

World Bank app competition - potterzot
http://appsfordevelopment.challengepost.com/
In case anyone needs a project for the next month...  There is a lot of very cool data there.
======
erikpukinskis
I'll design an app that helps you plan excessive infrastructure projects for
developing nations that plunge them into debt so they can be exploited for
political gain! The World Bank will love that!

~~~
john_horton
And then the World Bank will write-off that debt under their Heavily Indebted
Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC): <http://goo.gl/iaQfJ>

The fact that the US has a lot of control over the World Bank seems reasonable
given that they put up the lion's share of the capital. As far as dictating
terms and conditions, regardless of their merit, there aren't many banks that
will give million dollar loans to bad credit risks w/o strings attached.
What's the alternative scenario? No bank? They just give out money?

------
madair
man you gotta be such a sucker to fall for this one.

debt, assumed by despotic and self serving governments, 20% of which goes to
fund their militarily held regimes without providing growth, which enslave
generations, all well documented, all neo-colonialism: suckers & selfishticos
sign-up here, your dream awaits. join the world bank in its phony do-gooder
endeavors.

god what the hell is wrong with people, is propaganda really this good? i
mean, seriously. this is on the front page. people voting this up are very
evil or very very very stupid, which these do you up-voters prefer to be?

~~~
nodata
_people voting this up are very evil or very very very stupid, which these do
you up-voters prefer to be?_

I wouldn't want to be seen as stupid! I'd better agree with you!

Your comment reads like a rant: how about some links to educate us?

~~~
madair
do your own homework. i'm not the one voting up the world bank. the voter
uppers have the burden of responsibility for advocation. not all ideas are
equal.

this site does not allow me to vote down, this means an unequal burden in
defense of a down vote versus an up vote, despite an up-vote being an positive
advocation. (this is not a brainstorming session, this is life)

and please note that i'm being called upon to carefully document a response to
_propaganda_ on top of defending an idea against anonymous up-votes. hmmm. can
you smell the bullshit? can you taste it? all i smell and taste are kangaroo
court judges in a carefully constructed technolalaland.

and since the dumbsters really won't get it: if your head is appointed by the
president of the united states, not to mention if only americans can be head,
then this marketing effort is dictionary definition of _propaganda_ , that's
not an opinion statement. (it's amazing how often one needs to pull out the
dictionary in this joint)

~~~
nodata
_it's amazing how often one needs to pull out the dictionary in this joint_

Leave the dictionary: just give us some links to backup what you claim.

Look at it this way: you're complaining that people don't do X. You want them
to do Y, and are annoyed that they don't. It would therefore benefit you to
educate people about why X is bad and Y is good. If you don't at least try,
I'm not sure you get to complain any more.

Let's avoid the name calling and rhetoric, recommend us some good reading.

~~~
madair
no, i'm complaining that people DO X, please get it straight. They DO advocate
X. They DO advocate the world bank marketing effort, which is governmental
making it intrinsic propaganda.

Back up YOUR up-votes. why is the world bank a good thing to support? i mean,
it's been around 50 years or so, you know, european post-war reconstruction
all that. so...tell me, all the poverty...getting worse, yeah, so, how's that
whole world bank working out for you, tell me?

i mean, i don't have to get into the neo-colonialism angle. as an atheist i
can say to the christians in the bunch _by their fruits ye shall know them_.

so, you're backing up something, you think it's a good idea to read about,
support, take action for. or no, it's just _interesting_ in some faux-amoral
sense. but you still think that it's valid to accept that on face value, and
you're doubtful about the concept of deceptive & self-serving propaganda as
something to guard carefully against.

well, tell me, what do you know about this program? what independent analysis
have you seen? why are you advocating? why are you so sure the dissent has the
burden of proof when the dissent is not actually taking any actions except to
dissent _in response_?

there is a rhetorical paradox presented here. also known as hypocrisy (since
we're speaking of dictionaries)

p.s. as you can see, i think the weaknesses in our frameworks for debate are a
far bigger problem than advocating the world bank. we propagate bullshit for
generations. our frameworks are broken. our well annotated frameworks are
broken. we're deceiving ourselves with some pseudo-victorian genteel ideal.

speak your fucking mind. why are we letting taboos rule our time? micro-
managers rule our time.

we are screwed if we don't break free from this hypersensitivity and inability
to consider and face our problems with our attempts to improve quality of life
for more than just a few technostartopoliptocrats.

what good is free speech if we fear the inconvenient as much as this?

------
noverloop
I'm surprised by the anti-world bank sentiment here. You should read 'The
Bottom Billion', which was written by the director of the Development Research
Group at the World bank (2003-2008)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bottom_Billion>

~~~
jswinghammer
The problem has to do with how much good debt does for people and how much
influence the US government has over the organization. It's not unfair to see
the bank as an arm of US foreign policy since the US has to agree to
everything that happens.

The world bank insists on policies that we would never agree to like water
privatization. That has lead to a lot of problems in poorer countries. It just
seems like a scheme to transfer what wealth exists in poor countries and
transfer it to the banks of the west.

If we really wanted to do good in the world we wouldn't give loans we'd give
aid for these projects instead.

