Clean water is a fundamental human right... Not according to Canada!
- Thread starter s_lone
- Start date
IPCC
Very true. However, with that said, it is becoming more and more important to scrutinize the utility of the UN as a body.
As you mentioned, multiple declarations have been passed and really, to what result? Add in the remarkable choices of that body in appointing representatives that are highly suspect. In my eyes, the UN is the global, political equivalent of an appendix... It's there but doesn't really do anything.
Socialist plot? That may be too strong, however, the "related links" say it all.
You know, there once was a time when a person assumed responsibility for themselves and didn't look to blame everyone else for their woes/misfortune... The UN is actively paving the way to allow any and all to offload their issues onto the world... That will work, but only if you are weak enough to accept that responsibility on behalf of those that don't have the kahuna's.
So.. Socialist plot?.. You be the judge.
You' re dead right... The UN will leverage that "acceptance" and pass the buck onto anyone that is feeble-minded enough to accept it.
It still amazes me that despite the fact that this issue has been at the forefront of global consciousness for decades, the "suffering nations" have passed the buck onto everyone else. There are a myriad of aid, charity, humanitarian, etc. agencies that pour bags of cash and resources into these projects/issues and yet, the home nation(s) is without any effective contributions. Add in the vast sums of federal aid from many nations to the suffering nations and it sure seems that the cash goes somewhere else.
Perhaps it's time that the contributing nations require an accounting of the prior aid expenditures prior to throwing more money or being brow-beaten by the UN at this problem.
No I don't. I think this is a misreading of the UN resolution. The UN has issued similar resolutions regarding torture, education, and other human rights issues. It is not enforceable and is not intended to be. It is merely meant to serve as a guideline for the behaviour of the various nations around the world. Nations can choose to act on it or not. The fact that Canada abstained from supporting the resolution essentially means that the government of Canada dos not support the right of clean water for Canadians; something I find more than a little strange.
Here is a link to an article on the resolution. It seems quite plain to me that it has nothing to do with forcing Canada or any other nation to give water to anyone.
Reuters AlertNet - UN assembly asserts water rights, some disagree
Here is also a second link detailing Canada's objections. Canada fears that it might be committed to help develop facilities for clean water in developing countries if clean water becomes a right. However, Canada already has the provision of clean water in the developing world as part of its foreign aid programs, so it would require no change in policy at all by the Canadian government.
Canada tepid to UN resolution on water rights
C'mon. Do you really believe that your government does not believe your people have a right to clean water? That is silly. They don't need the UN telling you that.
I'll check that out.
That is what I was saying. So it seems that they don't want Canada's water...but they want Canada's money as well as everyone elses money to build clean water facilities in nations that don't have them. Another program designed to suck money into the coffeirs of degenrate governments that...even though it is 2010...can't figure out how to get clean water when other nations have been doing it for over 100 years.
I am sure Canada has aid programs but they aren't UN aid programs so they do not have full control of your Loonies. What the F*** good is that to the UN?
I guess you would have to explain that to some of the members of the Canadian First Nations who still do not have safe clean water. The following article gives an example. Perhaps that is the real motive in abstaining. After all it might be a little awkward if the government of Canada actually had to ensure that all Canadians have clean water.
CBC News In Depth: Aboriginal Canadians
Agreed.... hell back when people were migrating to the New World, finding their spots of land to start farming and living on, it wasn't all peachy and fun.... it was a lot of hard work for these people starting their lives over....... and at the same time, they all dug their own wells and got their own damn water themselves with what we'd consider today as rudimentary technology.
Here it is like 200+ years later, with newer technology and resources and it seems like these people in these poverty stricken nations can't even figure out how to make their own damn wells and obtain their own fresh water and need others in the world to ship it to them so they can chug it down in plastic bottles.
Teach them how to make their own wells, teach them how to purify their water in their areas, tech them how to build sanitation...... if after that they can't still figure it out for themselves, then too bad.... let natural selection take its course.
If someone taught me how to seek out water, dig my own well and purify my own water because I really needed to do this to survive..... I'd friggin do it..... and I'd teach others who live nearby so I'm not stuck with the only well and water, and having to spend everyday providing water for these people as well as myself.
Spread the education and knowledge and make people more independent..... it applies on a national/global scale as well..... if a country has water and knows how to get it, but never teaches other nations how to get their own, they'll only spend their time on continually handing out water to these people who should be smart enough to do it themselves.
And for the record, I was born and raised in homes that had their own independent wells, and many on my mothers side of the family all used their own wells they built by themselves.
From what it seems is that sending them water is not really the goal. Giving the UN more money so they can "educate" and build more water treatment facilities is the goal. Of course a balance of the money will go to UN overhead and corrupt government officials who will skim some money off the top. Only a fraction of it will go to getting folks clean water and treatment facilities.
Even if we told them: "All our fresh water is yours! Come and get it!", would they be smart enough, would they have the wherewithals to take advantage of such generous offer?
I doubt it. They left agricultural machinery rust in their harbours. They never came for free grains or any other free food.
If it is not offered up on a silver platter and/or delivered free of charge, bitching about not getting it is far easier than doing something to help themselves.
I doubt it. They left agricultural machinery rust in their harbours. They never came for free grains or any other free food.
If it is not offered up on a silver platter and/or delivered free of charge, bitching about not getting it is far easier than doing something to help themselves.
Spit it out. Where is this safe fresh water that we export in bulk along with farm machinery without fuel?
Who lives in the harbour? Or do people live far inland in places where you just can't drop off a tractor or bag of grain?
If you needed aid where you live would you walk to Vancouver to go get it? How would you get you new plow and bag of seed back to MB?
What good is aid if it is not distributable?
petros, there are just a few people live in the harbour city of Dar es Salaam, in Tanzania. Look it up on Google.
If the people of Tanzania are so desparate for foreign aid, why can't they come and get it from their own sea port, delivered free of charge by the donor? I mean just how pathetically incompetant can you get?
If the people of Tanzania are so desparate for foreign aid, why can't they come and get it from their own sea port, delivered free of charge by the donor? I mean just how pathetically incompetant can you get?
Harbours and cities are ****ty places to plant crops.Try that again. How would you get a plow and a sack of grain from Vancouver if you had no truck, fuel or road access?
Yeah it's the European's fault it rains like crazy and washes out their infratruture of dirt roads.
But you'd never think of that would you?
During the 1980s and early 1990s, Mozambique's agricultural sector was barely functional due to a combination of manmade and natural causes. The prolonged drought of 1981 to 1984 was followed by the floods and cyclone of 1984. By 1986, a famine emerged from renewed drought and civil war. Drought continued into 1987, followed by floods and locusts in 1988. Normal rainfall came in 1990, only to be followed by renewed drought in 1991 and 1992. In some regions food production declined by 80%, and in 1992 the food deficit reached a record 1.3 million tons. Normal rains returned in 1993, but the ongoing food relief requirement, exclusive of war refugees, was put at one million tons in 1994. Good rains and harvests helped the Mozambican economy grow by 5% in 1995 and 1996. By 1999, agricultural production was 5.5% higher than during 1989–91.
Only about 4% of Mozambique is under cultivation at any one time, and more than two-thirds of the land is not exploited in any way. Nevertheless, agricultural pursuits support almost 80% of the population and provided about 24% of the GDP in 2001. Since independence, there has been a serious decline in agricultural production, attributed to the collapse of rural transport and marketing systems when Portuguese farmers and traders left the country. In the 1980s, state farms received the bulk of agricultural investment, but the yields were poor.
Mozambique's major cash crops are cashew nuts, cotton, copra, sugar, tea, and cassava, and its major food crops are corn and sorghum. Crop production in 1999 included cassava, 5,650,000 tons; sugarcane 369,000 tons; coconuts, 435,000 tons; sorghum, 327,000 tons; peanuts, 145,000 tons; corn, 1,185,000 tons; bananas, 88,000 tons; oranges, 19,000 tons; grapefruits, 19,000 tons; cashew nuts, 53,000 tons; rice, 200,000 tons; copra, 73,000 tons; cotton fiber, 30,000 tons; sunflowers, 16,000 tons; and cottonseed, 60,000 tons. Mozambique is a net importer of food; in 2001, the trade deficit in agricultural products was $185.2 million.
Only about 4% of Mozambique is under cultivation at any one time, and more than two-thirds of the land is not exploited in any way. Nevertheless, agricultural pursuits support almost 80% of the population and provided about 24% of the GDP in 2001. Since independence, there has been a serious decline in agricultural production, attributed to the collapse of rural transport and marketing systems when Portuguese farmers and traders left the country. In the 1980s, state farms received the bulk of agricultural investment, but the yields were poor.
Mozambique's major cash crops are cashew nuts, cotton, copra, sugar, tea, and cassava, and its major food crops are corn and sorghum. Crop production in 1999 included cassava, 5,650,000 tons; sugarcane 369,000 tons; coconuts, 435,000 tons; sorghum, 327,000 tons; peanuts, 145,000 tons; corn, 1,185,000 tons; bananas, 88,000 tons; oranges, 19,000 tons; grapefruits, 19,000 tons; cashew nuts, 53,000 tons; rice, 200,000 tons; copra, 73,000 tons; cotton fiber, 30,000 tons; sunflowers, 16,000 tons; and cottonseed, 60,000 tons. Mozambique is a net importer of food; in 2001, the trade deficit in agricultural products was $185.2 million.
Either the creek that flows down the property or else one of the springs on the property.
Actually there are some countries that physically have no water near them. They ususally manage to scrounge some wells, but the water is laced with bacteria and minerals not conducive to good health.
Pretty much. Quite a few countries have wells, but the refresh rate is extremely slow, the water gets bacterial infestation and a lot of the time the mineral content will not allow for drinking.
Agriculture? The ground in some of those countries is not nutritional for growing much. Good luck watering your crops anyway.