― Ainsworthy, Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:11 (twenty years ago)
― Pears can just fuck right off. (kenan), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:12 (twenty years ago)
im not really sure why, its just this gut feeling i have.
― Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:12 (twenty years ago)
― Pears can just fuck right off. (kenan), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:13 (twenty years ago)
― LSTD (answer) (sexyDancer), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:14 (twenty years ago)
GO AWAY.
― Ainsworthy, Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:15 (twenty years ago)
― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:16 (twenty years ago)
― Pears can just fuck right off. (kenan), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:16 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:16 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:17 (twenty years ago)
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:19 (twenty years ago)
― Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:20 (twenty years ago)
Africa for example. If the debt was wiped.
― Ainsworthy, Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:22 (twenty years ago)
Boobs have often been considered the root of the problems in the so called "third world". What is this 'third world' anyway? I think needs to be established before we can even hope to discuss boobs. The 'Third world' can be reached through the Television (a simple teleportation device - pun INTENDED). You can use this 'television' to communicate with those who have trancesded the the 'third world'. You can yell at them, or feel bad for them, or EVEN THROW MONEY AT THE SCREEN!!! So now we know how to communicate with this third world. Of course the third world doesn't actually exist, as most things on television. But that doesn't mean they should be entitled to boobs, which is the main problem. We fly planes over this (imaginary) third world and drop rakes, fish, goats, clothes...but no boobs. So this year we propose that 'silicone' breasts be dropped over those places most in need, so that a lady (or man) can feed his/her family for the rest of their lives by starring in such future classics as 'The Secret Caves Of The Third World: An Anal Adventure', and 'Less Water More Boobs'.
A Fish can feed a family for a week, Boobs can give those in need the opportunity to star in low budget porn films and feed everybody forever.
Let us pray.
― Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:23 (twenty years ago)
― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:23 (twenty years ago)
― Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:29 (twenty years ago)
That's one hell of a country.
― Adamdrome Crankypants (Autumn Almanac), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:30 (twenty years ago)
― phil-two (phil-two), Thursday, 6 January 2005 23:30 (twenty years ago)
― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 7 January 2005 00:44 (twenty years ago)
I mean, we've already seen what would actually happen if the third world was just simply wiped.
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Friday, 7 January 2005 00:47 (twenty years ago)
Lots of things would actually happen. For one thing, it would completely remove one item from the agenda of many economic conferences held in places like Geneva or Brussels. You just wouldn't see that item on the agenda again for several years. Maybe longer.
What would be the effect on global economics?
Money would move in the same channels as now, but in different amounts.
Do you think it would be a giant step forward for the third world?
More of a middling-sized step, taken obliquely.
― Aimless (Aimless), Friday, 7 January 2005 01:00 (twenty years ago)
tits
― contribute, Friday, 7 January 2005 02:50 (twenty years ago)
Like a dance step?
― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 7 January 2005 02:54 (twenty years ago)
NB: I decided you all had been treating Ainsworthy so very shabbily, what with your all not sticking to the topic, in spite of his saying "PLEASE" in all caps and his petulant threats to hold his breath until he turned blue unless you all answered his questions and his shaking his tiny fist at you in a delirium of frustrated anger at all your clowning antics and your talk of tits, tits, tits, until the topic of tits had been thoroughly grasped, kneaded and done to a turn, to the point where I couldn't think of any action more appropriate than giving him a lame on-topic answer, any further witticisms on the subject of tits having eluded me. In case anyone was wondering, that is.
In the meantime, if I think of any good tits jokes, I'll get back to you.
― Aimless (Aimless), Friday, 7 January 2005 04:18 (twenty years ago)
― contribute, Friday, 7 January 2005 04:23 (twenty years ago)
Btw, anybody notice how Argentina is doing just fine now (or at least is better, and is sustaining growth) because they've ignored the World Bank's dictates? Good on them.
xpost - 17.
― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 7 January 2005 04:25 (twenty years ago)
what would actually happen if first world debt was wiped?
― laxalt, Monday, 7 April 2008 12:24 (seventeen years ago)
does any country in the world not have a national debt?
― darraghmac, Monday, 7 April 2008 12:29 (seventeen years ago)
money is created as debt, so no. debt is never repayable because there is more debt than "money"
― laxalt, Monday, 7 April 2008 12:33 (seventeen years ago)
what would happen if my own personal debt was wiped?
― akm, Monday, 7 April 2008 13:35 (seventeen years ago)
staying on topic - the effects of wiping out Third World debt would depend on how it was wiped out. If the debts were paid off by someone else, then basically the main effect would be a massive net transfer to the Third World. Result.
If the debt was just cancelled, with no one paying it off, then I reckon that Third World countries would have major problems ever borrowing money again.
― The Real Dirty Vicar, Monday, 7 April 2008 13:41 (seventeen years ago)
Well thats kind of what is happening in the US (and by US exposed financial institutions - and into uk/europe now also) right now, with its own population, thats what all those write downs basically?
'Borrowing' is kind of a misnomer as a term for this, as it never existed to borrow, it was born at the issuance of the loan. Whether the receiver of the loan is a US householder, a Belgian business, or Sierra Leone, the principal is still the same?
― laxalt, Monday, 7 April 2008 13:51 (seventeen years ago)
I think i meant 'Principle'
― laxalt, Monday, 7 April 2008 13:52 (seventeen years ago)