That's not at all against your beloved Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Pretty sure segregation is also a perfectly legal and moral solution.
Why would anybody offer healthcare to people who can't afford to pay for it?
Why would anybody create a business in a part of the world that is almost entirely undesirable, and where the general populace has no means of supporting said business in the first place. You think a business owner is going to make money by employing people but lacking anybody to buy his products?
When the infant mortality rate is so drastically high as it is in much of Africa, the only way to sustain one's family/tribe/race/species is to make a whole lot of babies and hope some of them live long enough to reproduce. It's called nature, and it tends to happen.
Worst drought in the middle of the US since 1921 as well. It's a global issue this year.
I don't believe that, enter all the data into a supercomputer and it would have a good go at finding the best solution.There's no solution to help Africa...
I think it's a bit silly to feel bad for people who live in the most inhospitable parts of the planet by choice.
I think their population is way too high for such a dry place on earth but they can't go anywhere. I feel sorry for them but there is only so much land on earth where crops can be grown so other countries will have a hard time helping out starveing countries. we live in an overpopulated world.
What's wrong with simply letting them die? Things die every now and then - that has nothing to do with segregation.on segregation there is no point trying to help those who are bound to die very soon
let those who will live another 40+ years better the society
Don't forget they don't have oil, so interest in their prosperity and peace doesn't exist.
"The heart of man is only bad all the time"
That might change if they started blowing up our citizens.
That's like what the US is trying to do to the Arab nations that aren't democracies. The US putting it's head in the "Arab Spring" overall(in all the nations that the people are trying to overthrow their government) the US's actions won't effect the outcome. (Except in Libya where Obama decided to spend a billion dollars dropping weapons) Hiliary Clinton was crazy enough to announce a partnership with the Muslim Brotherhood(read the history about the organization and you'll see what I mean). Just because our politicians think they've given a successful dose of democracy doesn't mean that all these nations after signing new constitutions will automatically establish themselves as democracies. Forcing a country to do something won't get rid of the corruption, which is whyno devoloped country has decided it's going to force the multipal governments in Africa to change so that the aid can get to the people it's intended to be given to.MootI don't believe that, enter all the data into a supercomputer and it would have a good go at finding the best solution.
You might mean Africa itself accepting the solution. In the same vein as Amy Wine house, excuse the pun, Africa is destroying itself, but it can be helped, if help was forced onto it. If all African presidents were forced to rescind their power and give it wholly to the UN. Something could be done. That is a solution. Africa won't accept it maybe, but we can do it. If we don't do it, it is partly our fault that Africa suffers.