aid is not the best answer
Today's top BBC story is the need for aid to Pakistan earthquake victims.
"While 92 countries had helped nations hit by last year's Indian Ocean tsunami,People just don't like giving aid. So it's not an effective way to solve (and more importantly, prevent) problems. But you only need aid if there is poverty. So the solution is to end poverty. It's not as difficult as it sounds.
only some 15 to 20 countries had responded to the latest disaster. ... the
earthquake has come at a time when aid agencies are already very stretched
carrying out relief work in storm-hit central America, as well as Niger and
Sudan. She quotes a senior official as saying agencies would find it very
difficult to respond to another disaster. "
posted by Chris Tolworthy at 7:46 AM
2 Comments:
I agree. But that logic does not apply to the aftermath of a disaster, which by definition destroys wealth.
True, but preparation makes all the difference. An earthquake in San Francisco would probably kill far fewer people, even though population density is far higher. Wealth allows stronger buildings, more roads (even if some are destroyed), more warning, faster help, and so on.
Post a Comment
<< Home