Also, in regards to Africa at least, part of the problem is the governments themselves. Give 150billion to some poor African nation is more than likely oging to enrich the thug who runs the government than actually help those who are most in need.

The politics in the poor nations have got to improve, if poverty is going to improve.

Yeah I read it, and linked to it in my post on my blog. I've read some of Sach's research on this, and I'm not terribly impressed. It isn't horrible, but I'm not sure it justifies the kind of spending he is claiming. Maybe it does, but I'm not convinced yet.

My position is that we don't even know if the $150 billion will reduce poverty by 10%, 25% let alone 50% or the 100% that is being claimed (not to mention the $50 billion of "just in case" money). Further prior to spening all of the money we could spend it on something else, and once it is spent on poverty reduction it can't be spent on something else. You know, that annoying concept called opportunity costs.

Or if that was too abstract for you let me put it this way.

1. We have a finite amount of resources.
2. We have a great many things this money can be spent on (such as research for cures for diseases, environmental issues, so forth).
3. If we spend the money on a given project it can't be spent on another.
4. Lets at least be pretty damn sure we are going to get something good out of this kind of expenditure.

I see.

I agree that such a response is cold-hearted and more than just a bit scary, and I'm not advancing such a view. What I am saying is that Sach's solution may not be much of a solution and it sure would suck if we threw $150 billion down toilet when we could have spent the money on something else and/or spent it more wisely.

The more I read of Sach's position, the less impressed I am. It really does seem to be throwing cash at the problem as I outline here.

I wish the focus were on "finding a realistic way to combat world poverty" instead of "shooting down any project for combatting world poverty." Sure, it's unrealistic. So was the A-bomb.