 |
 |
Hi Max I just try and speak from the grassroots where my voice belongs collectively with other oppressed human beings, in the U.K and global world. We can't commodify human-life, at any costs. The right to independent living, is a fundamental human and civil right for all disabled people. Also all humans, rich or poor have the human and civil right to health and social care around the global world, their should be 'no-rationing'. We should not be putting an economic value on human life. Regards Colin R ----- Original Message ----- From: "max neill" <[log in to unmask]> To: "ColRevs" <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 11:53 AM Subject: Re: data on costs Thanks for your reply Colin, I always enjoy reading your posts - they are generally witty and original, and I like the political and social analysis behind them. In this particular discussion you are spot on on the consequences of globalisation. The problem of the discussion for those putting an anti-World Bank perspective is that the Bank are couching their enquiry in terms of a 'neutral' search for knowledge about costs, which they can use 'for the benefit' of people with disabilities. Those who object are somehow disrupting their valuable 'practical' work for purely 'ideological' motives. I have tried to counter this by showing that, despite their well-publicised projects around accessibility etc, their overall policies are designed to promote access by big business to cheap labour and low taxes, rather than access by ordinary people to social and economic life "We speak and the word goes beyond us to consequences and ends which we had not conceived of" Gadamer ---------- Original Message ----------- From: "ColRevs" <[log in to unmask]> To: "max neill" <[log in to unmask]>, <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 11:16:55 +0100 Subject: Re: data on costs > Max > > I have mentioned these are the economic policies, practices and procedures > within the 'New World Order', in which 'excludes' poor disabled and > non-disabled human-beings across the global planet. It's about > 'politics of greed', within 'new-right 'political ideology, in which > protects the economic interests of those in 'power' within the > Worldbank and IMF, not the interests of the poor from grassroots levels. > > Regards > > Colin R > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "max neill" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 10:39 AM > Subject: Re: data on costs > > It can be shown that the policies of the World Bank are causing exclusion > and impoverishment across the world. > > Their 'Structural Adjustment Programmes' make privatisation of > Education and Health Services, and the introduction of user charges > a condition of their loans. > > Schools and Hospitals could be built with the best ramps and widest > doors - but if people cannot afford to use them, they are being excluded. > If people are excluded from Education and Health Services, then they > are excluded from employment. With their track record on promoting user > charges, they should not be surprised that people are suspicious > when they start investigating 'data on costs'. > > The World Bank also needs to look at it's promotion of the use of > 'Disability Adjusted Life Years' as a method for deciding how > treatment in Health Services should be rationed. The logic behind > this method is chillingly eugenic. > > It is these privatising, excluding and rationing policies that are > ideological, not the opposition to them, which is motivated by the > disastrous practical > consequences of such policies for so many people in developing countries. > > Here are a few relevant links: > http://www.phmovement.org/pubs/issuepapers/hong11.html > > http://www.whirledbank.org/development/health.html > http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/exp-ch.htm > > http://www.healthwrights.org/articles/manage_ltd.htm > > http://www.africaaction.org/docs02/ugan0204.htm > > "We speak and the word goes beyond us to consequences and ends which > we had not conceived of" Gadamer > > ---------- Original Message ----------- > From: ColRevs <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:35:55 +0100 > Subject: Re: data on costs > > > New report reveals third world debt package failings > > With kind permission from Drop the Debt a news release, titled, > > "Egg on faces of HIPC architects as new report reveals third world > > debt package failings", dated April 23 2001 has been reposted here. > > You can also see the article at their web site: > http://www.dropthedebt.org/press/sustainability2304.shtml. > > > > Drop the Debt news release, 23 > > > > > http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/ExternalArticles/sustainability2304.asp > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jorge Bolaños" <[log in to unmask]> > > To: <[log in to unmask]> > > Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 8:52 PM > > Subject: Re: data on costs > > > > > Hi Col, > > > I totally disagree with everything you said. > > > As a classical liberal myself, I dislike the World Bank and the IMF. > Above > > > all because they are useless and cause much more harm than benefits. > > > However, the assertion that they have caused the poverty all around the > > > world would be exagerated, if not completely faulse. Look at Argentina, > > for > > > instance. > > > Regards, > > > Jorge > > > Spain > > > > > > > > > >From: ColRevs <[log in to unmask]> > > > >Reply-To: ColRevs <[log in to unmask]> > > > >To: [log in to unmask] > > > >Subject: Re: data on costs > > > >Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:14:55 +0100 > > > > > > > >Amanda > > > > > > > >I totally agree wit everything you say. It's the Worldbank and IMF who > > have > > > >caused poverty around the global world and they have disabled so many > > > >disabled people with the oppressive policies, procedures and practices. > > > > > > > >How can we FREEOURPEOPLE around the global planet when 'we' have > > oppressive > > > >organisations like them in 'our' global world who are causing poverty > and > > > >impairments, due to them 'not' 'dropping the debt' against all the poor > > > >countries. > > > > > > > >'Ignorance is bliss'; or would I state 'if you think a disabled persons > > > >human and civil right to the 7 needs for independent living is too > > > >expensive, then ignorance is definitely blissful for the people in > power > > > >making these decisions about humanity and who give them the right to > play > > > >god and commodify humanity?' > > > > > > > >FREEOURPEOPLE > > > > > > > >Colin R > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "Amanda Tink" <[log in to unmask]> > > > >To: <[log in to unmask]> > > > >Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 5:58 AM > > > >Subject: Re: data on costs > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Dan and all, > > > > > > > > > > Dan wrote: > > > > > > I am working at the World Bank in an effort to promote an > inclusive > > > > > > approach to our various projects in health, education, and > > employment. > > > > > > > > > > If you really are interested in promoting an inclusive approach, why > > is > > > >it > > > > > that you are asking these questions in terms of what it costs to > make > > > >these > > > > > things accessible? Wouldn't people be interested in inclusiveness if > > you > > > > > told them about the costs of not making these things accessible? > When > > I > > > >say > > > > > that, I really do mean the costs of not making things accessible > from > > an > > > > > economic perspective. I strongly believe that the loss to society > is > > > >much > > > > > more important, but the way you phrased those questions convinces me > > > >that > > > > > I'd get nowhere with that approach. > > > > > > > > > > There's that wonderful line "if you think education is expensive, > how > > > >about > > > > > ignorance!" I haven't studied the topic, so I can't recommend any > > > >specific > > > > > research. But I know that, over and over, research supports the > idea > > > >that > > > > > education improves economic options, so I'm sure the articles > couldn't > > > >be > > > > > that hard to find. They don't need to be disability-specific, since > > I'm > > > > > sure you can find research of that kind which makes no reference to > > > >whether > > > > > it's subjects had disability or not. > > > > > > > > > > The same goes for health care. The healthier people are, the more > > > >likely > > > > > they are to be able to make what could be called an economic > > > >contribution. > > > > > > > > > > I think it would help you, when considering your questions, to keep > in > > > >mind > > > > > that accessibility is one of the many features that is part of > > something > > > >as > > > > > a whole. It is not an optional extra. You wouldn't consider > > > >constructing > > > > > a school without chairs and tables for students; similarly, you > should > > > >not > > > > > construct a school with narrow doorways. I know it could be said > that > > > >many > > > > > schools throughout the world do exist without chairs and tables or > an > > > > > equivalent, but the reality is that that only works for some of the > > > >people > > > > > some of the time, and will most certainly not work any of the time > for > > > >each > > > > > person at some point throughout their schooling. > > > > > > > > > > Including the necessities from the ground up is the most cost > > effective > > > > > thing to do, and it's certainly a hell of a lot more cost effective > > then > > > > > adding a necessity in later. If you're thinking accessibility is > not > > > > > really a necessity, then you don't really believe in inclusiveness. > > > > > > > > > > Take a long-term approach. This should not just be about the costs > at > > > >the > > > > > point of construction, it should be about the costs overall over 10 > or > > > >20 > > > > > years or longer. I think you'll find that, regardless of how much > > those > > > > > "additional costs" (as you called them) are, they will, in the > > > >long-term, > > > > > be less than the cost of not being inclusive. > > > > > > > > > > Amanda. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Amanda Tink: [log in to unmask] > > > > > "But then with Powerpoint you can reduce War and Peace to dot > points. > > > >And > > > > > which US President of all the US Presidents does his press > conference > > > >with > > > > > dot points? You know the one, and there's only been one." (Don > > Watson) > > > > > *Consider all www users: use, support and create text-friendly > sites!* > > > > > > > > > > ________________End of message______________________ > > > > > > > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > > > > > are now located at: > > > > > > > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > > > > > > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > > > > > > > >________________End of message______________________ > > > > > > > >Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > > > >are now located at: > > > > > > > >www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > > > > > > >You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > La información más fresca desde diferentes puntos de vista en la Revista > > de > > > Prensa de MSN. http://es.newsbot.msn.com/ > > > > > > > ________________End of message______________________ > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > > are now located at: > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > ------- End of Original Message ------- > > ________________End of message______________________ > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > are now located at: > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. ------- End of Original Message ------- ________________End of message______________________ Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are now located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.