Should we keep people poor?

[Lackadaisical2]

I think (or hope) that developing countries like China will go through the same process the West did: build a good economy then when it can support them implement some reforms to help workers out. That and technology.

It's gonna take a whole lot of money to get that going (China's already more or less at that last step anyway). But for the rest of the global South it's going to take a lot more than what they can do on their own because there isn't anyone in the global North who is going to let the developing nations become the resource whores the global North had to be to get where they are today.

Indeed. It'll be interesting watching the economic development of the LEDC's as they don't have colonies, unlike us when we did all that stuff.

They also don't have to develop all the new technologies they want to sue either, just go to college here and come back, or buy equipment or hire specialists form our countries. They're avoiding a lot of research costs, while having access to more advanced technology than was available 1-300 years ago.

[Karsol]

There will always be more poor people to take their place.

Exactly. Poor people are like lemurs. *nods*

And rich people, like lemmings.

[Kma2]

....
Yeah, which is why I wait until I get home to do the more juicer debating. I cant really be too distracted by looking up sources for every whining child who is enamored by their post count.

And yet the one time you provided a source in this thread, you were forced to admit you were wrong. Interesting.

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

Yeah. Whatever. If correcting my grammar is the only way you can be right, I will give it to you. Far be it for me to stifle ones sense of rightness.

[Kma2]

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

hm... it makes more sense the way he put it. If it was an impossible problem, no one would hire him, since even he couldn't solve it.

Except I CAN and do solve the impossible problems. That is why I get paid the big bucks

[DaWoad]

....
Yeah, which is why I wait until I get home to do the more juicer debating. I cant really be too distracted by looking up sources for every whining child who is enamored by their post count.

And yet the one time you provided a source in this thread, you were forced to admit you were wrong. Interesting.

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

Yeah. Whatever. If correcting my grammar is the only way you can be right, I will give it to you. Far be it for me to stifle ones sense of rightness.

One's and I'm not sure that rightness is a . . . . oh wait. . .I see what you did there!

[DaWoad]

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

hm... it makes more sense the way he put it. If it was an impossible problem, no one would hire him, since even he couldn't solve it.

Except I CAN and do solve the impossible problems. That is why I get paid the big bucks

then the problem wasn't impossible. . .merely extremely difficult at worst.

[Buffett and Colbert]

There will always be more poor people to take their place.

Exactly. Poor people are like lemurs. *nods*

And rich people, like lemmings.

I think I meant lemmings...

[Kma2]

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

hm... it makes more sense the way he put it. If it was an impossible problem, no one would hire him, since even he couldn't solve it.

Except I CAN and do solve the impossible problems. That is why I get paid the big bucks

then the problem wasn't impossible. . .merely extremely difficult at worst.

No. My clients perceived the problem as impossible. Nothing is impossible.

[DaWoad]

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

hm... it makes more sense the way he put it. If it was an impossible problem, no one would hire him, since even he couldn't solve it.

Except I CAN and do solve the impossible problems. That is why I get paid the big bucks

then the problem wasn't impossible. . .merely extremely difficult at worst.

No. My clients perceived the problem as impossible. Nothing is impossible.

got yah. out of curiosity . . . what was the problem?(note im a med student . . .im not that great at economics).

[Gift-of-god]

They also don't have to develop all the new technologies they want to sue either, just go to college here and come back, or buy equipment or hire specialists form our countries. They're avoiding a lot of research costs, while having access to more advanced technology than was available 1-300 years ago.

Most developing economies have problems that developing nations never had. A good example is Somalia's fishery resources, or to be more exact, the lack thereof.

Since the collapse of the central government, there has been no coast guard. This has allowed two things to happen: large scale factory fishing boats have come in and taken as much as they physically can, doing extensive damage to the ecosystem on which local fisheries relied; and other ships have come in and dumped all sorts of waste into the water, causing similar damage. Many of the so-called pirates are actually former fishermen and members of the former coast guard trying to protect their waters. I doubt any of the developed nations of the world had to deal with such problems.

---

....
Yeah, which is why I wait until I get home to do the more juicer debating. I cant really be too distracted by looking up sources for every whining child who is enamored by their post count.

And yet the one time you provided a source in this thread, you were forced to admit you were wrong. Interesting.

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

Yeah. Whatever. If correcting my grammar is the only way you can be right, I will give it to you. Far be it for me to stifle ones sense of rightness.

Your faulty grammar is merely the humourous aspect of your post, though it does make me wonder why the client would hire you to resolve complex problems if you are incapable of even proofreading.

The actual point I was addressing, which you ignored, is the simple fact that you characterise those who ask for sources as whining children. This contrasts, in a rather ironic manner, with the fact that those of us who did ask for a source were able to use that source to show that you were wrong.

Perhaps you should listen to 'whining children' more often.

[F1-Insanity]

Of course not.

Which is why development aid ought to be stopped immediately. Fifty years of development aid has only made Africa poorer and more dependent.

By giving handouts, you make people dependent, you stifle progress and enterprise and in the end no one is helped except the directors of the big development aid organizations.

[Muravyets]

....
Yeah, which is why I wait until I get home to do the more juicer debating. I cant really be too distracted by looking up sources for every whining child who is enamored by their post count.

And yet the one time you provided a source in this thread, you were forced to admit you were wrong. Interesting.

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

It could also have been "nigh" impossible. Confusion over which correction to make to a jarring error -- it's nice when a flawed argument comes with its own built-in distraction.

[Kma2]

By the way, it's "I was hired to solve complex, nay, impossible problems".

hm... it makes more sense the way he put it. If it was an impossible problem, no one would hire him, since even he couldn't solve it.

Except I CAN and do solve the impossible problems. That is why I get paid the big bucks

then the problem wasn't impossible. . .merely extremely difficult at worst.

No. My clients perceived the problem as impossible. Nothing is impossible.

got yah. out of curiosity . . . what was the problem?(note im a med student . . .im not that great at economics).

One example is developing a petroleum decline curve analysis program in .Net. Essentially as complex a model as weather forecasting. I have been doing this type of problem solving for 20 years, so there are several.

[Cloddhopper-Love]

That's the whole problem behind slave labour and underpaid workers. The public wants things cheaper. The producers see that and begin to cut costs. Where are the costs cut? At the source. Look at chocolate. The cocoa beans are often picked by children who are yanked out of school and underpaid. Their working conditions are horrible, and injuries oft go untreated, but they do it just to scrape by. Of course, the consumers don't think of this. Fair trade goods people. The more you buy, the more it sends a message to the producers. If there is a market for it, they will cater to it, and the larger the market, the more those at the bottom will get. If you can find items certifed as "fair trade goods" those are the ones that are doing good.