It’s nice to be rich enough to not need aid.

I was sent an email which contained some points put forward by a blogger called David Craig. It is not verbatim as he tends to be outspoken, but I thought, did raise points that do seem to be overlooked by well meaning aid agencies and donors.

If one were to imagine the population of the UK doubling every 20 years. Officially there are just over 66 million people living in the UK. But with unregistered illegal immigrants, possibly over 70 million.) However, accepting the official 66 million figure, we’d have about 132 million people by 2040, and around 264 million by 2060.

It should be obvious to most, that such population growth would be unsustainable leading to
unemployment, poverty, with people living in overcrowded slums. Civil strife as different ethnic groups began fighting over limited resources of food, water and space, while the rich retreat into well-guarded, fortress-like compounds. Britain with 264 million people would probably be dystopic. Fortunately, Britain’s population is not doubling every 20 years. But the population of practically every Asian and African state is.

When writing about poverty, famine, floods, the one word the media never use is “self-inflicted”. Africa is not poor. Africa is a rich continent with massive resources of land, water and minerals. But most Africans live in abject poverty. Mismanagement, corruption, inefficiency and their numbers, too many with populations growing faster than their economies.

Oxfam, Save the Children, and various other NGO well-paid bosses constantly ask for more money to help the poor. After World War II under the Marshall Plan, Europe received about $20 billion (in today’s money) over 5 years to aid rebuilding. Since massive aid started flowing into Africa in the mid 1960s, Africa has received about $20 billion (in today’s money) every 5 years – equivalent to ten Marshall Plans. The result? More Africans live in poverty than they did before the huge flows of foreign aid started.

We need to help people affected by famines“. There has been a lack of rainfall in the Horn of Africa every 7 to 10 years, and recently, weather patterns are getting more erratic But if Ethiopia Somalia Sudan etc had growing economies that could support their people. this could be better managed But all these countries have rapidly growing populations that no reasonable amount of foreign aid can ever adequately feed, clothe and house. When Bob Geldorf whipped up support in 1985 there were about 40.8 million Ethiopians, ethiopia-population now there are about 110 million. And by 2040 there will be about 200 million. How are they going to find jobs, homes and food for all those people? As for the aid that was raised, how was it used?
Live Aid: The Terrible Truth

We need to help people affected by floods. One reason there are often devastating floods in some Third-World states is due to excessive population growth which has lead to deforestation. Floods and their damage can be mitigated and alleviated if countries have manageable populations, resources and money, and control the stripping away of forests by out of control population growth

Civil war? Most civil wars start when too many people fighting over too few resources – land, food, water, or when under corrupt dictatorships with oppression, human rights abuses and too few resources being stolen. With fewer people and more resources available for each person, many civil wars could possibly be avoided.

Population control, not just material aid! In the last 30 years, with their one-child policy, the Chinese have managed to take over 600 million people out of poverty. In the last 30 years, due to explosive population growth, Africa has managed to push another 600 million people into poverty.

Their perhaps needs to be more though to placing of conditions on all foreign aid and charity money, to poorer countries who are simply not controlling population growth with active birth control programmes. Because without taking that into consideration, through foreign aid and charities, some aid is actually encouraging unsustainable population growth and its attendant problems.
 
@Resasi, good post. One thing I'd add, however, is the corrosive effect of religion. There are plenty of places in the areas which you describe where the Christian and Muslim populations are trying to out-breed each other.

Of course, suggesting that this might be a bad idea can be very injurious to one's health.
 
did raise points that do seem to be overlooked by well meaning aid agencies and donors.
Well there's your problem.
All the while NGO's have a "need' to highlight they will keep themselves in work. The post you mention tells us nothing new. There are various threads on this site highlighting various charities and the squandering of money, resources and talent that seems commonplace.
Until overpopulation and corruption are brought under control, you may as well push water uphill.
 
And in the meantime, the well meaning will push money into a bottomless pit.
Dambisa Moyo is being thought of as President of the World Bank (I don't know how far this process has gone, yet). She is a Zambian (wikipaedia entry here), whose views on 'aid' are well known. If she takes the post, and implements the policies she has written about, she may well save billions of lives, living now and yet unborn. Until now, 'aid' has merely destroyed the lives and futures of millions, while enriching the Mercedes and Toyota dealerships throughout Africa and further East, and the real estate industries of the Cote d'Azur and California.
 

overopensights

ADC
Book Reviewer
And in the meantime, the well meaning will push money into a bottomless pit.
While money is being pushed into those bottomless pits, the Chinese are robbing the same African nations of their rich minerals. Who is right; The West or the Chinese, in the past the USA with our help has bombed schools while the Chinese are building them, in 3rd World locations. !
 
Culturally, your children are your pension plan in Africa. For this reason a dozen or more kids with three or so surviving their teens was the way to plan for your old age. The needs have changed, people are moving into urban environments and western NGOs are making sure that the survival rate of children born to parents who don't know any better is at unheard of levels, thus the rapid increase in populations.

These children are not being educated and follow the example of their parents, breeding prolifically the first chance they get.

Add to this absent fathers seeking work in cities or just not bothered looking after the now vast broods of children and you can understand how resources are unable to support the population.

Populist politicians chasing away investment by promising to strip the productive of assets are not helping things. Neither are poor education policies designed to keep a population compliant, on message and not asking awkward questions of their leaders.

Like locusts, when resources have been stripped and become unsustainable, they move on to where new resources are available. You're seeing the vanguard in Europe, soon to become a flood.

Addendum: Anywhere you go in Africa, the rural areas have an adult population far outnumbered by children. You'll see a few old people and a couple of adults but the majority are children and youths. The adults gravitate to cities where they look for work, or as has been seen recently, migrate to places with richer pickings, leaving behind their progeny who will follow the same path the minute they reach maturity. It's a bomb in the process of exploding.
 
Last edited:
While money is being pushed into those bottomless pits, the Chinese are robbing the same African nations of their rich minerals. Who is right; The West or the Chinese, in the past the USA with our help has bombed schools while the Chinese are building them, in 3rd World locations. !
Robbing, or paying the market/an agreed rate whilst not also trying to impose democracy or some form of humanitarian values?
 
Add to this absent fathers seeking work in cities or just not bothered looking after the now vast broods of children and you can understand how resources are unable to support the population.
Africa is massive. That's MASSIVE. A couple of Australias massive.

There is resource enough. But there is also massive corruption, incompetence and, it must be said, idleness.
 
My point being that a lot of the time Western nations try and attach conditions to aid. The Chinese are far less squeamish. They simply pay whichever regime or despot and get on and mine or harvest whatever it is they're after.
They don't tolerate complaints about this from SJW citizens either!
 
Africa is massive. That's MASSIVE. A couple of Australias massive.

There is resource enough. But there is also massive corruption, incompetence and, it must be said, idleness.
All true, although I tend to think that while the first two qualities are inexcusable, the third is mostly imposed by them. The overruling factor is a cultural one; just as the Middle Eastern countries have dominant cultures which are fiercely patriarchal and religious, the African ones remain, even after most tribes have been largely subsumed into mobile-phone ways of thinking, tribally-oriented.
This means that the hierarchies are preserved at whatever cost, and the voter - previously the head of the family - votes for the Big Man regardless; the Big Man thanks the voter for his wisdom and keeps him down on the shamba where he belongs. The voter, knowing that a policeman with a stick will beat him otherwise, agrees and carries on growing his maize. The Big man buys another big Mercedes to show the voter that the country is in economically sound hands. It is changing, slowly, but while Europe and America continue to send the Big Man cash to keep his policemen in sticks, it'll take longer.
 
Africa is massive. That's MASSIVE. A couple of Australias massive.

There is resource enough. But there is also massive corruption, incompetence and, it must be said, idleness.
A lot of the continent is unusable for agriculture unless you're Israeli. Lack of infrastructure is also a major problem.

The wetlands in South Sudan around the Nile are huge and would likely produce all the rice the continent would need but there's no way to transport it and no will to address the issue. The west have made Africa reliant on aid and it's easier to sit around looking pitiful and wait for food to fall from the sky than plant it and tend to the crops every day. The population of South Sudan has boomed since the stupid white man has taken it upon himself to supply food. It's easier to walk 30km once a week for a bag of Unimix than work in the fields seven days a week. If you have nothing much to do you have plenty of energy and time on your hands so the missus starts to look pretty good, and before you know it you're a dad - again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

And again...

But not to worry. The UN will just increase the aid package and pressure donors to supply more food.


DSC00142.JPG
 
The west have made Africa reliant on aid
Could not agree more.

My own opinion is that elements of the West manifest their (misplaced and erroneous) colonial guilt through aid.

Many charities love the PR of saving the world and its poorest people. But they need to enable the poor to get out of poverty themselves rather than just hand outs or doing the work for them.

Of course in the UK international aid is a multi billion pound industry that benefits not just the recipients of aid. Huge salaries for executives, virtue signalling for staff and bags of HM Government's cash to spend on things like a vanity City of London headquarters are added benefits for many of these charities!
 
Could not agree more.

My own opinion is that elements of the West manifest their (misplaced and erroneous) colonial guilt through aid.

Many charities love the PR of saving the world and its poorest people. But they need to enable the poor to get out of poverty themselves rather than just hand outs or doing the work for them.

Of course in the UK international aid is a multi billion pound industry that benefits not just the recipients of aid. Huge salaries for executives, virtue signalling for staff and bags of HM Government's cash to spend on things like a vanity City of London headquarters are added benefits for many of these charities!
If they did that their well paid jobs would disappear
 

Latest Threads

Top