Truths are illusions which we have
forgotten are illusions.
From The Nietzsche Family Circus via More Notes From Underground
There is a "mystery" we must explain: How is it that as corporate investments and foreign aid and international loans to poor countries have increased dramatically throughout the world over the last half century, so has poverty? The number of people living in poverty is growing at a faster rate than the world’s population. What do we make of this?
[...]
It is, of course, no mystery at all if you don't adhere to trickle-down mystification. Why has poverty deepened while foreign aid and loans and investments have grown? Answer: Loans, investments, and most forms of aid are designed not to fight poverty but to augment the wealth of transnational investors at the expense of local populations.
There is no trickle down, only a siphoning up from the toiling many to the moneyed few. (From Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty in the World by Michael Parenti)
If one billion dollars in overseas aid truly lifted 434,000 people out of extreme poverty... then the world would be an altogether different place.
[...]
The 'trickle-down theorists', in no short number, argue with the same few hackneyed metaphors to illustrate their obsession with economic growth, like the rising tide that lifts all boats, or that, rather than share the cake more evenly, it is better to bake an even larger one... What this complacent premise fails to account for is the billions of people earning less than two dollars a day who are fortunate to own a corrugated shelter, let alone a 'cake' or a 'boat' to rise in. Poverty eradication is a nice enough idea, the lesson seems to be, so long as it remains consistent with the assumption of the rich getting richer.
To plead for a redistribution of wealth, even for a one percent redistribution of the incomes of the richest 20 percent to the poorest 20 percent, is tantamount to asking for a magic wand so long as the existing macroeconomic polices drive international politics... Another rudimentary metaphor to add to the trickle-down theorists limited repertoire, in this sense, might be the description of a cancerous tumour.
Ever since two studies linked sprawl and obesity in 2003, study upon study has been published suggesting that our built environment -- marked by car-oriented, isolated, unwalkable neighborhoods -- is having a deleterious influence on our health. In other words, sprawl is making us unhealthy, unhappy and fat.
One early study of 200,00 people, led by urban planner Reid Ewing, found that residents of sprawling communities tended to weigh more, walk less and have higher blood pressure than those living in more densely populated areas. Another study, by health psychologist James Sallis of San Diego State University, concluded that people living in "high-walkability" neighborhoods walk more and were less likely to be obese than residents of low-walkability neighborhoods. A 2004 study based in Atlanta, led by Lawrence Frank, reported that the number of minutes spent in a car correlated with a risk of obesity. Among the oft-cited conclusions of the study: A typical white male living in an isolated residential-only neighborhood weighs about 10 pounds more than one living in a walkable, mixed-use community.
1) the “findings” have been updated to include language from the State Department’s human rights report that describes outrages the Meles regime has inflicted on members of the opposition, including unlawful killings, beatings, and arrests.This legislation may not be perfect, but its enactment would be a tremendous benefit to Ethiopia. We should have an initial list of co-sponsors very soon. Once we have the list we will know who should be thanked for their support and especially who should be contacted to solicit support.
2) the findings describe the results of an investigation by the Commission of Inquiry that the Meles regime created to investigate the use of force by government security forces. Although the Commission was hand picked by the government, it concluded that government security forces acted illegally and with extreme brutality.
3) Makes U.S. non-humanitarian assistance to Ethiopia contingent on punishment of security personnel who were involved in the unlawful killing of demonstrators. The bill specifically mentions Etenesh Yemam and the killing of prisoners at Kaliti prison.
4) The section on economic development assistance for Ethiopia has been expanded. It specifies that the U.S. government is to provide financial assistance for the development of irrigation to avoid future famines, including funds for the Blue Nile and Awash River. It also directs the U.S. to support Ethiopia’s healthcare infrastructure.
5) The bill authorizes the expenditure of $20 million per year for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 to accomplish its goals.
6) Language in the previous version of the bill that provided assistance for development of Ethiopia’s tax collection system, debt management and other financial infrastructure has been deleted.
Now they are saying we are 'a threat' to them. But hasn't it always been they who have threatened us?
[...]
Yes, we are a threat to them. Every time we break bread, thousands of them are at risk from each munch of our teeth. Every time I chew a grape or a sugared date, suck a mulberry or an apricot, someone in England must shudder in fear. Every time my son climbs a tree to find a fig, the fine imperial gentlemen of England are put at risk. Yet all we have ever wanted to do is to live our own lives without them. The other night on TV I heard an old Iraqi layman saying, 'they have everything, we have nothing. We don't want anything from them - but still they want more from us'. All we ask is for them to stop interfering with us. We have not been bombing them since 1920. It is they who have been bombing us. Do they never think of that? It never bothers them. They seem to think of it as their god-given right. Or is it another of their human rights - the right to bomb?
[...]
And still they claim that it is we who are a threat to them. So much so that they have been killing us over the decades, bomb after bomb after bomb, whenever we displeased them or went against their interests. Our problem though, I suppose, is that ... we didn't just go along with everything they wanted... They will never subdue us, you will see, never 'pacify' us - even if they keep at it for all eternity.
[...]
I often wonder how they would feel if we had been bombing them in England every now and then from one generation to the next, if we changed their governments when it suited us, destroyed their hospitals, made sure they had no clean water, and killed their children and their families. How many children is it that have died now? I can't even bring myself to think how many. They say that their imperial era is over now. It does not feel that way when you hear the staccato crack of their fireballs from the air. Or when the building shakes around you and your children from their bombs as you lie in your bed. It is then that you dream of real freedom - in shaa' allah - freedom from the RAF