Controversy with Bono's opinions on aid to Africa? - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-24-2008, 07:19 PM   #31
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
This sounds like guilt. If we really wanted to solve problems to that level we would be bankrupt. Even 1% of the GDP wouldn't be enough. At some point the Africans are going to have to decide what they want. Many are hostile to our point of view because they call it "cultural colonialism". Damned if we do and damned if we don't. Aid has some short-term benefits, but as I pointed out in my other post, the economic ideas are not given as much fanfare and it is what is mainly needed. Education, health care and infrastructure paid by us for all poor Africans is too expensive. Even Bono knows that what we promise to do and what he asks is only the beginning. The idea that Bono has is to get us to commit to more spending in aid and then once we do that and it doesn't do enough, then we need to spend MORE. One of the guys from DATA mentioned the same thing about debt. If we write off debt, then lend more and they get into debt trouble again we should just keep writing it off. I'm sorry but we have our own responsibilities to our citizens. Taxpayers shouldn't be treated that way.
Guilt? Oh yes the favorite "guilt" catch phrase of the right, it's basically used when someone wants to avoid moral obligations.

Of course aid is a temporary solution, no one is arguing otherwise, this is where your argument fails, for you approach it as if anyone is arguing otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
We are doing that but only some are listening. This kind of education I'm for because we need some communication and it's not as costly, but Bono wants education spending at the level of Ireland and that's just not possible for us to spend on. He thinks he can compare Ireland to Africa. Ireland was poor in the past but never as bad off in infrastructure and poverty as Africa. Ireland has private property laws, democracy, and when Ireland joined the Euro and lowered taxes their economy expanded and people saved money and invested. The education then was useful at that point. There was capital flowing to create jobs to take advantage of the educated populace. A lot of education is created when there is more international trade. I agree we need to trade with Africa more. Lots of trade barriers and farm subsidies are keeping Africans farmers down. Yet this would make Bono (who agrees with this) closer to Margaret Thatcher. Oh the HORROR! Free Trade! Also Africans need to embrace more trade too. They are often proponents of trade barriers as well.
What do you mean "Bono wants education spending at the level of Ireland"?

I'm sorry but I just can't take what you say seriously anymore.

You say this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
The Western world was able to create better economies with the same problems. I'll add some detail later in this post.
but right above you say:

Quote:
Ireland was poor in the past but never as bad off in infrastructure and poverty as Africa.
Please name me a time in the Western world where millions were dying left and right from diseases that the rest of the world had treatments and cures for... just name me one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Sorry, but there is no free lunch. If we get all bleeding heart and emotional about it all we will have is a bunch of activists asking for more money and the western population saying "screw you". We need to start trading with Africa because more money will be made by Africans who are healthy (yes they do exist) and they can pay for their own infrastructure. Also business owners will want to have property rights to protect their profits from their despotic leaders. They may even fight them because they will have a stake in society to fight for.
Free lunch?

I'm talking about human lives, you're talking about $$. There's no point in talking about economies if the population is wiped out.


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Economics is not as sexy as World Vision and DATA I guess.
There is absolutely nothing sexy about your grasp on economics.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 04:59 PM   #32
The Fly
 
Jon Seidman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 169
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Bono and Africa

Thanks for all those interesting posts regarding my U2 and Religion thread! I am also wondering, are there any fans out there who love U2 and/or Bono but are either totally uninterested in and/or oppose his efforts regarding Africa, poverty, etc...?
__________________

__________________
Jon Seidman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 05:03 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
Aardvark747's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Obscured By Clouds...
Posts: 22,359
Local Time: 06:57 AM
I certainly don't oppose his efforts, however I would prefer not to hear about it at a gig. Seeing him on the news would do just fine.
__________________
Aardvark747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 05:07 PM   #34
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 12:57 AM
There's actually a thread about this in FYM, well sorta, the OP got a little carried away
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 02:29 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I'm certain this is the reason a lot of bands try and target younger audiences to keep their success alive. Once families start with financial responsibilities of mortgage and raising kids a rock 'n roll lifestyle and lots of fun becomes something in the background.
you underestimate the baby boomers
U2s primary target must be everyone aged 12-40 because they´ve been along for some time; never would a 45 yr old buy a record of, say, justin timberlake because he just don´t care , but will buy a U2 recird because they were already rocking him when he grew up. memories and all.

of course the whole music marketing thing is geared towards 12-30 yr old people because parents also buy records for their kids and kids have a lot of buying power. but you don´t think the eagles sold 3 million copies to the kids do you?

the target audience relates to the act.
__________________
hiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 02:34 PM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I find it interesting you guys think my ideas aren't just wrong but weak. I assure you their not. They are arguments that economists would use. You may not agree with them but they aren't strange or unknown points of view. My argument of the social worker is also not unknown either. It's a typical argument economists have for government workers
Right, these are arguments economists HAVE used and continue to use in order to put more money into their pockets while the rest of the world is starving.
__________________
hiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 03:13 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I don't believe in colonialism, but the infrastructure for Africans then was better then it is now, which is disappointing. You have to ask yourself how we got wealthy. The principles are the same for every race on earth.
Well, Europe got wealthy because of colonialism without which the industrial revolution would not have happened, so English, French, Spaniards, Portugese and Netherlandersers stole all raw materials they could grab and their upper class got filthy rich

America got wealthy because they claimed an incredibly big mass of land to be their own; America got a whole massive country for free (when you don´t count a few minor fights with native indians) while Europeans still fought wars for an acre of land

As to the infrastructure, it was necessary or do you think any English upper class prick could have administered East Indian trade from a slum? Infrasturcture was built where it suited our societies´ needs, see South Africa colonised by Dutch and English in compare to Burkina Faso.
__________________
hiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:33 AM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiphop View Post
Well, Europe got wealthy because of colonialism without which the industrial revolution would not have happened, so English, French, Spaniards, Portugese and Netherlandersers stole all raw materials they could grab and their upper class got filthy rich

America got wealthy because they claimed an incredibly big mass of land to be their own; America got a whole massive country for free (when you don´t count a few minor fights with native indians) while Europeans still fought wars for an acre of land

As to the infrastructure, it was necessary or do you think any English upper class prick could have administered East Indian trade from a slum? Infrasturcture was built where it suited our societies´ needs, see South Africa colonised by Dutch and English in compare to Burkina Faso.

That's not how you keep wealth. The Spanish found more gold in the Americas and eliminated many cultures in the process and did even more plundering than the British did when Colonialism was starting, but when the Spanish spent their gold they bought products from Netherlands and Britain. Those 2 countries were the first to industrialize. You can't just rob. You have to be able to produce. If robbing was the only way to get rich then trade wouldn't have been pursued as much as it was. Spain and Portugal ended up being relatively poor in comparison to Britain which pursued free trade in the 1800's. How do you think Switzerland, (a country with less natural resources), got rich? Trade anyone?

People use colonialism for guilt purposes to ignore how economics works. Colonialism isn't necessary for wealth.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:15 PM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Guilt? Oh yes the favorite "guilt" catch phrase of the right, it's basically used when someone wants to avoid moral obligations.
Yeah, like we don't have our own personal obligations right? It's a favorite catch phrase of the right because the left uses it so often.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Of course aid is a temporary solution, no one is arguing otherwise, this is where your argument fails, for you approach it as if anyone is arguing otherwise.
My argument began because I didn't like it when Bono shouted down an African journalist who was offering a different point of view. There are detrimental effects of some of the aid which should be looked at. Bono then went on about how Ireland prospered from a 3rd world country to now. This annoyed me even further because Ireland was never in the same position as Africa because they had democracy and private property rights. Bono felt that if the education spending that went on in Ireland was done the same way in Africa it would work in the Africa the same way. Then my point after that was to acknowledge that Ireland had lower taxes joined the Euro which increased trade. They made more money then and this provided jobs that "educated" people could take advantage of. Democracy, private property rights, and trade are the reasons for Ireland's great improvement, and this more than just education spending.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
What do you mean "Bono wants education spending at the level of Ireland"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
I'm sorry but I just can't take what you say seriously anymore.

You say this:


but right above you say:
I was talking about the middle ages regarding the black plague and how it affected the economy changing Europe. The Ireland comment was about recent history including the last 20 years. There is no contradiction. My prior post is a history lesson on what we learned about economics and how much of it was by accident. We shouldn't ignore those lessons. Simply spending money on education like in Ireland is not the solution. You need jobs at the other end for the spending to be useful. Look at the former Soviet republics. Lots have "free" education but lousy jobs that don't relate to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Please name me a time in the Western world where millions were dying left and right from diseases that the rest of the world had treatments and cures for... just name me one.

I wrote in my prior posts about the black plague and how freer economics by accident started showing up. The purpose of that post was to show that certain behaviours with money and competition lead to better results DESPITE horrible diseases. People didn't start living up to 65 years of age until the late 1800's, yet the seeds of understanding economics was already starting 100s of years before that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Free lunch?

I'm talking about human lives, you're talking about $$. There's no point in talking about economies if the population is wiped out.
Guilt again? Hey, I didn't kill them. If Bono wants to tell us that we are letting a "holocaust" happen because of our inaction then he's using the same liberal guilt complex to get us to spend our money with emotion instead of thinking. You can't talk about $$$ without talking about $$$. Economics is about $$$. $$$ allow us to spread wealth without bartering.

Bono is setting up a premise that there are only 2 options. Aid or inaction. That premise is limited because Bono's knowledge of economics is limited. Why don't we use the choice that has worked everytime it's tried instead of wealth distribution.

It doesn't take an economist to do the math. Providing heathcare, & education for 100's of millions of people on the continent of Africa will cost more than 1% of the GDP. Applying institutions that we take for granted in the west in Africa and trading with them will alleviate poverty faster than what we're doing now with aid. Also there is poverty in Asia, East Europe, and South America as well. There are so many special interests competing for $$$. Then add global warming and the carbon taxes along with it. We will be overrun with bureaucrats feathering their nests at our cost and doing little to improve other countries. Hence the purpose of the U.N.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
There is absolutely nothing sexy about your grasp on economics.
I guess economists better pick up electric guitars and start working on songs because it appears people can't get beyond what is "cool" and what is truth.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:46 PM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiphop View Post
Well, Europe got wealthy because of colonialism without which the industrial revolution would not have happened, so English, French, Spaniards, Portugese and Netherlandersers stole all raw materials they could grab and their upper class got filthy rich
Now that the entire world is explored and colonialism is past history you can't believe in the power of exchange? Countries tend to be more peaceful with each other when there is more trade. They depend on each other more therefore become less hostile based on integrated self interest.

Actual wealth and high standards of living come from creating products and services faster than the population growth. Doesn't anyone have a problem with that? Socialists do. They are about envy and guilt and they want a society with equal outcomes. If the west believes in the template of the left we will have to use this reasoning:

"We are guilty for poverty in Africa so we should give money to them. The poor people envy us and they are right to be envious of us. Our wealth should go to them." This scenario is a money pit and doesn't actually solve the structural problems in poor countries. You can't distribute wealth until you build it first. You also can't distribute the money too fast or you will punish those who build it in the first place.

Work is painful and people seek to avoid pain. People will only build wealth if they are not overly punished for it. It's ironic that when government taxes less they grow larger because the overall economy is allowed to grow and they both grow along together. People also personally donate their money more when they have a better economy.

In fact this idea of distribution falls under the thought of plunder because it simply says: "Rich people have all the money and so just take it from them and give it to the poor." It ignores that once you take the wealth from the rich what are you going to do when it has been consumed? Where is the future wealth? Would the rich even want to stay in a country that plunders them? Look at Zimbabwe. The white farmers were chased off and the government took their property. Now that they don't run the farms properly and just print money so the government can take what it wants no matter what, and now they are doing worse than under colonialism. If colonialism was bad and Mugabe worse then we need to look at helping the people who sympathize with modernizing Africa helping them spread the knowledge of how to do that. If a dictator starts bullying those supporters then revolution will be the only way to uproot them. Otherwise the jerk dictators of the world will continue decide what goes on and not the people.

If a worse case scenario occurs and the right people win and they become hypocrites and establish another military dictatorship and do no changes they subcribed to in the past then the vicious cycle will continue until they learn their lesson. If we don't learn lessons from the past the mistakes will keep repeating until we do.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:58 PM   #41
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Guilt again? Hey, I didn't kill them.
Well then, the discussion is over... I mean you didn't do anything wrong, let them die, things were probably a lot better before you knew anything was going on over there right?



Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Bono is setting up a premise that there are only 2 options. Aid or inaction. That premise is limited because Bono's knowledge of economics is limited. Why don't we use the choice that has worked everytime it's tried instead of wealth distribution.
Actually, you know very little about economics and even less about his premise. It's never been aid or inaction, it's aid with economic development.

I'm done.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:28 PM   #42
War Child
 
AnnRKeyintheUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: not coming down
Posts: 603
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
The average person has to save 40% of what they make to get to the point of self sufficiency by 65 which is a big struggle if you took too long to pay off your mortgage.
The 'average person' CAN'T save 40% of what they make because they need it to live on in the meantime. Too long to pay off your mortgage? Who can pay it off early? If you can, you're not 'the average person.'
__________________
AnnRKeyintheUSA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2008, 11:41 AM   #43
Refugee
 
A stor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: U.S.A. East Coast
Posts: 2,464
Local Time: 06:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aardvark747 View Post
I certainly don't oppose his efforts, however I would prefer not to hear about it at a gig. Seeing him on the news would do just fine.
I agree.....Besides, at a concert. Bono does not have the time to discuss all of the problems facing some nations in Africa. I would enjoy seeing him more on the news. I think Bono is a very smart man. He has done his homework. A lot of what he says makes sense to me. And as an American taxpayer, I would like to see my monies re-routed to more foreign aid and investment, with Africa.
__________________

__________________
A stor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
africa, bono

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com