AIDS: Should America Stay home?

[RC]

I can understand asking the country to develop education prgrams to help slow the spread of AIDS. (ABC) But to ask them to buy one type of pill when they can, for the same price, buy oh say... 20 pills and help more people. It seems heartless otherwise.

This is exactly what I'm talking about though. You are seeing this as a purely humanitarian effort, promoting it as such, and allowing your values to interpret what is best for someone else. Sort of like you were saying Bush is doing.

It's the education programs they aren't going to necessarily like for the same reason you didn't - education programs like the one you slam Bush for promoting...abstinence/fidelity...seems to go a long way for Uganda but that was THEIR choice.

All I'm saying is we need to stop promoting it like its charity so we don't get into this catch 22 where all of our decisions are viewed as pushing our ideals down someone elses throat.

Bush gets us into a lot of trouble by preaching our values in relation to foreign diplomacy.
It worked on you.
And I think its what pisses people off more than anything. If a country shares our general culture, they may think we're great, if they don't, they're going to poke holes in everything we do.

That is just compounded by how WE view it, like the guy who wrote the article in the first post. Lets act all bent out of shape because someone dissed our "charity". Well, we left ourselves open for that.

See what I mean now?

[haggis]

Nicole,
If there’s one thing I've learned from our exchanges it is, NEVER assume anything about your opinions until you state them!

I certainly didn't mean to infer that here.

I'm just so tired of the BBC and other social leaning publication in Europe and Canada always holding Cuba out as some kind of Socialist paradise when they're only half right and that half ain't "paradise!!"

It seem as reasonable to me to send Cuban nurses and doctors to deal with AIDS about as much as hiring Tongans to preach the evils of obesity

[Nicole Marie]

Sure. Call the Kettle black. And I wish Bush would be honest for once and come out and say it instead of screwing with my tax dollars, the US image and peoples lives. But he will not do that, it's an election year.

I am not mad at those that dissed the "charity". I'm ticked at the ass that pitched it that way. He makes us look bad. And he's playing with peoples lives by not fully fuding effect programs (ABC) that have been proven to save people.

[Nicole Marie]

Haggis, I did not get that from the article. It only seemed to state what was going on not if it was good etc. I think you may be taking it to personal.

[dai bread]

Originally posted by piqaboo:

Would you approve an increase in your taxes so our govt, like NZ's, can pay the drug companies to develop drugs just so they can be genericized immediately?

I didn't think we were doing this. If so, why do I read howls of anguish from free trade advocates who say that U.S. pharmaceutical companies hate us for not letting them charge what they like? (European ones hate us too).

Before the Govt. set up its purchasing organisation, Pharmac, we were paying twice the price that the Australians paid for some drugs. We were paying more than most for just about everything in the pharmaceutical line. Now we're not.

One of the things that has upset the Aussies in regard to their FTA with the U.S. is that U.S. pharmaceutical companies will be able to charge what they like, to the detriment not only of the Australian citizen but also the Australian drug industry.

Pharmaceuticals may well be expensive to develop, but we resent what we see as gouging of the end user.

This is an interesting thread. I will now continue reading it.

[dai bread]

As several people have said, charity is one thing and Govt. aid is another.

When you're dealing with taxpayers' money, strings need to be firmly attached. Not strings to the donor country's companies, but strings to accountablity and value for money.

We've found that out the hard way, not only with international aid but also with local "development" incentives of various sorts. For instance, someone spent NZD 70 000 travelling the world "researching" hip-hop music. Someone else wanted to travel to New York to promote her cashmere fibre for clothing. She'd already had a grant to go to California, a place big enough to take everything her farm could ever produce (she only had one!), but if the silly Govt. would pay for a trip to NY, why not go there?

My sister-in-law's sister ran a hospital in Uganda for years. I've heard some appalling tales from her. She was convinced, at one stage, that AIDS is man-made. I don't know if she still holds that opinion or not. She's retired now, and is back in Ireland.

The poor old U.S of A. is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. Someone, RC I think, mentioned jealousy. I agree. I think back to my childhood and some of the comments that were made about things Americans had & we didn't. Automatic transmissions, for instance. They were hopeless; couldn't do crash starts. Who had automatic transmissions? Americans. Who didn't? Us. Dishwashers were horrible too. they didn't do pots. Who had dishwashers? Who didn't?

I like to think that we've got over that now, though I'm not at all sure.

[haggis]

"I think you may be taking it to personal.
"

Well, yeah..

If you'll recall that was the premise of this thread, the U.S. may grow tired enough and frustrated enough to withdraw its attention (and support) from the rest of the world.

I do take some things very personally, and Africa and the world’s attitude towards Africa is one of them.

I’ve been in Africa more times than I want to recall and every time it was on a U.S. humanitarian mission to feed, to rescue, to help.

Europe abandoned Africa in the last century largely because Europe doesn’t want to admit that several centuries of shameful exploitation and colonization had left the continent in religious, racial, ethnic, political and economic ruin. Mainly caused by Britain and France, but Portugal, Spain, Italy and Belgium have their share of the blame as well.

No one country other than the U.S. has ever pledged ANY assistance or help to Africa and all of a sudden we’re the villains because we have certain expectations of how that aid is to be used? If those expectations so outrage the sensibilities of some should we then withdraw?

After the horror of half a million deaths in Rwanda was finally considered “newsworthy” enough to make it onto the front page of the New York Times, President Clinton was rightfully criticized for not doing more. I suspect that President Bush may be facing the same criticism a year from now concerning Darfur.

[Nicole Marie]

Hi Haggis-

Actually Portugal has re-established ties with the old colonies. (Not as "dictator" but as a business partner.) After the wars in Africa (which my father in law served in... he has some really horrible stories about the war.) The Community of the Portuguese-Speaking Countries (CPLP) was est. in 1996 to develop partnerships that offer assistance to each other, trade, etc. This relationship includes Portugal, Brazil, and the PALOP countries, which are Angola, Mozambique, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau and Sao Tome and Principe. (All ex colonies) And several of the countries that were held in the Pacific are looking to join, like Malaysia.

So yes Portugal left the colonies in a mess but have re-established and are doing some good for the African countries. http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/english/200010/09/eng20001009_52157.html

[haggis]

Sudan massacres are not genocide, says EU

'Cause if it were really, ya know, genocide then the EU might have to do something about it.

World-class cynicism.

[Nicole Marie]

sigh