I just read this and spotted:
To me "the poorest countries" means the third world. And what happens when you lend money to a third world country? 9 times out of 10, they honestly can't afford to pay it back. Cue "cancel third world debt" protests throughout western capital cities, Amnesty International TV campaigns and Bob Geldoff getting all sweary on your telly.
As it's unlikely they'll see much of the $100bn back, why don't they just say "set aside $100bn to assist development in the poorest countries"? That's assuming these particular countries want to be developed as it's very arrogant to assume that our way of life is automatically to be aspired to, in my opinion (with the exception of clean water and medicine).
The cynic in me says that it's so, when the protests start a few years down the line, the G20 leaders can look good by cancelling the debt.
It's all posturing to win votes anyway/
To me "the poorest countries" means the third world. And what happens when you lend money to a third world country? 9 times out of 10, they honestly can't afford to pay it back. Cue "cancel third world debt" protests throughout western capital cities, Amnesty International TV campaigns and Bob Geldoff getting all sweary on your telly.
As it's unlikely they'll see much of the $100bn back, why don't they just say "set aside $100bn to assist development in the poorest countries"? That's assuming these particular countries want to be developed as it's very arrogant to assume that our way of life is automatically to be aspired to, in my opinion (with the exception of clean water and medicine).
The cynic in me says that it's so, when the protests start a few years down the line, the G20 leaders can look good by cancelling the debt.
It's all posturing to win votes anyway/
