Money Forum World

Why are western people less worried about world money imbalance, its historical and present causes?
Historical causes of poverty particulalry in Africa include slavery, colonialism and present day unfair trade terms. In view of this, Africa depends on the concious of the west to overcome poverty. in spite of awful TV pictures of complete misery, people dont act to change the world, why is it like this? If TV pictures cant make the worlds citizens to act, what will make western governments to be accountable and bring about just international trade, guideline of multinational businesses and lending institutions? What will it take for the most to start being human with compassion for others? The world has taken long to move through histroy and reach present civilisation position usually caused by illiteracy and poor communication in the past, but with this generation, education and easy communication is projected to bring about happiness for all people with equal opportunities and access to health and education. To accomplish this, peoples of the world should act, why are we not acting?

why is it the rest of the world has millennial of history we have 200 years still they want us to share they had 20 times more to develop than we why dont they share their money and resources

Because we have money other people dont. The issue of proverty is only an issue when it directly effects us.
Its called selfihness.

The people in 1st world countries are the ones benefitting from the imbalance. that means money and power which majority of people are less keen on sharing when they get more of it. Sad, but true.

People in the western world are less aware or worried about the poverty that's rampant through most of the rest of the world for some reasons.

First and primary, the sheer successfulness in the western world, especially the US, insulates most of their citizens from the severe realities that so many more people around the globe have to endure. as well, in the case of the US, it's a country that's physically lonely from the poorest regions of the world.

Secondly, there are cultural assumptions and taboos that make it less probably for people in the West to learn about the economic and social injustices that exist around the globe. One of these is the myth of the individual starting out at the bottom and increasing to the top: while there are cases where someone has risen from poverty to great success, the simple fact is majority of people that rise to the top were born pretty well close to the top already. Access to adequate education and work is largely reduced among the poor. This also relates to the taboo, especially in the US, against acknowledging the reality of class differences and the struggle between classes. The poor, when they're acknowledged at all, are blamed for their asperity, and most efforts to help them are considered futile and subesequently financial support for such programs is cut. By contrast, the 5% of Americans that own 95% of the money of the nation live in a world of such elegance and successfulness that not only could most Americans not recognize it, but majority of people around the globe could think the wealthy were aliens from another planet. still, consensus is made through the media among the general voting populace to support policies that favor this aristocracy and its corporate underpinnings.

This leads to our next reason why the West is less worried about conditions in the Third World: the media. The fact is people in the West, exactly the US, don't really know much, if anything, about the outside world, because the corporate media has no interest in maintaining journalists in obscure, far removed countries to cover stories that either reveal how corporate interests are actively working to keep the impoverished regions of the world oppressed and exploitable or that majority viewers simply arent all that interested in anyway.

What the West has still to learn is that access to adequate education and work anywhere and everywhere in the world IS a national security issue. People that have good jobs and good homes are typically too busy enjoying their lives to take up the arms of war.

Because quite simply its not a problem till it begins to influence us in such ways as competing with rising countries for natural resources that drive the prices up, then we care.

We are killing this planet and unless a minimum of 20% reduction of world population inside next 20 years this Earth won't be inhabitable once next 100 years.