MAKE POVERTY HISTORY?

kernow62 says on Jul 7, 2005, 05:02:

What is the guarantee that these countries will not rack up more debt? Most of the debt is a fairly recent thing, so it would seem logical that the debt will be established again unless the fundamental way in which loans are repaid is changed.

Supposedly removing the debt will suddenly make these countries better able to compete in a global market. I don't doubt it will help but it isn't a solution.

Perhaps I am being too simplistic, but when a person declares bankruptcy often they go right out and build up huge debts again.

Life isn't fair.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Gator says on Jul 7, 2005, 07:00:

How Can.... many of these countries be so far in debt and spend to much for "defense"?


From BBC News

"In June, it was reported that Zimbabwe's defence ministry had ordered 12 fighter jets and 100 military vehicles from China, without informing parliament.

Sydney Sekeramayi, defense minister, said the government did not need to seek authority from anybody to buy what was necessary for the military and refused to give details of military spending.

"I have told you very clearly we are not spending the money that people are saying we are spending... [and] it is not any of your business. That is our business," he said.

Speaking on Armed Forces day on Tuesday, President Robert Mugabe told a huge crowd that the "government will always continue to give priority to the defence force training and equipment programme".

Zimbabwe is suffering a major economic crisis, with inflation at more than 400%, unemployment at about 70% and millions people surviving on foreign food aid, blamed by critics on the controversial land reform which saw white-owned farmed distributed to blacks."

"Credidi pretio parvo emere et magno vendere tibi in animo fuisse!" .

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Cerealkiller says on Jul 7, 2005, 07:09:

Zimbabwe is a different story. I heard the debt wont be condoned for countries like Nigeria and Gabon for they are oil rich and can certainly pay for their debt. I reckon Zimbabwe is on that list as well...and Id be unpleasantly surprised if they did.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Cerealkiller says on Jul 7, 2005, 07:58:

GiB socialist and social democrats defending welfare states are totally different. I agree with you when you say condoning the debt isnt going to guarantee anything other that rampant corruption, but if it is combined with complementary measures it can definitely go a long way.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jul 7, 2005, 10:15:

It helps to learn a bit about international debt Before making sweeping comments of any kind, it pays to know a thing or two about the way foreign debt is structured.

Many times (not always) developing countries rack up debts to the World Bank and other entities because those lending groups come to, let's just say, the government of Guyana and say, "we'll give you a billion dollars to build a new highway system."

In countries with corrupt leadership, this presents an irresistible opportunity to benefit personally (through sweetheart contracts and kickbacks) while fucking the country as a whole over with unpayable debts. The 1st world countries benefit because most of these projects are designed, developed and executed by multinationals like Bechtel and Halliburton.

So maybe it's not such a bad thing to let countries out from under the burden of crippling debt, as long as it's accompanied by efforts to reduce corruption and things like that.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Hunter says on Jul 7, 2005, 10:46:

kernow62 You are 100% on the mark, article below from the British Financial Times.

Its a complete waste of time, until these Countries can learn to manage themselves, which they can't, although some are improving over the last few years.

Hunter

Lex: Debt relief
Published: July 1 2005 13:16 | Last updated: July 1 2005 20:47

To err is human; to forgive debt, divine. Once the warm glow from Saturday's Live 8 concert has passed, anti-poverty campaigners should ask themselves how effective the debt relief they have extracted from G8 policymakers actually is.

First, the relief on offer for the 14 targeted sub-Saharan African countries represents just $500m in annual debt service. Such a saving will not have a huge impact. Second, debt relief is in effect an aid transfer, and there is enormous controversy over whether aid works. International Monetary Fund research published this week suggests that aid has not helped raise growth rates in poor countries, and that simply not enough is known about what makes aid work to conclude that it will reduce poverty in the future. Then there is moral hazard. There is evidence that governments which have received debt relief borrow more and reform less. From 1989 to 1997, debt forgiveness for the 41 highly indebted poor countries reached $33bn, while new borrowing totalled $41bn.

Latin America worked through its 1980s debt crisis by scrapping part of its commercial debt and repackaging the rest into tradeable bonds. This allowed it continued access to market-priced credit, which made policymakers' choices clear, and which grew cheaper as the macroeconomic environment improved. Restructuring debt is not as sexy as debt relief, but it might help Africa's poor more, by enforcing discipline on its governments, who owe the debt anyway.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 7, 2005, 11:17:

I wonder The debt relief talked about in England and the bombings today coinciding with the G8 meeting?

Hummm, India spends loan money for medical equipment like MRI's. African nations waste it on? Oh,, maybe studies on why there are fewer Rhino's?

Colombia could have TWO chickens in every pot,, I guess.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jul 7, 2005, 12:26:

I don't think forgiving debt is necessarily going to be good, like others have mentioned.

However, debt payments should be made much more flexible than they currently are.

How can people expect Colombia to, at the same time, do the following without missing a beat:

a)Spend money to pay off loans and debts right on time.

b)Spend money for defense and counterinsurgency purposes (no, it's not the U.S. that's providing the vast majority of this money at all, despite what some might be inclined to believe).

c)Spend money for socio-economic purposes (fight poverty, unemployment, etc.)

Under such conditions, it's logical that something has to give...and usually, in the case of Colombia, that's c).

Personally, the first world should just be willing to say "we'll accept that your *payments* are going to be reduced 30% to 50% of current amounts for the next few of years and we won't drown you in senseless interest, as long as you do continue to pay on time".

Is that too much to ask? Evidently not.

But apparently for the bankers in the IMF, G-8 and co. it's much easier to simply write off X amount of debt, while simultaneously preparing new loans under the same old heartless conditions...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 7, 2005, 12:39:

Answers A, B, C quit the kidnapping, extortion, and murders of Colombians who are trying to operate a small business (or large for that matter) AND WORKING. Left alone these people would provide opportunities and employment.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jul 7, 2005, 13:08:

And how exactly will the kidnapping, murders and extortion stop? Not without heavily funding B) and maybe even to a degree C) as well, at the very least.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 7, 2005, 13:14:

One thought ? Just say NO ?

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 7, 2005, 13:21:

Almost everyone is on a pension where I live,, or at least owed a pension.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jul 7, 2005, 13:41:

Forgiving debt For those of you who think forgiving debt is hopeless, consider a few things:

Countries such as Ecuador spend almost all of their government revenue (read taxes) servicing debt rather than financing social programs, educating kids, providing clean water, etc. So people are paying taxes yet getting virtually no services. Which leads to unhappiness and instability... You can figure out the rest.

The World Bank and IMF exist to serve 1st world interests. Unless you help countries out from under a legacy of debt the vicious cycles will continue. Which isn't to say debt forgiveness is a miracle cure. But it's a leg up.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jul 7, 2005, 18:28:

Debt relief: necessary, but not sufficient As Mr. H. points out, debt relief is urgent in nations where payments are taking a significant portion of public monies. While that's not the case in most of Latin America, it appears to be more true in most of sub-Saharan Africa. But that is no guarantee for "making poverty history": a number of structural social, political and economic changes need to be addressed for that. It's way too complicated to be optimistic about it. Kernow asks a valid question: "What is the guarantee that these countries will not rack up more debt?" Take Colombia, for instance. Being in debt up to its head, it's amazing how the Uribe government is getting even more money from the IMF. And this is not to restructure our current debt: it's to spend it on our beloved Plan Colombia, which ultimately ends up the pockets of arms manufacturers. Meanwhile, MY share of the debt increases. And then you wonder why I'm pissed.

Hunter: I can't fully trust a report that talks about $500m as not having a huge impact, when this is not represented in GDP points from the receiving end. But, again, the fact that debt relief doesn't solve EVERYTHING doesn't mean that it doesn't solve ANYTHING. I'm with juancegomez in that, at least for countries like Colombia, debt relief is not needed as much as a) political reform, and b) debt restructuring so that interests are below usury levels. Maybe we need to be a bit more drastic and -along with other larger debtors- stop paying under the current conditions. It worked for Argentina, right?

Pension reform: Tinto, a reform of the pension system recently passed through Congress. I think Uribe was satisfied with it, which makes me sort of suspicious, but I haven't looked at it, so I have no opinion on that matter. I'll get back to you on that.

"El que a hierro mata..."

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

caslug says on Jul 7, 2005, 20:09:

Does COL have NGO.. that do Micro lending to women? I know in Peru there are groups that do that. Saw an interesting documentary on micrlending. The banker said that women are better canidate than men. Because 1) women have long term obj(getting out of poverty) and 2) increase income by women goes DIRECTLY to their childrens, hence the lending improves lives of women AND children.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sylvie says on Jul 7, 2005, 22:21:

...... Governments have been giving money to relieve poverty in Africa for over 50 years. Problem is that it goes into the hands of the wrong people. Often times the government officials who are basically dictators keep the money to themselves and end up investing it for themselves into OTHER countries. That is just sick!

Many leaders of African countries are f*cking theieves. They spend the AIDE money on cars, vacations and mansions in other countries.

Instead of giving them money how about people take the time to educate them? You know the saying "if you give a man a fish he eats for one day, teach a man to fish he can eat for a life time."
I think that saying should be taken into consideration in this circumstance

I find South American leaders much wiser. Colombia, and Chile have fully used foriegn aide to improve living situations for the poor. Brazil supposedly still has problems and much of the money is not used properly.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 8, 2005, 00:03:

Wonder where this comes from it's to spend it on our beloved Plan Colombia, which ultimately ends up the pockets of arms manufacturers

Other than the fact you wrote this,, can you please explain your statement,, remember just because YOU wrote it does not make it much of a FACT.

Try furnishing a link.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 8, 2005, 00:22:

Improvement Many leaders of African countries are f*cking theieves

The genocide must be finished or do they need more loans to replenish the ammunition. Seems they could make do with machetes?

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sylvie says on Jul 8, 2005, 08:55:

...... Just a small part of the donated money goes to genoside. The rest is spent on making themselves fat and well dressed. I remember specifically an article about the former President (cough cough dictator) of Togo took aide money and invested it into the New York and UK market under his name. Mean while his people had no human rights, they straved and he was living in luxury somewhere in France.

Makes me ill just thinking about it!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

caulfield2 says on Jul 8, 2005, 09:06:

The United States has its own problems with debt, but if you're rich, you get bailed out by the government. For examples, look at Orange County (retirement/pension plan), the airlines' and automakers' pension plans...more specifically, there was the Savings and Loans bailout in the 1980's (Bush's brother was involved, as well as some senators and representatives), the Keating Five and the bailout of Long-Term Capital Management, a hedge fund run by Nobel prize winners in economics. The government has spent billions of taxpayer dollars in these situations...so I don't see how forgiving legitimate debt with usurious interest rates is such a bad thing.

In the United States, the rich are always protected, and their losses are minimized. When Donald Trump went bankrupt in the early 90's, he mitigated his personal responsibility to the point where it was only $1 billion out of the $10 billion owed. Look at Enron, Global Crossing, Adelphia Communications, Martha Stewart, Ivan Boesky, Michael Milken...white collar crime is okay in the US if you're a millionaire or billionaire, but we should only spend 1% of GNP/GDP to help developing countries, right?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jul 8, 2005, 09:45:

Plan Colombia and the things I learned in kidergarden Poco: "remember just because YOU wrote it does not make it much of a FACT."

If you are not willing to read through the posts where I have discussed this issue (e.g., http://www.poorbuthappy.com/colombia/node/9240), you can at least try asking with a bit more of grace.

http://www.mamacoca.org/Octubre2004/doc/EL_PLAN_COLOMBIA_DESPUES_DE_TRES_ANOS_DE_EJECUCION.htm
http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/fs/2001/1042.htm

To track Colombia's relation with the IMF go to:

http://www.imf.org/external/country/COL/

And BTW, interesting how you can make a joke out of genocide. A new low for tastelessness.

"El que a hierro mata..."

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

greg says on Jul 8, 2005, 12:06:

Good commentary The G8 Summit: A Fraud And A Circus June 24, 2005
By John Pilger

The front page of the London Observer on 12 June announced, "55 billion
Africa debt deal 'a victory for millions'." The "victory for millions"
is a quotation of Bob Geldof, who said, "Tomorrow 280 million Africans
will wake up for the first time in their lives without owing you or me
a penny...". The nonsense of this would be breathtaking if the reader's
breath had not already been extracted by the unrelenting sophistry of
Geldof, Bono, Blair, the Observer et al. Africa's imperial plunder and
tragedy have been turned into a circus for the benefit of the so-called
G8 leaders due in Scotland next month and those of us willing to be
distracted by the barkers of the circus: the establishment media and
its "celebrities".

The illusion of an anti establishment crusade led by pop stars - a
cultivated, controlling image of rebellion - serves to dilute a great
political movement of anger. In summit after summit, not a single
significant "promise" of the G8 has been kept, and the "victory for
millions" is no different. It is a fraud - actually a setback to
reducing poverty in Africa. Entirely conditional on vicious,
discredited economic programmes imposed by the World Bank and the IMF,
the "package" will ensure that the "chosen" countries slip deeper into
poverty. Is it any surprise that this is backed by Blair and his
treasurer, Gordon Brown, and George Bush; even the White House calls it
a "milestone"? For them, it is an important facade, held up by the
famous and the naive and the inane. Having effused about Blair, Geldof
describes Bush as "passionate and sincere" about ending poverty. Bono
has called Blair and Brown "the John and Paul of the global development
stage". Behind this front, rapacious power can "re-order" the lives of
millions in favour of totalitarian corporations and their control of
the world's resources.

There is no conspiracy; the goal is no secret. Gordon Brown spells it
out in speech after speech, which liberal journalists choose to ignore,
preferring the Treasury spun version. The G8 communique announcing the
"victory for millions" is unequivocal. Under a section headed "G8
proposals for HIPC debt cancellation", it says that debt relief to poor
countries will be granted only if they are shown "adjusting their gross
assistance flows by the amount given": in other words, their aid will
be reduced by the same amount as the debt relief. So they gain nothing.
Paragraph Two states that "it is essential" that poor countries "boost
private sector development" and ensure "the elimination of impediments
to private investment, both domestic and foreign". The "55 billion"
claimed by the Observer comes down, at most, to 1 billion spread over
18 countries. This will almost certainly be halved - providing less
than six days' worth of debt payments - because Blair and Brown want
the IMF to pay its share of the "relief" by revaluing its vast stock of
gold, and passionate and sincere Bush has said no. The first
unmentionable is that the gold was plundered originally from Africa.
The second unmentionable is that debt payments are due to rise sharply
from next year, more than doubling by 2015. This will mean not "victory
for millions", but death for millions. At present, for every 1 dollar
of "aid" to Africa, 3 dollars are taken out by western banks,
institutions and governments, and that does not account for the
repatriated profit of transnational corporations.

Take the Congo. Thirty-two corporations, all of them based in G8
countries, dominate the exploitation of this deeply impoverished,
minerals-rich country, where millions have died in the "cause" of 200
years of imperialism. In the Cote d'Ivoire, three G8 companies control
95 per cent of the processing and export of cocoa: the main resource.
The profits of Unilever, a British company long in Africa, are a third
larger than Mozambique's GDP. One American company, Monsanto - of
genetic engineering notoriety - controls 52 per cent of the maize seed
in South Africa, that country's staple food. Blair could not give two
flying faeces for the people of Africa. Ian Taylor at the University of
St Andrews used the Freedom of Information Act to learn that while
Blair was declaiming his desire to "make poverty history", he was
secretly cutting the government's Africa desk officers and staff. At
the same time, his "department for international development" was
forcing, by the back door, privatisation of water supply in Ghana for
the benefit of British investors. This ministry lives by the dictates
of its "Business Partnership Unit", which is devoted to finding "ways
in which DfID can improve the enabling environment for productive
investment overseas and... contribute to the operation of the financial
sector".

Poverty reduction? Of course not. A charade promotes the modern
imperial ideology known as neoliberalism, yet it is almost never
reported that way and the connections are seldom made. In the issue of
the Observer announcing "victory for millions" was a secondary news
item that British arms sales to Africa had passed 1 billion. One
British arms client is Malawi, which pays out more on the interest on
its debt than its entire health budget, despite the fact that 15 per
cent of its population has HIV. Gordon Brown likes to use Malawi as
example of why "we should make poverty history", yet Malawi will not
receive a penny of the "victory for millions" relief.

The charade is a gift for Blair, who will try anything to persuade the
public to "move on" from the third unmentionable: his part in the
greatest political scandal of the modern era, his crime in Iraq.
Although essentially an opportunist, as his lying demonstrates, he
presents himself as a Kiplingesque imperialist. His "vision for Africa"
is as patronising and exploitative as a stage full of white pop stars
(with black tokens now added). His messianic references to "shaking the
kaleidoscope" of societies about which he understands little and
"watching the pieces fall" has translated into seven violent
interventions abroad, more than any British prime minister for half a
century.

Bob Geldof, an Irishman at his court, duly knighted, says nothing about
this. The protesters going to the G8 summit at Gleneagles ought not to
allow themselves to be distracted by these games. If inspiration is
needed, along with evidence that direct action can work, they should
look to Latin America's mighty popular movements against total locura
capitalista (total capitalist folly). They should look to Bolivia, the
poorest country in Latin America, where an indigenous movement has
Blair's and Bush's corporate friends on the run, and Venezuela, the
only country in the world where oil revenue has been diverted for the
benefit of the majority, and Uruguay and Argentina, Ecuador and Peru,
and Brazil's great landless people's movement. Across the continent,
ordinary people are standing up to the old Washington-sponsored order.
"Que se vayan todos!" (Out with them all!) say the crowds in the
streets.

Much of the propaganda that passes for news in our own society is given
to immobilising and pacifying people and diverting them from the idea
that they can confront power. The current babble about Europe, of which
no reporter makes sense, is part of this; yet the French and Dutch "no"
votes are part of the same movement as in Latin America, returning
democracy to its true home: that of power accountable to the people,
not to the "free market" or the war policies of rampant bullies. And
this is just a beginning

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jul 8, 2005, 12:39:

Usury Just a few numbers, from January 2004:

Total debt (public and private): $37965 millions
Interest payment for January: $843 millions

(Source: El Pais, based on IMF, World Economic Outlook)

That is, 2.22% in one month. Just in interests. I haven't compound it over a year, but it sounds to me like Treasury could simply get a credit card and start paying the minimum. It's probably a better deal.

"El que a hierro mata..."

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

caulfield2 says on Jul 8, 2005, 14:10:

2.22 X 12=26.64%

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jul 8, 2005, 15:04:

Tinto Thanks for the feedback. You are right, these were payments over the whole Oct-Dec 04 quarter, just interest (no principal), including (but not restricted to) the conditions of a stand-by agreement: IMF pretty much lent some more money (2+ billion, I don't remember the exact figure) that should be paid in 2-3 years. I have not being able to figure out the total balance of Colombia in IMF; the whole 38K million package is a mix of all private and public debt, not just multilateral lenders.

Compounded over a year, it gives me 9.095%. I can still get a better deal from my credit union.

"El que a hierro mata..."

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jul 8, 2005, 15:17:

Doing business with the COL goverment I had some experience doing business with the colombian government. It's always a great deal (i.e., it's easy to screw), as long as you get them to pay you. That, to put it mildly, is a bitch. But, of course, one thing is getting calls from the accountant of Tertius & Cia. Ltda., and another to be arm twisted by the International Monetary Fund.

"El que a hierro mata..."

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 8, 2005, 19:07:

Looked at links -- where is it it's to spend it on our beloved Plan Colombia, which ultimately ends up the pockets of arms manufacturers

I didn’t see any FACTS posted explaining ARMS MONEY being pocketed? PLUS WHY bring up posts from another board? Nothing better to do ?

Just how much ends up in the pockets of these arms manufactures percentage wise? What is bought / sold ? Hummm isn’t Plan Colombia MAINLY spraying and Coca eradication?

This is a link to the budget figures plus a chart for 10 years of AID to Colombia. Which line item gives credence to your post?

Colombia – US AID Charts and FACTS at least this is something to quote.

Joke? The BIGGEST joke is the UN. They WOULD NOT mention the word Genocide, if they did,, THEN they would be required to POLICE the area. THATS the BIG joke.
BBC – UN REGRETS THE KILLING and feels bad about it.

There is lots more info on the net. Guess WHAT,, the US is critized for NOT DOING ENOUGH,, what a joke, could be TO MUCH or NOTHING, NO MATTER someone out of 6 billion people WILL NOT BE HAPPY.

The only thing the UN did was KICK OUT mercenaries from South Africa who had STOPPED the killing in some areas. THEN THE UN in their infinite wisdom managed to “POLICE” a REGRESSION to even more killing.

South African - EXECUTIVE OUTCOMES

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 8, 2005, 19:29:

G8 Summit Less critical Report on G8

6 Billion people in the world and some will NEVER be happy with ANYTHING.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jul 8, 2005, 19:46:

Man, do I need to join the dots for you? "I didn’t see any FACTS posted explaining ARMS MONEY being pocketed?"

First figure from the mamacoca.org link. Data from the Comptroller General. Under the "fight against narcotraffic" category, the thickest row is "aeromobile capacity" with $329 of $519.2 millions of US aid. Colombia's contribution is not tied the same way, but some money is going there since Colombia is paying for 58% of the Plan through debt. The "aeromobile capacity" is described in the SD webpage as "procurement and support of 14 UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters ($208 million); procurement, refurbishment, and support of 30 UH-1H Huey II helicopters ($60 million); and support for 15 UH-1N helicopters ($60 million) for use by the Colombian army." Do I need to explain you who manufactures these choppers?

"Hummm isn’t Plan Colombia MAINLY spraying and Coca eradication?"

Which shows that you didn't take a minute to read through either one of the two documents, and that your background on Plan Colombia is zilch. To put it short: no.

"PLUS WHY bring up posts from another board? Nothing better to do ?"

Precisely because I have better things to do than retyping what you could've read by yourself if you followed the link. And talking about better things to do, have a good day.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Kwame Charles says on Jul 15, 2005, 14:56:

This is a silly question. How the hell do you compare Poverty in Africa to Latin America. Do you have an idea how America and the West have stolen and raped Africa. Latin America is dont need help like Africa does. use your head

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 15, 2005, 15:40:

Not to worry This is a silly question. How the hell do you compare Poverty in Africa to Latin America. Do you have an idea how America and the West have stolen and raped Africa.

Yes and w/o KY Jelly. The most recent raping in Somalia GUARANTEES the U.S. will NEVER meddle in AFRICA, along with the U.N. (our good buddy allies). The AFRICAN nations can continue with GENOCIDE until Hell Freezes over w/o much interference.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Kwame Charles says on Jul 15, 2005, 16:51:

Look I'm not goin got complain too much but haven't you noticed that there is a pattern going on here. African people get the worst deal every single time. They suffer povery, hunger, disease and on top of that they have to deal with bloody racism. Compared to all the other third world country's I think africa is like a forth world country. Because Africa has a debt which will never be paid because Americans and Westerns put such stupid interest rates on them they'll never be able to pay the whole thing. Why don't they just cancel the whole debt. Because they are afraid Africa will catch up. Africa is a very rich country in case you dont know.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 15, 2005, 18:19:

You are so right Africa is a very rich country in case you dont know.

Exactly my point, JUST THE SAME as Colombia – South America. RICH, RICH, RICH.

Not all that long ago MORE than Half a Million Americans were killed by OTHER Americans during the Civil War. Was this Genocide? Maybe, although this was done in the name of “WAR”, “Principal” or maybe people just can’t be contented w/o adversity.

Go figure.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

adrimm says on Jul 15, 2005, 18:57:

Kwame and Poco "Country" of Africa? Hmmm.....and I live in an igloo and have a pet reindeer.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jul 15, 2005, 21:25:

Splitting Hairs "Country" of Africa? Hmmm.....and I live in an igloo and have a pet reindeer.

I just cut and paste, most people believe Africa is a country so why ruin their day?

http://www.house.gov/jec/imf/highlght.htm#4
This is old but I'm sure the system is about the same.

You can believe this or not, but the IMF and I'd assume the World Banks is giving money away at "risk free" loan rates.

Then again, maybe not, I'd sure believe it if something different was posted on mamacoca.com.

Does the IMF Loan at Subsidized Interest Rates?
Representative Saxton. Dr. Lindsey, if you would respond, I have what I believe to be an accurate record of the interest rates that are generally charged by the IMF on a monthly basis, from October to February, and those interest rates seem to indicate that it's about 4.5 to 4.7 percent. That seems to me to be significantly below market rate. Is that correct?
Dr. Lindsey. I think that is a fair conclusion.
Representative Saxton. But what market rate?
Dr. Lindsey. . . . So what is happening is the IMF is taking an essentially risk-free rate, tacking on a little administrative cost, and calling that a market rate. It really is not a market rate. . . . So what the IMF is doing–I think the better phrase, rather than market rate, they are charging these countries a risk-free rate. To the extent there is risk in the system, it is not being reflected in what the countries are being asked to pay. . . .

Representative Saxton. . . .In any event, it is below the true market rate.

"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." Quote - General Tommy Franks

0 funny, 0 helpful.

flaleo says on Jul 19, 2005, 06:18:

The point is some simple and cheap drugs can create a 180 for so many people there - JUST DO IT.

0 funny, 0 helpful.