.
Lv 5
. asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Should all countries be required to keep a minimum stock of distaster aid relief supplies?

Food, water, medical supplies etc. boxed up, ready to go.

Then if there is a disaster, the aid can be transported almost immediately, starting with the neighboring countries first.

instead of trying to fly insignificant amounts of aid half-way round the planet

15 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    A Man-Made Famine

    There are many causes behind the world food crisis, but one chief villain: World Bank head, Robert Zoellick

    By Raj Patel

    16/04/08 "The Guardian" -- - For anyone who understands the current food crisis, it is hard to listen to the head of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, without gagging. Earlier this week, Zoellick waxed apocalyptic about the consequences of the global surge in prices, arguing that free trade had become a humanitarian necessity, to ensure that poor people had enough to eat. The current wave of food riots has already claimed the prime minister of Haiti, and there have been protests around the world, from Mexico, to Egypt, to India. The reason for the price rise is perfect storm of high oil prices, an increasing demand for meat in developing countries, poor harvests, population growth, financial speculation and biofuels. But

    prices have fluctuated before. The reason we're seeing such misery as a result of this particular spike has everything to do with Zoellick and his friends. Before he replaced Paul Wolfowitz at the World Bank, Zoellick was

    the US trade representative, their man at the World Trade Organisation. While there, he won a reputation as a tough and uileful negotiator, savvy with details and pushy with the neoconservative economic agenda: a technocrat with a knuckleduster. His mission was to accelerate two decades of trade liberalisation in key strategic commodities for the United States, among them agriculture. Practically, this meant the removal of developing countries' ability to stockpile grain (food mountains interfere with the market), to create tariff barriers (ditto), and to support farmers (they ought to be able to compete on their own). This Zoellick did often, and enthusiastically. Without agricultural support policies, though, there's no buffer between the price shocks and the bellies of the poorest people on earth. No option to support sustainable smaller-scale farmers, because they've been driven off their land by cheap EU and US imports. No option to dip into grain reserves because they've been

    sold off to service debt. No way of increasing the income of the poorest, because social programmes have been cut to the bone. The reason that today's price increases hurt the poor so much is that all protection from price shocks has been flayed away, by organisations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation and the World Bank.

    Even the World Bank's own Independent Evaluation Groupadmits (pdf)

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Maybe you don't understand the term DISASTER.

    If everyone is ready for anything that can go wrong, it isn't a disaster, it is an inconvenience.

    Katrina would not have been as bad if the Louisiana National Guard hadn't been in Iraq. It was a disaster. The wealthiest nation on Earth botched it. We had the supplies. We didn't have the trained people ready because of decisions made by people we expected to do their jobs.

    Relief has to be timely in order to save lives. It wasn't.

    Is California ready for a 9.0 earthquake? Not even close. Will there be one? Oh yeah!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It would be great if all nations had disaster relief supplies available if in the event of an emergency; however, many nations cannot afford it. If the nation is a developing nation state, they struggle to maintain a budget and might only pay 0.01% to the United Nations budget so that can be represented.

    I support the United States of America and what it does to provide aid to other nations around the world after disasters occur. After all, the United States of America (to the best of my knowledge) shows more Love and Compassion to people around the world than any nation state and the United States of America SHOULD NEVER have to apologize for all the Hospitality and Goodwill it provides to the world.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Sounds on the surface like a good idea.

    But when you have a country such as Myanmar unwilliing to let aid & specialists in it wont make a difference.

    The "Insignificant amounts" the USA sends are more than the rest of the world donates son

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Required? I don't know how in the world one would enforce that and it seems like it would be costly to enforce. Of course, countries SHOULD do this, but I really don't see how it could be required. What would the penalty be for non compliance, for example? How would one decide what is a sufficient amount? What if a country is simply too poor to comply? It's prudent and if a country has the resources, they indeed should do this, but I don't feel requiring other countries to do this would work.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It's a good idea but who has the authority to require any country to stock the materials and respond when needed. there are some countries that might go for the idea but there are others that would not.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    First, it takes a huge amount of money

    Second, it has a limited self life

    Third, it does not take into consideration corruption. I.E. officials raiding the supplies to line their own pockets.

    It could work, but given the 3 items above, I doubt if it would work world wide.

    ===============

    Life is so simple, but we insist on making it complicated

    Confucius

    551 - 479 BC

    ===============

    Peace

    Jim

    .

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    How about YOU keep a stock of emergency supplies for YOU. Why always rely on the government to solve all of your problems. That is the first mistake. The second is thinking they will.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I wouldn't say that it should be a requirement, but more a standard in an intelligent and caring world! (maybe here lies the problem!)

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes, definitely. A great suggestion

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.