Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Globally sharing cost of Earthquake proofing and relief ?

  1. #1

    Default Globally sharing cost of Earthquake proofing and relief ?

    In my Earth Science class we were in earthquakes and I saw something odd. There was a mention of the whole earth sharing the financial costs of earthquake proofing and relief. I am kind of on both sides of this. I feel like the poorer countries that get frequent earthquakes should not recieve the same help and etc for less, and that places that are seemingly void of earthquakes should not have to join.

    I believe this could work if it was just the 1st world countries that supported it and they could split it up based on size, magnitude and etc, so the more relief the country recieves the more it has to contribute.

  2. #2

    Default

    So wait. You are saying that the places that were built over fault lines that people were unaware of at the time should need to pay more than places that don't get earthquakes and places that don't get earthquakes shouldn't pay at all?

    A lot of the poorer countries are poorer BECAUSE they need to spend all their money fixing up their places from natural disasters. How would making them pay more than, say the USA, be helping?

    Should the world share in the cost? To an extent. The countries that HAVE more money should be helping the lesser countries more. Just like larger businesses pay higher taxes.

  3. #3

    Default

    your logic makes virtually no sense, its akin to taxing lower classes the highest. asilly idea

    either your joking or you dont get the first idea of givig a boost to those who need iit most, to say that the more they recieve the more they have to drain their treasuries of money that otherwise may be used for asters seems woefully misguided.

  4. #4

    Default

    I think he is making the same argument used against health care.

    "Why should I have to pay for someone else's illness"

    I like the idea of a global fund for earthquake relief it brings us closer to a one world government and thats something I think we need if we are ever going to progress as a species.

  5. #5

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by ChildishDaze View Post
    I think he is making the same argument used against health care.

    "Why should I have to pay for someone else's illness"

    I like the idea of a global fund for earthquake relief it brings us closer to a one world government and thats something I think we need if we are ever going to progress as a species.
    a one worl government? perish the thought if he who weras shiny hat hears you :P

    but, unity, yeah, and collaberation, it wont be perfect but often clearlyits had some benefits

  6. #6

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by silent deadly alchemist View Post
    a one worl government? perish the thought if he who weras shiny hat hears you :P

    but, unity, yeah, and collaberation, it wont be perfect but often clearlyits had some benefits
    Not anything like the silly NWO, but man if we had one world, one government, one people we would still have social problems but no more Bullshit of people hating each other because of what nation the come from or whole armies fighting over land and resources. No more of one country (mine for the moment) living the best while places like Zambia get fucked over. Equal shares of technology, education, food, everything amongst the people. Then, into space to spread our people to new worlds.

    Impossible, no. It happened once in history (without the space part of course) and would have worked if it weren't for human greed and a greater propensity to violence.

  7. #7

    Default

    "Why should I have to pay for someone else's illness"

    This.

    It's not fair at all for the more wealthy and less earthquake ridden places to have to help with those that are less fortunate. That's why i'm thankful most of the big countries are not favoring it.

  8. #8

    Default

    It's an interesting concept. From the standpoint of insurance, if you live in a flood plain, you have to pay a lot more for flood insurance than if you live on high ground. The same thing applies if you live where hurricanes occur.

    As for poorer countries, other countries often come to their aid and spend far more money in benevolent contributions than applied fees, I would think. It's easy to ignore a poor countries plight until you see the suffering on the news, and especially the children.

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by dogboy View Post
    As for poorer countries, other countries often come to their aid and spend far more money in benevolent contributions than applied fees, I would think. It's easy to ignore a poor countries plight until you see the suffering on the news, and especially the children.
    Yeah I agree unfortunately, I think they shouldnt dipslay any images or the like only keep it as unbiased text.

  10. #10
    Mesmerale

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by TsuKiyoMe View Post
    "Why should I have to pay for someone else's illness"

    This.

    It's not fair at all for the more wealthy and less earthquake ridden places to have to help with those that are less fortunate. That's why i'm thankful most of the big countries are not favoring it.
    You do realize that we, including the person who posted that line, is arguing that it's a bad idea to think like that, right?

Similar Threads

  1. 8.8 Magnitude Chilean Earthquake
    By EvaIlyxtra in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-Mar-2010, 15:31
  2. AB/DL/TB as stress relief?
    By wetatnight in forum Adult Babies & Littles
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 27-Apr-2009, 22:41
  3. Does this cost too much?
    By ScubaSteve in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 20-Feb-2008, 23:39

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.