Oh those EVIL capitalistic countries!!

bigred · 11th June 2005, 01:24 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...ica/index.html

Ed · 11th June 2005, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bigred

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...ica/index.html

What else are they going to do? The charmers that run those countries have already blown the loot for big pots to stew missionaries in.

aerocontrols · 11th June 2005, 03:42 PM

This is excellent news, but I'm still waiting for the press coverage to reach the Elephant in the room...

Rob Lister · 11th June 2005, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aerocontrols
This is excellent news, but I'm still waiting for the press coverage to reach the Elephant in the room...

I think the news is poor. Debt 'relief' is one thing but it is another to forgive debt unless the circumstances change greatly (complete change of regime/institution of democraticish reforms) otherwise you're just asking for more debt, more poverty, more dictatorship, more hardship all around.

The best you'll get is a promise of a controlling or influencial vote in future economic matters, which won't mean squat in terms of real upward economic change.

From a conspiracy POV, that may be what the G8 is really after.

aerocontrols · 11th June 2005, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rob Lister
I think the news is poor. Debt 'relief' is one thing but it is another to forgive debt unless the circumstances change greatly (complete change of regime/institution of democraticish reforms) otherwise you're just asking for more debt, more poverty, more dictatorship, more hardship all around.

The best you'll get is a promise of a controlling or influencial vote in future economic matters, which won't mean squat in terms of real upward economic change.

From a conspiracy POV, that may be what the G8 is really after.

The point is to move away from loans altogether and offer grants instead, but to make the criteria for receiving them more difficult.

Skeptic · 11th June 2005, 05:39 PM

I think they should just send the money direct to the various African leaders' Swiss bank accounts.

That's going to be the end result anyway, after all, and they'll save on transaction costs.

Rob Lister · 11th June 2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aerocontrols
The point is to move away from loans altogether and offer grants instead, but to make the criteria for receiving them more difficult.

If only I could talk my morgage company into doing that.

davefoc · 11th June 2005, 08:42 PM

Are loans to poorer countries really made with the hope of helping the recipient of the loans?

My thought is that a larger driving force behind loans to poorer countries is to provide them with money to buy products from the loaning country or countries. Of course this is a losing venture for the host country because it loses in net far more money than it ever gains. But politicians don't make the loans either for the benefit of the donor country or the benefit of the target country. They make the loans to curry favor with their country's industrial leaders and their lobbiests.

I think it is fairly likely that this is a major driving force behind the US loans/foreign aid to Israel. And foreign aid to Israel routinely makes up something in the range of half of all US foreign aid. Israel's loans are also routinely forgiven by the US I believe.

If I was a citizen of a poorer country I would feel no particular moral imperative to pay back a loan of this type. Many times, as has been noted above, big parts of the money are lost through corruption, and then more big chunks are lost because the donor country expects the money to be used to buy crap I don't think my country needs. So 10 years down the line and my country is still friggin poor, I'm supposed to get all worked up because we're not going to pay back a loan that was of no obvious benefit to my country? Not likely.

Drooper · 12th June 2005, 02:21 AM

Another backward patronising step in foreign policy toawrds Africa. Politicians falling for the great luvvie onslaught of Bono and Geldof and NGOs in the world that mix 99% moral outrage, with 1% rational thought to come to the conclusion that this will do anything positive at all.

This is driven by headline loving luvvies with more media savvy and political influence than is healthy, and spineless pandering politicans. Pity about poor ordinary Africans who will find that this policy direction spells nothing but more corruption, violence and poverty for them.

It will also mean wealthy politicians around the world can now breath a sigh of relief and pat themselve on the back for their wonderful act and avoid doing anything that would actually help.

The Luvvies like Bono and Geldof can retire to their tax havens and bask in the warm glow of their own self importance and maybe through a party or two - for select "friends" only. (don't you even think about stepping over that velvet rope).

This whole debacle fills me with morale outrage and makes me physically ill.

11th June 2005, 01:24 PM	#1
bigred Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: USA Posts: 12,533	Oh those EVIL capitalistic countries!! http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...ica/index.html

11th June 2005, 01:34 PM	#2
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Re: Oh those EVIL capitalistic countries!! Quote: Originally posted by bigred http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...ica/index.html What else are they going to do? The charmers that run those countries have already blown the loot for big pots to stew missionaries in.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

11th June 2005, 03:42 PM	#3
aerocontrols Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,445	This is excellent news, but I'm still waiting for the press coverage to reach the Elephant in the room...
	__________________ Misunderestimated in 2000. Unredefeated in 2004. My dog does his tricks. My roomate's dog tries to escape the kitchen. We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest. Source

11th June 2005, 04:32 PM	#5
aerocontrols Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,445	Quote: Originally posted by Rob Lister I think the news is poor. Debt 'relief' is one thing but it is another to forgive debt unless the circumstances change greatly (complete change of regime/institution of democraticish reforms) otherwise you're just asking for more debt, more poverty, more dictatorship, more hardship all around. The best you'll get is a promise of a controlling or influencial vote in future economic matters, which won't mean squat in terms of real upward economic change. From a conspiracy POV, that may be what the G8 is really after. The point is to move away from loans altogether and offer grants instead, but to make the criteria for receiving them more difficult.
	__________________ Misunderestimated in 2000. Unredefeated in 2004. My dog does his tricks. My roomate's dog tries to escape the kitchen. We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest. Source

12th June 2005, 02:21 AM	#9
Drooper Guest Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,983	Another backward patronising step in foreign policy toawrds Africa. Politicians falling for the great luvvie onslaught of Bono and Geldof and NGOs in the world that mix 99% moral outrage, with 1% rational thought to come to the conclusion that this will do anything positive at all. This is driven by headline loving luvvies with more media savvy and political influence than is healthy, and spineless pandering politicans. Pity about poor ordinary Africans who will find that this policy direction spells nothing but more corruption, violence and poverty for them. It will also mean wealthy politicians around the world can now breath a sigh of relief and pat themselve on the back for their wonderful act and avoid doing anything that would actually help. The Luvvies like Bono and Geldof can retire to their tax havens and bask in the warm glow of their own self importance and maybe through a party or two - for select "friends" only. (don't you even think about stepping over that velvet rope). This whole debacle fills me with morale outrage and makes me physically ill.
Drooper Guest Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,983

11th June 2005, 04:14 PM	#4
Rob Lister Suspended Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523	Quote: Originally posted by aerocontrols This is excellent news, but I'm still waiting for the press coverage to reach the Elephant in the room... I think the news is poor. Debt 'relief' is one thing but it is another to forgive debt unless the circumstances change greatly (complete change of regime/institution of democraticish reforms) otherwise you're just asking for more debt, more poverty, more dictatorship, more hardship all around. The best you'll get is a promise of a controlling or influencial vote in future economic matters, which won't mean squat in terms of real upward economic change. From a conspiracy POV, that may be what the G8 is really after.

11th June 2005, 05:39 PM	#6
Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Behind the chessboard Posts: 18,361	I think they should just send the money direct to the various African leaders' Swiss bank accounts. That's going to be the end result anyway, after all, and they'll save on transaction costs.

11th June 2005, 05:55 PM	#7
Rob Lister Suspended Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523	Quote: Originally posted by aerocontrols The point is to move away from loans altogether and offer grants instead, but to make the criteria for receiving them more difficult. If only I could talk my morgage company into doing that.

11th June 2005, 08:42 PM	#8
davefoc Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: orange country, california Posts: 7,244	Are loans to poorer countries really made with the hope of helping the recipient of the loans? My thought is that a larger driving force behind loans to poorer countries is to provide them with money to buy products from the loaning country or countries. Of course this is a losing venture for the host country because it loses in net far more money than it ever gains. But politicians don't make the loans either for the benefit of the donor country or the benefit of the target country. They make the loans to curry favor with their country's industrial leaders and their lobbiests. I think it is fairly likely that this is a major driving force behind the US loans/foreign aid to Israel. And foreign aid to Israel routinely makes up something in the range of half of all US foreign aid. Israel's loans are also routinely forgiven by the US I believe. If I was a citizen of a poorer country I would feel no particular moral imperative to pay back a loan of this type. Many times, as has been noted above, big parts of the money are lost through corruption, and then more big chunks are lost because the donor country expects the money to be used to buy crap I don't think my country needs. So 10 years down the line and my country is still friggin poor, I'm supposed to get all worked up because we're not going to pay back a loan that was of no obvious benefit to my country? Not likely.