Live8 - What's the REAL deal here? by AURaptor

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Live8 - What's the REAL deal here?

POSTED BY: AURAPTOR
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 6, 2005 18:51
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2760
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, July 2, 2005 7:08 AM

America loves a winner!

Rock legends come together to solve the world's problems, at least poverty and hunger in Africa.

But this isn't a fund raiser. They don't want your $ this time. It's an 'awareness' raiser. Again, not for us. We supposidly know all about the problems in Africa. What Geldoff et al want to do is awaken those at the G-8 summit and somehow make THEM do something ( what, I'm not really sure ). Never mind the fact that Tony Blair has already put helping Africa the top issue for this G8 meeting. Never mind the fact that $40 BILLION in debt owed has been wiped clean from the books for the poorest countries in Africa already.

But wait. Does the root of the problem lie w/ those in the G8? I fail to see how. The bulk of the blame lies w/ the likes of Zimbabwe's President Mugabe. He's stolen land from profitable farmers, literlaly at gun point, and given it over to a vastly unskilled public. Zimbabwe's economy is crumbling, and a bunch of aged rockers want us to focus our attention on the G8 ????

I'll enjoy the music, for a while. But at some point the inevitable guilt trip being layed on us all will force me to tune out.

Happy INDEPENDENTS Day weekend, y'all

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 9:52 AM

CREVANREAVER

Here's what Noel Gallagher of Oasis had to say about Live 8:

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but are they hoping that one of these guys from the G8 is on a quick 15 minute break at Gleneagles (in Scotland) and sees ANNIE LENNOX singing SWEET DREAMS and thinks, 'Fuck me, she might have a point there, you know?'

"KEANE doing SOMEWHERE ONLY WE KNOW and some Japanese businessman going, 'Aw, look at him... we should really fucking drop that debt, you know.'

"It's not going to happen, is it?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 10:23 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
Here's what Noel Gallagher of Oasis had to say about Live 8:

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but are they hoping that one of these guys from the G8 is on a quick 15 minute break at Gleneagles (in Scotland) and sees ANNIE LENNOX singing SWEET DREAMS and thinks, 'Fuck me, she might have a point there, you know?'

"KEANE doing SOMEWHERE ONLY WE KNOW and some Japanese businessman going, 'Aw, look at him... we should really fucking drop that debt, you know.'

"It's not going to happen, is it?"

40 BILLION dollars of debt have already been wiped clean from the poorest of African countries.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 11:45 AM

MRSKBORG

No G8 aren't totally responsible for the situation in Africa but they are a major part of it. IMO forcing a country to privatise its water supply too qualify for aid, and then sell their own water back to them at prices they can't afford is profiteering. Oh the water company (a UK company)that bought it spent £400, 000 on advertising campaign to persuade the people of that country it was in their interests. Yeah right.

Zimbabwe is one country in Africa and not all African countries are the same as this one.

Also $40billion is a drop in the ocean. When a country is forced to repay a debt which amounts to more than it spends on Education or Health there is something vastly wrong.

Trade rules set by the wealthiest countries of which G8 are, are loaded in favour of the wealtier countries so it doesn't matter how hard people work in the developing world, or how much their countries produce, trade relationships benefit the rich world most.

They're forcing poor countries to open up their markets to foreign imports and businesses, and sell off public services like electricity - even when this isn't in their interest. They're also banning poor countries from supporting vulnerable farmers and industries, while wealthy nations continue to support their own.

That's what "awareness" is about. That's what Live 8 is about. Yes it may a guilt trip, but it's time people in the "1st World" woke up,and stopped being so selfish.

"This movie may be a beautiful butterfly, but I loved that damn caterpillar." Joss Whedon.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 1:05 PM

ALANFRANCIS

Perfectly said borg, exactly what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me the typing. ;):)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 1:28 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Yes it may a guilt trip, but it's time people in the "1st World" woke up,and stopped being so selfish.

Selfish like when how many millions were raised for LiveAid and virtually nothing got done?

Selfish like when Bob Geldof frantically blurts out such demands as "Give me the money! Just GIVE IT TO ME!" ?

Selfish.. yeah, there's a easy word to toss around. They suffer because others are selfish. Mainly, it's their own leaders who are selfish, and deprive the people of freedoms, honest government and land ownership.

There might be ways of getting assistance to those who really need it, but laying the blame for all of Africa's troubles at the feet of others and then demanding we give ( more? Yes..MORE ) aid isn't exactly the way to start things out on a firm foundation.

I simply don't agree w/ the underlying tone that is being displayed here. The ' You'd better give us what we want or else..' mentality doesn't fly very well.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 3:25 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Should trade be made equal, sure.

BUT, Africa is in a far worse place because of itself not the G8. If it would solve its massive corruption problems then that would solve a lot of problems.

One must admit that even if the G8 wiped all debt and even made trade equal, the common man would see little change because of all the corruption.

It's all fine and dandy to blame the G8 for the problems of the world. But, when it comes down to it, we all must take responsibility for our own actions. ie Countries of Africa, get your

act together and actually rid yourself of corruption. As much as possible as least.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 3:27 PM

SIMONWHO

But it's not the Africans demanding money and change; it's us, the citizens of the UK, the US, Canada and other G8 countries demanding that our leaders (who so regularly profess themselves to be our humble servants) get the deals done to a) allow Africa to trade on a more balanced footing, b) wipe out the trade debt that is crippling so many countries in Africa and c) to do more in direct aid to countries that need it.

We're allowed to tell our leaders to act; in fact, it's probably our civil duty to do so. There's really only three things we can do with Africa: 1) strike deals with existing regimes. 2) remove existing regimes and replace them with democratic ones. 3) ignore it and let it die. Live 8 suggests the first option. Personally, I agree.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 4:42 PM

THEGREYJEDI

Quote:
Originally posted by mrskborg:
Yes it may a guilt trip, but it's time people in the "1st World" woke up,and stopped being so selfish.

I think we should just roll in and take over. More money for the Republicans. Long Live Imperialism!

--------------------------------------------------------------
Chief Engineer - USS SereniTREE
http://tomeofgrey.blogspot.com
Real Fans Wait - 09/30/05

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 2, 2005 8:22 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

a) allow Africa to trade on a more balanced footing,

I agree with this one.

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

b) wipe out the trade debt that is crippling so many countries in Africa

In principle this is a good thing. See next.

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

c) to do more in direct aid to countries that need it.

More direct aid like sending food/supplies/money/etc to meet specific needs, right?

In principle this is a good idea. BUT, when these regimes are soooo corrupt that an extremely large percentage of what is sent never actually gets distributed, instead lining the pockets of those in charge, what's the point?

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

1) strike deals with existing regimes.

See corruption remarks above.

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

2) remove existing regimes and replace them with democratic ones.

This one never turns out well. *coughiraqcough*

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

3) ignore it and let it die.

Never an option.

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

Live 8 suggests the first option. Personally, I agree.

No offense, but given the current conditions, I really don't think that this is practical nor realistic. There needs to be much changed before a time comes in which this is practical.

Personally, I think that the only think that can be done is support programs like doctors without borders and such; programs that everything pretty much goes directly to the people bypassing the corruption. That is the only thing that is going to do any good. Anything else is just going to make the rich bastards at the top more so.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 3, 2005 1:09 AM

SIMONWHO

You say option 3 "Ignore Africa and let it die" was never an option. Well, it's what we've been doing for the past 20 years. They're dying. Slowly, horribly, across the entire continent. HIV infection rates are through the roof. Basic immunisation is missing for vast chunks of the population. Countries that aren't able to pay for basic medical, educational and emergency services are forced to pay back debts to us that we knew they couldn't afford.

The Live 8 demands aren't about giving Africa a helping hand. It's about us taking our foot off their throats. To complain about their leaders when we put a lot of them in office and support a whole load more (if they buy our country's military equipment) is pointless at best. We might lose a lot of the donations to corrupt officials. Would you not give water to a man dying of thirst because you knew he was going to spill most of it?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 3, 2005 7:23 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

The real deal is- "We" (the upper political strata, the banks and large multinationals) support the current leaders BECAUSE they are corrupt.

Quote:
The UK bank Standard Chartered has decided to turn its back on the mass market in Cameroon, with its new policy of serving only the wealthy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3148624.stm

Quote:
Bribery And Disruption - British Companies Fuel Corruption In Africa
...In Equatorial Guinea, BG plc (formerly the British Gas state company) has closed a deal with the regime of President Teodoro Obiang to buy up the country's production of liquefied natural gas for the next 17 years. Britain's HSBC bank has been accused by a US Senate committee of helping Mr Obiang move cash from the country's oil revenues into financial "black holes" in Luxembourg and Cyprus. The country is threatened with repeated coups by outsiders keen to get their hands on the oil wealth....In Liberia, which has been beset by civil war, LIB, a private London bank, was behind attempts to monopolise alluvial diamond production and the country's telecommunications...And in Angola, the victim of an even more destructive internal war, one of the UK's leading development banks, Standard Chartered, has been accused of damaging the country's economy by providing record multibillion dollar loans which give a stranglehold over future oil production.

www.guardian.co.uk/hearafrica05/story/0,15756,1496561,00.html

Banks and big corporations LOVE corrupt dictators because it is far easier to make big profits there. The regimes keep labor and commodity prices low, and their cut of the action takes out far less than increasing living standard of an entire population.

Some people on this board claim that we have "given" many of these nations an infrastructure. Nothing could be further from the truth. It has been USA policy, through its dominance of World Bank and IMF and with the cooperation of the US Treasury to overload corrupt, resource-rich, undeveloped nations with debt. Once these nations take on the debt, the money is used to build large structures using USA contractors, so the money comes right back to us instead of boosting the local economy. And the infrastructure is used to make money for the elite in the debtor nation. Once the debtor nation is so deeply in the hole that they can't climb out, their resources are forfeit to whoever holds the loan. And this isn't just an African problem. This is all detailed in "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" John Perkins. You will find example after example of stories similar to the quotes above relating to nations all over the world. Please read it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 3, 2005 8:18 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh, BTW, Do you wonder who this debt forgiveness benefits and who pays for it? the debt forgiveness only applies to the World Bank, IMF and the African Developmetn Bank (ADB) all of which are government-funded.

Quote:
Under the deal, the World Bank, the IMF and the African Development Fund will immediately write off all of the money owed to them by 18 countries—some $40 billion.

http://economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4054539

For details on ADB financing go to
www.afdb.org/portal/page?_pageid=313,165668&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

However, it does not apply to the numerous commercial loans that fuel much of the poverty and corruption. Until large nations (including China) multinationals and banks stop supporting corrupt (but profitable!) regimes and stop gang-raping Africa, this is merely a bandage of YOUR TAX DOLLARS on the gaping wounds.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 3, 2005 9:04 AM

GINOBIFFARONI

You do have excellent points about trade imbalances and practices...

The problem I have is people like Mandela, calling for a increase of handouts, which I would argue what the present aid programs are.

When I donate money, I would like to see it used to eliminate the need for such handouts, increasing irrigation in drought areas, drilling of water wells, the setting up of industrial infrastructure that would put the region to work ( to their own benefit, not ours )

Even assistance to obtain medicines, or produce their own ( when the US isn't bombing the factory )

But, that is not what has happened all these years... Some of it has yes, but not near enough.

Perhaps instead of combining the worlds aid and spreading about so haphazardly, maybe each donor country should pick just one country to help... and the value of that assistance can be measured by the result, rather that the forever aid that we seem to face.

When my eloquence escapes you
My logic ties you up and rapes you

http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/the_police/de_do_do_do_de_da_da_da.h
tml

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 3, 2005 9:28 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Altho the loans fall under the heading "onerous debt", I don't believe in bailing out the current regimes either. The biggest impediment of Africa getting on its feet is corruption, and corruption starts at the top. Africa needs "regime change" more than any other continent. What we should do is only to forgive the debts of leaders who practice transparency and democracy. That would give them something to work towards. Of course, the multinationals and banks may not like doing business in an open environment. Tough.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 4, 2005 10:23 AM

SIGMANUNKI

@SimonWho:
You seem to be missing my point.

As I have stated many times over, I agree that we should help the African people. Please note that I've stated African people. Please note that this does not include there corrupt government regimes.

I have explicitly mentioned doctors without borders as something that more money should be dumped into. I would also support money being dumped into like programs. This would help the African people directly. This would also bypass much of the corruption. All good things.

I have also explicitly stated, that trade should be made equal. But, I also mention that this would currently not have any benificial effects to the African people.

What I am for is things that will have immediate (or near immediate) effect, positive effect, for the African people, not there corrupt government.

After all, this is for the people in Africa, not the governments, right? You do realize that there is a very large difference between the two, right?

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 4, 2005 1:11 PM

SIMONWHO

Obviously. But governments are what everything goes through: the Red Cross, Medicin sans Frontiers, every programme you can name is allowed into countries at the whim of the government involved. If suddenly any one organisation was cash rich, suddenly they'd be hit by charges, taxes, etc, etc. (Even the moderately respectable Sri Lankan government couldn't resist charging import duties for equipment purely donated by charity to help with the Tsunami relief.)

The corrupt will be wherever the money is. There's no magic bullet for that. The question we've got to ask ourselves is that even if the corrupt take most of the money, does that mean we shouldn't donate?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 6, 2005 4:21 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Oddly enough, Sigma actually makes sense.

I think that much of the attitude for “helping” Africa often spawns from one of two sources, either it is an opportunity to criticize rich western nations or it is out a sense of conscience.

Noble as the later may be sometimes, it is pie-in-the-sky bologna. If the governments are so corrupt that little to no aid actually gets to the people when channeled through normal measures then it serves nothing put to prop up corrupt regimes and alleviate the conscience of rich western people who like to sit in their coffeeshops and pat themselves on the back for being so “anti-war” and “pro-Africa.” Most people who whine about the African situation know this, yet still insist, beyond reason, that we continue to channel money to these African regimes. Maybe people are expecting some kind of quantum tunneling effect.

Now I’m not saying I know what the answer is, but the G8 is not the problem, the corrupt African regimes are the problem, and the sooner rich westerners come to terms with this, the sooner we might actually find a real solution to help the African problem. Forgiving debt is one possible tool, but in the absence of some other more effective methods it is useless, because the corrupt African regimes will simply recur the debt, which is wonderful for everyone except the African people. By constantly insisting that we forgive African debt we may be simply turning African regimes into a huge welfare state at the expense of Western countries.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 6, 2005 6:51 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

does that mean we shouldn't donate?

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00
.html

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE