US 'could end world poverty by 2025'

[emad]

Julian Borger in Washington
Monday March 7, 2005
The Guardian

Jeffrey Sachs, a prominent US economist and a special adviser to the UN secretary general, argues in a new book that extreme poverty could be eradicated by 2025.

In The End of Poverty, he says much will depend on the choices made by Americans, who are paying a far smaller share of their income in foreign aid than they promised three years ago, and only a 30th of the "nearly $500bn <£260bn> the US will spend this year on the military".

"Currently, more than eight million people around the world die each year because they are too poor to stay alive. Yet our generation, in the US and abroad, can choose to end extreme poverty by the year 2025," he writes.

Professor Sachs is the director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and the head of the UN's Millennium Project, formulating anti-poverty goals.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1432059,00.html

[Poppyseedman]

1. Jeffrey, stay away from the crack pipe

In The End of Poverty, he says much will depend on the choices made by Americans,

he says there is little evidence that corruption has been the main obstacle to development in Africa, where extreme poverty is concentrated.

I'm sorry, but I find it extremely hard to believe that crushing poverty is caused by our failure to act, when for the large part extreme poverty is caused by political agendas and religious hatred in the vast majority of the world, especially Africa.

We need to do our fair share and even more, but poverty isn't going to go away because we open our pocketbooks and let the corrupt governments that oppress their own people loot our wealth for their personal gain.

[Mandate My Ass]

2. You don't have to look far

for "corrupt governments that oppress their own people loot our wealth for their personal gain."

We have one right here in DC!

[Poppyseedman]

3. At least we have enough wealth for

every pea picking tin hat dictator looking for a handout and enough DC bureaucrats willing to give it away so the world can say "Feel guilty you have a pot to piss in"

At least we get to vote for our oppressors.

[Mandate My Ass]

5. You have far more confidence in our voting system than I do

There are ways to help the poor without any money landing in the hands of "every pea picking tin hat dictator." That is just the newest twist on demonizing the poor.

[Poppyseedman]

6. Demonizing worlds poor? .......................B.S.

Sure the poor in this county get demonised, some of it is fair, most isn't. Welfare queens driving Cadillacs and having cell phones is the picture you see on the news, which does a dis - service to the real poor who really need and want to improve their lives.

There is a difference between our poor and the worlds poor. Most of the worlds poor would give their right arm to be our USA poor to live like princes.

What the majority of the worlds poor need is their governments to stop oppressing them. No amount of our money will stop them from being poor,until they can determine their own course. We may help him to survive from day to day, which we should and already do in many cases.

But to say by 2025, a mere 20 years away, the USA can remove extreme poverty in the world is laying a guilt trip on us to fleece the dollars out of our pockets into theres. After twenty years there still will be the poor and someones Swiss bank account will be full.

[Mandate My Ass]

7. demonization is never fair or justified

you can write them off as not worthy if you want, and it seems you truly do.

Maybe GWB can spread some democracy on those oppressors. You know him, the guy who is fleecing the US taxpayers and the Iraqi people in the name of spreading freedom and democracy.

[Poppyseedman]

8. Demonization is fair and justified to those that deseve it.

If Miss Welfare Queen is pulling in $100,000 a year fraudulently, I'll demonize her every which way but loose.

Our American system to help the poor is certainly a worthy one for those who need it and I fully support it. I'm not writing off anyone.

They also should be able to use the system to improve their lives rather than just live off of it.

As for the world poor, we need to help as much as we can and be effective

Throwing money down a rat hole just to make ourselves or worst the world feel better, at least to me, a waste of money and resources.

I'm all for helping anyone who is poor, here or across the sea as long as it makes a difference in their lives and doesn't line the pockets of a bureaucrat or government official.

That scenario rarely works out.

[GiovanniC]

9. I'm Curious: How Many "Welfare Queens" Rake in $100k Annually?

It must be positively pandemic to hear you tell the story.

[Poppyseedman]

10. The point which you seem to have

missed entirely, is not how many welfare queens there are, (there are some) but how I was demonizing the poor, by marginalizing the article that stated Americans can stop extreme poverty in the world by 2025.

I was accused of demonizing the poor and I'll demonize anyone who is ripping off the system whether it's here or across the world. The truly poor need our help and we should give our fair share, but not to line the pockets of corrupt governments or officials, which normally is what happens for the worlds poor when we send money to help.

Is Kofi Annan or his son a Welfare King?

I'm positively pandemic to hear you justify the corruption at the U.N.

In theory the UN is a great idea if it wasn't run by a bunch of thugs.

[GiovanniC]

11. When You Get Done Spouting Off Right-Wing Talking Points

Maybe you'll answer the question that was posed to you: to wit, how widespread is this problem of welfare queens making $100,000 per year?

You seem to imply that this is a "HUGH" and widespread problem and that it's fair to demonize the poor as a result... so let's hear it: you made the claim that welfare queens are out there driving their Escalades and making $100,000 a year and I'd really like to know how many there are. A number, not just "some" or "many" or "a few". Also, while you're at it, go ahead and back up your claims with credible information (i.e., links).

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GiovanniC]

13. Either It's a Pervasive Problem

(which I see no evidence of) or it's not.

If it's a pervasive problem and there are all these people who are just getting filthy rich off welfare, making $100,000 a year and driving expensive cars (your claim), then you would provide evidence beyond "I seen it".

If it's not a pervasive problem and it is just a hypothetical "could happen" or a fairly infrequent issue, then I fail to see what the fuck your point is. Even the best, most well-designed system is going to be susceptible to some amount of fraud, there's almost no way around it. Everything that deals with money is susceptible to fraud, period.

I asked you a simple question. You made the assertion that welfare queens were raking in $100,000 a year. I asked how many. If you're going to make claims, you should back them up.

The only thing you've really contributed so far is that you seem to suggest that "welfare queens" are a significant issue, that we should eliminate "corrupt governments that oppress their own people" and that the UN is "run by a bunch of thugs".

[Poppyseedman]

14. Well, you're batting two for three. Not bad for someone

sitting on their horse.

1. You claim I stated Welfare queens are a significant problem is easily refuted by the amazing ability to read my posts. No where did I claim that, only you thought I did. Did I hit a sore spot?

2. Eliminate corrupt governments that oppress their own people is a good concept

3. The U.N is run by a bunch of thugs.

I guess every one is entitled to their own opinion. The people of Danfar may think it's run by thugs, as they starve to death while the U.N does absolutely nothing.

Now, there some really poor people you can get worked up about instead of defending welfare queens. How many there are ,is a question nobody really knows nor does it really matter.

[GiovanniC]

15. If Welfare Queens Aren't a Big Problem, Why Is It Relevant?

You continued to harp on all these supposed welfare queens that are making $100,000 a year and driving around in sweet rides. Then you say it's not a big deal. So what are you trying to gain by talking about them? Right-wingers talk about these welfare boogeymen all the time, but at least they have a reason: they want to undermine programs that help poor individuals, families, and children. So what's your agenda?

As for your other two points... let's just say that at the very least, you have a lot in common with the people who are ruining this country day by day.

[GOPBasher]

4. We should do more, BUT...

Okay, we certainly should do more. The rich European nations give much more in foreign aid as a percentage of their GDPs. And Japan actually gives more MONEY, period, even though their GDP is much, much less than ours. Plus, foreign aid could be seen as national defence, since less people would hate us if we helped poor nations out more. We spend over $400 trillion per year on the military to defend ourselves; a little more foreign aid would even begin to tough that amount of money. So yes, we should do more.

However, I want to echo a previous poster who made the comment that we're not the ones who *caused* this poverty. Our failure to help them out doesn't create the problem. The problem exists because of first the problems that were created from colonialism and now the corrupt governments down there.