Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Caring, like any human emotion, is not logical.

    You might as well ask 'Why should I fall in love?'

    If you don't care, it's because you have less empathy than most humans.

    I can assure you, people who are donating are not donating out of guilt. They see footage of a mother screaming for her child, they see footage of schoolchildren covered in blood, totally disorientated, afraid.

    They see all these things, and they have an irrational emotional response: pity, distress, the desire to help someone they don't even know.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Salt_)
    Why? It's not our suffering, it's not making me unhappy at all knowing other people are suffering. Not especially when there's people in our own country that are also suffering, there's so much help for people thousands of miles away, and there's still people suffering in our own neighbourhoods.
    Are you really that ******* deluded as to think that a similar number of people are suffering in our country to the same extent as many Haitians are at the moment?

    Honestly, threads like this do nothing but show a pitiful side to humanity.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:


    Ok, time to come clean I only started this thread to see if I make a ridiculously insane point seem valid to some.

    Most of you were throughly unconvinced, this is reassuring.

    SALT, please tell me you are just arguing for the sake of argument too. Surely, you cannot believe we should simply stand by while people suffer hell on earth.

    To sit on our snug little throne of an island while the world drowns in povety.

    If you do, you have my sympathy my friend.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ......?)
    You could say that by giving aid to africa she is helping more people than by giving aid in the UK since her money will go further, you could feed and shelter people for less over there and so it makes more sense if your aim was to help people.

    I don't see what you are saying with your second last sentence, are you saying that homeless british people aren't less fortunate?
    Her theory was that starving Africans are 'less fortunate' than starving British people. Which sure, when you factor in the country is less developed it puts it into perspective that yes, Africans in general are less fortunate than British people in general. But one person starving in Africa is equal to one person starving in Britain, she didn't agree.

    (Original post by Chucklefiend)
    SALT, please tell me you are just arguing for the sake of argument too. Surely, you cannot believe we should simply stand by while people surfer hell on earth.

    To sit on our snug little throne of an island while the world drowns in povety. If you do, you have my sympathy my friend.
    Nope, I genuinely believe what I say. If you give me your sympathy you have but my pity in return.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I do think the situation in Haiti is tragic. However, I really do not believe the UK and particularly the US should be committing so much financial aid at a time when their economies are heavily indebted.

    I find it hilarious that while we are committing so much, China (the second largest economy in the world) are only giving 4 million dollars!

    And people wonder why the US is on the decline and the rise of China is unstoppable? It's because they're ruthless, smart and have plenty of common sense.

    Haiti has been given so much financial aid over the years, and been given chances over and over again. It's failed miserably each time, mostly due to corruption and infighting.

    Sometimes tough love is the way to go if a country is to ever improve. We should let things take their natural course over there, we have our own problems to worry about.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Salt_)
    Her theory was that starving Africans are 'less fortunate' than starving British people. Which sure, when you factor in the country is less developed it puts it into perspective that yes, Africans in general are less fortunate than British people in general. But one person starving in Africa is equal to one person starving in Britain, she didn't agree.
    I would say that a person starving is equal to a person starving regardless of where they are born, but I don't think anyone has starved to death in the UK for years and so I can understand why she might have said that.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Well, this depends on how far you buy into the concept of nationality. Whether these people are 'weak' or 'strong' depends on where they were born. Luckily for you, you were born in a rich country (i'm assuming, or at least you live in one now) but that wasn't your doing. So really, thinking as an individual there is no weak and strong here as it's not natural selection by nature. It's 'natural selection' by politics. My country doesn't define my entirety and so I look at these people as equal fellow humans not as weaker due to being in a less powerful country.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toaster Leavings)
    Well, this depends on how far you buy into the concept of nationality. Whether these people are 'weak' or 'strong' depends on where they were born. Luckily for you, you were born in a rich country (i'm assuming, or at least you live in one now) but that wasn't your doing. So really, thinking as an individual there is no weak and strong here as it's not natural selection by nature. It's 'natural selection' by politics. My country doesn't define my entirety and so I look at these people as equal fellow humans not as weaker due to being in a less powerful country.
    LOL. Get real mate. "Equal human beings". The world is dog eat dog, some win, some lose. Simple as that. Just be thankful you're a winner.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Salt_)
    Her theory was that starving Africans are 'less fortunate' than starving British people. Which sure, when you factor in the country is less developed it puts it into perspective that yes, Africans in general are less fortunate than British people in general. But one person starving in Africa is equal to one person starving in Britain, she didn't agree.Nope, I genuinely believe what I say. If you give me your sympathy you have but my pity in return.
    It was fun to argue on you're side, but to geniunely believe that this is the way for people to behave?

    My points were theoretically valid. It is true that, as shaped by natural selection, beings are inexorably selfish and unsympathetic. I would however, have hoped that people would have evolved enough, become intelligent and empathetic enough, to see that this primitive selfishness is derrived from a time when it was required in order to survive and that therefore, as a civilised species we can rise above this primordial innate impulse.

    Some, it seems, are a little behind others.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Salt_)
    The question is why should I care about the Haitians. There is no reason for me to care about the Haitians. I'm not happy with the situation there, when I see it on TV I don't feel as though it's good that it happened. I just don't care that it's happened. I'm not affected by it, so it's not my business.

    Apply the logic elsewhere. There's a car crash and people die. Are you personally going to give money to help the families and the survivors of the car crash? Are you going to care for them, give them aid, support, all that nonsense? No you're not. You have no connection to the people so you don't care.

    If it weren't for this Haiti thing being broadcast 24/7 you wouldn't care about that either. It's only because every news broadcast, every cause advert about it screams at you to feel guilty for other people. Then offers you a way to buy your way out of your guilt.
    Wow, we actually have a car crash comparison...

    How on Earth can you suggest that experiencing the death of a loved one in a car crash is on the same level as witnessing the complete destruction of your country and the death and suffering of hundreds of thousands of people, most likely including some of your own friends/family?

    Instead of trying to backup your view, just admit that you are a *** and be done with it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dotherma)
    I do think the situation in Haiti is tragic. However, I really do not believe the UK and particularly the US should be committing so much financial aid at a time when their economies are heavily indebted.

    I find it hilarious that while we are committing so much, China (the second largest economy in the world) are only giving 4 million dollars!

    And people wonder why the US is on the decline and the rise of China is unstoppable? It's because they're ruthless, smart and have plenty of common sense.

    Haiti has been given so much financial aid over the years, and been given chances over and over again. It's failed miserably each time, mostly due to corruption and infighting.

    Sometimes tough love is the way to go if a country is to ever improve. We should let things take their natural course over there, we have our own problems to worry about.

    The aid is a tiny tiny fraction of the budget, probably equal to an hour in Iraq (I think the US spends $720 million a day on war).

    The US isn't in decline, the amount of innovation is rising, the proportion of college educated people is increasing. The real value of a country is now harder to define, it is more about intelligence than production, and China's current policies will lead to a lack of certain types of intelligence and they will have problems in the future with an educated but freedomless population.

    An even better way than tough love is smart policies, no trade barriers, increased education and in the current situation aid to help during the crisis, look at japan and south korea after US aid was used to help develop their countries after devastating wars.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not saying we shouldn't help them. I'm saying that there's no reason that we should. Being empathetic, again, isn't a reason that we OUGHT to help. It's a reason that we might WANT to help.

    Like I said, I don't care if other people are helping, I just find it funny that they are so up themselves because they are helping people, yet fail to realize there are other people that need help and they aren't helping. I find it annoying that every 30 seconds someone shouts at me to feel guilty for people I don't know or have any emotional attachment to, then offer to take away my guilt... for 2 pounds a month. Yet when I say I'm not feeling guilty for those people they think it's okay to call me all the insults under the sun just because I don't feel guilty for people I don't know.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ......?)
    The aid is a tiny tiny fraction of the budget, probably equal to an hour in Iraq (I think the US spends $720 million a day on war).

    The US isn't in decline, the amount of innovation is rising, the proportion of college educated people is increasing. The real value of a country is now harder to define, it is more about intelligence than production, and China's current policies will lead to a lack of certain types of intelligence and they will have problems in the future with an educated but freedomless population.

    An even better way than tough love is smart policies, no trade barriers, increased education and in the current situation aid to help during the crisis, look at japan and south korea after US aid was used to help develop their countries after devastating wars.
    LOL. And you think that because there are more university educated citizens in a country, that it's economy is necessarily better. Get real. Same in the UK, the proportion of young people graduating uni is at its highest ever. The fact is that a good proportion of these "highly skilled" graduates are doing silly degrees such as pysiotherapy (not an academic subject last time I checked) or computer science at the University of East London.

    Is it any wonder that so many grads these days are unemployed? By the way, the US is on the decline- unemployment numbers are the highest they have been in a long time, and sooner or later it will lose its place as the number one economy in the world. It's influence on the world stage is also decreasing sharply, particularly after the economic crisis.

    Ditto for the UK. Let's start helping ourselves, not places like Haiti.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dotherma)
    LOL. Get real mate. "Equal human beings". The world is dog eat dog, some win, some lose. Simple as that. Just be thankful you're a winner.
    Clearly they are losers in luck being born under corrupt leadership rather than the entire country being full of 'weak' people. You can harp on about tough love all you want and us needing the money, but the aid is hardly going to run the UK completely into the ground. It's basic human empathy, simple as, suck it up robot.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Sometimes the humane thing to do is to let nature take its course
    Will Durant, the author of 'The Story of Philosophy' wrote that:

    If the human brood is too numerous for the food supply, nature has three agents for restoring balance: famine, pestilence and war.
    This can't happen now as huge aid programmes without any contraceptive requirements allow populations to balloon to unsustainable levels. Haiti was overpopulated when there were 3 million people. Now there are 9 million. As Sailer suggests:

    It appears that Haitian women now wisely want to reduce the number of children they have—Haiti’s total fertility rate is said to be down to 3.8 babies per lifetime, the same as Saudi Arabia’s. But Haitians need to bring their fertility down to European below-replacement rates for a couple of generations to allow the land to recover—and the people, hopefully, improve their “human capital”.

    Let’s make long lasting Depo Provera contraceptive injections free to Haitian women.

    Anyone got any better ideas?
    http://vdare.com/sailer/100117_haiti.htm
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toaster Leavings)
    You can harp on about tough love all you want and us needing the money, but the aid is hardly going to run the UK completely into the ground.
    Every little helps. Not to mention, the US in particular, has committed billions to Haiti over the years, with little or no progress. They have wasted it all instead of improving their lives/putting in place infrastructure. I have little sympathy for the people there.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chucklefiend)
    Sometimes the humane thing to do is to let nature take its course.
    Mate Haiti is a poor country obviously they are not prepared for such causes....they can't afford to have an early warning system or proper education. And we should help them since they need aid from other countries. If Britain is stuck by a natural disaster other countries would help us.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    An even better way than tough love is smart policies, no trade barriers, increased education and in the current situation aid to help during the crisis, look at japan and south korea after US aid was used to help develop their countries after devastating wars.
    This is correct, but overlooks the difference in population ability.

    Recent research shows the importance of cognitive ability to macroeconomic outcomes.

    Populations show different average levels, which robustly predict economic performance.

    'The impact of smart fractions, cognitive ability of politicians and average competence of peoples on social development' Rindermann et al Talent Development & Excellence
    Vol. 1, No. 1, 2009, 3-25

    http://iratde.org/issues/1-2009/tde_...mann_et_al.pdf

    Miller in the Economist suggests future gene research may identify reasons for this:

    "We will also identify the many genes that create physical and mental differences across populations, and we will be able to estimate when those genes arose. Some of those differences probably occurred very recently, within recorded history. Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending argued in "The 10,000 Year Explosion" that some human groups experienced a vastly accelerated rate of evolutionary change within the past few thousand years, benefiting from the new genetic diversity created within far larger populations, and in response to the new survival, social and reproductive challenges of agriculture, cities, divisions of labour and social classes. Others did not experience these changes until the past few hundred years when they were subject to contact, colonisation and, all too often, extermination.

    If the shift from GWAS to sequencing studies finds evidence of such politically awkward and morally perplexing facts, we can expect the usual range of ideological reactions, including nationalistic retro-racism from conservatives and outraged denial from blank-slate liberals. The few who really understand the genetics will gain a more enlightened, live-and-let-live recognition of the biodiversity within our extraordinary species-including a clearer view of likely comparative advantages between the world's different economies."
    http://www.economist.com/displaystor...ry_id=14742737
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dotherma)
    LOL. And you think that because there are more university educated citizens in a country, that it's economy is necessarily better. Get real. Same in the UK, the proportion of young people graduating uni is at its highest ever. The fact is that a good proportion of these "highly skilled" graduates are doing silly degrees such as pysiotherapy (not an academic subject last time I checked) or computer science at the University of East London.

    Is it any wonder that so many grads these days are unemployed? By the way, the US is on the decline- unemployment numbers are the highest they have been in a long time, and sooner or later it will lose its place as the number one economy in the world. It's influence on the world stage is also decreasing sharply, particularly after the economic crisis.

    Ditto for the UK. Let's start helping ourselves, not places like Haiti.
    I started this thread. It is advertantly ridiculous. There mere suggestion of leaving a nation on its own to cope with such a large scale natural disaster is absurd. If I hadn't had the misfortune of being exposed to cretins such as yourself in the past, I would be shocked.

    Here is another deliberate absurdity for you to ponder: Go stick your **** in a toaster.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think that helping rebuild is fine, but ongoing aid needs to be linked to contraception otherwise their problems will increase.

    http://alfin2100.blogspot.com/2010/0...i-so-poor.html
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.