  They may deliver emergency aid well but people can't live off hand-outs they need the infrastructure to get themselves on thier own feet and this can't be given without government involvement.  My dad works for British aid so i actually do know what i'm talking about (not as much as him, but i've listened to him talk about it my whole life even if i wasn't always listening).  They don't give aid willy-nilly, there are conditions.  They don't say do this and we'll give you money, that would be effectively colonialism.  But there are certian stardards that are agreed upon and the government comes up with their own stratagy to reach them.  If they fail we don't give aid.  It may not be perfect but can you think of a better way to help people?  If thousands of dedicated trained professionals who actually care can't do better i very much doubt you or i could find the perfect solution.

Anyway i know i was ranting but i really can't understand the points of view that have been expressed here, it seems to stem more from ignorance and greed than any formed belief.  You are not more important or more deserving than anyone else on this planet, understand that.

[keys]

I'm sorry i've not had internet for a while so i'm a bit late in barging in with a rant here, but i can't believe some of the things i've just read in this thread. Mikeyg, i'll start with you. First, healthcare and social welfare are individuals problems? So if you weren't fortunate enopugh to be born into a rich white family, go to a decent school/university and get a good job you deserve to die? Is that about what you're saying? I seriously can't believe people actually think this, you should be willing to give up your money for those less fortunate. I'm sure people work hard for their money sitting in an office stressing over a load of numbers or whatever, but why should they be paid 70,000 a year while some poor bastard works two hard labour jobs, sleeps about four hours a night and barely sees his wife and kids deserve about 20,000, no free health and no decent education for his children who will then be stuck in the same cycle. You could help sort this out if you were willing to live without your third porche and your TV in every bedroom.

Anyway i know i was ranting but i really can't understand the points of view that have been expressed here, it seems to stem more from ignorance and greed than any formed belief. You are not more important or more deserving than anyone else on this planet, understand that.

Oh my, you are typical.

Let me guess, 12 – 13 years in a government run school?

At least that much “education” for your Father?

Fairly well off yourself?

I know exactly what I am talking about when I post on Government’s “Aid” for the poor.  I’ve been on the receiving end! Watching the Government waste all that money is actually a lot more painful when you don’t have a dime to your name.  My family and I avoided government aid as much as we could, even under the circumstances. It’s dirty money.

The system of taxation is reprehensible. It’s as if they have forgotten that all government revenue is stolen money. Social programs designed to put money back into the community and help underprivileged families are poor compensation. It is remarkably easy to be charitable with other people’s money. Underprivileged families should be allowed to buy bread before they are forced to pay for public day care for other people’s children. I saw our family’s tax dollars going towards things such as garbage pick-up and public schools before we could afford food and water.  The government has never been the benchmark for morality; churches and charities accomplish far more good without extorting money. The effect of the current taxation policies does far more financial damage to underprivileged families than most people seem to realize. Many politicians appear to think that taxing the rich more will improve the quality of life for poor families. In reality, all that does is punish success.

I have heard so many self-righteous, ignorant people speak –supposedly on my behalf – on poverty, and I wish they would think it through a little more thoroughly before they subject me to there ill-conceived ideas.  To them it’s just philosophy, to me it’s actually my life. You should be ashamed of yourself for assuming that poor families want the kind of help that the Government offers. 

As for Keys, do you actually know what you're talking about? Yes some (even most) governments in Africa are corrupt, do you really think the people who run our governments (while possibly corrupt too) don't know that? You support giving to NGO's but they don't do as much good as they make out. They may deliver emergency aid well but people can't live off hand-outs they need the infrastructure to get themselves on thier own feet and this can't be given without government involvement. My dad works for British aid so i actually do know what i'm talking about (not as much as him, but i've listened to him talk about it my whole life even if i wasn't always listening). They don't give aid willy-nilly, there are conditions. They don't say do this and we'll give you money, that would be effectively colonialism. But there are certian stardards that are agreed upon and the government comes up with their own stratagy to reach them. If they fail we don't give aid. It may not be perfect but can you think of a better way to help people? If thousands of dedicated trained professionals who actually care can't do better i very much doubt you or i could find the perfect solution.

Listen to yourself!! "They need the infrastructure to get themselves on their own feet and this can't be given without government involvement." It was the government who knocked them down in the first place! One corrupt government, stealing from it's people to give to another corrupt government who's people are starving because it's been stealing from them, is detestable. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[greyrune]

Thanks for saying i'm typical, it's a relief to know the majority apparently thinks like me.  As for my upbringing, yes i'm well off, and yes i was possibly indoctrinated by my dad when i was younger, but i think i've learned to question of his beliefs, and think for myself.  As for the schooling, no i was in a kind of cooperative home education thing (kind of hippy, but it worked) for primary school and then went to local and international schools in Zimbabwe and Belgium before coming back to England for university.  I'm just saying this because while i don't have any first hand experience with poverty i've been around it a lot of my life (my first school was mainly run by the definately poor end of the london scale).

Anyway, i can respect that some families, obviously yours included don't want government aid, they may see it as charity and i know that there are few harder things to accept.  To say that the whole system of taxation is reprehensible though is rediculous.  I'm sure you weren't talking in absolutes but if taxation were not around how would the country function.  There would be no public transport, no public health service, no roads, no free education, any country would be in a mess.  You can't possibly think these things are bad or could concievably be provided by the market.  From what i think you're saying you mean that the money from tax that goes to individuals rather than the collective is bad, and should stay with those who earn it.  While there are those out there like you who will work their fingers to the bone rather than be dependant, and i have great respect for that, there are many others not as determined or njot as capable.  I agree that the government taking hard earned money and giving it to some lazy bloke who just can't be bothered to go and try find a job is wrong.  It has to be given to those that try to their full extent but simply can't survive without aid.  You can't depend on churces and charities for this kind of large scale help, there's just not enough money to go around for them.  A church can make a soup kitchen and feed the homelss, but it can't build them houses or support them while they get on thier feet.  Without government help my foster sister for example for probably be dead by now.

She has a wierd genetic disease called mitochandrial syopathy (not really sure on the spelling) which my other foster sister died of a few years ago.  In her case it's not fatal but she can't really move around much.  She has two kids (by a complete arsehole who later left) and without government aid she'd be completely unable to cope.  As it is she has a maid to clean her place and help out with the kids, she gets disability benefits so she can feed them.  Without that she and her children would have been homeless and starving.  I suppose we as her family could support her but what if we couldn't?  I realise that society is not to blame for her predicament and i can see that you therefore think they they should not be made to support her, but if you are comfortable why shouldn't you give some of that up to help the less fortunate.

Anyway i realise that i won't change your mind and you won't change mine and all that can possibly happen is us ending up more annoyed at each other than we were before.   However it's been fun as all arguments are.

[BoliverAllmon]

I hate the idea of being a dog eat dog world and nobody wants to help anybody. I don't mind helping people, I do mind paying taxes for stupid crap.

[keys]

townhall.com
The Live 8 dead end
Paul Jacob
https://www.townhall.com/columnists/pauljacob/pj20050710.shtml


July 10, 2005


Irish rocker Bob Geldorf and the music superstars who recently held Live 8 concerts across the globe made a lot of noise. Their siren songs entreated us to pressure the leaders of the G-8 Nations to spend whatever it takes in Africa to "make poverty history."

But beyond the wall of electric amplifiers, a quiet truth rarely got much notice. You see, a cure for poverty has already been found. Yes, a cure!

Freedom.

And by freedom I mean more than just the right to buy rock 'n' roll records. I mean the right to private property, to buy and sell, to compete for any peaceful business. And more. Free markets and free individuals — communicating, trading, praying, working, with maximum liberty and minimum harassment from criminals or governments.

Throughout the history of agriculture there have been great advances in know-how and machinery. But none of these have vanquished poverty or famine from our world. It is the freedom to grow and harvest and enjoy the fruit (and grain and buffalo and ostrich) of one's labor that makes all the difference.

Unfortunately, freedom is too rarely prescribed. In the cruel history of our species, those wielding political power commonly doctor up the laws to favor themselves at the expense of the people.

Africa is such a place, sadly — poor precisely because of the many despots in power. According to the Heritage Foundation's 2005 Index of Economic Freedom, Africa lacks a single nation considered to be "free" and 87 percent of the continent's countries were found to be either "mostly unfree" or downright "repressed."

Dictators destroy economies. And too often they take the aid we send to help the poor and use it to stay longer in power.

Africans know this well. Asked about more aid, a Kenyan health care worker quickly and depressingly predicted that "the aid money will go into the pockets of corrupt officials to buy their fully loaded Mercedes-Benzes."

"For God's sake, please stop the aid," Kenyan economist James Shikwati bluntly told a German weekly. "If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit."

In the 20 years since Live 8's predecessor, Live Aid, raised $2 billion for African famine relief, Africa's Gross Domestic Product shrank 25 percent. The continent's share of world trade has fallen from 6 percent in 1980 to just 2 percent in 2002. Of course, this was not exactly Live Aid's fault: compared to the over $25 billion in foreign aid Africa has received over the last decade, Live Aid's effort was a drop in the bucket.

As the late economist Peter Bauer pointed out, "The argument that aid is indispensable for development runs into an inescapable dilemma. If the conditions for development other than capital are present, the capital required will either be generated locally or be available commercially from abroad to governments or to businesses. If the required conditions are not present, then aid will be ineffective and wasted."

Foreign aid just doesn't work. Sending more will only make aging musicians feel good.

But we can't say that the pop-musician activists are stuck in the past. They have swapped strategies. Unlike the Live Aid effort of two decades ago, which asked individuals to donate voluntarily, Live 8 asks us instead to lobby our leaders to fork over the cash.

Gee whiz, I wonder from which trees Bush, Blair and other politicians will pluck that cash?

The concerts were timed to influence the annual "Group of Eight" Summit, featuring the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the world's eight wealthiest countries. As Live 8 posted on its website: "This summer, these leaders will gather in Scotland to decide the fate of an entire generation living on less than one dollar a day."

British Prime Minister Tony Blair harmonized with the Live 8 effort, saying, "There can be no excuse, no defense, no justification for the plight of millions of our fellow human beings in Africa today." He's right there. But he adds, "And there should be nothing that stands in our way of changing it."

"Our" way? Are we really supposed to believe that Bush and Blair and other leaders of wealthy countries will decide the fate of Africans, without Africans getting even a cameo role? Isn't this just a little condescending?

Some Africans think so. Ousmane Sembene, a Senegalese-born filmmaker, called the efforts "fake." Nigerian musician Femi Kuti called Live 8 a "waste of time."

These men and others are looking elsewhere for solutions. Kuti cites a need for new leadership, saying, "Africa has very many old leaders who do not want to leave office. They are the ones who have made our debts reach billions of dollars through corruption and stealing. And they are still asking for more so that they can steal to their graves and leave the youth with the burden of paying the debts."

Mr. Shikwati says Africa "must take the first steps into modernity on its own. There must be a change in mentality. We have to stop perceiving ourselves as beggars."

Sembene states what is obvious and overlooked, "The only way for us to come out of poverty is to work hard."

True, the Live 8 campaigners are on target in demanding that Western governments end the agricultural subsidies that hurt African farm products in the world market. This is precisely where Americans can make a difference for Africans — by demanding a free market system here at home.

But the rest of the Live 8 agenda rehashes the same old snake oil: the West, with wealth produced by the freedom we have, must bail out countries in Africa, where government corruption and tyranny make progress impossible.

Luckily, Africa's future does not depend on Western aid. Or even rock 'n' roll.

Africa simply needs freedom. It won't be easy to come by. Never is. But it is a crusade that can and must be won by Africans themselves.

Time for a new campaign to make poverty history? Call it "Liber-8."

[keys]

I decided I must have not been doing a very good job explaining things, so I posted an article that I thought might clear things up.

I will post as soon as I can to explain why the system of taxation is reprehensible, but I don’t have time right now.

[keys]

In Canada the system of taxation roughly resembles this: The Government (using force if necessary) extorts a portion of money according to the income of the individual. The Government also places taxes on items the individual must purchase with his or her remaining funds.  The Government owns certain monopolies as well, which also contribute to its revenue but is a detriment to the economy in general.

 Supporting this system was very draining to poor families. And although it appears that most people condone stealing from the rich, stealing from the poor was a little harder to get excited about. The Government created Social Programs in an attempt to create equality. Now the rich were supporting the poor through their tax dollars, increasing the taxation tremendously. The poor were still paying a great deal in taxes, but they were hidden better as not to offend anyone.  They also made aid readily available, so it was easily abused (another indisputable fact).  All of these things created a country of dependents.  There is simply very little motivation to work.

If you give tax breaks and social services to the poor, the taxes for the rich will obviously increase.

If you give the money to the poor, they have less motivation to work.

 If you tax the rich, they eventually become poor.

The equality that is created is not a society where everyone becomes equally rich, but one where everyone becomes equally poor.

To make matters worse, the Government is notoriously bad at handling money.  Billions of dollars are wasted, and sometimes blatantly stolen. As I mentioned previously the Canadian Liberal Government was recently involved in a scandal that gave it the distinction of being the largest organized crime gang in the country! And we have no choice but to fund them!

[BoliverAllmon]

that was a good description. I agree that the government can't handle money. There is no real reason for them to be financially responsible. There is no one telling them to quit. Clinton balanced the budget and began to actually pay off our debt. It wasn't because he was this real nice guy, but rather Ross Perot was preaching the economic troubles. He was actually starting to get people behind him. To cure this problem. Clinton bit the bullet and balanced the budget. Because the budget was now balanced, ross perot had nothing to preach about and therefore the threat was gone. It was all a power thing.

boliver