Jorge, I'm glad that you're talking about this because I'm learning a lot.
Jorge Gallardo Rius wrote: >Hi Taran & All, > Let me explain a little of what I know about how >debt condonation works: >(1) The countries in the list for debt condonation >(forgiven or in the process) are the countries with >the severest poverty conditions, so if that means that >funds will be available to other "more needy" >countries is a concept I don't really understand, >because greater poverty than these have, who else? >But there's plenty of space to talk because as some >poor countries reach new levels of growth, the concept >of poverty takes new meanings. > > Yes, it is sort of weird. But I won't pretend to understand the 'who has most poverty' issues and how they are decided, and I'm not certain that the debt of the nation itself is or isn't factored in. Maybe someone on the list knows? >(2) The countries whose debts are forgiven continue to >collect taxes as if they were going to pay the debt >and is budgeted, except that (by law) the money gets >re-invested in poverty reduction programs. > > This is where it's up to the particular government. As Andrew Cuomo once said (US HUD Secretary, 1999, in Time Magazine): "There was never a war on poverty. Maybe there was a skirmish on poverty." 'Poverty Reduction Programs', too, is a phrase that must have been made by committee... It's definitely not a friendly phrase to people who are actually in poverty. I can talk to someone who doesn't have a computer about the Digital Divide, but I don't know if I would feel comfortable about talking to a person without money about 'Poverty Reduction'. I say this because the phrase seems tailored to impress the people who created it rather than the people who such programs are supposed to help, and that speaks volumes. >(3) The poverty reduction programs that will recieve >these funds are encompassed in a Poverty Reduction >Strategy (PRS). So the secret to the effectiveness >lies in the PRS that the particular countries have. >(4) The idea that 100% of the debt was forgiven is a >relative concept, because the guys forgiving the debt >can only forgive that part of the debt that the >country has with them (multilateral debt). Thus, 100% >of the Honduran debt was forgiven means that the 30% >of our debt with those countries was forgiven, but the >InterAmerican Development Bank and the Paris Club are >not included, so Honduras still has 70% of its debt >outstanding. So do the other countries. > >Still, that means that funds are available in the >country for poverty reduction and that these funds are >"tied" to the PRS. > > This makes a lot more sense than the generalities that I have read in the media. Thank you. >In Honduras, the specifics are managed by a >Government-Civil Society-Cooperating Agencies >partnership. But there are no cooperating agencies >that are prioritizing Telecenters as a tool to >eradicate poverty. ITU for instance is doing >telecenters but mostly as a tool of technology >transfer. > >Which was the point I was making in an earlier e-mail >to DDN. We must somehow see beyond the "digital >divide" and see it as a technology solution to HUMAN >needs. > > I agree. Quality of life issues are what technology is supposed to address. >I don't know why solutions such as Kidlink and the >Boston ICC clubs that present solutions to human >learning problems are not more participative in these >issues. We need agricultural systems that can help >the peasants that live in the most abject situations >but can benefit from a telecenter. We need health >solutions through the internet that can help rural >children where they have a minimal health clinic with >no doctors. > > Look to India. Such things are being done in India - in fact, they have been a focus. >I don't know. Maybe I'm just dreaming. > > Maybe we need more dreamers. I'm used to reading ideas which seem less practical to me, where education is pushed into prominence ahead of more practical aspects. I was having a discussion on another list... while technology can educate people and allow them to write software, and do wondrous things with technology - the truth is that if mixing concrete is needed, then someone needs to mix the concrete. The developing world needs the people who grow the crops, and the artists, and the people who pick up the garbage just as it needs those that use technology as a means in itself. While I don't believe that the debt erasure will directly help with this, it is nice to hope. Most of the time, funding isn't as much of an issue as people who pursue funding would think it is. I'm at a hospital in Guyana, and every time I turn around I keep hearing about budgets when the real issue seems to be a lack of people working on things. Regardless of how much money is available, people will need to do things with what they have... the emphasis being on *do* instead of *having*. Personally, I think that the money saved from the taxes should be funneled into areas which will assure that the countries will not be in debt again - at least at the same level. I think that technology has a place there, but I think that the priority will have to be decided by the governments that benefited from this boon. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: Georgetown, Guyana [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran "Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
