Full Article.
Many small acts by many people and a few great acts by a few able people can work miracles if we let it.
Peace Prize for prioritizing ending Poverty
- Thread starter shesulsa
- Start date
Many small acts by many people and a few great acts by a few able people can work miracles if we let it.
What's also great is the linkage that the award makes between peace on the one hand and people's economic well-being, their ability to feed and clothe themselves and their children. It's not a perfect matchup, but it covers the sources of an awful lot of the conflicts in this poor torn-up world.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #5
Here here!
CoryKS
Senior Master
Exactly. Which means that it's likely to work. Because nobody keeps throwing their own money at failed ideas for long. The idea is brilliant, especially the group repayment scheme.
Something important that I'd meant to say that Jeff's post gets right to the heart of---Corky beat me to it, but it bears repeating, I think: development projects of this kind tend to be much smarter than the usual throw-money-at-'em government projects---much less chance, I believe, of the funds being silently redirected to corrupt elites and bureaucratic go-betweens who line (or fill) their pockets and do creative bookkeeping to keep everyone happy. Private outfits are bound to be much savvier about making sure the money gets to those who are able to convert it into real economic growth and opportunity for the people the funds are intended to benefit---after all, they've got a real stake in what happens to the money.
It's nice to see high-level recognition of this kind of initiative---thanks for posting the link, shesulsa. Makes you feel that there really is some hope for us all.
It's not the first program of it's type, but I think it's a great idea - in contrast to so many other programs, it is a hand up, not a hand out, so the people receiving the aid become self-sufficient, not dependent. I'm really glad that this type of program is receiving this level of recognition.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Microloans have been a great idea since they were first put in place. They allow for wonders in the communities where they available.
As a note to those who use this program to take a shot at government, shame on you. Goverments serve a purpose. One such purpose is to establish banking laws that allow people like Muhammad Yunus to open banks, become successful and establish programs such as this.
Any bank that lends out more than five billion dollars in not wild west outfit. Laws need to be in place to create the environment that allows such economic transactions.
As a note to those who use this program to take a shot at government, shame on you. Goverments serve a purpose. One such purpose is to establish banking laws that allow people like Muhammad Yunus to open banks, become successful and establish programs such as this.
Any bank that lends out more than five billion dollars in not wild west outfit. Laws need to be in place to create the environment that allows such economic transactions.
Michael, I'm not trashing government. I believe that most of my tax money is well spent, very good value in service for the money paid. But I was a public employee for many years---I was a researcher at the Britich Columbia Provincial Museum in Victoria, and we were a branch of the government, without a board of trustees or anything to run interference for us. I've seen close up the discrepencies between the intentions of some of the programs that were funded and the way they were executed. Indifference and outright corruption were commonplace, and the chief victims were the people who were supposed to benefit (this held over a whide variety of social service program during many years under a particular administration in B.C., and was simply a familiar fact of life to thus of us who were involved with the Native Canadian community).
There is all the difference in the world between intention and execution. Governments tend to entrust distribution of development money to their opposite numbers in the countries where the money is going. That fact alone should be enough to make anyone suspicious of how effective the aid intended for poor people in these countries---people with zero political clout with their own governments---is going to be.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2006
- Messages
- 9,141
- Reaction score
- 44
I'm sorry if you misinterpreted what I was saying Michael. It was not a "shot" at government. It was praise of individuals and of a private bank. Governments are good for many things. This however was done not by a government but by private individuals. Because of that, as has been stated by others, I'm sure more of the money is going to address the issue instead of going through a bureaucracy, be it a good or a corrupt one. Plus, nobody's money was taken away at gunpoint to fund it.
Jeff
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
JeffJ, I will take you at your word. But to even mention government, in relation to this recognition, begs the question, how many Nobel Peace Prizes have been awarded to government?
The answer to that, of course, is zero. Never. None.
The Peace Prize is not awarded every year, unlike other Nobel prizes. Over the last one hundred five years, ninety four individuals, and nineteen organizations have been recognized by the Nobel committee. In some years, the award has been shared between two or three individuals or organizations.
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/
Exile said it pretty well in his response to you. But I would just like to add that the regulation and protection goverments perform is indeed a very neccesary thing to have. But when programs to help people are run by the goverment they almost always seem to go to hell.
No one seems to be held responsible when things don't go as planned and things worsen due to the goverment's act. When have you last heard of a goverment employee being fired for something like not noticing that a dictator skimmed off almost all the develpoment funds into his Swiss bank account?
Politicians make big speeches about helping other countries and take every chance to get in front of the cameras showing their concern in order to get elected. Once the cameras are turned off and the public concentrate on something else the beuracrats take over. They did not sign up to do things like this like Yunus did and really have no stake if it works or not. If they do not produce great results, they will not get fired. The money is taken from the people in the form of taxes and they have no fear of it being cut off. Other interests present themselves and back room deals are made.
But Yunus wanted to help people and took it on himself to make sure it happened. He only cares about results and not his career in goverment. The people that support him only care about results and can withhold their money if the purpose of the project is not met.
That is the real reason that it is a good thing that this is not a goverment program. We need goverment to make sure that bankers do not run off with our money, factories do not dump polutants in our water or people do not lie about their products. But when you have a goverment try to set something up to improve people's lives like this, it never seems to work out for all the reasons we know so well.
Similar threads
