Is the Chinese government doing enough to help the poor?
492153
russian privatization sucked,  their economy is centered on oil, and government is back to dictatorship. China is doing much better, carefully chosing investors for privatization, and expanding manufacturing sector. Chinese economy is more capitalist than russia's by now.
83291
Theoretically it is to help poor countries develop.  In reality the governments lose their autonomy by having to follow the rules of those who are "helping".  Often at the expense of the citizens and more to the reward of the "helping" country.  The biggest offender being the United States.
30819
You have to remember that government programs to help the poor are really just applying a financial band-aid to the problem.  It keeps them alive, so that they can climb their way back into a better life.\nThe key is that the person must desire to change.  This is true for any disadvantaged person: poor, alcohol or drug dependent, overweight, etc.  They must desire change, or no amount of help will do anything over the long term.\n\nThe government programs are their to sustain these people until they are ready to help themselves...and then there are government programs to help them do that, too.
168558
The Chinese economy has adopted a policy of laissez faire capitalism that they call market reforms in order to convince their citizens they are still a communist country. These market reform have led for instance to the cheap labor you refered to and are signifcant because they have led to the state being even less involved in the Chinese economy than in the US. The reason they are still viewed as communist is their curtailment of free speech and free press. The econmic growth you are referring to however is mostly enjoyed by the people who were wealthy to begin with and have now gotten even wealthier while the poor have become even poorer. So the short answer is the government no longer has a significant role in the economy of China.
45676
trade is benefiting china as a nation, which is capitalism.  however the government still functions as a socialist government for taxes, etc.\n\ntheir economy is growing due to global capitalism and their large population and cheap labor.  their govt is still communist.
400013
As a capitalist, I believe the best way for me to help the people in Africa is work hard at the job I have and to waste as few resources as I can. If everyone everywhere did this there would be more to go around. \n\nAs a realist, I realise that there is a tendency for wealth to accumulate (IE. the rich get rich) therefore I accept  that there is a need to redistribute wealth.\n\nI don't particular feel the need to give money to professional charities. Especially those with large professional staffs and who are less effective than the government when it comes to providing help to people.\n\nHowever, if you planning a trip to Africa to work there, dont let me discourage you. If you have skills they need, then I do recommend you go.
483074
there are two issues...spending monies so friends in the military support systems recieve it and the fact that all civilizations have class systems designed to have a steep downhill slope.the industry that helps the poor once they are reduced to crime,depression,the requiring of assistance is not much different than the military...just a different face.there will always be poor.
251825
Rule of law from the weakest person to the strongest should be a goal of every country, unfortunately, the Chinese communist party is threatened by the "spiritual" movement Falung Gong, so it's possible these acts are condoned tacitly to "scare "citizens back into the communist fold. Any acts like these, if true, would be signs of desperation. The Chinese government will be on it's best behavior until the Olympics in '08, then I believe there may be great confrontation in China. Their economy is more and more capitalist, the people want and are getting, to a certain degree, a more free and materialistic lifestyle, yet the Communist party still holds sole political power. At some point one will have to give way to the other.
638436
NO!! because then nothing is done to solve the problem, thats what they are doing now, they come over here, have a baby over here, and then apply some way for government assistance, like AFDC, food stamps etc...
157277
The country is still totally controlled by the Communist Party of China, which is the central government.  Individual provinces have their own governments, controlled by party members.\nBut economically, capitalism has been allowed to flourish, bringing prosperity to the country which communism failed to do.  The first people to benefit from this are the Communists - very ironically, the sworn opponents of capitalism!  Hopefully, however, the centralisation of power and national planning will channel this new money the right way.  The government has just announced it's latest 5-year plan for the rural (agricultural) sector (most Chinese are still down on the farm, and poor).  All agricultural taxes have been abolished and many measures will be taken to help the farmers. One wishes them every success in this worthwhile endeavour.
1096034
I think that's true. I mean, look at the history of all the current wealthy countries today (United States, China, India, Argentina, etc). They were once consider a poverish nation and with leadership and trade laws, these countries flourish. Countries that are dependent on foreign aid will never get rid of poverty because the leaders of these countries are selfish and greedy. When countries donate money to poverish nations, it is up to the government of these poverish nations to distribute. Too bad the leaders of these poverish countries can take full advantage of this. They take in the foreign aid and usually never distribute to the people in need. Sometimes they steal foreign supplies and sell it in the market.
440924
The government of the UK spent £4823 on international aid in the year 2004/2005\n\nIt comes 11th in a league of aid donors when the money donated is presented as a percentage of GNP  (I believe Norway is first) \n\n\nBy 2007/2008 The UK Government aims this ammount to be meeting the UN target of spending 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) on official development assistance (ODA). \n\nTotal UK official development assistance will rise to almost £6.5 billion by 2007/08. These additional resources will be used to increase UK bilateral aid to Africa to at least £1.25 billion a year by 2008, spend at least £1.5 billion on HIV/AIDS related work over the next three years, and ensure that more children in the world’s poorest countries are able to go to primary school.\n\nAround the would these are the main countries the UK donates to                                \n            £millions  per year.\n India      259\n \n Bangladesh   128\n\n Tanzania   97\n \n Sudan   84\n \n Afghanistan   80\n \n Ghana   72\n \n Ethiopia  62\n \n Uganda   61\n \n Malawi  56\n \n Iraq    49\n \n Mozambique  48\n \n Nigeria  47\n \n Rwanda   42\n \n Vietnam   40\n \n China  36\n \n Kenya  35\n \n Nepal   35\n \n Pakistan  31\n \n Republic of South Africa   31\n \n Zambia  31\n \n\nHere are some current examples of aid projects\n\nBRAC Afghanistan was registered as an international NGO in Afghanistan in May 2002 and opened its office in Kabul in the same year. With support from the Afghan government and donors like DFID and USAID, BRAC Afghanistan has been working in 19 provinces to work towards "alleviation of poverty and empowerment of the poor".\n\nMicrofinance is considered worldwide as an effective tool for enabling the poor to develop their own sources of income and to improve their ability to provide for their families. But the lack of banking services and infrastructure is a big part of why many Afghanis struggle to get out of poverty. \n\nWithout access to financial services, poor Afghanis can't borrow, save or invest. To change this, DFID provides £20 million over three years  (2004-2008) to the Microfinance Investment and Support Facility for Afghanistan (MISFA), which provides essential credit and other financial services to help Afghans set up small businesses\n\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n£70 million for post-earthquake reconstruction in Pakistan is to be pledged by the UK at a high-level aid conference in Islamabad this weekend, the Secretary of State for International Development Hilary Benn announced today.\n\nThe pledge, to be made by International Development Minister Gareth Thomas who will attend the conference for the UK, will be paid out over 3 years to help fund rebuilding in quake-affected areas.\n\nThe new pledge brings the UK’s total support to Pakistan, for both relief and reconstruction, to over £100 million, to date. \n\nEncouraging other countries to follow suit with substantial reconstruction pledges of their own Gareth Thomas said: \n\n“Round-the-clock relief work continues as winter sets in and we try to prevent further suffering and loss of life. But we must also help Pakistan begin to rebuild the schools, hospitals and homes which were destroyed by the quake. The UK is giving generously – it urges others to do so too.\n\n“We will continue to monitor needs as they arise and respond as part of the international community.”\n\nDiscussions at this weekend’s conference in Islamabad will centre on an assessment of reconstruction priorities made for the government of Pakistan by the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank. \n\nThe UK is to date the second largest bilateral donor of post-earthquake relief funds (after the US). \n\n\n\nAn innovative television drama series, produced with DFID funding, is educating rural people in East Africa about issues that matter to them. \n\nCalled Makutano Junction, it aims to entertain and e
742677
Where do they spend their money?  China has opened her borders but her people still suffer.  Obviously the government is benefitting but most likely because of corruption the advantages don't trickle down.  \n\nAny time a country transitions from an agricultural lifestyle to an industrial one there will be a flocking to the cities for work but high unemployment.  Asians are very hard workers.  The free enterprise system should bring the best out in them.  Perhaps the government should subsidize individual companies with start up funds as long as they hire X amount of employees.
140643
I would have to say no. A lot of the things they do are there to help us, and a lot do. But then there are a lot of things that don't. We need a change in this country. A reform. Maybe a revolution. The corrupted needs to be cleaned up.
52928
No.  China has many benefits such as low wages, but with time the people will want better wages.  As a nation industrializes, it faces the same burden as we have faced.  Their workers will demand more safety for its mines and factories, more benefits and better regulation of free enterprise.  Japan has gone through the same growth pain and so will China.  We went through it the earliest.  Understand that China has limited natural resources within its land.  We have a lot of natural resources.  China must import most of its oil for its industries, that will limit the growth to the ability of the Middle East to supply the oil.\n\nAs their economy grow, they will face a problem.  The problem is when the next generation has money and want political freedom.  This will curtail the growth for some time as the China will be forced to change from Communism to a more democratic form of government.
286356
I disagree that there is lots of help for the working poor, I have seen directly that unless you fit into the "low income requirement" scale, there is virtually no help for working people who need a hand to make it above poverty level. (I am speaking about the state of CA)
202653
OH MY GOD!!! I was just thinking that today.\nI had read in a tabloid that there are approx 798 BILLIONARES. But they never mentioned the poor. If there are so many rich people, then couldn't they spare a little to help out a fellow human being?? Even save some starving people from sure death?\n\nNO all they want is more and more money (most of them)!!!! How selfish and stingy is that?!\n\nPEOPLE, DONATE TO THE POOR. Don't you think that it is shameful that a person that has very little is more generous than a person that has more than his share? THINK ABOUT THAT PEOPLE AND START CHANGING...