Not required, but stressed alot to.
2006-06-20 04:46:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by ASDFGHJKL 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
No, the outrageously rich, (some make $40,000,000 a picture now) liberal American movie stars, as Angelina Jolie has started, should help relieve the plight of peoples governed by irresponsible, corrupt, and greedy third world governments. When a country cannot take care of its own, look to its government! Believe me, these countries have their wealthy citizens, but they're hogging it all for themselves. It makes me furious how people from poor countries don't see this or do nothing about it. They always expect the U.S. to bail them out. Besides, do you have any idea what the United States taxpayers are already doing to relieve poverty in the world? What....we've done nothing throughout history??? This argument drives me nuts.
2006-06-20 11:52:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nani 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only if the wealthy nation can forcefully take their lands & natural resources.
Seriously no. That is socialism 101.
Should smarter students have to share their grades with the other students in their class?
Should Miami share the NBA title with Dallas because Dallas is a smaller team?
Should the US put water stations in the southwest desert becuase illegal aliens keep dying due to their own desires and lawbreaking?
2006-06-20 11:44:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by therandman 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
... required... no... should they help morally... yes... it is the fundamentals of Christianity to help your fellow brothers to become better people and you can help them in many different ways... we have been blessed so much, God may take these blessings away if we do not share with others.. we do share some now, but I think that we can always do better...
I mean, to require something, you would have to have someone to enforce it... something to police the requirement... and there is no such organization right now... I mean the UN can talk about it, but they can't make America do anything it wouldn't want too...
The world won't get any better through greed..
2006-06-20 11:49:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. There's no way to force a government to give out money, food, etc. Foreign aid is a voluntary thing for a country. Sad fact is, most countries who do it, become hated. (Us for example) Being a benefactor's nice, but the recipient usually ends up hating the giver, for having what they don't. The giving country ends up being conspicuously wealthy for having enough to give to others. We end up hated for having what others don't. Rabble rousers will then point to this as a reason to hate what we are, as well as what we have.
2006-06-20 11:49:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no, the wealthy need dependant societies to keep working for them & fighting wars. if the poor were to educate they wouldnt play into the hands of the rich.
2006-06-20 11:54:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
They already do this. It could not be a requirement or nations would no longer be sovereign. Half of all food eaten outside the United States is produced in the United States.
I know a professor who spends one week a year teaching in Nigeria. It is more difficult that it appears. Many cultural concepts ingrained in small children in America are absent in Nigeria. As a consequence, transfering productive concepts to eliminate poverty are at best challenging. Many pre-existing cultural concepts interfere with national productivity. These are often little things that people don't notice such as scheduling, time management concepts, money time equivalence, time of day, money object trades and so on. The American school system is designed to create productive workers. Even children's games are designed to this end. Children hurry from place to place to meet baseball schedules and learn this behavior from parents, parents will do things at 6:00 pm, toys cost $1.95 and they have an allowance of $5.00 or earn so much per hour working in the house, classes last for 45 minutes and so on.
Although these are little things, they are internalized in American children, they have to be taught to adults in Nigeria. They don't internalize this. Of course you can see this in the Americans of history too. Baseball is the prime example of this prior ethos. Baseball is over when it is over, the innings last as long as they last, there is no time, a single player can score up to four points causing others to score with a home run. The more modern sports are time driven, each person can only produce their production of one score. In baseball, games can last more than one day, weather is permitted to stop or cancel the game, the manager is powerless during the work (he is in the dugout and has no input when the ball is in play).
A worker can receive no more than what they produce. If you produce $10 per hour worth of value then you can be paid anything less than $10. If you were paid more than $10 then the customers would not buy the goods. The average American household produced about $22 per hour worth of goods in 2003. When you consider the percentage that is retired and remove small children from the measure then Americans probably produce between $40 and $50 per working household per hour. That is a lot of goods and services per worker. Americans are largely wealthy not from creating stores of value such as savings, in fact Americans are notorious for not saving, but from producing more per worker per hour than anyone else except possibly the Japanese and the Germans. In certain areas, the Germans and Japanese do a better job per hour. In fact, Germany produces the same physical output as the United States (excluding services and agriculture) with 1/3 the workforce. Stored value only has value if it can be turned into the purchase of productive goods. American pensions are dependent upon highly productive workers. Pension failures that are systemic are failures of production increases to keep up with prices paid for retirment assets such as stocks and bonds.
Nigeria averages less than $1 per day per worker in production. It is more than just education and access to food, it is cultural values and beliefs as well. If you want to make a poor nation rich, you need to secure property rights to individuals, teach small children to be good workers as defined by the workers customers, you need to encourage cooperation between cultural groups, and eliminate government regulation and protection of its powerful interests.
2006-06-20 11:53:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by OPM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
how many countries got wealthy plundering the natural resources of under developed countries? and you want them to give it back? That's like asking them to do the right thing.
2006-06-20 11:43:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by ranger12 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Required? By whom?
Enforced with whose Army?
2006-06-20 11:41:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by scott.braden 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Send them packing and reject their doles... they offer aid only to control your politics and economy. If only the West (esp US) keeps off and does not arm insurgencies in the third world we will be more than fine.
2006-06-20 11:50:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by boogie man 4
·
0⤊
0⤋