Being that this is the current media orgasm, I thought I'd chime in. Since this will likely be a quite lengthy editorial, I'll just hope you know to click the Read More link.
1. End foreign aid to African governments.
What you may ask? Solve poverty by not giving the countries money?! Yup. Damn right. The majority of these governments are corrupt. They take the money we give them and feed themselves with it.
So, stop feeding the beast! Give the money to private organizations such as the International Red Cross/Crescent societies or who ever else is out there to make sure these people get food and medicine.
2. Find a way for it to be beneficial for large companies to set up shop in Africa.
Such as factories, or energy companies. Or infrastructure companies.
This has an immediate benefit: jobs. They are scarce in Africa because there really isn't much basic infrastructure. Without jobs, you can't have an economy. This leads to my next point.
3. Ensure an infrastructure is built.
This means power plants, power lines, telephone system, roads. The basic necessities for a modern industrial nation.
4. Forgive current debt.
But don't forgive costs of previous 4 points, treat them as a loan. Infusion of cash is a great short term growth operation. At least Keynes thought so. Not that I'm the biggest Keynesian.
On the other hand, if you just give people money, they'll take it for granted. Treat it like the Marshall Plan. It worked for Europe, which at the time really wasn't much better off than Africa is now.
5. Educate the people.
All this will do no good if the people don't have basic skills of a 6th grader. Many Africans already understand this in ways many Americans don't, but short term necessity prevents them from attaining it.
6. Only agree to help a nation that will allow for free elections and some sort of representative government.
You can lead a horse to water, but you damn sure can't make it drink. Same principle really. We can dump 100% GDP into Africa, and it would be to waste if the same dictators ran it. They would simply continue to run it into the ground and rape it. You simply can not have economic growth without economic freedom. Even China has figured that one out, for all it's social and intellectual controls. I guarantee that at its height, the Soviet's had more economic freedom than most of Africa has right now.
7. Take Action.
Puttings on awareness events such as concerts and all is wonderful. But if you're Paul McCartney or whoever else is involved in the "Live 8" events, I know damned well you're worth quite a pile. More than I am with my livable E-3 salary. If everyone who is involved in that event doesn't donate a large amount of money to the cause and take some of the time they'd otherwise spend in their Riviera vacation homes and go hand out food, then they are in my mind hypocrites. I can't go to Africa to hand out food. I have no money to give. But if I were Paul McCartney I could. I don't know if he is taking action, but I'd bet not.
-
Is any of this going to be done? No. They're just going to increase foreign aid to the corrupt governments. People will continue to die, and as it was so eloquently put in "Hotel Rwanda" people around the world will say "My, that's terrible" and go on eating their dinner (not just Americans, apathy isn't an American disease despite what the Europeans seem to believe.)
Is this the best solution? Maybe, maybe not. I'm not an economist, or a city planner, or even a business man. But I'm a reasonably intelligent person, with a good sense of history and just basic common sense. I can see what the problem is and it's 90% that the people in charge are the wrong people. Most of them put themselves in charge and that doesn't help either.
Bottom line, we can help, but we can't do it all. The African peoples have the lions share of responsibilities. We can only donate a finite amount of time and money to the cause and pray it isn't all for not.
Posted by Skywalker at July 4, 2005 03:17 AM | TrackBackThose sound like good ideas to me. Especially education. without that....there's little chance in today's world of a successful life (that goes for everyone regardless of who you are or where you live). But like you said too:
"...short term necessity prevents them from attaining it."
To me the most important thing is making sure the money get to the people who can use it, which it isn't right now. Right now it goes to buy dictators there car collections (not that I'm against wealthy people collecting cars, I plan to one day be that wealthy and have a collection of my own.)
Posted by: skywalker at July 4, 2005 01:27 PMWell, when you look at the big picture, not one problem is worse than the other (obviously). There all bad (which is why they're problems to begin with). Sometimes when a country like this is experiancing so much hardship, disease and corruption - it's hard to know where to start without just diving right on in. Everything goes hand in hand.
I do agree, though, that it's hard (pretty damn impossible rather) to make things better when corruption is running so rampant. Bono has acknowledged that himself (of course, he's been trying to help these people for years. He'd be a moron not to realize this).
Hopefully the more people have a chance at a good education maybe they could be the key in taking steps to ensure the true freedoms of their people. Only God knows how this is going to happen.
"...I plan to one day be that wealthy and have a collection of my own.)"
:-)
Don't we all wish to be that wealthy someday. One day I would like to aquire my *own* collection of "machines" as well. Hopefully in the form of motercycles and dirtbikes (maybe then I will learn how to ride them). Not to mention someday owning 2 "vacation" homes aside from the main house we plane to live in. Be able to do ALOT of traveling and for muddy and me to take complete finacial care of ourselves through our retirement years (and leave some left over to the kiddos) wihtout the help of any government involvement. But we all have our dreams now don't we. Here's hoping they come true.:-)
Difference: I don't just wish it, I plan it.
Posted by: skywalker at July 4, 2005 02:40 PMDifference? Between you and me? Watch your words there. I'll kick you marine ass for that comment.
Beside, just because you *plan* things, doesn't give you a garuntee that they'll happen (sometimes somethings aren't ment to be). Just remember, life NEVER turns out the exact way you expect (I'm sure you've learned that by now) so just hang on for the ride.
Posted by: mrs. muddy at July 4, 2005 02:56 PMI quote Ronald Reagan, though he was quoting Berlin Wall graffiti:
"This wall will fall, dreams become reality."
the first thing thats wrong with your grandiose plan is its upside down. Education needs to be the first priority of all african nations. the #1 way to reduce the birth rate is to educate women. not only well this help with population concerns it will also produce a work force that will at least be able to operate virgining industry. and before you go on your Capitialism rant, just look what Nehru did in India. if it wasnt for his investing heavily in india techincal institute with his [eveil socialist ideals] the Indian people wouldnt be taking Muddys IT jobs today.
secondly, i belive all your talk about corruption is exaggerated. there is certainly "corruption", but more than "corruption" it is governments run by dictators who use the few resources of the state for their personal ambitions. now i guess this is just a matter of symantics since that can be called "corruption", but quite frankly its more a dictator and tyrant problem thats ruining the countries.
th warlords who sieze power and take use the resources to buy more weapons for their own personal armies. its in many way simmilar to the situation in afghanistan with some african countries having entire regions controlled by certain warlods. just take the congo for example.
lastly, instead of More private interprise, i think most foriegn comapanies need to get kicked out of these africa nations, or at least have their contratcs readjusted.
these Foriegn companies come into a nation, agree to a Large contract with the "leader" [AKA dictator or warlod who is currently holding power.] these foriegn companies take 85% of the revenues from the materials being exported and give a pittenace to the dictator and the nation. not only has this happened in the past, its happening now.
the US government and foriegn companies have Thwarted efforts in democracy and kept dictators in power just for financial or "security" concerns. even though colonialism has ended, the european powers and the US have had a very heavy hand meddling in african affairs, Most of which have not bennfited the people of those lands.
a few years ago, maybe 01 or 02 when i was watching BBC world news on my Liberal PBS station; they had a report on the African country of CHAD becoming an oil producer. exxon was heavily investing in the country, and the Warlord/leader struck a deal where Chad got 15% of total revenues from oil pipeline. exxon and the world bank were supposedly putting some of the money in a trust fund so it could help the "people" of the country. however with the 1st bit of money from the foriegn companies, the Leader of chad was buying Weapons to "defend" the country.
so here you have a Warlord in control of one of the poorest country in the world; he strikes a deal where 85% of his nations resources are going to foriegn companies. how is that fair? if it was even 60/40 i could somewhat understand that, but 15%? now even with the worldbank "watching over" the money, how much of it will be funneled into swiss account for the dictator of this country?
now magnify whats happening in chad with majority of african countries over the last 45 years, and youll see why africa is in such shambles.
lastly on the whole "plan" to be wealthy, i would find this plan very amusing? a lance cpl planning on being rich? you better get some butter bars and start kissing ass, then you can be discharged and hired by haliburton and get some stock shares. theyll own half of america in 20 years.
I'm working on butter bars.
See you believe wealth comes from luck, I believe it comes from hard work.
Kicking private companies out of Africa will compound problems: where will people get jobs?!
Education is in my mind the second priority. No one will bother getting an education if they can't first feed themselves. No, getting jobs low paying or not is definitely the top priority. We can not indefinitely feed an entire generation.
Posted by: skywalker at July 4, 2005 09:01 PM6. Only agree to help a nation that will allow for free elections and some sort of representative government.
You can lead a horse to water, but you damn sure can't make it drink. Same principle really. We can dump 100% GDP into Africa, and it would be to waste if the same dictators ran it. They would simply continue to run it into the ground and rape it. You simply can not have economic growth without economic freedom. Even China has figured that one out, for all it's social and intellectual controls. I guarantee that at its height, the Soviet's had more economic freedom than most of Africa has right now.
That measure is the toughest of all. I'm backing it but I doubt it would be enough. You should add, back financially and politically democratic parties, finance training for judges and electoral leaders (this could be done through voluntary work) ...
However, France for instance has recently back the "election" of a new eyadema president in TOgo. The election was 100% fake. ANd France favored the eviction of the democratic opponent.
Why ?
Well
1 eyadema and allies finance political parties in France.
2 all many african countries give very good conditions to foreign companies (french in this case), get cash directly from these companies. If a democratic leader was to be elected, the first thing he would do, would be tax profits, nationalise some of these companies ... Which means less money for croony foreign investors.
So you get back to your point 2. Even though it may be beneficial in the long term for large companies to be in a stable political environment in a democratic country, in the short term it means paying more in order to access to the local resources. Private companies are the first source of briberies and civil war in Africa ...
(total financed armed rebellion in Congo)
That story is centuries old.
Remember how khomeyny came to power in Iran ?
Back in 1951 the newly elected leader is socialist and nationalise oil. THe USA don't like it, they overthrow it and replace it by the SHah a dictator.
Finally the shah is overthrown by the rebellion led by khomeiny...
So it's good to want others to turn democratic, but that means less immediate profit by the companies who often finance your political party...
That's why improving democracy in a place you don't control (Iraq, africa) is cool. Improving it in a place you used to control is not cool (CHavez is no good, same with Lula).
But the truth is, large companies do not invest on democracy, their aim is to make money, and fast, not to bring in political change for the better.
Bringing in democracy in a country is a tough job that can also turn against you. The USA are discovering it in Iraq (not that they had not been told it was hard, but you know, most people need to learn by themselves, and often several times before they get it)
Posted by: DF at July 13, 2005 06:07 AM