What is Digg?168 Comments
- newanon, on 10/12/2007, -8/+60well it _is_ an improvement
- greymaxcat, on 10/12/2007, -17/+57Again... Bush can do nothing right in the minds of some...
- shortarabguy, on 10/12/2007, -24/+59Hahaha, And Kanye West said Bush hated black people...
I'll admit that Bush is doing something good there, albeit ineffective, but the solution's not in foreign aid via dollars and cents. Read _The White Man's Burden_ and you'll get a better picture of what's needed to solve the problems presented in third-world nations. - wonderboy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32I think you mean trillion.
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -12/+30Umm White Mans Burden calls us to convert poorer nations to our religion, if I'm not mistaken.. Sure, sending over money isn't the most personal way to do things, but its what they need.
- Persol2point0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Sending more money may not be the perfect solution, but it's a move in the right direction.
What exactly do you think 'should' be done? I can't imagine you listing anything that wouldn't be helped by funding. - CandidateZero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17I'm wondering about the channels through which these funds are being routed, though. For instance, I know that the last great pledge of billions to Africa for AIDS drugs was given directly to US pharmaceuticals. Those companies in turn used that money to secure a deals in African countries to give US drugs in exchange for the elimination of the African-made generic AIDS drugs sold at one third the price.
In effect, the deal was arranged to give Africans a one-time supply of American drugs while ending the production of the cheaper generics. After the influx of American drugs ran out, Africans could only get their drugs from the American suppliers at three times the cost of the generics. It makes good dollars and sense, of course, but it's a little underhanded, especially when it effectively fools people into thinking the deal was philanthropic. - tbeseda, on 10/12/2007, -14/+27they are drawing conclusions from extreme left winged media brain washing.
- geekchic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14The best thing that Bush could do for Africa is stop subsidising farmers in the USA and drop import trade tariffs. Let the African nations export their produce to the USA on free and open terms.
Then, you wont spend a fortune of taxpayers dollars on subsidies for rich US farmers, and you wont spend taxpayers dollars on overseas aid - as you enabled them to trade their way out of poverty.
Everyone wins - expect the xenaphobes of course. - FushBuck, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17"Then there are conditions that are attached where the emphasis is more on countries that open up their markets so American companies can go in and privatize things like water and electrical service or have access to certain resources.
The malaria program complements the president's largest global health initiative, the $15 billion, five-year plan known as the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).
PEPFAR, which often funds programs through religious organizations, has come under criticism for promoting faith-based ideology over science, emphasizing abstinence programs and giving inaccurate information about the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV transmission."
And people wonder why I'm so cynical. - NoStoppingUs, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13my tax dollars wont help poverty.
capitalism will. - Hensworth, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Oh my god Bush is sending more money to Africa! Only democrats can do that! There MUST be some hidden evil agenda!
- CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Gee. More money into the pockets of the "Men of the Benz", the dictators and cronies who keep their countries from flourishing by force.
There is only one reason why the countries of Africa are not flourishing: Excess Government. - flake, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9"Helping" the aids epidemic in Africa by spending more of MY $$$ to teach abstinance, which will *RAISE* the ammount of AIDS is good how?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10....um, every single country is in debt to another country. It sorta gives them leverage.... you're all familiar with leverage, no?
- mcrosby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6You don't send food - You send the tools they need to build an infrustructure so that they can irrigate their land, and catch and grow food.
- mcrosby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Bush is putting money into "faith based" organizations - not governments. Don't you think he would have already thought this through?
- OreosRgood4me, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6It's not going to do anything. The problem is not scarcity and lack of food, but rather poverty and inequality. Giving an unjust government foreign aid is going to do nothing, as they will just use it for their corrupt means.
- kettlechips, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Agreed, but it will never happen. The electoral system gives disproportional influence to rural areas, so politicians are slaves to the farmer.
- mcrosby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Before anyone says "just send them food!", no, that wont work - it will work in the short term, but what happens when the food runs out? Worthless idea! We need to give them the facilities and infrustructure to get their own food - they dont want hand outs.
- Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6With the PR issues Bush is currently having, why on earth did he do that quietly??
- brianbennett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is nice and all, but Africa needs democracy more than money, they already have money... ofcourse it's all in the hands of warlords and DeBeers.
- gradient01, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6There's definitely some truth to that: a disgusting amount of US foreign aid simply goes to line the pockets of dictators. Perhaps that's one of the reasons Bush is funneling the money to "faith based" organizations and not giving it directly to the governments? Just a thought ...
- Lionhart, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Hahaha, it looks like mulubabe got banned? Racist *****.
- LoveWidescreen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ah, so you're the official representative of the Digg groupthink, I see. :P
- Rosemary02, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yes, and if he weren't doing anything, the critics would be screaming about that! Bush can't win.
- Wamzlee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I remember him stating in a State of the Union Address a couple years back that he wanted to do this. Its nice to see he has followed through on something for once...and he is doing it quietly and not holding a press conference to say what a great thing he did.
- Rosemary02, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Please try to use your brain.
Radical Islam in Africa has killed thousands. The bombings of our two embassies alone killed a few hundred Africans. Taking a strategic approach, helping to stabilize African countries, and not allowing them to be overwhelmed by violent radicals is both a practical and a noble goal. It is in our MUTUAL best interests. - foofightrs777, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I always thought that monetary donations should only be given to nations who either are actively eliminating corruption or generally not corrupt. That way the money is spent on the nation and not enriching the leaders. Otherwise, aid should be given in kind, as directly as possible, to the people.
- eth3l, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes, he does. If you, howeve, knew your Presidential history you would relaize that Presidents always begin programs to continue through the terms of their successors - its called a legacy.
- swimanubis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4so much for being from the 'we spend less' party
- dattaway, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I hope this money isn't going right back to the drug companies that are currently lobbying Washington.
- Ratty, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Is this the same kind of 'aid' that various western countries gave to Africa which resulted in Africas massive debts? Or is it proper aid?
- JettaMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I agree with Owls. When you make anyone dependent on handouts (corporations, nations, Native Americans, individuals) it utterly destroys them. It makes them dependent. Utterly destroys their sense of self worth too. So if you want to destroy Africa, lets keep sending handouts. If you want to save Africa, stop interfering and let them figure out their own problems. They aren't children.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Enlighten us, oh wise one of the cult of the tinfoil hat...
- jackminardi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"There is only one reason why the countries of Africa are not flourishing: Excess Government."
This is the one reason almost all governments fail - gradient01, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5OK, this is about the 6th time that I've read this comment in almost the exact same wording (people are probably just repeating something they heard on CNN or BBC, etc.). If it's true, then where's the proof that "Often, the money that is earmarked to fight aids is only allowed to be spent on abstinence only education"? Where's the budget numbers? If you don't have them, then where did you hear this, because it doesn't make any sense. Caring for people dying of AIDS and running orphanages is going to take a hell of a lot more money then any education program they are trying to run.
- gdm9000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I hate Junior as much as anyone, but I don't care what his motivation is; if it results in good policy, I'll support him. And this sounds like good policy. Failed African states are a serious problem that is leading to much geopolitical instability, and it needs to be addressed.
- moxx, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11@mulubabe, I hope that was sarcastic...
If it wasn't...that was quite possibly the worst comment I have ever read... - MusicalGenius, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@ajrahim You are being a little... I can't find the word just yet... Sick... yeah that's right. Sick. How could you BEGIN to compare thousands of lives to your SCHOOLING!!!??? No, that just doesn't work.
Yes, the money will probably be spent horribly, I'll be the first to agree that type of comment. Money doesn't do everything, they should donate effort more than money. But aside from all the political argument etc. You can't compare it to your schooling. The government handles money horribly. Wasting time in congress renaming buildings wastes money yes. Budgeting poorly wastes money. Not documenting where every dime of military money goes is wasting. Compare those to your schooling. Not thousands who are either starving, diseased, homeless, etc... this list could go on forever... NOT them. You CAN NOT compare thousands suffering and dying etc. More happens there than you could possibly know. YOU CAN NOT compare it to your EDUCATION... You could probably still get SOME sort of funding and if not America is still TO A POINT the land of opportunity.
YOU COULD LIVE WITHOUT COLLEGE IF IT MEANT SAVING A FEW LIVES.... DEAL WITH IT!! - exegesisClique, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You don't take a loan from a man in a trench coat and speaks with a Sicilian accent and then immediately hand it to the beggar at your feet.
I am of course referring to our rampant and uncontrolled indebtedness to China.
Philanthropy is, in my mind, a wonderful idea. But please, stop selling our nation to the freaking Chinese and Saudis to do so. - xGORDOx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Also, when unemployment was at 4.8%, Clinton was hailed in the media. Even now, what is Clinton remembered for besides Lewinsky? The Economy.
Yet Bush's Economy is light years ahead of Clinton - not a word.
Yea, what media bias? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I'm sorry if I seem like an *****, but I really don't care about Africa I still can't afford college because of some stupid rules in financial aide. The government obviously doesn't have the right priorities... I thought the students were the FUTURE of this country.
- nagaisu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thinly veiled neo-liberalism. I would llike to believe that this is an altruistic gesture on the part of Bush. But, aid from the US usually has very detrimental strings attached in the form of opening their respective markets and resources up to be plundered. Then, there is the problem of debt accumulation that can't possibly be paid back. Now, I know that this is aid, not loans, but I'm sure that there are quite a few uncompromising stipulations that will come with it to the benefit of US business interests. This is not conspiracy BS, it's just the way we do business when shelling out money. We want something in return.
- smoaky, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Its hard to find fault in giving aid, but the Bush Administration has historically favored faith based groups as the recipients of aid in Africa. Often, the money that is earmarked to fight aids is only allowed to be spent on abstinence only education. Abstinence only education is actually harmful in fighting aids, as people end up having sex anyway, without the real protection, a condom, instead of jerking off every day as the bush administration wishes.
- DiggsOnlyNeoCon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but a whole heck of a lot more than you donating your 10$ weekly allowance.
- there, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3 Nine billion is peanuts compared to the hundreds of billions spend annually on weapons but this is a step in the right direction. Now if we can convince more leaders that trying to help nations develop is a much more sound (and humane) strategy towards national security than randomly blowing stuff up.... we'll have made some progress.
- Comanch09, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3USA debt for the win. Lets keep spending money we dont have, who cares...............
-
Show 51 - 100 of 162 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is