Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

998519 Posts in 39163 Topics- by 30574 Members - Latest Member: rosa89n20

April 19, 2014, 04:45:46 PM
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGeneralIs this you?
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Author Topic: Is this you?  (Read 1517 times)
Danmark
Level 7
**



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2012, 01:38:48 PM »

Wherever something is provided for free that would otherwise be bought locally, local markets are destroyed. Nobody can compete with free.

as an example, in the US, food stamps did not "destroy" the market for food...


Neither do foreign corporations literally destroy local markets. I just copied Schoq's rhetorical device.

The point is remote economies of scale often flatten smaller local economies in competition, with devastating consequences for the agency and dignity of locals. There are certainly ways remote intervention can help people without such intolerable fallout, but it does imply you have to be very careful with the kind of charity you support (and that gov't food aid is kaput).


Turns out nobody's disagreeing with anyone, we're just bad at being clear.

True. Looks like this could go on for a while though...
Logged
ElVaquero
Level 0
**


View Profile Email
« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2012, 01:45:15 PM »

As a former political studies major....

 Beg please lock this thread Beg
Logged
VDZ
Level 3
***


My post is there read that instead ->

supervdz@dolfijn.nl
View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2012, 08:10:31 PM »

As a former political studies major....

 Beg please lock this thread Beg
People are having a pleasant discussion here. The thread can be locked once the thread has devolved into a flame war.
Logged
rob
Level 8
***


all 'bout Zumba (absolute pro @ Zumba)


View Profile Email
« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2012, 09:38:37 PM »

As a former political studies major....

 Beg please lock this thread Beg

as a former political studies major

please contribute to a political discussion if you disagree with anything





also, i be mad donatin' cuz i dont fuck wit dem perfect solution fallacies
Logged

Danmark
Level 7
**



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: October 13, 2012, 06:03:50 AM »

also, i be mad donatin' cuz i dont fuck wit dem perfect solution fallacies

Has nought to do with perfection. Much charity is a net detriment. Paying to harm people is crazy.


As a former political studies major....

 Beg please lock this thread Beg

As a sophomoric dropout, it should be your duty to inform us know where we're wrong.
please rate this burn. your feedback is valuable!
Logged
VDZ
Level 3
***


My post is there read that instead ->

supervdz@dolfijn.nl
View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: October 13, 2012, 02:27:22 PM »

As a former political studies major....

 Beg please lock this thread Beg

As a sophomoric dropout, it should be your duty to inform us know where we're wrong.
please rate this burn. your feedback is valuable!
I'm not even sure what you're trying to say, let alone how it would refute his argument in a spectacular way. 2/10
Logged
ElVaquero
Level 0
**


View Profile Email
« Reply #36 on: October 13, 2012, 03:55:30 PM »

Welp! The scenario zalzane described doesn't actually occur very much and that was my problem.
Bill Gates, USAID, or nearly any non-profit would refuse to just give money or free things to people anymore. It's all money for projects or loans (microfinance, like giving a farmer money for tools, has become incredibly widespread over the last 20 years).

Problems with a Cold War term like "third world" aside, corruption and graft are not a reason to not donate money to aid organizations in an emergency or on an ongoing basis. It's just a reason to target your money better and I'm glad that was said by a few posters.

Ending poverty has a lot more to it than just developing nations, because, erm... there's a fuckload of poor people in developed nations too. It's just that we have more substantial safety nets (food stamps, community action agencies, unemployment insurance, etc.) than other, less well-to-do nations.

The point of my complaint was that the OP's survey didn't say location, class, or race--actually let's just leave race out of it-- but I'm guessing those would be similarly homogeneous. These are significant factors when you open your mouth in a public forum, even if they weren't included.

Sorry this was just my careerish before gamedev!

please rate this burn. your feedback is valuable!
Woulda been a wicked sick burn except I did get my degree and all I have to show for it is a fat paper about Chinese aid in Africa :/

I thought mobile developers were just developers that moved around a lot.
This is the best part of the thread so far.  Hand Clap
Logged
Danmark
Level 7
**



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2012, 07:08:05 PM »

Welp! The scenario zalzane described doesn't actually occur very much and that was my problem.
Bill Gates, USAID, or nearly any non-profit would refuse to just give money or free things to people anymore. It's all money for projects or loans (microfinance, like giving a farmer money for tools, has become incredibly widespread over the last 20 years).

Problems with a Cold War term like "third world" aside, corruption and graft are not a reason to not donate money to aid organizations in an emergency or on an ongoing basis. It's just a reason to target your money better and I'm glad that was said by a few posters.


Ah, that's good to hear. I thought microfinance became widespread much more recently than that.

It's just hard to believe things are hunky-dory when you see tons of ads for bullshit like Christian Children's Fund on the boob tube (nothing against Christian generosity, it's a bad charity, at least as they present it in the ads), and read of shenanigans like this all the time. A few years ago my local newspaper had a scathing investigative piece on charities based nearby whose bigwigs were paying themselves handsomely.

Charities are immediately dubious because they claim to help people. Yet at worst, you entrust money to a middleman who pockets it or wastes it, with neither provider nor middleman considering the supposed recipient of the charity. You can contrast this with for-profit corporations, which legitimately claim to provide good products and services in exchange for money, despite their methods being unethical (or amoral) most of the time. You can trust a corporation to do whatever it takes to make a buck. With charities it's up in the air. There's nothing systematically optimizing charities to do what they're meant to. Some do, some don't. Nothing forces under ones that don't.

How do you make average Joes and Janes cautious about what they give to without putting them off donating altogether? You gotta have some kind of contingency as our society slides from high- to low-trust.


Ending poverty has a lot more to it than just developing nations, because, erm... there's a fuckload of poor people in developed nations too. It's just that we have more substantial safety nets (food stamps, community action agencies, unemployment insurance, etc.) than other, less well-to-do nations.

True. However, most safety nets in developed countries reduce people to strictly economic terms, so lie somewhere between inadequate and nefarious.


please rate this burn. your feedback is valuable!
Woulda been a wicked sick burn except I did get my degree and all I have to show for it is a fat paper about Chinese aid in Africa :/

LOL I regret going to uni. Might as well give my degree to high schoolers as top-tier roach paper.

Hope you at least don't shoulder massive debt.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic