Slashdot Mirror

Poverty in India (and elsewhere) is truly a horrific problem, one I hope becomes a more widely understood issue in the "privileged" world. However, I am curious as to this assertion:

About 35% of the population of India lives below the poverty line. FYI, the poverty line translates to $6 US a year!

World Bank estimates that ~24% of the Indian populace earns less than $1 per day, but $6 per year is orders of magnitude more dire. Now, estimates are estimates, and I am certainly willing to be corrected, but if the situation is so severe that reliable estimates vary by orders of magnitude, I would be interested to know about it.

Regardless, I think that the tremendous opportunity that this tablet may provide for whoever has the chance to make use of it could help the people involved innovate in really exciting ways. I look forward to hearing about the uses the devices are put to, because I know that many of them will be surprising and ingenious. Potentially, those innovations could help other impoverished people if similar programs are initiated in other countries. It sort of reminds me of a digital Heifer International, except that information replicates even faster than rabbits!

It might also help that Bhutan has 38 passenger cars per 1000 people.

You are right about lowering consumption, no arguments. My beef is with any attempt to compare first world countries with developing countries when it comes to energy consumption and generation.

Bilderburgers laugh derisively at your attempts to undermine the World Bank, IMF, ECB, and the 'Almighty Dollar' with your pathetic 'currency'. However...Bernie Madoff is intrigued by your ideas and wishes to subscribe to your newsletter.

I think that this world is already overpopulated with humans as it is.

No it isn't. There aren't a lot of people dying of starvation due to scarcity of food, which is the usual way of indicating overpopulation. Seems to me that people starving these days are mostly due to neglect or problems with distribution, both of which would happen with half the population we have now.

Environmental damage is not a sign of overpopulation either, that's poor resource management and again, could and would be happening with half our population levels.

We're certainly not running out of space on Earth, so that's right out.

Seriously, what makes you say the world is overpopulated? Traffic on your commute getting worse? Warped elitism "I didn't have a kid, and it was because having a kid is an irresponsible thing to do?"

Anyway, it looks like Sweden's population is growing extremely slow, 0.9% in 2009. One more kid in the world doesn't change the situation much.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EASTASIAPACIFICEXT/Images/226299-1210036921678/grain_prices050508_400.jpg

A billion new middle-class consumers are the cause of rising food prices. Monetary inflation is just one method through which Chimerica transfers that food from where it is grown to where it is consumed.

"WHO IS NOT allowed to have a military (Plus they have the balls to use the word "dong" to name their missile name... Type-of-Dong which would make getting deep-throated by one that much more humiliating) 5) Any threat to Japan is a threat to the US who is in charge of protecting them in exchange for giving up the military."

Totally false. Japan spends almost as much on their military as the United Kingdom. They just don't call it one.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?cid=GPD_42

Japan: (1/100)*5068996399491 = 5.07 10^10 UK: 2174529808278*(2.7/100) = 5.87 10^10

By some (possibly more reliable) estimates, it is more: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/jda.htm

Also, Biology including evolution, Astronomy, Chemistry; Algebra, Trigonometry, Calculus; Computer programming; Print shop, metal shop, and actual knowledge about health. If you want to see more of that and less "social engineering", then more money should be put into them.

The US spending per student is already comparable to the UK, Sweden, Switzerland, Austria, Japan, Israel, etc. Perhaps the problem is not the current spending level but how/where it is being spent?
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.PRIM.PC.ZS/countries/1W?display=default

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastercard
Revenue US$5.10 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Operating income US$2.26 Billion (FY 2009)
Net income US$1.46 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Total assets US$7.47 Billion (FY 2009)[2]
Total equity US$3.50 Billion (FY 2009)[2]
Employees 5,000 (2008)

Seriously? Thats pretty damn small....
world bank financial statement, as of June 30, 2009
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTAR2009/Resources/6223977-1253132981998/6440371-1253209164289/Financial_Statements.pdf

total assets- 275 BILLION

The world bank makes single loans that number in the billions.

They couldn't have built their own network and emulated phones to test this protocol, they had to go live with their phone provider? Some University. I bet MIT is laughing out loud.

Also, how's the coverage out there?

A few points

• You ignore any tax, royalty or dividens the local governments get
• By your figures, you seem to imply the Morila mine got a $150m loan from the World Bank.
  • Mining companies usually finance their own exploration & development
  • The loan, if given, should be paid back to the World Bank, not reinvested in the community
  • This seems to imply the Morila mine received no loan, while a related project got a $25m loan back in 1996. As an aside, the same article also metions that the Government of Mali got $156m in taxes, royalties and dividends from the property that did get the loan
• Community investment is now standard practice by all respectable mining companies operating in the third world
  • The investment from the mine you mentioned is more that $100k; apparently, $160k was invested in a single year:

    "Randgold Resources is also committed to the integration of environmental and social impact management into its business activities, and operates to international standards in this regard. On the social responsibility front, Morila last year spent more than US$160 000 on direct community development while Loulo spent more than US$240 000 on projects ranging from building and equipping schools to malaria control programmes," he said.

  • The same press release gives a current figure for the taxes, royalties and dividends:

    Bristow said Mali presented an outstanding example of what this approach could achieve. He noted that over the past 10 years, Randgold Resources alone had invested and reinvested more than US$1 billion there. During that time, the mines it developed at Morila and Loulo - in areas where there had been little economic activity other than subsistence farming - had paid US$500 million directly to the government in taxes, royalties and dividends. It was the largest single taxpayer in the country as well as its largest private-sector employer...

• Finally, if you want to look at West Africa, why not look at Ghana - the first West African country to gain independence, a country with political and social stability, and a country with a long history of mining (it used to be known as the Gold Coast). Mining there is a huge contributor to the national economy, and has been for years.

Mining can be damaging to the environment and to communities, and it is important that a close eye be kept on the industry, especially when it operates in countries with weak governments. But, the assumption that mines are inherently destructive, and that mining companies are inherently evil, is wrong.

I suppose the next ideal evolution will be getting the textbooks onto the computers. That would be an entirely new level of awesome.

I read where that's already being done. Some schools in Africa had satellite dishes installed. Then instead of having to distribute new editions of printed books, ebook are quickly downloaded and copied to laptops. This is both quicker and cheaper. An article on a World Bank blog asks "Can eBooks replace printed books in Africa? An experiment".

Falcon

I appreciate the linked document as I had a difficult time finding historical information on poverty rate. I guess economic statistics really get you worked up if you're at the point of calling names. Personally, I find it hard to get emotional about statistics, but I'll try to address your argument again:

standard of living was also quite higher than now

Standard of Living is defined as:

"The level of well-being (of an individual, group or the population of a country) as measured by the level of income (for example, GNP per capita) or by the quantity of various goods and services consumed (for example, the number of cars per 1,000 people or the number of television sets per capita)" - World Bank

While the definition above doesn't mention anything about poverty rate in calculating standard of living, I was able to find a definition on Wikipedia (I know, not the most reliable source) that says "Standard of living is generally measured by standards such as real (i.e. inflation adjusted) income per person and poverty rate".

If we use the Worldbank's definition of standard of living then there is no argument. The standard of living has increased since 1990 as measured by the real and nominal GDP figures. If you can find stats on car or TV ownership I would find them interesting but I doubt that they will support your case.

If we use the Wikipedia definition then we can add poverty rate to the metric. So lets do that:

Real per capita GDP between 1990 and 2009 increased by about 95%. The number of people in poverty has increased by 1.5%. A 1.5% increase in poverty compared to a 95% increase in income isn't a very convincing argument for a "quite higher" standard of living in 1990. In fact, it says the opposite: most people are a lot better off.

Also, lets not forget that the poverty line is defined by the number of people making less than 60% of the median income. If the real per capita income increased by 95% then the poverty line also increased. In other words, even the poor enjoy a higher real income than they did in 1990.

The average German is way better off now than in 1990 thanks to capitalist reforms (on average 95% better off). But some people are poorer. Why? Well, the document you posted has the answer: the Gini coefficient. There is a more unequal distribution of wealth now than in 1990. The rich have a greater share of the wealth. That's to be expected in any switch from a socialist to a capitalist market.

A rising tide lifts all boats, or Germans.

Exactly. But Negroponte is about PR and vapor, not producing actual solutions or products.

So, ignoring the rest of what OLPC has delivered, the 380,000+ computers in the hands of Uruguayan students that have raised the average computer literacy of 8 year olds to the average level of 18 year olds prior to the project aren't "actual solutions or products"?

I happen to be Uruguayan and currently live in Uruguay... and while I endorse the OLPC project in my country (Plan Ceibal), I'd say you're grossly exaggerating its results - we already had a very good literacy prior to it (as in, better than the US), and the XO itself might not even have been the cheapest option.

Though if the OLPC project had not existed, I doubt such a far-reaching and ambitious plan would have been implemented, so even if it was more PR than anything, it WAS important, in making the politician's minds open to the possibility (and it was a HUGE selling point for politicians of the current party in power at the recent elections which they won).

Exactly. But Negroponte is about PR and vapor, not producing actual solutions or products.

So, ignoring the rest of what OLPC has delivered, the 380,000+ computers in the hands of Uruguayan students that have raised the average computer literacy of 8 year olds to the average level of 18 year olds prior to the project aren't "actual solutions or products"?

(And, yes, while XO are used, the local project is a lot broader than just getting OLPC laptops -- which is exactly the point of the OLPC project, to enable broader projects in the countries that use it.)

Sir —

As a matter of interest, the phrase "international law" covers the law governing the resolution of disputes on international trade, as well as disputes between states that are governed by treaties (among other sources of international law). The prior is known as private international law (see, e.g. UNIDROIT for the most recent attempts to codify the norm), the latter public international law. Private international law generally refers to the mechanism for choosing a procedural and substantive law to resolve a dispute between private parties (i.e. German law, U.S. law, Mercantile law, etc. governing a dispute over lost cargo between e.g. Apple in the U.S. and Acer in Taiwan), often referred to with the phrase conflict of laws.

The phrase "international law", though, is often interchangeably used to refer to both - although in a context-sensitive way. One would hardly ever use the phrase "international law" to refer to a situation where the dispute fell into both categories, although with the advent of such vehicles for private disputes against states such as ICSID and other mechanisms this is changing.

The phrase "international law" covers a great deal of to what happens in the Hague - at the Peace Palace, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, etc. Such happenings include both private and public international law. The international law that gives rise to these happenings generally require an accord between states, and in some states the ratification of that accord into law, which may (or may not) require the cessation of sovereignty (as the grandparent post suggests, though bald it was), subject to the actual enforceability of the treaty's terms as against a state in breach. However, the treaty may impose obligations (directly or by way of legislation ratifying the treaty) on private parties as to whom and how the dispute is resolved, which obligations are both domestic and extraterritorial and may often be enforced in any number of venues (Courts, arbitrations, etc) around the world (in other words a human or corporation in a state may have obligations enforced against it because the state has signed into law an agreement to a treaty).

Regardless of whether international treaties may constitute a cessation of state sovereignty, in my opinion the cessation of sovereignty is neither novel nor wrong. Quite the opposite, it is the defining building block of civilized global society from our current fractured set of post-Peace of Westphalia styled sovereign states. At present individual sovereign states are ostensibly adverse in interest on many issues, but nevertheless need to rely on each other and have to live together in harmony indefinitely. Without accords (treaties or otherwise) this co-existence would be counterproductive and ultimately untenable. Treaties such as ACTA may be heinous (in my humble opinion), but that example ought not to deprive humanity of forward thinking accords that are of mutual benefit.

You are quite right that ACTA is being brought in an unconventional and clandestine way. The media companies are using the EU as a political proxy to push for obligations on Canadian citizens, and the vehicle for those obligations is -at the moment- a proposed international treaty. I'm not as apprised on this as I would like to be, so I would parrot Michael Geist's comments on it.

Look at Somalia before (socialist dictatorship) and after (near total anarchy) and you will see that Somalia is better off stateless. (look at this paper http://www.peterleeson.com/Better_Off_Stateless.pdf). Lets see, comparing the last 1985 to 1990 (last 5 years of the Somali government) and 2000-2005 (5 years under near total anarchy), life expectancy has gone up 3 years, over half Somalia's population has access to health care compared to just a bit more than 25% under their government, technology has increased with many more people owning phones, TVs and radios, infant mortality has gone down, and the only two things that have really decreased since anarchy is adult literacy (down 5% points) and school enrollment. This of course is to be expected (even today about 43% of people in Somalia live on less than $1 per day, though it is much better than 60% with their government) with no body to subsidize school and little to no demand for skilled labor.

Free trade has flourished also, (see http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/AFRICAEXT/SOMALIAEXTN/0,,contentMDK:20398872~menuPK:367671~pagePK:141137~piPK:141127~theSitePK:367665,00.html) airlines increased dramatically, as have telecoms, media, and many other businesses. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia for an overview)

While Somalia is still a dangerous country, and still a poor country. There have been numerous improvements in their conditions from pre-1990 to post 1990. And while Somalia is an extreme incident, it just shows the explosive growth possible with a truly free economy.

Now you argue it'll lead to a population of sheep. Which is, not incidentally, what most Americans seem to believe the Chinese people are now.

Not at all. I argue that people act to protect what they have, and Chinese people are no exception.

"the hundreds of millions of rural poor ... who never wanted anything to do with Beijing"

I wrote, "the hundreds of millions of rural poor or the conquered peoples who never wanted anything to do with Beijing". The second "the" marks a separate phrase.

The fact is China has experienced near miraculous economic growth over the past thirty years.

Your own source notes that the fruits of this expansion have been distributed unequally and that government policies have exacerbated the situation.

As to the "rural poor", according to the latest World Bank numbers China's poverty rate plummeted from 69% in 1978, to 10% in 2004 -- significantly lower than the US's usual 12 to 17%.

I would rather discuss China as China, but I would be remiss not to point out that the US government's poverty line is more than 20 times higher than the World Bank's. In fact, it's just under the World Bank's definition of high income. (Incidentally, the official US poverty rate has fluctuated between 11 and 16% since 1965. The Wikipedia article cites an offline source for the alternative figures but doesn't explain the small discrepancy.)

The latest World Bank numbers retroactively raise the poverty line, giving China a poverty rate of 84% in 1981 and 16% in 2005. Whatever numbers one uses, most of the reduction was in the early 1980s, and most of it seems attributable to reversing the failed policies that produced such shocking poverty. This was vital, but singling out China diminishes the accomplishments of other countries that avoided China's mistakes.

The World Bank itself acknowledges that any poverty threshold is arbitrary. (It's too bad this message gets lost whenever it publishes another round of estimates.) The effects of poverty are numerous and continuous, and calculations of purchasing power parity are not nearly as precise as the numbers imply. In other words, poverty is relative.

Lee Kaiwen, Shanghai, China

First - Commercial paper is neither shady or immoral. The terms are laid out in black and white, and investors are equally free to accept the deal or walk away.

Second - What if you DID run out and buy a shit load of gear on credit for your business? And then what if all that gear came in handy for, I don't know, extra unexpected work?! And what if the reward of that unexpected extra work was more money than you paid for both the gear and the interest on borrowing?!

Wouldn't you then have actually benefited from borrowing?

By not borrowing though, you've foregone that opportunity, many many times over. In fact, I guarantee you that your business would be bigger if you had borrowed within your ability to pay this whole time.

Don't believe me? Do some finance reading.

The "World Bank" is neither a 'world' institution, nor is it a Bank.

the World Bank has a corrupting influence over those in the rich world, especially the U.S. government, who have tended to use the Bank as a tool of "diplomacy by other means". Bribery, in short. Oh, nobody calls it that in polite society, but that is most assuredly what it is. It must be extremely expedient for Western governments to punish recalcitrant governments in the developing world by withholding World Bank and IMF "assistance"; and conversely reward compliant ones.

http://www.zambia.co.zm/articles/world_bank.html

The World Bank is a prestigious and large international financial institution. Since its foundation it has widened the scope and the size of its activities. One interpretation of what the World Bank is doing is the provision of public goods. If we take this interpretation seriously the comprehensiveness of the Bank's activity suggests that the Bank is assuming more and more the functions of a world government in the making. An alternative interpretation would look at the World Bank as a huge bureaucratic organization, acting on its own behalf. This interpretation can not be endorsed fully by the available information, but only in the sense of bureau-shaping. The Bank itself is proud of being a knowledge bank. But its actual activity is the popularization of ideas on development and not the application of research outcomes in its day-to-day operations. The most appropriate interpretation of the activity of the World Bank is that its changing scope and size is shaped heavily by pressure from different interest groups.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=588648

As an acredited Spore aficionado, I must say that: More than half of humans on planet Earth live on the Civilization Phase, and most of the rest is still on the Tribal phase [see this UN population report] We have some few people working on the Space phase, but they're vestigial. But the Creature phase is over. We can't grow horns, wings or an extra pair of legs any more. Bummer.

I think the proper quote is "capitalism is the worst form of economic system, except for every other one."

Not true.

Every first-world nation on earth, and even most second-world nations, are "mixed economies".

Without government intervention, capitalism quickly devolves into feudalism.

The per capita income charts show the proper level of government intervention is much further toward "socialism" than reaganites like yourself care to admit.

But the US is not even top 5 in real per capita income.

Notice us is 15th in per capita income when measured in it's own currency!

It fares better in international dollars, but it's still below singapore, norway, etc.

It's easier to get a damn cell phone than it is to get clean water.

Actually, Russia's economy has been growing steadily over the last few years http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/ECAEXT/RUSSIANFEDERATIONEXTN/0,,contentMDK:20888536~menuPK:2445695~pagePK:1497618~piPK:217854~theSitePK:305600,00.html and they still have quite a lot of oil and NG, not to mention a storehouse of minerals in Siberia. The country has just begun to modernize and I suspect in 15 years, they could easily be an economic powerhouse (depending of course on stable government). 15 years is not a long time, chances are any drilling at the pole and its environs is going to be long term for anybody.

The G8 used to consist of the 8 largest economies in the world. Now it is mostly just a group of good-old-boys who wish they were still relevant on the world economic stage.

Members of the G8: US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada, Russia.

Respective ranks in world GDP: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11. Total GDP: two thirds of the world.

Some has-beens.

See The World Bank and IMF for why that ain't necessarily so.

> Having lived in a poor country myself for a number of years, I suspect that some member of the ruling oligarchy

Ah, but Nigeria isn't a poor country (per-capita not withstanding):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
read the bbc notes about Nigeria's informal economy which is estimated to be at least twice these official numbers:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1689165.stm
http://rru.worldbank.org/Discussions/Topics/Topic18.aspx

"Nigeria, is set to lead mobile phone market in the continent by December 2007, surpassing South Africa".
http://emergingworld.blogspot.com/2006/11/nigeria-another-giant-in-mobile-market.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_Nigeria

How many poor economies of oligarchs can support 40 million cellular phone subscribers? (from a total of 140 million)?

Just saying, the view that Nigeria is poor is sorely outdated and outmoded. I'm actually surprised they ordered "only" 17,000 units.

And I am less socialist than Ronald Reagan: at least I believe in fiscal sanity, like Clinton -- and unlike the last three Republican presidents in a row (Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II).

However, I acknowledge that some socialist policies can be beneficial to a country. Universal education is one of them, and is the single biggest difference between East Asia and the other developing regions of the world. China, for example, is able to manufacture so much high technology because its people are educated and skilled. Is that not obvious to a libertarian?

And I stand by my assertion that libertarian policies are deceptive, because they will end up making the rich richer and the poor poorer -- but very few libertarians are honest enough to admit this.

And I am not going to explain why libertarianism for a country is like AIDS for the human body. I want you to think about it. I want you waking up in the middle of the night wondering why. And when you finally get it, and you realize that the conclusion was unavoidable given the precepts of libertarianism, I want you to say, "How could I have been so stupid!"

How does this idiocy get modded up, when even a cursory examination (warning: .pdf) shows that China has a GDP of 2.6B, compared to 2.9 for Germany, 4.3 for Japan, and 13 for the U.S.

With a larger GDP, they will be able to outspend us militarily, without causing any strain on their economy.

We spend about $466B, the rest of the world combined spends about $500B, and China $65B. Granted, China's PPP means they get more stuff for their $65B, but they still spend far, far less than we do.

The parent post is so wrong that it should be modded down.

Panama is service oriented therefore economic issues with the devaluation of goods in a deflationary economy are reduced.

Both Panama and the US have roughly 80% of their economies geared towards the service sector. The two countries are very similar in this regard. This doesn't explain the disparity in inflation rates between the two countries.

Much of the wealth of the country comes from international sources (Panama Canal, banking, etc), so the primary economic engines are not internal.

How does the source of wealth impact inflationary pressures? Additionally, while the U.S. has an extremely powerful economic engine of its own, a large part of that engine is fueled by international sources (credit extended to US businesses and the US Govt).

Also, Panama has one of the greatest disparities of income in the world and an extremely high poverty rate; so while a Panamanian economic model works well for the banking industry and the wealthy, it does not necessarily translate into economic health for much of the population.

Panamanian poverty levels are in line with other countries in the region. Large disparities are typical for an emerging market, although the disparities are a greater than normal in Panama as you mentioned. However, the poverty level has been steadily falling. The World Bank has an interesting report about poverty in Panama here.

But it's not even about states: it's about metropolitan areas. If you measure by states, you have the same problem as if you measure by country: you'll have centralized urban areas with higher densities, surrounded by much less populous areas. The state of New York is deceptive; even if it has the largest American city in it, that's balanced by its much less densely populated upstate region. California likewise. (The densest state? New Jersey, at 1,134.4 per square kilometer - not that it's got big cities, but that there's near-continuous low-density build-up covering about half of the state.)

And let me also note that it's not about "cities" either! Most people define cities as regions with certain single municipal governments, but a city isn't complete without its periphery - New York makes no sense if you don't include the parts of its metropolitan area in New Jersey and Connecticut. Suburbs do, by virtue of being spread out more, often require more resources for upkeep of things like telephone lines.

Finally, this PDF from the World Bank shows the US's rate of urbanization in 2003 at 78%, compared to the UK's at 90, Canada's at 79, France's at 76, Germany's at 88, Italy's at 67, etc. There is difference of course, but it's pretty clear to me that there isn't enough of a pattern for the rate of urbanization to really be a predictor for competitiveness in the broadband market (however you'd measure that anyway).

I spent a couple of weeks on a boat there and visited several islands. I've also been fortunate enough to visit wildlife areas all over the world.

Glad you like it (I did) but I think you're seriously underestimating just how much the vegetation and animal populations have changed - see wikipedia and this for a summary. I stand by my point that the animals are wary; not surprising considering how much they've been hunted by seamen and feral animals. Sounds like your experience was different.

The population is growing fast and your 10,000 population figure is probably a little out of date. According to these slides there is currently a total population of 30,000 with about 2/3 being legal residents.

---

DRM. You don't control it means you don't own it.

The AK-47's ubiquity could alternatively be explained as a result of a path dependent process. Economic historians recognize that an inferior product may persist when a small but early advantage becomes large over time and builds up a legacy that makes switching costly (David 1975). In the case of the AK-47 that early advantage may be that as a Soviet invention it was not subject to patent and so could be freely copied. Furthermore, large caches of these weapons were freely distributed to regimes and rebels sympathetic to the Soviet Union - more freely, that is, than weapons were distributed by the US - thereby giving the AK-47 a foothold advantage in the emerging post-World War II market for small arms.

Wow, really? I thought he was a big supporter of the poor.

If he's out there killing poor people, I better not vote for the guy after all.

anarchy quickly becomes rule by warlords

if you don't understand why, you don't understand human nature.

i'm certain in your thought experiments anarchy really rocks, but in the real world, populated by real human beings, it is basically the definition of suckage

please move to somalia where you can experience your glorious anarchy...

...and leave the rest of us with a better grasp on human nature with the pursuit of a sound government we deserve

AIDS in Iran is mainly caused by injecting drug use of heroin. Most of the heroin driving this injecting drug use comes from Afghanistan. The amount of heroin has been increasing dramatically since the US led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. According to the UNODC, opiate production there increased by 60% in 2005-6 alone.

Iran actually does have a far more liberal and effective system of HIV prevention that the US. Known Islamist sympathisers like the World Bank and Lancet recently wrote:

"Several factors helped catalyze change and explain Iran's current progressive (HIV prevention) policies: (i) the important role NGOs and civil society played in advocacy and implementation of successful programs that reached vulnerable groups; (ii) the close cooperation and common understanding between the Ministry of Health, the prison department health authorities, and the judiciary authorities and other stakeholders, on drug treatment and HIV/AIDS, leading to increased government support for implementation of evidence-based harm reduction policies; and, (iii) informed advocacy among senior policy-makers paving the way for adoption of harm reduction measures in early 2000. A national harm reduction committee has been established with representatives from various ministries, academic centers and NGOs.

Harm reduction programs are now implemented by both government and non-governmental facilities. A program recognized as a best practice, is the triangular clinic which integrates services for treatment and prevention of STIs, injecting drug use and HIV/AIDS.17 These clinics are set up in prisons and by NGOs to effectively reach IDU communities. A unique model for comprehensive harm reduction is being implemented by the Persepolis NGO. It provides needle exchange, methadone maintenance treatment, general medical care, and referral for voluntary counseling and testing. It runs drop in centers for street-based IDUs as part of a continuum of care, and services extend to the provision of food, clothes and other basic needs."

(HIV/AIDS Prevention among Injecting Drug Users: Learning from Harm Reduction in Iran, World Bank 2006) http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTSAREGTOPHIVA IDS/Resources/LancetHarmReductionIran.pdf

Google for harm reduction and HIV in the US. Judge for yourself where HIV prevention is more effective.

I guess the lesson is this: there is active propaganda campaign being waged by the US and its allies against Iran at the moment. As in the case of the USSR, everything is being painted black. Laughing at "cures for AIDS" is part of this propaganda campaign.

Judging by HIV prevention evidence at least, it is pretty clear where religious fundamentalist nutsos are doing the damage.

If you like having corporate headquarters which have a tendency to use resources and produce nothing, then yes, replacing your income tax with a sales tax is a very good idea.

They can just avoid it by importing goods from Oregon.

Not since the new Capital Gains tax cut went into effect.

Yep, that's a big one- percentage of total income paid in taxes. Of course, if we had a truly progressive income tax with a maximum wage rate, that would not be a problem.

Yeah, sure, because paying for a 8000 man private army is so much cheaper than buying off 550 legislators. They're going to manipulate the regulation and taxation laws one way or the other- if not by subverting democracy, then with force.

"In Thailand, Microsoft was the first corporation to be nominated for a royal decoration award from the king"

What possibly could a software vendor teach educators about education .

USA: 31 people per km2 urban population 2003 78%
Sweden: 20 ppkm2, urb 83%
Finland: 16 ppkm2, urb 59%
Norway: 12 ppkm2, urb 76%.

Sources: wikipedia and http://devdata.worldbank.org/wdipdfs/table3_10.pdf

About poverty in India:

It is a highly controversial topic. There is bias in all directions. Certainly, the western media (oddly, the liberals most of all) love to portray India exclusively as a country of beggars and untouchables. It certainly makes them feel secure in their hatred of Indians.

However, there is no doubt that the human development index of India has risen remarkably over the last few decades (certainly a lot more than other countries in the subcontinent, where the poverty situation is worse).

There is an ongoing controversy over poverty statistics and figures made during the nineties, with some economists, banks, sociologists siding with the figures that indicate reduced poverty and others siding with
the "India is a country of beggars and untouchables" polemic.

The world bank's assessment is below:
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES /SOUTHASIAEXT/EXTSAREGTOPPOVRED/0,,contentMDK:2057 4067~menuPK:493447~pagePK:34004173~piPK:34003707~t heSitePK:493441,00.html

The Indian debate has run parallel to, and is itself a large part of, the wider debate about globalization and poverty. The economic reforms of the early 1990s were followed by rates of economic growth that were high by Indian historical standards. The effects on poverty remain controversial, and the official numbers published by the Government of India,showing a reduction of poverty from 36 percent of the population in 1993 - 94 to 26 percent of the population in 1999 - 00, have been challenged both for allegedly showing too little and too much poverty reduction

Issues over "data and dogma" in a paper published by a Princeton Univ prof and a world bank guy:

http://poverty2.forumone.com/files/15168_deaton_ko zel_2004.pdf

There has been a consensus on the fact that liberalization has led to a reduction of income poverty. The picture, however, is not so clear if one considers other factors (such as health, education, crime and access to infrastructure). Some have criticozed the stats as too one-dimensional.However, they only criticize, and do not offer any ways to objectively gauge all the criteria for poverty in India, suggesting that they are simply whining.

With the rapid economic growth that India is experiencing, it is likely that a significant fraction of the rural population will continue to migrate toward cities, making the issue of urban poverty more significant in the long run

http://www.csh-delhi.com/events/downloads/Backgrou ndNote67102006.pdf

Although there is no full consensus on what happened to Indian poverty in the 1990s, it is claimed that the official estimates of poverty reduction are too optimistic, particularly for rural India. This alleged overoptimism was amplified by statistical uncertainty that created space for commentators to argue that poverty had been virtually eliminated in India in the wake of the economic reforms.

On the other side, well-known economits Pravin Visaria have defended the validity of many of the statistics that demonstrated the reduction in overall poverty in India, as well as the declration made by India's Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha that poverty in India has reduced significantly.

He asserts that the state surveys were well designed and supervised and felt that just because they did not appear to fit preconceived notions about poverty in India,they should not be dismissed outright

http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20010319/jairam. shtml

Also, Nicholas Stern, vi

"Off-grid renewable energy investments are cheaper when communities and individuals can build and operate electricity generation facilities without going through regional governments and utilities. In Nepal systems under 1 MW do not need approval for off-grid development. This has played a critical role in helping local micro-hydro entrepreneurs set a tariff which is acceptable to the community being serviced as well as being profitable to the entrepreneur running the micro-hydro plant"

1. Switzerland ~9M
2. Denmark ~5M
3. Sweden ~9M
4. United States ~300M
5. Germany ~82M
6. Japan ~127M
7. Austria ~8M
8. Norway ~4M
9. France ~59M
10. Belux ~10M

Interestingly, the top 3 have their wealth spread over only 20M folks. Of course if you took a look at some regions with 20M folks out of 300M in the US (say california or new york), there's an interesting comparison there...

78% of the US population lives in urban areas (2003)
42% lives in urban areas with more than 1 million people (2005)

compared to Italy (67%/20%), Spain (78%/23%) and Norway (76%/?), it doesn't look like there's an inherent disadvantage.

source: http://devdata.worldbank.org/wdipdfs/table3_10.pdf

...when "double the prevailing wage" is still far below the national poverty line for that nation.

Simply not true, at least in the case of China (and very unlikely to be true in any country, if you think about it for a second). This table shows World Bank poverty estimates for every country in the world. If you look up China, you will see that well under 10% of the population is under the poverty line. The prevailing wage is what the median worker makes, and clearly even this amount if over the poverty line. So double this wage would be well over.

It is the responsibility of the government to enforce minimum standards for employment (both over there and over here).

I suppose by "the government" you mean the U.S. government, since clearly the Chinese government can't do much (which was my point). In a sense, you're right; since Apple's headquarters are here, the U.S. government could act in this case. But it would still decrease Apple's employment. I don't understand why you or anyone would consider this an "empty threat" - as you say, Apple is driven by (as you would say) "greed" (or as I would say, profit) and wants to maximize their return on investment. If the cost of labor goes up, Apple will require that average productivity increase, which means (given that not all workers are identically productive) that employment must decrease.

Unless you come up with any particularly new and enlightening points, I'll let you get the last word here.

Looks like you don't know how HIV works if you think 5 years is plenty of time to say that guy is all in the clear.

Here is a page with some details, but I'll snip out the important part that I thought was common knowledge to anyone who had done any sort of rudimentary research into this topic.

It has a long incubation period. Persons who are infected by the virus may have many years of productive normal life, although they can infect others during this period. It is not certain how long this latent period is; estimates range from five to fifteen years, with the shorter period being found in the developing world, where people are less healthy and well nourished. It is known that good health and nutrition, and early treatment of opportunistic infections, will extend the period of healthy and productive life. Unfortunately infected children will, for the most part, die before their fifth birthdays.

Quite frankly fives years ain't jack, especially if you're a healthy specimen in the first place. Sorry, not convinced, even if the website you continually link to in almost every comment on this thread has supporting statements from various experts. People can be wrong and very often are, no matter what background they come from, and people can very often have underlying reasons to say what they do (I'm not saying anyone there has such incentives, I'm simply saying that it's a very bad idea to just say oh that guy's an 'expert', he must know what he's talking about!).

The Indian nobel laurelate Amartya Sen made the point that the literacy rate in India is much lower than the literacy in the east asian countries such as China, and therefore the chinese factory workers has ended up being more valuable than the Indian factory workers. On the contrary India has a lot of well-weducated people. As a result of this difference the cheap plastic industry has ended up in China whereas the Indian economic growth is centered around a comparatively small middle class. In other words the lack of investment in education of the poor has lead to inequality. I warmly recommend Sen's book

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0199257493/qid=11 52349068

On the contrary I recently heard a talk of Montek Singh Ahluwalia, who was one of the arcitects behind the Indian move towards market economy in the 1980's. He said that according to some of the standard measures of inequeality the inequality is India has not been rising. Here is a summary of a similar speach

http://info.worldbank.org/etools/BSPAN/Presentatio nView.asp?PID=1069&EID=328

Personally, I don't know what to believe. Perhaps some Indian slashdot readers can enlighten me.