UNICEF Appeal For the Somalia Region Famine

[Hurricane]

But it's funny how they manage to convince themselves it's due to increased wisdom and experience rather than a change in which policies benefit them personally.
.

I am turning 39 this year and am slowly becoming more conservative not much more, I still vote Labour, it is not polices that help me more now as a tax payer - it is more that is harder to pull on my heart strings now. I can't explain why. Neil's quote about the young liberal and the older conservative resonates with me.

 

[Hurricane]

Latest UN report concluded that the nations with the freest economic systems were those most quickly moving themselves out of poverty. China, India, Brazil are key examples. Whilst charity is useful in these areas, intervention is often not. You local MP will probably get money from the budget then go to a tractor manufacturer in his local electorate and end up delivering 5 new tractors to people in need of fresh water and other equipment.

I guess there is a belief that the government is incompetent and is incapable of getting anything right - (your tractor example). And that the free market is the solution to everything. The answer to starvation in Africa is not lowering taxes and lessening government involvement. Unless you believe in laissez faire economics and not having a welfare state then most agree that there is a role for government in addressing market failures. And mass starvation would be an example of the free market not working very well. Natural disasters are a general time for the government to provide aid and they did step in after the Christchurch earthquake no amount of fund raising or telethons would have done anything as much as the government.

I can't really get into a debate with you about whether the government is incompetent or not - I believe it is competent and does many good things in the community (the police, hospitals, education). But I can't have a full on debate as I work for the government

 

[Anil]

I'd still class myself as socially liberal - i.e. not a fan of the state telling people what they can and cannot do - which issues did you notice specifically?

there was one post on immigration a while back that i can remember off the top of my head...i am not saying you have issues or anything, it is just a significant change from your stance on such issues from a few years back...just wondered what prompted the change, that's all...

 

[Anil]

I'd still class myself as socially liberal - i.e. not a fan of the state telling people what they can and cannot do - which issues did you notice specifically?

there was one post on immigration a while back that i can remember off the top of my head...i am not saying you have issues or anything, it is just a significant change from your stance on such issues from a few years back...just wondered what prompted the change, that's all...

 

[Goughy]

I cant say I have become more conservative regarding charitable donations as Ive grown older. It may sound callous but I have never really cared that much. However, I do recognise the it is important to others for a number of reasons.

It is important to differentiate between disaster relief and development aid though. Disaster aid (famines, earthquakes, tsunami etc) is vital. I may not contribute directly through charity but I am happy to see some of my tax dollars going to help other people in an emergancy situation. Of course, charity for disaster aid is often hurt by the poor adminstration and petty politics of those wanting to administer it.

Development aid, on the other hand, doesnt work-- at least based on the evidence of the last 50 or so years and can often do far more harm than good. The only way for a country to progress is through rule of law and while that can be encouraged by outsiders the changes must be made by the country itself. Development aid to countries with weak rule of law and corrupt systems just reinforces those systems and reduces internal change for the better.

 

[Uppercut]

It is important to differentiate between disaster relief and development aid though. Disaster aid (famines, earthquakes, tsunami etc) is vital. I may not contribute directly through charity but I am happy to see some of my tax dollars going to help other people in an emergancy situation. Of course, charity for disaster aid is often hurt by the poor adminstration and petty politics of those wanting to administer it.

Development aid, on the other hand, doesnt work-- at least based on the evidence of the last 50 or so years and can often do far more harm than good. The only way for a country to progress is through rule of law and while that can be encouraged by outsiders the changes must be made by the country itself. Development aid to countries with weak rule of law and corrupt systems just reinforces those systems and reduces internal change for the better.

Spot on here. Was going to make a similar comment relating to the Somalian famine but I'm not sufficiently educated in the specific situation at hand to make a judgment on which of the two it is.

 

[Goughy]

Spot on here. Was going to make a similar comment relating to the Somalian famine but I'm not sufficiently educated in the specific situation at hand to make a judgment on which of the two it is.

It is a very difficult question. The Somali famine has to qualify as a disaster requiring immediate international aid but people are wary of commiting funds to areas where the safety of aid workers cannot be guaranteed, where local 'big men' 'tax' the convoys and resources are getting diverted to people with history of human rights abuses. IMO, however there has to be aid given in the immediate future due to the severity of the problem. However, this situation isnt going away. Somalia isnt going to get better overnight and people should be wary of providing resources to address long term problems that have no chance of disappearing in a fractured country where a lot of people have done a lot of bad things.

So, IMHO, something needs to be done immediately (and it is) but it will never be enough to deal with the situation completely and there is no end in sight.