by 112-1077774096 » Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:11 am
i have an idea, why dont the charitable people open up their homes and adopt an african family to help them
ok i am joking here, of course they wont do that. I find it admirable that people give to charity when i wont even give money to beggars in the street (and believe there arelots in bangkok). but I always have the belief that by giving people charity allows them to take responsibility away from themsselves or their elected governments.
imaging being PM of some tin pot african country, "shall we help the poor? oh no, lets wait, the british will send us money, we will cream most of it and pass the rest on to the poor so it looks we are doing something". Its just plain wrong guys.
natural disasters are different i think, like the tsunami, I can understand aid being given to restructure the infrastructure to get lives back to normal, but the whole african thing is a different issue, the countries do have money but choose to keep it amongst the elite few.
i have already said in this thread that education is the key, they need to stop breeding.
now to be contraversial, in the past when the earth has been overpopulated we have had wars, i mean world wars which has culled the population. a world war now would obliterate the population so thats out. now lets turn to aids, is it manufactured to get rid of the problem, get rid of the poor and uneducated (with a few non poor casualties along the way)
any thoughts?