‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’

The United Nations is on a mission to alleviate extreme poverty in Africa by 2010. Such a mission requires a definition of poor as people living below a designated specified level of poverty,which entails that only what is defined as poor Not what they are pushing the brakes on what 'is', or may be perceived as poor by the masses. Secondly, is the target they have set, achievable? 2010 is right around the corner.There's also an impossible effort by the United nations to eradicate hunger and poverty, the World Over by 2015.Their eight goal-criterion to end poverty is: End hunger,universal education,Gender equity,child health,maternal health, combat HIV/AIDS, environmental sustainability and Global partnership.


All the No points:


‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Please cast your vote after you've read the arguments.
You can also add to the debate by leaving your comment at the end of the page.
(0%) (0%)


‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

The poorest of the world: Farmers are suffering the most

The climate crisis has led to flooding, drought and the drying up of crops. Farmers are suffering and the U.N has not made any special effort to prevent or alleviate the poor farmers from their grief. Global warming and the food crisis have been looming over us for some time now yet the U.N has made minimal effort in trying to avert the crisis and perhaps accelerated it.

To 'alleviate' poverty it has mostly encouraged micro-financing and created jobs that aren't really good for the environment(poor people getting jobs as labourers in factories which callously pollute the atmosphere or buying,raising and killing cows(Paul McCartney would not approve), selling,manufacturing,distributing plastic bags etc. Most of the U.N's efforts to end poverty have added to a global crisis which will hit the poorest people of the Earth, the most.

The African Government had been welcomed by Member States at the U.N General assembly, to attempt to both make domestic resources movable and bring in private capital to achieve development goals, The African representatives rightly felt that the goal of doubling aid to Africa by 2010 can and will not be achieved.
Africa called for fulfilling all official development assistance (ODA) commitments, including those by developed countries, to increase their share to 0.7 per cent of gross national income by 2015.-
22nd September 2008 [[http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2008/ga10748.doc.htm]]

And now years later Africa is still mired in deep unending poverty and it'll be 2010 in three months.

Lack of Industrialization and poor inefficient technology for agriculture, has long been considered a characteristic of poor under or less-developed Countries. The U.N has consequentially pressed the poor of the world to move towards coal/oil burning or industrialisation to extract themselves from their pitiful economic state. This has led to an uncontrollable rise in pollution, causing global warming and adverse results for agriculture thus food-shortages and high mortality rates. The method has backfired considerably.

Using the impetus of the changing earth and economic incentives, farmers have emigrated from farms to cities, leading to an overcrowded mess of further pollution stimuli in the name of 'urbanisation'. This leads to greater food shortages,pollution and thus dry weather and inundation(floods carry saline seawater) which causes morbidity/mortality/death because of a lack of crops and clean fresh water.

Poorer countries are generally Agro-based and will suffer gravely. In the words of Paul Hoffman:"Everyone knows an under-developed Country.It is a Country characterised by poverty, with beggars in the cities and villagers seeking out a bare subsistence in the rural areas...In spite of the generally prevailing poverty of people, it may have isolated islands of wealth with a few persons living in luxury..."

No because...

Jeffery Sachs cited as the 'most important economist in the world' by the New York Times, claims that poverty will and can be ended very soon.-January 2005 [[http://www.earth.columbia.edu/news/2005/story03-01-05e.html]] He explains thoroughly how wealth is generated and distributed and why the rich are rich and the poor are poor. There is an exact science to it and it is working.

His extensive research reveals changeable, removable bureaucratic flaws in the systems of underdeveloped Countries of the third and fourth world. China and India have made considerable improvements that were not as evident before 2005 when Sachs documented his educated,informed optimism about the near-end of world poverty.

Remarks on Jeff Sachs' book 'The end of poverty' follow:
“... A landmark book…combines [Sachs’] practical experience with sharp professional analysis and clear exposition….If there is any one work to put extreme poverty back onto the global agenda, this is it." — Publisher’s Weekly starred review

“Sachs proposes a many pronged, needs-based attack…that is eminently practical and minimally pipe-dreamy….A solid, reasonable argument in which the dismal science offers a brightening prospect for the world’s poor." — Kirkus reviews

“Jeffrey Sachs is that rare phenomenon: an academic economist famous for his theories about why some countries are poor and others rich, and also famous for his successful practical work in helping poor countries become richer. In this long-awaited, fascinating, clearly and movingly written book, he distills his experience to propose answers to the hard choices now facing the world." — Jared Diamond, Pulitzer-Prize-Winning author of Guns, Germs and Steel and Collapse

“Yes, Jeff Sachs is a dreamer, but one whose dreams flow not only from idealism but also from good analysis and impressive experience. If you care about development, and more importantly about poor people, in the developing world, this volume is a must." — President Ernesto Zedillo

‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

"Stand Up, Take Action, End Poverty Now!"

Where did the money from Guinness go?
People win millions for a breaking and making a Guiness world record. The money couldn't have gone to the protesters or their governments, it could have gone to the organisation. And what will the organisation do with it? It urges people to nag their governments to end poverty not the organisation.

The 'movement' has achieved near nothing.
[[http://www.endpoverty2015.org/stand-up]]

No because...

One Seventy Three Million Forty Five thousand three hundred and twenty five people have voiced their woes to the governments in more than one hundred and twenty Countries. They have appealed that governments take punitive action to end Poverty and achieve the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals. "Stand Up, Take Action, End Poverty Now!", has been certified by Guinness World Records as the a new world record and remains the largest movement of human beings in recorded history.

Most of the World's economies are democratic , the people have spoken, poverty will be stopped. [[http://standagainstpoverty.org/?gclid=COq5vYXo150CFY0vpAoduSAfsA]]

And micro-finance 'can' be eco-friendly and has bettered countless lives. [[http://www.grameenfoundation.org/where_we_work/]] It has been a very effective tool in curtailing poverty. [[http://www.endpoverty2015.org/g-20-london-summit-2009-special]] G-20 meeting, London Summit. The U.N Millennium campaign pronged the most influential world leaders to act.

‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

Abuja declarations

The Abuja declarations signed by many African leaders have not been substantiated. Africans are falling victim to Malaria by the thousands and there's only a month left to the deadline. Not everyone is like China, Africa is lagging behind on health issues, is still spending less than 15% qua their GDP on health, and continues to disappoint. "The 2008 World Malaria Report indicates that malaria claimed 881,000 lives in 2006, of which 91% (801,000) were in Africa, while 85% were children under 5 years of age. In addition, half a billion African people became ill and unable to work."[[http://www.endpoverty2015.org/africa/news/world-malaria-day-african-governments-are-reminded-deliver-their-abuja-declarations/06/may/09]] Shameful just shameful.

China is the exception to the rule , poverty everywhere else is increasing and will go on increasing as the ice-caps melt and crops dry up in the hotter and hotter sun.

HIV/AIDS continues to rise exponentially as African men marry many women, do not generally(unless they're Muslim) get circumcised or use contraceptives, condoms and other protective measures during sexual-intercourse. and awareness is hard to understand and even considered taboo at times.Black South Africans have learned not to trust the white man from history and the racial economic divide in their country and unlearning is a hefty process.

Poverty in the sense of a stop to A.I.D.S is not going to end and more serious measures must be taken to stop the spread of AIDS, those infected with HIV must be quarantined, this is not a joke, men and women with HIV/AIDS should not be mating so freely. What is the U.N doing with the awareness of how the disease spreads? Why can't they stop these people?

No because...
‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

UPA fails on education target in India

There have been very meager changes on spending in health and education in India and no reforms of any kind other than the addition of lunch-breaks/meals during the school-day.

The government has made no substantial changes in development and infrastructure. Education and health are thus , bound to suffer and grind to a very uncomfortable disconcerting standstill. The calling of the times is innovation, strength, improvement, sweeping changes and the United progressive Alliance (U.P.A) has not delivered.

'The United Progressive Alliance has failed to deliver on its promise to raise spending on the two sectors to internationally accepted levels of 2-3% GDP for public expenditure on health, and 6% GDP for public expenditure on Education by 2009, as promised in the National Common Minimum Program. The integration of this target in the 11th Five Year Plan however ensures that the ’9% GDP for public spending on Health & Education’ goal remains a part of the national development agenda.'- [[http://www.endpoverty2015.org/asia/news/upa-govt-fails-nation-health-and-education/03/mar/08]]

Education is not encouraged by micro-financing or the undeterred continual use of child labour and thus over population, the logic being a child has 'one' mouth to feed and two hands to work with. In poverty-stricken areas parents either do not let their children get educated, go-to school or pull them out in an early age, so the children can work on farms or in factories and bring money home.The U.N.O consistently brings attention to the issue of child labour but takes minimal or no action to stop it.

No because...
‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

Rich Countries care more about their banks than the poor of the world

Richer developed Countries have spent tenfold the amount they have given to efforts in alleviating poverty in developing and underdeveloped Countries on bailing out their financial institutions in light of the recent financial crisis.

Priorities

The rich like being rich and would like to stay that way. They also like the poor to be and remain poor. The fact being they had funds to spare and were saving them for a rainy day not to alleviate world poverty, which clearly, is not on the top of their agenda.
[[http://www.endpoverty2015.org/global-partnership/news/millennium-campaign-calls-rich-countries-meet-their-aid-commitments-bbc-world-service-radio/24/jun/09]]

No because...
‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

Vicious cycle of poverty not spoked

Professor Ragnar Nurkse has been reported to have said,"Countries are poor because they are poor".highlighting poverty as the real cause of poverty. It is an economic fact that poor people have a relatively greater marginal propensity to consume and a lesser marginal propensity to save. Less savings equals less investment thus less income and stifling economic growth. As a direct consequence the economy continues to suffer, poor people to finance their consumption take on loans usually with interest, and drown deeper into the quagmire of debt and unending poverty.

The U.N has done close to nothing to encourage poor people to SAVE instead the U.N.O has encouraged credit-financed lifestyles and micro-financing to continue a life of being slightly relatively economically better off but still steering the path of inescapable poverty.

No because...
‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
Yes because...

Subsisitence farming , inefficient farming tools and methods

Governments buy farming equipment rejected by foreign farmers of developed countries at high prices and sell the same equipment to local farmers at subsidised rates. Local farmers are usually untrained in the use of even outdated, unwanted foriegn farming equipment and use it inefficiently.

Farmers spangled allover these countries grow crop only for their families for no profit(subsistence farming). The U.N as always, records and reports these peculiarities without making any special effort to change them.

No because...
‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
No because...

India is doing so well

“Poverty eradication is a feasible and realistic goal. The primary responsibility must lie with the people and governments of developing countries. This book of Professor Jeffrey Sachs provides a deep insight into the success achieved in this regard in many developing countries and provides useful lessons for all practitioners of policy making for poverty eradication and economic development. The insights are incisive and are placed in the larger global context of economic change and enable readers to convert these into effective policy instruments." — Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

Manmohan Singh ameliorated the Indian economy by a landslide. If he can do it, so can the U.N. The U.N has no excuse or reason to impede the process since it has plenty of other issues to deal with. Information alone, used effectively and intelligently by world leaders can end poverty in the blink of an eye. No one could have predicted the plight of India and China before it happened but it is testament to what will inevitably follow.

Yes because...

The U.N does have excuses to slow down efforts to snuff poverty,it gets a lot of funding for these efforts and who checks on them? where/how are these funds used? By making short term changes without any work on the grassroots? Buying a cow does not improve a man's mind or body or that of his family, it only creates a family business of raising cows and aggravating the climate crisis. Working in a carbon-emitting factory(burning coal and oil) teaches a man/woman/worker a skill that is useless outside of the industrial world that is killing his crops.

India and China's poor are as poor as ever. The gap between the economic well being of the rich and poor in these Countries widens dramatically and extensively every second. If G.D.P rises by 5 percent, so too , does the gap. If I had 5 quid and say t had 10 quid, then t has only 5 quid more than me but if our wealth increases to 200 times its original value, then t would have 2000 quid and I'd have 1000 quid, yes our wealth would hypothetically increase but now t would have 1000 more than me. I would be okay with a difference of 5 but 1000 is a big difference.

As the gap widens, lifestyles become starkly different , the poor become desperate for a significantly higher living standard but are frustrated by how little money they have comparatively/relatively to the rich and thus depression,crime and suicide ensue in the poorer classes.

‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
No because...

China has already reached the U.N milleneum goals

[[http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/csd/2006/statements/China.pdf]]

Realistic targets, development for the long-run/term, no quick-fixes, realistic money demands , consideration for China's natural habitat/resources and an undeterred persevering determination to succeed are all reasons why China had achieved her Millennium goals ahead of time. And continues to stand strong in these trying times.

If China can do it, every other country in the world should at least try.

Yes because...
‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’
No because...

Getting Beautiful Actresses on board

On the contrary, beautiful actresses ,aware of a cause, highlight that cause because of all the attention they get. Getting Beautiful actresses on board creates public appeal/interest. People want to know more about global issues,awareness increases, funding increases and everybody's happy.

And little girls should know that being beautiful can mean being aware and not being dumb. Housework and child-rearing are important factors in the formation and foundation/base of a stable society and should not be undermined.

Yes because...

is not going to eat away gender inequity/inequality. [[http://www.endpoverty2015.org/portugal/news/interview-caterina-furtado/17/jun/09]] all it dies is encourage girls to be silly and beautiful , so they can be cast as heroines in blockbuster films in the future, or be devastated if they don't make it and are left as good for nothing else.

Girls should be made to follow scientists,writers, serious not-so-good-looking actresses who take on complex roles/awards and other female academia not be urged to idolize women who make money off their looks/personality/male-appeal alone. Girls need smarter role models and the U.N staff is getting dumbed down and sexed up.

There goes gender equity down the garbage chute.

The social,economic,cultural and religious set-up of poor Countries has never encouraged gender/sex equity. Women have been valued for their external beauty and skill/competence in the area/field of housework and/or child-rearing. A Women with a job gets crticised for neglecting the home/latter even if she is doing very well in both departments, simply because she is out working. Single mothers have the hardest life, since they are pushed to marry/re-marry and not leave their residence to 'protect their modesty', there are accusations of being working girls/sex-workers/prostitutes/unfaithful/disloyal/bad-mothers and women eventually either whittle the rest of their lives away in a temple/mosque/charity or get remarried and waste their skills as a valuable economic contributor to her Country/home or as a respectable self-appreciating member of the workforce.





‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’

What do you think?
(0%) (0%)

Continue the Debate - Leave a Comment

1 Comment on "‘The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty’"

Dave

We would love to hear what you think – please leave a comment!

wpDiscuz
Debates > 'The U.N is not making enough of an effort to alleviate World Poverty'