Heard last night on the radio the world in 2004 netted around 31 trillion dollars as income. That's $5000 per *head*, yet one fifth of humanity lives on a dollar a day. Sick hunh? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
This is an Article from a reader placed in "The West Australian" newspaper " COSTLY COMPARISONS " Let us get the Tsunami disaster and, indeed, all the problems afflicting the Third World into perspective. Here is the perspective. Cost of one F-22 Raptor tactical fighter jet - $225 million; cost of US war in a Iraq -$228 million a day; amount spent by Messrs Kerry and Bush election campaigns-$400 million; estimated cost of Mr Bush's second inauguration ball-$40 million; amount of US tax cuts under Mr Bush-$1 trillion; cost of the US Iraq war in 2004 - $147 billion; US recopnstructive aid budgeted for Iraq (though never spent) - $18 billion >>>; amount US offered to tsunami aid after being chasitised by the UN - $35 million. - Barry Healy, Darlington ....considering most of that money is invested into machines of war, and stupid fancy jewelrey and making and consuming obscene products we dont need. I would say it is more than sick.... it is disgusting. But thats life eh ? Im to blame aswell.... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You guys are really thick-headed. Ok, fancy jewelery? Who do you think does most of the Diamond Mining? Africans. Without that industry, there'd be no mining, no Africans would have jobs and they'd be in even MORE squalid living conditions. You think we're not paying them their fair price? Well then YOU pay 5,000 dollars a 1/4 karat for that piece of stone, I sure won't.
Heck, you talk about "5,000" a head, I remember reading an old Charleston Gazette that a woman wrote in (1850s) asking if it is wise to marry a man who only makes 1,000 dollars a year, and they gave a listing of why it is a good thing to do. 1,000 dollars a year! Some countries' economies are still that undeveloped, that 5,000 a year would be RICH.
Pfff. Hard to find any point in such erratic postings, FreeMason, but let's try: [1] You guys are really thick-headed. Happy New Year to you too. [2] Without that industry, there'd be no mining, no Africans would have jobs and they'd be in even MORE squalid living conditions. Fortunately for them we are there to relieve them of their totally surplus natural resources for bottom dollar. [3] You think we're not paying them their fair price? Well then YOU pay 5,000 dollars a 1/4 karat for that piece of stone, I sure won't. Which is what this is all about in the first place: how much you pay for YOUR diamonds. [4] Yeah well also, a dollar will go very far in such regions. Not for very long, at the rate it's currently being devaluated. [5] Heck, you talk about "5,000" a head, I remember reading an old Charleston Gazette that a woman wrote in (1850s) asking if it is wise to marry a man who only makes 1,000 dollars a year, and they gave a listing of why it is a good thing to do. 1,000 dollars a year! A thousand dollars in Charleston in 1850 would be worth $13,000 in that same Charleston in 1991. Your point being? [6] Some countries' economies are still that undeveloped, that 5,000 a year would be RICH. Thank you, you seem to understand after all.
That 1/5 of the world living on $1/day is mostly because of living under governments that are inherintly corrupt and unstable or allmost no government at all . The countries governed by warlords or dictators whos only interest is themselves and their corrupt little world and the constant state of war brought about by those very conditions. I agree that it is sick that those conditions exist for so many and that it takes generations for things to change in those countries. The wealthy nations of the world are not working to keep the poor nations down.
Oh, but they do. Slavery (in the West) was abolished when machines were introduced, not for any other reason. It was just cheaper, and less fuss. Around 1960, Africa suddenly became independent wholesale, almost in the same year, all over the continent. After the formation of large economic structures in the West after the second world war it had become evident there was no need for a continued formal presence. It was just cheaper, and less fuss. These countries were not countries, of course, but just ruler-straight lines on maps with a lot of different tribes living between those lines. They got into fights. We supply weapons, continually. There is no more war, no more peace. Only an ever continuing 'peace process', in which essentially everything stays the same. 'Do they know it's Christmas time' brought in a 144 million pounds for relief work in Africa. To put things in perspective: that's the amount of money Africa has to pay the West in interest on loans, every WEEK. Everybody in the West could carpet their house with those CD's and still make no difference what-so-ever to the state of things in the world. But those countries DO work hard in 'keeping the poor nations down'. Quite successfully. And get away with it.
Hmm what big rich countries do we know that could be described just as easily in those same terms? haha.
What exactly do you mean by "lives on a dollar a day"? Do you mean that their average yearly salary is around $365? Or are you saying that the total value of everything that they take home and produce for themselves is $365/year? I mean, I could easily imagine some peasant farmer in India who grows enough food for his family to eat comfortably simply living off what he produces, and not actually getting paid any cash.
Hi Nasor, It's GDP, so the latter would seem to be more appropriate. On the second: Bit of a two-edged sword. What's 'produce'? You can eat your crops, but as farmers know, that's an unhealthy diet, eating only what you can grow on your own. You need trade, and money enters the game. In the West we do not see things like subsistence computer programming (yet), although I guess you could 'eat' off that, too. But what does the programmer actually 'produce', even when 'normally' employed? Nothing, he 'facilitates' things, yet making more money than a 100 guys down in the jungle. What does he 'facilitate'? Actually, nothing more than that exact situation of 100 guys working their ass of so 1 guy can 'facilitate' on a huge salary. So, everything is hunky dory, seen from our perspective. Oh, and they HAVE stopped growing stuff in protest, at one point or another. With devastating results, you might say. People like Freemason still need their diamonds and stuff. If the supplier starts acting Commie, there's only one solution, and by our God-given stewardship over the peoples of this planet we shall prevail blah blah etc.
