Posted on 09/21/2004 11:06:36 AM PDT by dead
More than 100 countries have endorsed a campaign to raise an additional $US50 billion ($71 billion) a year in development aid to combat global hunger, but the United States has poured cold water on the project.
"The greatest scandal is not that hunger exists but that it persists, even when we have the means to eliminate it. It is time to take action," read a declaration signed by 110 nations and adopted at the close of a summit on hunger on Monday.
It urged governments to consider a report for the conference, setting out a series of options for raising the extra money.
These included a global tax on financial transactions, a tax on the sale of heavy arms, an international borrowing facility and a credit cards scheme that would direct a small percentage of transaction charges to the cause.
President Jacques Chirac of France said the report set out technically realistic and economically rational solutions.
However, the leader of the US delegation, the Agriculture Secretary, Ann Veneman, dismissed it. "Economic growth is the long-term solution to hunger and poverty," she told the meeting.
"The report should give more attention to practical steps to sustained growth. There is too much emphasis on schemes such as global taxes to raise external resources. Global taxes are inherently undemocratic. Implementation is impossible."
The US President, George Bush, did not attend the summit although he is due to address the General Assembly today.
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil, who organised the summit, said after the meeting that Washington had made it clear earlier that it would not participate.
Mr Chirac predicted the US position could change after the November 2 presidential elections. "Let's see when things settle down what their position will be," he said. "However strong the Americans may be, you cannot in the long run emerge victorious by opposing an idea that is backed by 100 countries and which will probably be approved by 150, creating a new political situation."
More than a billion people around the world live in extreme poverty, surviving on less than $US1 a day. They include 300 million in sub-Saharan Africa.
At a summit four years ago, United Nations members pledged to halve the number of people in deep poverty by 2015.
"Right now, however, we are falling short," said the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan.
Reuters
Gee, think 'Coughin' Anus' will go for it?
CHIRAC’S GAMBIT DOESN’T WASH WITH GWB
Why?
Because his little charade in NON-BINDING!
It doesn’t have any teeth!
The 100 countries that signed this know very well that this is non binding. Even I could vote for it!
Why stop there?
When you get down to it, is there really a difference in Socialism, Communism, or the United Nations? All are synonymous with Statism as their end-goal and many, if not all, of the citizen-starving Socialist and Communist countries are now U.N. members.
Git the US Outta the UN!!
Git the UN Outta the US!!
FReegards...MUD
Just a way for the UN to steal more money and not feed anyone but themselves!
This lady has it right.
I think it's safe to say the richest among these 150--nearly all of whom are Eurpoean--can easily raise $71 billion a year without US participation.
Heck, this can be a nice way of showing the US up! No relying on America to, say, foot 25% of the bill for this deal like it does for the UN each year. No needing thousands of US troops to provide for your common defense from enemies abroad whilst you spend billions on hard-core socialism at home, all the while using the US as the scapegoat for all that's wrong within your own borders so as to not face domestic wrath at home.
Yeah, Europe, I dare ya: show us up by covering that $71 billion a year yourselves! Don't accept even a single penny of our money.
"It is time to take action"
Well, ya know what? You just go ahead and do that. Leave the United States out of your global commie scam for food because we have enough problems feeding our own people and the 13 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT FELONS that have been dumped on us not to mention our effort to manage the war on terror without any help from you commies. Go to h--- UN pinkos.
I think that the majority of people who need aid but who are not receiving aid are in places where aid cannot be delivered. Most are refugees because they have been displaced from their homes by civil war. There is a plethora of organizations ready to supply aid if and when they can get the aid to the people who need it.
The UN is aware of this. The UN really wants a source of revenue because they intend to pi$$ of their largest benefactor (U.S.) more than they already have and they know we will subsequently withhold any payments to the UN.
Bad thing about it is that Kerry, if he should win, would be all for this scheme.
"United Nations members pledged to halve the number of people in deep poverty by 2015."
Didn't we already do this during the Johnson administration?
Let the fellows in the photo fund this grand scheme. They want to use the USA as a big ol' global ATM.
Thank heavens we have President Bush, not President Gore or President Kerry!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.