http://green-man-2010.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
green-man-2010.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
talkpolitics2010-05-22 09:05 am
green-man-2010.livejournal.com) wrote in talkpolitics2010-05-22 09:05 am
Entry tags:
The Fight Against Global Poverty.
I want to you to take a look at these maps. They show the state of the world and show that in spite of what we see in the media , the fight against endemic world poverty is being won.
The images are big, so behind an LJ cut to save your bandwidth.
First , lets understand IMR - it stands for Infant Mortality Rate.
If you were to look at Britain since the year 2000, you would find that for every 1,000 live births, less than 10 children died before their 1st birthday. Britain has an IMR of under 10.
Now in some countries, the IMR is 50, or even higher. This means that at least 1 child in 20 will die before it's a year old. Worse still, in some countries, the IMR iis 100 or over - in some cases IMrs top 200 - I child in 5 dying before it's first birthday.
Now, this IMR thing is not some random event. it is closely linked to what we call 'endemic poverty'. In the UK, it may be possible to see some homeless people sleeping rough on the streets of London. There are isolated incidents of people falling into poverty. However, for the bigger percentage of the population, things are different. most people have houses. Most, if not all children have shoes, go to school, and eat enough to stay alive.
In other countries, however, most children do not simply lack shoes, they lack homes wiith running water, proper sanitation, the means to go to school- and whole villages are like this. this is what we mean by 'endemic poverrty' poverty being widespread - it's the norm and out of control. In such countries, diseases like malaria are also wide spread, endemic and are delibitating the efforts people make to rise up out of poverty.
So- now we know this, let's take a look at the maps.
the world in 1960 - you can click the image for more detail, but basically, purple = high IMR and green = below 50.
look at how widespread endemic poverty is.
note that Europe and North America are relatively prosperous, but namy areas suffer IMRs well over 50.
1980
more green areas showing up - but still lots of places where work needs doing.
some counties are a darker shade of green - places like this have very low IMRs.
2000
The world seems to be winning the war against endemic poverty.
Any country that goes below 50 tends to stay there - only North Korea, with a communist Military dictatorship seems to have fallen back to being above IMR 50.
most places that have democratic, stable governments are making vast strides. I hope in my lifetime to see the whole world go below IMR 50.
If we change the way that international trade is conducted, if we back the initiatives of the World Health Organiisation, if we can persuade our own politicians to sponsor world health programmes instead of more expensive weapon systems, if we support democratic movements like those in burma and elsewhere against tyrannical regimes, if we educate ourselves on what's happening and how we can get involved - then that is perfectly possible.
The images are big, so behind an LJ cut to save your bandwidth.
First , lets understand IMR - it stands for Infant Mortality Rate.
If you were to look at Britain since the year 2000, you would find that for every 1,000 live births, less than 10 children died before their 1st birthday. Britain has an IMR of under 10.
Now in some countries, the IMR is 50, or even higher. This means that at least 1 child in 20 will die before it's a year old. Worse still, in some countries, the IMR iis 100 or over - in some cases IMrs top 200 - I child in 5 dying before it's first birthday.
Now, this IMR thing is not some random event. it is closely linked to what we call 'endemic poverty'. In the UK, it may be possible to see some homeless people sleeping rough on the streets of London. There are isolated incidents of people falling into poverty. However, for the bigger percentage of the population, things are different. most people have houses. Most, if not all children have shoes, go to school, and eat enough to stay alive.
In other countries, however, most children do not simply lack shoes, they lack homes wiith running water, proper sanitation, the means to go to school- and whole villages are like this. this is what we mean by 'endemic poverrty' poverty being widespread - it's the norm and out of control. In such countries, diseases like malaria are also wide spread, endemic and are delibitating the efforts people make to rise up out of poverty.
So- now we know this, let's take a look at the maps.
the world in 1960 - you can click the image for more detail, but basically, purple = high IMR and green = below 50.
look at how widespread endemic poverty is.
note that Europe and North America are relatively prosperous, but namy areas suffer IMRs well over 50.
1980
more green areas showing up - but still lots of places where work needs doing.
some counties are a darker shade of green - places like this have very low IMRs.
2000
The world seems to be winning the war against endemic poverty.
Any country that goes below 50 tends to stay there - only North Korea, with a communist Military dictatorship seems to have fallen back to being above IMR 50.
most places that have democratic, stable governments are making vast strides. I hope in my lifetime to see the whole world go below IMR 50.
If we change the way that international trade is conducted, if we back the initiatives of the World Health Organiisation, if we can persuade our own politicians to sponsor world health programmes instead of more expensive weapon systems, if we support democratic movements like those in burma and elsewhere against tyrannical regimes, if we educate ourselves on what's happening and how we can get involved - then that is perfectly possible.
no subject
May I suggest that someone goes out there and asks them exactly what THEY want, instead of treating them like helpless children who haave no say in what is done to "Help" them?
no subject
no subject
I can't be the only one with the belief microcredit will only encourage capitalist tendencies, this leads to the raping of all known rescourses, government corruption (Of which I feel pretty sure they need no more encouragement)
Me, I say ask them what they need, then send the tools, education (Non-religious), and materials for them to build their own required tools to do whatever they like.
Hell even micro-credit makes a profit (Small though it may be) ad I believe Muslims therefore cannot make good use of that w/o upsetting one of their gods/prophets(I'm not overly well read on the Muslim faith)
Tools, Food, manpower (Plenty of that there already I'd guess, just needs a little organisation.) and materials, when money, arms, even foodstuffs on occasions are sent, it seems to me that corrupt governments (and in a multi-faith country I think some will do badly out of the deal) will deal these out as they see fit and that's not always according to need. It's my opinion you cannot help those who won't help themselves.
I'll guess you live in a pseudo-democratic, capitalist society?, by the time FRB kicks in (Which always does in any capitalist state) do you really think the workers will be any better off in retirement?
no subject
While I think working with people is a great idea, to some extent the person offering the aid has the right to do it how they want. They are free to say no.
And most microcredit firms that I know of are non-profits and I don't think many charge interest which is what many Muslims find to be against their faith. Though often calling interest a 'fee' makes it ok.
By FRB do you mean the Fed? I am somewhat confused by your last line.
no subject
As for working with people, I'm not quite with it right now (Blighty has sun) but I actualy meant send people to assist with any complexities of toolmaking, whilst using local labour.
I think you're right with regards to capitalism, it's here to stay, it's not my preferred way of dealing with exchange of goods and services, I much prefer the "Chit systems" (Though I'm yet to try one) but even they tend to be valued by way of "Value according to £UK" which defeats many objects of the system other than that of "Buy locally, support locals"
People making money from money leads to instability of countries, inflation like you'd not believe, and of course poverty due to the inflation. If one man has to work 50 years to provide for his final 10, there's something wrong with the system, I know people are living longer, but really, if there's no extra demand (I guess because we're told there's no extra people in the country) then why the hell are things priced up so high?
As for the micro-banks, "Fee's/Interest", hell Blighty recently had a "Muslim Mortgage", ffs if people can't see through that one... I'd still suggest, Tools and materials, with the compulsion to pass forward when able, the pass forward system works for myself and quite a number of my friends, I'm in debt to some, (polyanarch for instance) In credit with many, but as I only give what I can afford, take (or ask for) what I need, system works fine:)
no subject
This may come as a shock, but the most anti-capitalist country is North Korea. Want to guess how their resources are used?
Capitalism is just a boogeyman. The free exchange of value between people is a net benefit. Even in places described as highly exploitative you see capitalist institutions having a ratchet effect on their end to poverty.
The problem people have with capitalism is as I believed PJ O'Rourke opined, it doesn't promise white teeth, perfect hair, and wonderful results. Capitalism is a tool. Almost everyone in the world uses that tool even if they deny it outright. They just hedge it in other forms. Some people use that tool and they fail. A surgeon can have the best scalpels and drugs and still lose the patient. That happens. But it's the best tool around to end poverty.
no subject
i would argue for regulated capitalisim. The Uk is a capitalist country, but London has one of the cleanest rivers in Europe going right through it.
capitalism can be regulated to be non polluting and resouce sustaining.
no subject
no subject
like I said, don't abolish capitalism , regulate it. Regulation does work.
no subject
no subject
yes I know, you went on to describe it as a tool, I see it as a game that illness/depression/drink habit/stuborness made me really bad at, and I'm a stroppy loser :)
I don't see it as the best tool for ending poverty though, come on, wasn't it just 10% of Geldofs millions reached their supposed destination? That's some need of regulation, yet for some reason Our Forces will never be sent there to deal with the problem at source, I wonder why.
no subject
there are , however, ways in which money may be borrowed and all sort of legal fictions are used to make banking Saria Compliant.