PM Makes Promise To Vaccinate World's Poor

It doesn't bother me, it's a drop in the ocean in goverment expendature. They waste money on a lot worst causes than this.
 
This looks sustainable?

popgraph.gif


The only way this is a good idea is if they put something in the vaccine that also sterilizes them.
 
matt_fsr said:
Exactly how is a population increase going to help these people?
Click to expand...

I think it's an error to think that vaccination will lead to a population increase over the medium term. In developed nations, family sizes dropped sharply as childhood survival rates increased, in nations where you can reasonably expect a child to survive to adulthood people tend to feel less need to have large families, and instead invest more heavily in a smaller number of children.
 
I have to say I'm in the 'charity starts at home camp' on this one.

Many people are less fortunate than me, there are also people more fortunate - that's life.
 
I'm concerned about where the money is going. If we're giving millions of pounds to countries that are spending billions on weapons of mass destruction and "defence", then we really need to examine whether or not we should be giving that money away.
 
Wont make a difference the more we help them to live longer the more they breed which inturn just makes the whole situation worse as they cant sustain themselves and their families.

Hate to say it but mother nature has been trying to cull certain populations in Africa for years but we keep jumping into help.
 
Mr Jack said:
I think it's an error to think that vaccination will lead to a population increase over the medium term. In developed nations, family sizes dropped sharply as childhood survival rates increased, in nations where you can reasonably expect a child to survive to adulthood people tend to feel less need to have large families, and instead invest more heavily in a smaller number of children.
Click to expand...

In third world countries children are your retirement plan. More children = better retirement.
 
I strongly disagree with being told to tighten my belt and pull up my bootstraps by a prime minister who's just announced that 814m is now going abroad.
 
Whilst on the face of it, I believe morally we should support the less well off - in practice there's a danger of creating further unsuitability in countries which cannot support further population growth.
 
Don't forget that your historically (and current) high standard of living comes from exploiting the resources/labour markets of the poor countries of the world.

This is a drop in the ocean back from what we have exploited to fund our way of life.
 
PianoBasher said:
In poor countries where famine is an issue, for example, it means that the population will increase to an even more unsustainable level, compounding the problem and requiring more food aid.

That's my objective view on it, even though it's good to help others if we can afford it.
Click to expand...

+1 We are making a rod for the backs of our childern to deal with
 
Freakbro said:
Don't forget that your historically (and current) high standard of living comes from exploiting the resources/labour markets of the poor countries of the world.

This is a drop in the ocean back from what we have exploited to fund our way of life.
Click to expand...

How is it exploitation? They could work for $0 an hour in the family rice paddy or $1 an hour in the ipad factory. Making ipads is actually a step up.
 
This is utter bull - A ploy to put more money into the hands of the pharmaceutical companies. Wonder how much Cameron got for this as a back hander......

Feeding the poor is more important and would cost millions less!!
 
Freakbro said:
The point is what we class as "struggling" and what the poor countries class as "struggling" are not even on the same planet.

We are on the whole warm, fed, have electricity & running water....when we don't have those things as standard we can class ourselves as struggling.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b011vnls/Poor_Kids/

I have no problem with helping children abroad but if you watch the documentary about the children above, what exactly have they done to deserve to have to live like that? Why do we prioritise them below others?
 
Waste of money IMO. As others have said, there just isn't a decent enough/civilized enough infrastructure to sustain the population there. I know I'm gonna sound stupid but why can't they just stop having sex so much?
 
I think throwing more money at people that should move to a more sustainable landscape pointless.
They will never be able to support themselves. Tell them no help unless they bloody move somewhere else!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom