I am really late to this thread, and it's kind of off the front page, but I have many things to say so I'll say them anyway.
On the original topic of whether aid is good or bad:
Aid, FDI, and a variety of other innovative programs are all needed at once. The problem needs to be solved from the top down and the bottom up at the same time, but it needs to be coordinated to make sure programs fit together and aren't contradictory.
People who criticize the concept of aid to Africa have their heads up their bums. Criticizing actual implementation is another story, and there are some in the field, particularly economists, who've become convinced that proper implementation is unachievable. But the concept of giving aid to the poorest people in Africa (which Bono vigourously promotes) is no different than the concept of welfare that we have in the first world.
As for cash aid - it should definately be cash to buy food if you want to implement a food aid program, and there is great research and current thinking on this topic (basically what the US does is dump excess food to control our national market at the expense of screwing with local markets where we're dumping). But another consideration is who the cash goes to - transfers to host countries to buy food aid are one type of program, but increasingly what is working is cash programs on a community level, be they microfinance or cash for work or other programs that provide cash for recipients to develop businesses or assets or skills. These programs can be coupled with food aid and other types of aid programming - but even when I say aid programming it implies the wrong thing for what is increasingly successful. Instead of "aid" and "relief" programs should be focusing on developing livelihoods and self sufficiency. This all seems kind of obvious but there are so many failing programs that just pay no attention to it.
The Edun debate:
As for Edun being a product that workers can't afford to buy, of course not. The problem with industry in underdeveloped countries (mostly in Latin America and Africa) is that there is no production at all. Edun already wins (I'm not addressing the final product's marketability here) by being a production program. What has happened for hundreds of years is that the first world has used third world countries as cheap sources for raw materials, extracted them (often at unfair prices and almost always with practices that are extraordinarily unfriendly to workers) sent the resources back home to produce in our industrialized factories, then sold the packaged products back to the underdeveloped countries. (All this bullshit about China investing in Africa is more of that - it's a great market for China, but luckily African governments are starting to be aware of how extraction focused some of China's "investments" are). This decimates local markets and for years has hindered industrialization (though it is not the only thing hindering industrialization).
In terms of Edun as a model business model, I'm not sure about that. I'ts a nice feel good program, like Red, and I think if it ever ended up so wildly successful that it actually did hurt other similar-tiered designers' sales it would have an impact, but in this scenario Edun's success would just be a symptom of a wonderful shift among that set of consumers to caring about ethical buying to an extreme degree. (Let's face it, most people who buy Edun are probably also buying the unethically produced stuff - it all looks good in their crowds, and wearing that Edun shirt or for the less wealthy that Red shirt is a nice way of showing off your ethical intelligence when you go ahead and wear an "unethical" brand right alongside it. Not saying this is true of all buyers, but personal image is definately part of why these products sell.) In terms of programs that successfully encourage and implement industrialization and transition to processing and production in underdevelopped countries (production for export and for local markets), it can be done, and it will be done. And hopefully it will be done without making the poor poorer, although that has yet to happen with industrialization (but we have learned lessons from that in the past, are aware of the trend, and can develop programs that aim to mitigate it - again, whether these programs will be successful is another question).
Back on page 3 butter7 asked why Nike produces in China and Indonesia and not in Africa. The answer isn't cheap labor, that exists in Africa too, it's infrastructure. That is the huge roadblock to industrial development in Africa. In part lack of developed infrastructure can be blamed on climate issues, but a lot of the problem comes down to government decision-making. China and most Asian countries developed their infrastructure so they would be attractive places for production and business. India did it, espeically with telecom in parts of the country. That's a hugely important step that most African countries need to take to be more marketable for FDI - and it's something they need to ask potential investing companies to partner on - if a company sets up shop, uses the local labor force etc, governments in granting that contract must ask for the company to give back in the form of road maintenance or well digging or somesuch. Too often they haven't, because higher-ups in the government (or 50 years ago, colonial rulers) can line their pockets with production and with resource extraction without asking for this. (This is very cynical and I don't believe it's universal or uncurable or whatever - there are plenty of actors in all governments who care about national welfare as well.)
And by the way, butter, FDI companies bring in their own employees from outside the country all the time.
Edun contracts with local factories - so do many, many other companies for their international production. Coca Cola is one example - on the opposite end of the spectrum, in that the companies they contract with are very unethical. But this is the usual, Edun is the exception.
p.s. I agree, Edun's clothes are not made for curvey women. Excuse me if I look like I went through puberty. On the other hand with T-shirts I always go for a child's medium or large. And my, say, Red Sox jersey t-shirt in a child's medium is the same size as my U2 women's small t-shirts anyway.