Ever read this article ?

[Xusein]

The main problem is inefficiency. Simple as that.

[Yoniii]

So Ethiopia isn't that badly off but it's in an emergency situation? Hmmm? Ethiopia is in a continuous state of emergency according to the WFP and they're never going to get out of this continuous state of emergency unless something is done about the root cause of this issue.

Did I say that Ethiopia isn't that badly off? I said that there are many countries affected, many are in a worse shape, that doesn't mean that Ethiopia doesn't have any problems.

Oh please, spare me the dramatics. Ethiopia has the ability to feed itself - food aid only damages the economy and creates a feeling of helplessness and lack of ambition in the population. Food aid should only be given in the case of true emergencies. But yes, standardized food aid should be phased out of Ethiopia and the money should instead be spent on improving local agricultural productions, buying in hi-tech equipment, or whatever is needed.

And it's very easy to blame all your problems on "bad governance." Now my question to you is what would the result be with "good governance?" Nothing would change since even if a central government put focus on improving agriculture local farmers would be put out of business by food aid dumpers out to "help".

Okay, lets stop the emergancy food aid. You have 8 million hungry people - what are YOU going to do if you had the power? You have 1-2 weeks before people starts dieing.

Buying in hi-tech equipment, improving agricultural productions etc are the goal.. But those things takes time and money. What will you do in the mean time, aid or death?

These things could have been done a long time ago, other poor countries have been able to feed themself. Who's fault is it if it isn't the governments? These suckers have been in power for over 20 years, we are still food aid dependent. They obiously can't do their job and should been fired a long time ago.

Ok? And?

Some people think famine is an African issue, or more specifically an East African issue. Ignorant people need to get educated, that's why I published the list.

[kaethar]

Originally Posted by odlum833

Alot of Africa's problems stem from former colonists - the Belgians, British etc basically raping them of resources and then just pulling out. The corrupt governance quickly filled the vacuum. IMO aid is making the situation worse and is actually propping up these governments.

Ireland is a good example - it had a famine which can only be attributed to British oppression of the country. At that time we lost half our population, millions of people. Some emigrated to the US and countries like that but most died of starvation. The article is absolutely right in that the same thing is happening constantly in various African countries yet the situation worsens because the population is increasing! Aid is doing that. It is supporting unsustainable population growth, which in turn requires more aid! Vicious circle.

Well said!

Originally Posted by Yoniii

Okay, lets stop the emergancy food aid. You have 8 million hungry people - what are YOU going to do if you had the power? You have 1-2 weeks before people starts dieing.

I said emergency food aid should be allowed. But what has been created in Ethiopia is a fake state of emergency. A state of emergency would be a drought but Ethiopians aren't only given food aid in areas of drought - they're given food aid in areas where they cannot feed themselves, for whatever reason. And one of these reasons is that they don't have their own system of agriculture partly because the dumping of food aid. It's an evil circle which creates dispirited people who become dependent on food aid. Why turn to subsistence farming if you can get fed without doing any work? It's a no-brainer. Agriculture has to be a worthy business for it to be an attractive option. So yes, I stick to my opinion. If I ran an aid organisation I would help families set up (fairly) hi-teq agricultural facilities and teach them how to run it (with a mentor living with each family or something) whilst at the same time phasing out food aid. The idea is of course that the families should grow enough to feed themselves and to sell to others. And when you help enough families you can soon have a nation exporting food. That was simplified, but there you go.

Originally Posted by Yoniii

Buying in hi-tech equipment, improving agricultural productions etc are the goal.. But those things takes time and money. What will you do in the mean time, aid or death?

Aid of course. Work-for-aid programmes to motivate people so food-aid works as a sort of salary whilst hi-teq agricultural methods are being set up and taught through learning-by-doing.

Originally Posted by Yoniii

These things could have been done a long time ago, other poor countries have been able to feed themself. Who's fault is it if it isn't the governments? These suckers have been in power for over 20 years, we are still food aid dependent. They obiously can't do their job and should been fired a long time ago.

What can the government do that aid organisations can't? Why do decisions regarding agriculture need to be centralised?

[Yoniii]

I said emergency food aid should be allowed. But what has been created in Ethiopia is a fake state of emergency. A state of emergency would be a drought but Ethiopians aren't only given food aid in areas of drought - they're given food aid in areas where they cannot feed themselves, for whatever reason. And one of these reasons is that they don't have their own system of agriculture partly because the dumping of food aid. It's an evil circle which creates dispirited people who become dependent on food aid. Why turn to subsistence farming if you can get fed without doing any work? It's a no-brainer. Agriculture has to be a worthy business for it to be an attractive option. So yes, I stick to my opinion. If I ran an aid organisation I would help families set up (fairly) hi-teq agricultural facilities and teach them how to run it (with a mentor living with each family or something) whilst at the same time phasing out food aid. The idea is of course that the families should grow enough to feed themselves and to sell to others. And when you help enough families you can soon have a nation exporting food. That was simplified, but there you go.


Aid of course. Work-for-aid programmes to motivate people so food-aid works as a sort of salary whilst hi-teq agricultural methods are being set up and taught through learning-by-doing.

I think we are on the same page. Food aid shouldn't be given for free, if you are able to work. Food-for-aid or food-for-education is the right way to go in drought effected areas.

What can the government do that aid organisations can't? Why do decisions regarding agriculture need to be centralised?

Aid organisations are meant to be used as a back-up, not the main source of anything.

The government are responsible in providing what it's citizents need, if they can't accomplished that, they should be replaced. Would any democratic country vote for a government that can't feed it's people, that are corrupt like ours, for 20 straight years? No, never.

[kaethar]

Originally Posted by Yoniii

I think we are on the same page. Food aid shouldn't be given for free, if you are able to work. Food-for-aid or food-for-education is the right way to go in drought effected areas.

Ok. Seems so.

Originally Posted by Yoniii

Aid organisations are meant to be used as a back-up, not the main source of anything.

The government are responsible in providing what it's citizents need, if they can't accomplished that, they should be replaced. Would any democratic country vote for a government that can't feed it's people, that are corrupt like ours, for 20 straight years? No, never.

And how do you plan on doing this? To install democratic non-corrupt governments has always been the goal but how often is it successful? And besides violence what can be done? It's even harder with a large uneducated part of the population who are unaware of the whole situation. Whilst the governments are being how they are aid organisations SHOULD step in. Perhaps set an example that a government can take over once it's proven to work. I don't see what the problem is. That would certainly be more helpful than just giving food to everyone and stalling the economy. The Ethiopian government probably even recognises that fixing the agricultural system could be a waste of money given the fact that so many people in rural areas are unmotivated to work due to free food aid and other forms of aid. And it's hard to convince uneducated rural people to see "the bigger picture." Governments don't feed their people - people do. Governments are managers. It's a lot easier for the government to simply focus money on other things (and themselves) since it's a bit of a lost cause. No, things need to happen and I'm for one pressuring the aid organisations here as well since they're part of the problem.