9 of 9
9
Pat Roberston is an evil scum
Posted: 18 January 2010 10:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 121 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  352
Joined  2008-04-24

I think eugenics would tend to be something more purposely driven (versus not violating the “Prime Directive” [ extra props for the Star Trek reference).  The kind of eugenics forwarded by racist, abortionist Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood’s original beginnings: the American Birth Control League).  Letting a country deal with it’s own issues isn’t purposefully driven in that same manner. 

“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

“I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

 Signature 

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (Democrat):

“It’s a free country; I wish it weren’t, but it’s a free country.” when speaking of a rally on the Capitol.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 12:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 122 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6139
Joined  2006-12-20
George - 18 January 2010 06:55 AM
UlsterScots432 - 17 January 2010 09:07 PM

Which begs another question: What responsibility do we, or anyone have, toward them?

That’s an interesting question and I don’t know what the solution is. The impact of the World Bank, for example, on the economy of the developing countries has been a complete failure. I believe our intentions to help the poor countries are noble and necessary, but until we are willing to consider what the real problem is, I doubt we’ll see much of a progress.

There is also another “solution.” As painful as it may sound, maybe we and the poor countries in the long term would be better off if we only let natural selection to take its course. We went through it and maybe, just a maybe, they will have to get trough it on their own to see better days.

But natural selection always takes it’s course whatever we do, doesn’t it?

Stephen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 01:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 123 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
StephenLawrence - 18 January 2010 12:08 PM
George - 18 January 2010 06:55 AM
UlsterScots432 - 17 January 2010 09:07 PM

Which begs another question: What responsibility do we, or anyone have, toward them?

That’s an interesting question and I don’t know what the solution is. The impact of the World Bank, for example, on the economy of the developing countries has been a complete failure. I believe our intentions to help the poor countries are noble and necessary, but until we are willing to consider what the real problem is, I doubt we’ll see much of a progress.

There is also another “solution.” As painful as it may sound, maybe we and the poor countries in the long term would be better off if we only let natural selection to take its course. We went through it and maybe, just a maybe, they will have to get trough it on their own to see better days.

But natural selection always takes it’s course whatever we do, doesn’t it?

Stephen

It does indeed. You are right, technically what I said is wrong. And no, we are not free to do much about it.  grin BTW, this is s common mistake even people like Pinker make. Pinker, who has no children and who seems to suggest (with regard to his childlessness) that he was somehow free to make that decision once said the following:

“By Darwinian standards I am a horrible mistake, a pathetic loser, not one iota less than if I were a card-carrying member of Queer Nation. But I am happy to be that way, and if my genes don’t like it, they can go jump in the lake.”

Well, yes, that’s exactly what his genes are doing: “jumping in the lake.” But it was either the decision of Pinker’s Cartesian puppeteer in his head, or the very act of his genes failing (from a Darwinian perspective) to form a “fit” vehicle to transform the genes into another generation. It would be wrong to speculate we (our “minds”) have a control over natural selection.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 02:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 124 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  113
Joined  2009-10-17
George - 18 January 2010 06:55 AM

There is also another “solution.” As painful as it may sound, maybe we and the poor countries in the long term would be better off if we only let natural selection to take its course. We went through it and maybe, just a maybe, they will have to get trough it on their own to see better days.

Haiti has produced a lot of people capable of problem solving and capable of addressing issues like infrastructure and public health etc.  Very few live in Haiti though.  A rather large contingent of the well-educated capable intelligent Haitians emigrate to the U. S., and Canada (and other countries), and become citizens of their new countries.  Though I have met more people from Haiti or Haitian parents than I can count on my fingers, I don’t think I have ever met anyone who is still a Haitian Citizen. 

In the U. S., we have had a history of more people immigrating into our country than emigrating out.  Often, people become U. S. citizens after working here as resident aliens for a few years, and they would not be working here if there were not employable.  Someone who is a doctor or nurse is more likely to emigrate from Haiti and become a U. S. citizen, than someone who has no reading skills.  I am not saying that the U. S. is bad for preferring highly-skilled immigrants, but I am saying the situation in Haiti has been bad enough that people feel that leaving is a better way to improve their lives than staying in Haiti and trying to improve it.  I don’t think I can blame them for leaving either.

People naturally select the U. S. as a preferable choice for home, and we naturally select many of their brightest to be citizens of our country.  If something could change so Haiti could have some advantage that would make leaving not such a desirable choice, then it has a better chance at survival.  Was this what you are getting at?

 Signature 

I Don’t Want My Country Back, I Want My Country Forward

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 02:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 125 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29

What I meant was that Haiti’s Malthusian poverty almost seems our fault. There are now thousands of charitable organizations active in Haiti and as a result the population keeps climbing. There are simply not enough resources in Haiti to support nine million people. As far as the emigration is concerned, even though many intelligent people may have left the country by now, I wouldn’t be so quick as to fall into despair and speculate that only the less intelligent people remained in Haiti. Surprisingly, when we compare Haiti with sub-Saharan Africa, it doesn’t seem to be doing so bad. Twenty-two sub-Saharan African countries have lower GDP per capita than that of Haiti. Maybe there is some hope for the country, but I am just not sure that pouring millions of dollars into Haiti will add to their long-term (!) solution.

[ Edited: 18 January 2010 02:46 PM by George ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 04:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 126 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  352
Joined  2008-04-24
Tradition Of Progress - 18 January 2010 02:10 PM
George - 18 January 2010 06:55 AM

There is also another “solution.” As painful as it may sound, maybe we and the poor countries in the long term would be better off if we only let natural selection to take its course. We went through it and maybe, just a maybe, they will have to get trough it on their own to see better days.

Haiti has produced a lot of people capable of problem solving and capable of addressing issues like infrastructure and public health etc.  Very few live in Haiti though.  A rather large contingent of the well-educated capable intelligent Haitians emigrate to the U. S., and Canada (and other countries), and become citizens of their new countries.  Though I have met more people from Haiti or Haitian parents than I can count on my fingers, I don’t think I have ever met anyone who is still a Haitian Citizen. 

In the U. S., we have had a history of more people immigrating into our country than emigrating out.  Often, people become U. S. citizens after working here as resident aliens for a few years, and they would not be working here if there were not employable.  Someone who is a doctor or nurse is more likely to emigrate from Haiti and become a U. S. citizen, than someone who has no reading skills.  I am not saying that the U. S. is bad for preferring highly-skilled immigrants, but I am saying the situation in Haiti has been bad enough that people feel that leaving is a better way to improve their lives than staying in Haiti and trying to improve it.  I don’t think I can blame them for leaving either.

People naturally select the U. S. as a preferable choice for home, and we naturally select many of their brightest to be citizens of our country.  If something could change so Haiti could have some advantage that would make leaving not such a desirable choice, then it has a better chance at survival.  Was this what you are getting at?

Seems to be the trend, doesn’t it?  The smartest leave, and eventually decide they don’t want to go back.  Every Haitian I have known has been well-educated and hardworking, the kind that could easily serve in a legislature back in Haiti.  But perhaps the best and brightest self-select to come here and go thru the hoops.  I’ve pondered reverse-immigration, although it is probably not politically feasible for discussion.  What if groups of Americans (Capitalists) went to nations like Haiti and began building businesses and infrastructure (everything that comes with it).  If legal aspects of such immigration were more liberal, folks would do it.  You rarely see Americans emigrate because most countries are not as liberal with their immigration laws as we are.

 Signature 

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (Democrat):

“It’s a free country; I wish it weren’t, but it’s a free country.” when speaking of a rally on the Capitol.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 06:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 127 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
UlsterScots432 - 18 January 2010 04:52 PM

What if groups of Americans (Capitalists) went to nations like Haiti and began building businesses and infrastructure (everything that comes with it).

Why would they do that? Somebody in this thread asked earlier why is everything made in China these days and not Haiti. I remember reading not too long ago about the impact of the textile industry on the world economy. As far as back as the 1950’s the textile manufactures were finding that mills in Kenya and Uganda made absolutely no profit. An obvious question then follows: Are poor countries poor due to their week economy, or is their economy week and the people poor because of the inefficiency of the people? These are important questions that nobody wants to find the answer to. I remember discussing this topic over the Christmas holidays with my brother-in-law who teaches history at the university of Montreal and he told me he didn’t want to know the answer. What a compassionate and dangerous way of looking at our world, I thought to myself.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 07:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 128 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2457
Joined  2008-06-03

I don’t know anything about profitability of textile mills, but if I were to take a guess, I’d say it was not only the cost of labor or minimum wage in the country, but also taxes and export fees that impact the choice of what country to locate in?

 Signature 

Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it’s a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.    - Lex Luthor

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 07:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 129 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6055
Joined  2009-02-26
George - 18 January 2010 06:48 PM
UlsterScots432 - 18 January 2010 04:52 PM

What if groups of Americans (Capitalists) went to nations like Haiti and began building businesses and infrastructure (everything that comes with it).

Why would they do that? Somebody in this thread asked earlier why is everything made in China these days and not Haiti. I remember reading not too long ago about the impact of the textile industry on the world economy. As far as back as the 1950’s the textile manufactures were finding that mills in Kenya and Uganda made absolutely no profit. An obvious question then follows: Are poor countries poor due to their week economy, or is their economy week and the people poor because of the inefficiency of the people? These are important questions that nobody wants to find the answer to. I remember discussing this topic over the Christmas holidays with my brother-in-law who teaches history at the university of Montreal and he told me he didn’t want to know the answer. What a compassionate and dangerous way of looking at our world, I thought to myself.

The answer to your question of competency is obvious. When you have a country with no resources, no education, and no infrastructure, any company is doomed to failure. Productivity and efficiency comes from training and distribution comes from infrastructure. If enough qualified “start-up” people can be found, anything is possible. It certainly is not a case that Haitians are any different from any other “peoples”.  It is a matter of investment in skilled management and training of the workforce.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 07:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 130 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Jules - 18 January 2010 07:01 PM

I don’t know anything about profitability of textile mills, but if I were to take a guess, I’d say it was not only the cost of labor or minimum wage in the country, but also taxes and export fees that impact the choice of what country to locate in?

There were no profits despite protective tariffs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 07:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 131 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Write4U - 18 January 2010 07:04 PM

If enough qualified “start-up” people can be found, anything is possible.

As far as I remember from the reading about the cotton textile industry, different countries needed different amounts of labour under the same British management. No, the “start-up people” had a very little effect on the final productivity.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 January 2010 05:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 132 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2416
Joined  2007-07-05

Well we know where to send him along with the atheists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFGrQMD6Uqc

  LOL  LOL  LOL

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
   
9 of 9
9