Posts
Development should mean more than survival
....... Those who truly believe in development should be guided by a simple maxim: Only what is good enough for us in the developed world will do for those in the developing world. We have access to cars, clean water, electricity, the internet, roads and telephones, and so should they. Everyone should enjoy the benefits of living in a modern industrialised economy.
This is the only realistic way to deal with the scourge of 'natural disasters' such as the tsunami, and other problems linked to economic scarcity. Life is about more than mere survival......
----
Daniel Ben-Ami is the author of Cowardly Capitalism: The Myth of the Global Financial Casino, John Wiley and Sons, 2001
http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/0000000CA883.htm
____________________________
Though I agree with the above article that the basic infrastucture is absolutely essential for development, but what that relevant infrastructure should be is not to be necessarily guided by what has worked well elsewhere. This typical bi-polarization of world into developed or developing is immature, and going so far is to say that we should have a world that look exactly same as west is preposterous !!
Jan 17, 2005
Did UN respond to my post ??
DEVELOPMENT GOALS NOT UTOPIAN, BUT EMINENTLY ACHIEVABLE, SECRETARY-GENERAL
SAYS AT LAUNCH OF MILLENNIUM PROJECT REPORT
......
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/sgsm9678.doc.htm
SAYS AT LAUNCH OF MILLENNIUM PROJECT REPORT
......
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/sgsm9678.doc.htm
New report to UN proposes solutions to problems of world poverty
The report is recommending that rich countries double their investments in poor countries to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of halving extreme poverty by 2015 and going beyond to eliminate it by 2025.
....
Fact : As of now (2005 Jan), more than one billion of the world's six billion people live on less that $1 day, and 2.7 billion live on less than $2 a day.
Low-income countries need investments of $70 to $80 per head per year from 2006, rising to $120 to $160 per year in 2015, it says, adding that many middle-income countries could fund those investments themselves, given adequate debt relief and appropriate, specialized technical assistance.
(source : United Nations, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=13063&Cr=millennium&Cr1=development)
__________________________
Great ! these are noble ideas and interests !! and wonder which of the s0-called rich countries are willing to donate to the cause of the poor. We had seen the struggles or I would call the "sick disaster politics" of Tsunami Aid about the contributions made by rich countries.
This is the utopian socialist dream.
I haven't read the 3000 pages in all but what bothers me is that this doesnot recognize the fact that living happily or progression of human society doesn't necessarily have to focus primarily on whether an average citizen is earning 1 or 1million a day. If that would have been the case the generations gone-by were mostly bankrupt and totally underdeveloped because probably a majority couldn't make buck a day in current monetary terms.
Development is not to be measured in monetary terms.. because the value or price of anything in this world is purely derived out of the created fictitious demand, and not necessarily its intrinsic worth.
So it is not to be assumed that a person in a so-called poor country not making a buck a day is on the lower rungs of development, as compared to that guy making a milli0n a day, because you can't measure the happiness or self-dignity or complacency etc etc., that the poor individual carries which could probably be a million times worth intrinsically than what the rich guy has.
This is because I believe there are thousand other factors that are crucial to development or the quality of life that are not in anyway direct proportional to the money or wealth, nor can be directly bought with wealth.
With my own assessment comes what practically I have seen in India, since my childhood. The cost of living or the earning potential or the average income levels has gone up probably 5-10 times if not more in the last 10 yrs, but the lack of moral values or drive towards the material wealth is degenerating the society to such levels that I cannot call that as development or progressing towards the right direction, especially when compared to what my grandfathers or fathers had.
Yes, my father earned more than my grand pa, and I earn much more that my father, but unforutnately I don't think that makes us the most happiest of all the generations, as we continue to be drawn towards artifical, material needs and forget about the basic purpose of life or why we exist?.
....
Fact : As of now (2005 Jan), more than one billion of the world's six billion people live on less that $1 day, and 2.7 billion live on less than $2 a day.
Low-income countries need investments of $70 to $80 per head per year from 2006, rising to $120 to $160 per year in 2015, it says, adding that many middle-income countries could fund those investments themselves, given adequate debt relief and appropriate, specialized technical assistance.
(source : United Nations, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=13063&Cr=millennium&Cr1=development)
__________________________
Great ! these are noble ideas and interests !! and wonder which of the s0-called rich countries are willing to donate to the cause of the poor. We had seen the struggles or I would call the "sick disaster politics" of Tsunami Aid about the contributions made by rich countries.
This is the utopian socialist dream.
I haven't read the 3000 pages in all but what bothers me is that this doesnot recognize the fact that living happily or progression of human society doesn't necessarily have to focus primarily on whether an average citizen is earning 1 or 1million a day. If that would have been the case the generations gone-by were mostly bankrupt and totally underdeveloped because probably a majority couldn't make buck a day in current monetary terms.
Development is not to be measured in monetary terms.. because the value or price of anything in this world is purely derived out of the created fictitious demand, and not necessarily its intrinsic worth.
So it is not to be assumed that a person in a so-called poor country not making a buck a day is on the lower rungs of development, as compared to that guy making a milli0n a day, because you can't measure the happiness or self-dignity or complacency etc etc., that the poor individual carries which could probably be a million times worth intrinsically than what the rich guy has.
This is because I believe there are thousand other factors that are crucial to development or the quality of life that are not in anyway direct proportional to the money or wealth, nor can be directly bought with wealth.
With my own assessment comes what practically I have seen in India, since my childhood. The cost of living or the earning potential or the average income levels has gone up probably 5-10 times if not more in the last 10 yrs, but the lack of moral values or drive towards the material wealth is degenerating the society to such levels that I cannot call that as development or progressing towards the right direction, especially when compared to what my grandfathers or fathers had.
Yes, my father earned more than my grand pa, and I earn much more that my father, but unforutnately I don't think that makes us the most happiest of all the generations, as we continue to be drawn towards artifical, material needs and forget about the basic purpose of life or why we exist?.
Jan 14, 2005
"Do we call this development?" Series 1 - Health Issues
Study Warns of Growing BP Problem
A Tulane University study warns the ratio of world's adult population with high blood pressure will rise from a quarter to a third by 2025. That means more than 1.5 billion adults will have BP problems in the next 20 years, says the study published in this week's issue of Britain's The Lancet. The prevalence of high blood pressure in various regions of the world has been previously reported but this is the first study to estimate the total worldwide figure.
The number of adults with high blood pressure was predicted to increase by about 60 percent to a total of 1.56 billion in 2025. "High blood pressure is an important health issue not only because of its high frequency but also because it is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease and kidney disease," Dr. He said.
A Tulane University study warns the ratio of world's adult population with high blood pressure will rise from a quarter to a third by 2025. That means more than 1.5 billion adults will have BP problems in the next 20 years, says the study published in this week's issue of Britain's The Lancet. The prevalence of high blood pressure in various regions of the world has been previously reported but this is the first study to estimate the total worldwide figure.
The number of adults with high blood pressure was predicted to increase by about 60 percent to a total of 1.56 billion in 2025. "High blood pressure is an important health issue not only because of its high frequency but also because it is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease and kidney disease," Dr. He said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
