Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 21 Sep '10 00:05
    UNITED NATIONS, Sept 20 (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pressed debt-ridden donor countries on Monday not to cut aid to the poor despite their budgetary woes.

    "We should not balance budgets on the backs of the poor," Ban told 140 leaders at the start of a three-day summit to review progress in meeting U.N. poverty goals by 2015.



    We are not only supposed to have a Nanny State for a country, but we are to play Nanny State to the world?

    Seems to me that we are looking at little more than world wide communism.


    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N20266544.htm
  2. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 00:16 / 1 edit
    The amount of money that developed country governments give to developing countries in aid is miniscule in terms of GDP or government expenditure. I suppose what the U.N. Secretary-General is actually getting at - but doesn't feel able to say too rawly - is that developed nations shouldn't placcate the most sneering ignorant smallminded conspiracy-paranoia-misanthropy-vortex elements among their own citizenries who would be gratified to see these funds - which are going towards relieving grinding poverty amongst fellow human beings overseas - reduced or stopped altogether, while in actual fact the amount 'saved' would be a mere tiny drop in the bucket in terms of domestic austerity measures and deficit-busting.
  3. 21 Sep '10 00:19
    They have no right to it. The UN has no right to claim money that is given to them as charity. Once it becomes an obligation instead of a gift, then UN becomes a world govenment.
  4. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 00:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Eladar
    They have no right to it. The UN has no right to claim money that is given to them as charity. Once it becomes an obligation instead of a gift, then UN becomes a world govenment.
    You mean the U.N. Secretary-General has "no right" to appeal to relatively rich donor countries to not cut aid to the poor - as they might - in these times of budgetary problems?
  5. 21 Sep '10 00:34
    Originally posted by FMF
    You mean the U.N. Secretary-General has "no right" to appeal to relatively rich donor countries to not cut aid to the poor - as they might - in these times of budgetary problems?
    He has the right to ask. Every nation has the right to say no, as long as France and Spain don't get their way. Try reading the link.
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 00:45 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Eladar
    He has the right to ask. Every nation has the right to say no, as long as France and Spain don't get their way.
    The U.S. can always leave the U.N. if it considers concerted aid to the poor amounting to tiny amounts of GDP to be 'world communism' or the U.N. to be a 'world government' or poverty alleviation to be a 'Nanny State'.
  7. 21 Sep '10 00:47
    Why would the US have to leave? All we have to do is say no. What's the UN going to do?
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 00:48
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Why would the US have to leave? All we have to do is say no. What's the UN going to do?
    Exactly. By jove, he's got it!
  9. 21 Sep '10 00:52
    Originally posted by FMF
    Exactly. By jove, he's got it!
    Oh course, but you never know what Obama will do. That's why I started the thread so that more Americans can know what is going on. Very few Americans want to go down that road and if we know about it, then it won't happen.

    Just like this election will go Republican because we know what Obama and his group is all about.
  10. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 00:57 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Eladar
    That's why I started the thread so that more Americans can know what is going on. Very few Americans want to go down that road and if we know about it, then it won't happen.
    Yes but Eladar, this is an international web site. French and Spanish people might read your posts and then know what you're doing and they might step up their efforts take the U.S.'s money against its wishes anyway and spread their communism to America.
  11. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    21 Sep '10 01:02
    Originally posted by FMF
    Yes but Eladar, this is an international web site. French and Spanish people might read your posts and then know what you're doing and they might step up their efforts take the U.S.'s money against its wishes anyway and spread their communism to America.
    D'oh! He's got ya there! Shhhh.
  12. 21 Sep '10 01:08
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    D'oh! He's got ya there! Shhhh.
    Yes he certainly does!

    It isn't the Spanish and French I'm concerned about, it is the lefties here in the US that I'm concerned about. The lefties of Europe will destroy themselves. It is the lefties in the US that will destroy the US.
  13. Subscriber Wajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    21 Sep '10 01:09
    Originally posted by Eladar
    They have no right to it. The UN has no right to claim money that is given to them as charity. Once it becomes an obligation instead of a gift, then UN becomes a world govenment.
    The membership 'costs' to the UN can never be considered charity, charity can only ever be voluntary. So while the bureaurats may decide how much (if any) goes where, that can never be called charity.

    I like P J O'Rourkes quote: (from memory)

    "Foriegn aid is; poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries."
  14. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 01:15
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    I like P J O'Rourkes quote: (from memory)

    "Foriegn aid is; poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries."
    There is a lot of truth in this.
  15. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Sep '10 01:17
    Originally posted by Eladar
    The lefties of Europe will destroy themselves. It is the lefties in the US that will destroy the US.
    How is the continuing donation of relatively miniscule amounts of aid to developing countries going to "destroy" Europe?