₦airaland Forum

onyeka onwenu has come out to stand up for a  poor young woman and i applaud her for that.  she knows whats she's talking about having been on the receiving end of it for many years. 

As for those condemning Onyeka for being a single parent - since when did that become a crime?

do you want her to be like the majority of nigerian women who are treated like door mats by husband's who dont respect them, at least she carried on with her life and make a success of her career.

Katsumoto:
Russia turning the tide at Stalingrad had nothing to do with communism but pure survival. It turned the tide after it had made the most losses in the war.

Communism is a failed ideology because it has been abandoned by the nation that practiced it's true philosophy. Russia provided almost everything for its citizens but we can all see that the model was unsustainable over the long term. North Korea - its citizens are suffering. China - has employed capitalism but it never really provided a lot of amenities to its citizens due to its share size. Chinese citizens still have to pay for most amenities. Cuba - has done well with its little resources but it has always been supported by Russia and now it has turned to Venezuela for help.

pure survival alone would not have been sufficient to defeat an army as formidable as the German Wermacht, you would need the weaponry, manpower and superior military tactics in order to do so, the russians intially started out with the first two but were outmanoevred by the nazis in the early stages of the war but with time they improved their military strategy and succeeded in defeating one of the most powerful armies in the world at that time.  They could not have done this without the iron fist of communisim, as i said earlier Stalin was brutal but he had to be that way or his people would have been annihilated. Cowards and traitors were executed summarily , you either went to the war front to fight  the nazis or you stayed home and were executed. 

Some of  your comments about russia's reason for winning the war are untrue, russian snipers in stalingrad deserve the biggest credit for russia's victory. 

also the russians improved their military tactics and succeeded in encircling the german 6th army in Stalingrad until they were cut off from the rest of their troops, subsequent attempts by the germans to break through this encirclement failed and that heralded the beginning of the end for Nazi Germany, so please give credit where it is due.

the reason that russia lost 27 million lives is because the nazis starved and murdered russians who were trapped in russian territory that was under nazi occupation.

Katsumoto:
The US is the richest nation on the planet because it is the most innovative, constantly developing new ideas and products including products that fall in the disruptive innovations category. You need to site examples with facts and not hear-say when discussing US foreign policy and how it has enriched the US.

No the US is the richest nation on the planet because it:

massacred the indigenous native american landowners and appropriated the land for themselves

used african slave labour for the mass production of cash crops which were in high demand
eg cotton, tobacco, sugar

annexed neighbouring countries like Hawaii and puerto rico, panama in order to expand its acquisition of territory

Fought and defeated the spanish and appropriated even more land further south eg texas, mexico etc

and thereby asssist in its agenda of capital accumulation

continues to practice the appropriation of land, labour and resources belonging to other countries in order to amass  more capital and wealth for itself:

Can you think of one nation where the government just allows corporations to maximise profit by not putting in place regulations, acts, and taxes? Let us agree that the US is the most capitalist country in the world; are there no regulations in the US? In light of the current financial turmoil, did the US not promulgate a few laws such as Dodd-Frank Act? Granted that the US does not have as much welfare as European countries but it still has welfare programs such as food stamps, inncome insurance, etc. Where do you think the funds for such programs is coming from? France has more fortune 500 companies than Germany but iit has more socialist policies.

there are regulations but they are largely ineffective because the regulators are the same people who flout the law, take for instance this Dodd Frank act you just mentioned - Both Dodd and Frank are congressmen who in the past have  received millions of dollars in campaign donations for their political parties from banking lobbyists - now do youwant to tell me that after receiving such huge sums of money from powerful banking lobbyists they will turn around and penalise these same people for flouting banking regulations?  come on man get real - it aint gonna happen.

this current banking meltdown occurred under the watch of these same regulatory bodies who collaborated with these bankers and turned a blind eye while the bankers flouted these regs.  They are taking the public for a ride!!

Yes the US does operate several welfare programmes however the govt is intent on slashing funding for most of these programmes whilst simultaneously giving welfare in the form of corporate tax breaks to big corporations.  It seems to me as if the people who need the welfare are being denied access to it while those who dont are constantly being given govt assistance in the form of huge tax breaks!!!!

by the way the reason these welfare programmes even exist is because the american people fought the govt to provide them  

You need to keep up to date with current affairs. Brazil had one of the worst income distribution in the world but under Lula, there has been progress. Lula instituted several programs such as the one which pays mothers to send their kids to school. More brazilian kids go to school these days because of that. Lula was able to do that by nationalising several enterprises and using the profits for welfare programs. Please read below part of an article from the economist

'Instead, Brazilians are revelling in a golden moment. A country that used to fall over whenever the world economy wobbled was one of the last to go into recession in 2008 and one of the first out in 2009. Median earnings are rising and, despite a minimum wage at its highest in real terms since 1979, so is employment.

Since 2003 some 20m Brazilians have emerged from poverty and joined the market economy. These new consumers buy everything from cars to cookers and fridges to flights. To this burgeoning domestic market, add China’s appetite for Brazilian iron ore, meat, soya and more, and in economic terms this is probably “the best moment in the entire history of Brazil,” says Marcelo Neri of the Fundação Getulio Vargas, a university.'

http://www.economist.com/node/17147828?story_id=17147828

I agree with some of what you've posted, perhaps i got it wrong with regard to the gradual changes that are happening,however here is how Lula's performance has been analysed in a recent publication:


During its two terms in office, the Lula government combined modest social assistance measures that refrained from challenging the national class divide, with neo-liberal free market policies. It ceded control of the central bank and fundamental economic decision-making to right-wing pro-business official

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/nov2010/braz-n02.shtml

Explicitly, US political commentators talk about the US exporting democracy. The US encourages most nations to adopt democracy; in the past, it might have encouraged dictators but the tide has changed. The US has been instrumental in democracy being installed in many African, Latin America and Asian countries. Since the US does not like democracy in other countries, why isn't it best friends with Cuba, North Korea? Since the US does not want other nations to be free, why has it not invaded Brazil, Malaysia, Vietnam, China, Angola, Singapore, Ghana, or any other country with an emerging market?

forget about the US commentators - they say what they are paid to say, perhaps the US invasion of Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Haiti, Chile, Nicaragua, to name a few were all for the purpose of installing democracy - i havent got time right now but ill post some links giving you further info on the role america has been playing in those countries.

Don't kid yourself, there is no capitalism in Nigeria. It seems that you think that most developing nations should get to a stage where everyone is equal and happy. That is simply naive. The better way to look at it is the number of people that are no longer friends with poverty. The situation in China and India is improving steadily. The middle class in both countries is increasing every day. That may not be enough in your view but it is progress.

so if its not capitalism that we are operating in nigeria what is it?

no i dont expect  utopia but i do expect to live in a world/country  where i can afford housing, clothing and food - the basics, in nigeria most of the above are beyond the reach of the average nigerian.

lekside44:
Russia would not have survived the Germans during the second world war if they were not practicing communism. every Russians from age 11 years upward were sent to the war front while children between age 5 years and 11 were engaged in weapon and supplies development for their soldiers in the war front.
capitalism itself has its own demerits, armed robbery, drug trafficking, prostitution, 419 (yahoo yahoo) just to mention a few.

exactly!! It took russia just 10 years to become an industrialised nation and acheive what britain had acheived in a century!! had russia not adopted communism  it would have have been dead meat in the hands of the nazis, Look at how they fought off the nazis in stalingrad!! that alone should demonstrate the merits of communism, i admit that Stalin was a brutal dictator but he was no more brutal than Hitler who championed capitalism.  Communism engendered a communal spirit in the russian people which they desperately
needed at such a crucial hour .

I have asked sagamite to explain to me why he beleives communism is a failed ideology but in his characteristic way of avoiding difficult questions his only response was to state that communism is utter shyte"  hmm very illuminating

Sagamite:
Where did you get your assertion that US chose not to implement free healthcare "in order to save money"?

no american administration is seriously committed to reforming  health care in america because that would mean stepping on the toes of powerfull healthcare lobby groups, it would  also mean comitting a lot of money into an area which has been long neglected by the govt and as i said earlier if there's one thing plutocrats hate doing its spending money without getting a huge return on their investment,  the US govt simply see it as a waste of money, hence their unseriousness about reforming it.

Yes, US can afford it. That was my point. I have educated you like I would inevitably.

you wish!!!

Amsorry!!!

How do you think Cuba funds its Healthcare? Funds that is like manna from heaven?

They use PUBLIC FUNDS or FOREIGN AID!

Is that a question or a statement?

Or you think the free healthcare is from Jesus?

Actually no i dont think the funding comes from Jesus more like the Cuban govt and the former Soviet Union, the cuban govt were in receipt of subsidies from the soviet union prior to its collapse in 1991 see below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Cuba

No, I am not going around in circles, I am pointing out your goof you are trying to twist instead of expressing your gratitude for a free online education.

man you are giving me some serious jokes here - sagamite educating ME!!!

Your initial assertion was that Cuba has achieved free healthcare that US could not. Don't try and change it and claim you were aware US could achieve it but was not interested.

You sound very confused - okay let me say it once again and try and get it this time - I said that Cuba has been able to provide its populace with free education up to university level and free health care - feats that the US is yet to acheive - at no point did i say that the US was INCAPABLE OF acheiving those feats, i merely stated that they WERE YET TO ACHEIVE THOSE FEATS - comprende!!!!!

Now if you understand english - and im beginning to have my doubts, but lets assume you do, it would be clear to you that a country as powerful and as rich as the US would obviously be capable of providing free healthcare and education to its citizens, therefore the logical path that your thoughts should have taken would be to then question why it doesnt do that instead of spending time arguing  that america can afford to provide those services.  As i said earlier its a no brainer, if america can allocate $1 trillion USD for its military budget it certainly can set aside an equally stupendous amount of revenue to fund healthcare and education provision.

You only realised the lack of interest when I educated you.

Sagamite do you suffer from low self esteem? why do your debates always have to descend into bitter arguments?

This is just rants. Communism is an inferior model.

Again no facts, no arguments to back up why he thinks this way, just banal one liners.  Did you notice that when i argued against capitalism i gave reasons as to why i didnt support it, why dont you do the same with communism?

Do your research instead of wasting my time.

says the man who spends all his time on nairaland

Even reading some of the posts on this thread is enough to explain, you want to waste my time to tell you butter is yellow?

immaturity at its peak

Most communist countries have converted to capitalism including the giant of communism, Russia.

Your use of the word "converted" is interesting, explain how russia "converted" to capitalism, how did they come to this realisation that capitalism was a much more economically viable model - looking forward to being "educated" by you 

Fidel Castro said it has failed and yet you want to waste my time to prove it to you?

Fidel Castro never said socialism had failed, Fidel Castro's enemies may have said that but not Fidel himself.
Enemies like the US who are waiting for him to die so that they can move in and take Cuba back to the days when their stooge Batista was running Cuba and when the US mafia controlled the gambling and prostitution rackets which were rife in Cuba in those days:

http://cubasocialista.com/batistaeng.htm

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/aug2006/cuba-a03.shtml

Boy, there is no other Western country with economic embargo on Cuba apart from US! Is that right or wrong?

Your claim was that:

That is wrong, is it not?

you probably read the link i posted setting out the nature of the US blockade against Cuba but didnt understand it!!! Sagamite the blockade penalises other countries who try to trade with Cuba, countries who were not in agreement with it  are punished, go and do the research i am not giving you any more free tuition. 

The thing that really concerns me is that you dont seem bothered by the fact that a country that had the courage to challenge the tyranny of the US is now the victim of one of the the most draconian trade embargoes in modern history, instead you are more preoccupied with the number of countries that are party to this embargoe.  A sane mind would have questioned the morality of such an action but perhaps im expecting too much from you.

http://www.cubasocialista.com/injustice.htm

Sagamite:
You allusion was "it was an achievement the US has not been capable of".

I take it, I have educated you that was wrong, the US can achieve the feat?

No you havent.

let me ask you a question - which is worse being able to acheive something and CHOOSING NOT TO DO SO IN ORDER TO SAVE MONEY  or simply being incapable of doing so- the argument is NOT about america's ability to  implement free or affordable healthcare because that is a no brainer - it is a rich country and therefore that is not the issue, the issue is does it have the desire to do so and the answer is a resounding NO.

You don't know Western countries that provide free healthcare? 

UK, France, Canada, Germany etc? People are taxed to pay for a publicly-funded healthcare system.

I can only speak for the UK and i can tell you that health care here is not free it is funded through national insurance contributions so i think youre getting really confused here.

No! The issue was your claim (understanding) that US was not capable of achieving the feat whilst Cuba can.

still going round in circles chasing your tail?

No, that is not the point. The point is that, it is lame to use such as the excuse of why communism is better than capitalism since there are capitalist nations that already provide free or affordable healthcare THAT IS BETTER than Cuba's.

Im sure there are however i think it is s.tupid to make a comparison between rich capitalist countries whose economies are based on exploitation and appropriation of wealth of weaker countries with a country like Cuba which is not an imperialist nation and whose very existence has been under threat from the US since its revolution in 1959.

You really don't need wasting time having arguments on this. Just go and research the number of nations that have tried it, failed and dropped it.

didnt think you'd have an answer to this - thanks for proving me right!

Whilst you are at it, try and figure out how many of the citizens of the communist countries try and escape to a capitalist country and the governments have to be brutal to keep them in the system.

But i could use the same argument to demonstrate the failure of capitalism - you are a nigerian, nigeria models its economy on a harsh undiluted system of capitalism under instructions handed out to it by washington and london, and yet you fled the poverty and misery of life under capitalism to live in the UK which incorporates aspects of socialism into its capitalist system. why didnt you remain in capitalist nigeria to reap the benefits of the free market system 

It is INDICATIVE, NOT QUALITATIVE!!!

really explain in detail what you mean by that ? 

Because 99.999% of Cubans can read and write does not mean it is a more economically developed than China if China has only 91% literacy rate!

please explain further

Out of the Cubas figure, it may only be that 20% are educated to a high level and even albeit not of a highly regarded quality, whilst 64% of China has education of the highest quality.

Literacy rate is only indicative of those than can read and write! It does not mean jack nothing, it is a lame tool to be used solely for comparing development between nations.

Do you get it?

No, please explain

Did you read the Reaction section of the link?

1) The law was passed in 1996, not 1959 as you implied.

2) It was condemned by virtually all Western nations and the UN stating it violates international laws and many enacted laws that ban their citizens or companies from complying with the law.

So only US has placed an economic embargo on Cuba since 1959 as I said, not "many western nations" as you claimed?

Yes i read the reaction section of the link and thats all it is a reaction from various western countries, this legislation is still in place, it has not been overturned, therefore it is still enforceable by the US  and binding on Cuba.

by the way this is not the only US legislation that has been passed in respect of the US trade embargo against Cuba
this particular piece of legislation merely updates previous legislation see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba[quote][/quote]

Sagamite:
That is not my point.

I think you erred by referring to Cuba and trying to praise their healthcare as an achievement that the capitalism of US cannot provide. Not that I think it is good US do not give free healthcare.

Of course its a major acheivement considering the draconian trade embargoes that the country is currently being subjected to.

I challenged you because:

1) There are several Westerm capitalist countries that give FREE healthcare, so it was lame to praise Cuba and proffer an argument like if US can not achieve the same.

Like? can we have examples please, and while your at it explain how this health care is free
the issue here is not whether america can provide free or affordable healthcare but the fact that it CHOOSES NOT TO because it beleives in the free market system controlling all aspects of the economy.

2) I think I have told you this before, Cuba's healthcare is only achievable because of quasi-forced labour. The government pays the medical staff peanuts and give them no option of leaving the system. That is virtually the only way they can achieve the feat otherwise they would not have resources to execute the free healthcare programme.

So what?  the point is health care provision is seen as a priority for the people by the Cuban govt whereas in powerful america only those rich enough to pay extortionate insurance premiums can afford it - does that make sense to you?

3) Communism is utter SHYT! Never praise it no matter what good side you see to it.

Can we have some constructive arguments from you to demonstrate why you think communism is "utter shyt"?

[quoteYour argument was lame to refer to some free healthcare and stewpid literacy rates to prove that communism of Cuba is better than capitalism of USA. That was a lame proof, you have to come up with arguments better than that.

[/quote]Really so literacy is no longer an important measurement of economic development- perhaps you could provide an alternative yardstick?


[quote]You still have not shown me your source here:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-542502.160.html#msg7074763

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms-Burton_Act

And now you add another. Which "many other western nations" have placed economic embargo on Cuba?

Please educate me due to my "lack of understanding".

see above

Really?

Let me let you answer the ones above before we delve into this.

Let us see your understanding.

see above

Sagamite:
Do you listen to the news?

Apart from difference between free and affordable that was pointed out to you, you do not know there are Americans that vehemently oppose the healthcare bill and have blocked it for years?

You did not know Clinton tried to introduce it in the 90s?

You do not know that the Republicans that just won the mid-term even plan to find a way to reverse it?

You honestly think America cannot afford and implement a free healthcare programme if it WANTS?

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-542502.160.html#msg7074763

okay can you clarify what it is exactly you are saying ?  are you saying that  a relatively poor country like Cuba which is able to provide free health care to its citizens has failed whereas a country as rich and powerful as america which has the wherewithal to do so but chooses not to is admirable?

Cuba is a tiny island which has been economically blockaded by america and many other western nations for over 50 years and is STILL able to provide free health care whereas the US which is one of the richest countries on the planet chooses not to do this and is to be commended are you sure you understand the issue here.

you have actually demonstrated unwittingly the reason why capitalism can not be a good thing for the common man on the street. The people who oppose health care reform are the insurance companies who reap huge profits by way of extortionate insurance health care premiums, of course these people will lobby against any reform of the system.  Do you know anyone who would be happy if their gravy train were suddenly terminated?

I dont think you understand how capitalism works, capitalist economies base everything they do on profit, anything which does not generate profit is not worth venturing into hence the huge opposition from powerful insurance healthcare lobby groups.  Try and understand issues before you open your mouth!!!

Sagamite:
US has not achieved the feat because US DOES NOT INTEND OR WANT TO achieve the feat.

That point is lame, you need to get your facts right. The US does not believe in free health care is the reason US does not have one, not because Cuba has a superior ideology.

i think your point is unbeleivably lame - if the US were so disinterested in affordable health care for its citizens why has Obama introduced the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act?

Sagamite:
One country putting an embargo on you is not an excuse for failure.

US has not achieved the feat because US DOES NOT INTEND OR WANT TO achieve the feat.

That point is lame, you need to get your facts right. The US does not believe in free health care is the reason US does not have one, not because Cuba has a superior ideology.

The US trade embargo has a knock on effect because it  also penalises foreign companies  that do business in Cuba by preventing them from doing business in the US.

In addition sanctions can also be applied to non-U.S. companies trading with Cuba, the embargoe even stipulates that ships docking at Cuban ports are not allowed to dock at U.S. ports for six months!!!!

Despite all this Cuba still IMPORTS goods from the US but importation of Cuban goods into america is banned!!!

Sagamite:
SMH!

The same socialism in Cuba that even Fidel Castro said has failed is what you are using as example as something that "can work"?

98% literacy rate? Where has that got them? What have they innovated? So just getting people to be able to read and write is the be all and end all?

Literacy rate means jack nothing except there is a mass of populace that are getting the best quality education money can buy.

You really don't know what you are talking about.

Sagamite socialism "failed" in Cuba because it has been economically blockaded by the US and a host of other countries since 1959!!!

which country would develop in such dire circumstances, the fact of the matter is that despite this injustice, it has STILL succeeded in educating the vast majority of its people and providing them with free health care a feat that the US is yet to achieve.  Nigeria despite its vast oil reserves has nothing to show for itself other than the fact that it succeeded in blowing over $300 billion USD in less than 3 decades!!!!

Katsumoto said:

Because of cultural differences amongst nations. If a nation does not have the right balance of welfare system, a progressive tax system, and a blend of solid policy, then what you get is a very unbalanced wealth distribution like what existed in Brazil prior to Lula getting elected with 1% of the population controlling approximately 96% of the wealth. Besides, what ever gave you the impression that the US wants all nations to adopt a free market system? The US wants all nations to adopt democracy and not a free market system. With a free market system in all countries, how do the rich nations get their raw materials, labour, and land at well below market price? Western corporations did not move to China and India to develop free market systems but to take advantage of lax labour laws, cheap labour, and cheap land.

Capitalism when practised rightly can be good and it is for each nation to understand how to implement capitalism and it shouldn't be based on another's country's implementation of capitalism. For instance China and Brazil both practise State Capitalism while India and Russia practice feudalistic capitalism, Britain and most European countries practice capitalism with mixed socialism.

Im sorry bro but you dont know what you're talking about the US DOES WANT THE WORLD TO ADOPT the capitalist economic model because that is the economic model that has enabled the US to become the richest nation on the planet, it has also helped the US in its expansionist adventures abroad.  

The idea that capitalism can only operate successfully where according to you there is the right balance of welfare systems and progressive tax is laughable because in a capitalist economy the aim is to maximise profit not to assist the poor or weak.  Capitalism is all about downsizing in order to generate profit not the other way around!!!

Your example of Brazil is a joke!! Brazil is one of the most inequitable countries in the world BECAUSE it pracitices an undiluted capitalist system (just like nigeria) capitalism THRIVES in such economies, that is why major corporations and multinationals flock there to do business - becuase of its dirt cheap labour. As a matter of fact the Brazilian elite who are white upper middle class STILL control the Brazilian economy irrespective of the protestations of Lula and other pseudo socialists.  there is no welfare system, no safety net for the poor hence the high crime rate.  Prostitution is also a national export, many of the young women resort to prostitution as the only way out of a life of abject poverty and misery.  

YOur statement about america wanting countries to adopt democracy rather than capitalism is quite frankly the funniest thing i have ever heard in my life.

America is an imperialist power, it wages war on countries who refuse to bow to its economic model aka the washington consensus, IT DOESNT CARE ABOUT DEMOCRACY, its own system of govt is not democratic, ALL AMERICA CARES ABOUT IS GLOBAL DOMINATION OF WORLD MARKETS IN ORDER TO MAKE PROFIT.

America's last defence budget for 2010/11 was $1 trillion USD.  Why do you think they spend so much money on "defence" ?

America uses its enormous military advantage to intervene in countries all over the world that are not following its capitalist economic model and it forces stubborn nations into compliance - read up on what the US did to former Panamanian president Torrijos, Nasser of Egypt, Salazar of Portugal, Manley of Jamaica and Allende of Chile.

All of the above leaders were trying to implement economic policies which promoted wealth redistribution, land reform which would benefit ordinary working people as opposed to members of the elite.

Any govt which strives for wealth redistribution or attempts to use economic surpluses to benefit the masses soon finds themselves on the receiving end of america's aggression.

A free market system or capitalist economy guarantees limitless exploitation of weaker nations.

Look at nigeria, we are practicing an undiluted capitalist system in which workers have no rights, the poor are treated like sh.it, there are no environmental regulations to ensure accountablity, this is why shell and other multinationals flock to nigeria and this is why nigeria has never been on the receviing end of american aggression.  we are doing everythign they tell us to do.

People keep talking about China as if life there is heaven, have you taken the time to speak to any chinese people and find out how they live, many of them work back to back shifts in order to keep their heads above water, yes the corporations are amassing a fortune, but what is life like for the ordinary man on the street, as for India, i don t know if you know this but 45% of their children suffer from malnutrition.

capitalism is a predatory economic system which will eventually destroy life as we know it, a system which is predicated on appropriation of land, labour and natural resources at the expense of the poor, weak or disenfranchised is not a sustainable system. Capitalism's only preoccupation is to make profit at any cost, it does not have any humane aspects to it, human beings are merely components in a giant mechanism designed to amass wealth and at the same time keep others on a treadmill where they work endlessly to enrich the owners of the capital.

When i hear people praising the capitalist system it always makes me wonder - nigerians are very good at singing the praises of capitalism without appreciating who the real winners are under this system. First of all lets be clear on one thing - the main beneficiaries of capitalism are the elite or owning classes. These are people who do not actually have to work for a living, these are the Rockefellers, Du Ponts, Buffets, Gates and Bush's etc - these people's wealth is generated from investments like stocks, bonds, rents etc Then you have the employee classes ie people like you and i who have to go out to work or we'll end up on the street. There are some inbetweeners but the majority of people fall into the "employee class" .

People tend to think that capitalism is an equitable system which gives everyone a fair chance to compete in a "free market" system, but this is a complete fallacy because only a few giant corporations control the so called free market system. Take for instance a giant like microsoft can you think of any other software corporation which is capable of competing with it, its only competitors are other giants like IBM, Hewlett Packard etc .

Corporations operate like monopolies, they control huge market shares smaller businesses who try to squeeze onto their turf either get swallowed up or go bankrupt.

People are forever going on about how great these corporations are because they create jobs, but people never seem to talk about the massive downsizing that happens quite regularly with these corporations.
The thing is corporations have to make profit therefore layoffs become inevitable. Look at whats happening now, huge layoffs with many of these corporations relocating to countries where labour is dirt cheap in order to guarantee higher profits for their businesses and shareholders.

I dont agree with people who say socialism is not a viable alternative, it can work if applied properly, Cuba operates a socialist economy and education is free for all its citizens up to university level - Cuba also has a 98% literacy rate, health care is also free even the US cant boast of those two attributes.

none of you people criticising Fela will acheive 1/4 of what he acheived even in a million life times.

Yes he was a polygamist but at least he wasnt a hypocrite like so many of you who claim to be god fearing but committ the worst atrocities under cover of darkness.

Leave the poor woman alone, she is a victim in all of this

I am in shock - soldiers rampaged through fela's house and shot innocent women dead in cold blood - what the f,

by the way this woman says she is 50 years old now and that she met fela in 1972 and had sex with him then, does it mean she was 12 years old when he slept with her?? isnt that statutory r.ape??

that yoruba guy try o, cant he see that that old woman is more suited to be his dad's wife and not his own wife, these guys are really loosing it, that guy must be really desperate.

[quote author=☻ajali☺ link=topic=504019.msg7050627#msg7050627 date=1288537211]Who says they have left Nigeria and Africa in general

Today it has only another name!

Severe poverty, huge dependencies. Wrong development aid hinders the development initiative in Africa. The system must be reformed, urgently. Because people are educated to inefficiency - and the developed countries have made beggars of partners.

The development aid for Africa is a blessing for all those who are involved in directly on donor and on recipient side. Donor officials earn, especially abroad, plenty of money, and many of those who take the help in reception knows to use it to their personal interests.

The aid of the passed 50 years has failed to a great extent.

We have arrogated too much responsibility for solving Africas problems ( most made by ourself) and people are "educated" in such a way that it is easy to understand when they call with an emerging problem foreign aid workers first before they ask themselves what they can do for its solution.

This awareness runs deep in African minds. This self-incapacitation is one of the worst results of the previous cooperation. Wrong development aid has made the people dependent, they get accustomed to the status of the ongoing assistance and impedes the formation of self-initiative. This damage done to the mentalities of the people is far worse than the huge material losses caused by failed aid. Also on our site, awareness has fixed that first and foremost we are responsible to develop Africa. This is wrong and a big mistake!
This mothering attitude that is widespread for decades in the third world circles of the North is contrary to the principle of subsidiarity, which requires that helping agencies, private or public, should not take over tasks that even can be done from the developing country.
What is lacking, is basic understanding and applied principles of clarity. Though, that the North can not develop the South and that every person and every company can only do it itself, is part of the inexpensive faith of donors, in practice however, it is hardly to recognise.
Another violation of the subsidiarity principle is applied in the existence of not only the huge national and international development agencies, from GTZ [/b]to [b]World Bank but also the myriad of small and large private organizations that cover the continent with their charity networks.

De facto this are , after the colonial period, the new "occupying powers".

What we do can not be development of others. Only endogenous development worthy the name, that what make people and societies by virtue of their spirit and their hands out of themselves. No one can be developed from outside.
When water lines and roads in Africa are built with aid - it stimulates and strengthens the efforts of the locals? Or could it be that the opposite is true: The more we do, the more likely it is that our partners sit back, because things are governed to their satisfaction by foreign assistance.
If billions of dollars flow in environmental, AIDS and other funds, that may be necessary, but it has nothing to do with development aid.
The aid goes passing by to people.
The development aid has promoted own efforts in Africa not enough, and often hindered, because the aid was too little subject-oriented but too much object-oriented. Too often, not the human but the project or program stood at the center. This behavior has put large parts of Africa in an undignified state. The huge worldwide network of aid agencies will not relieve them no matter how much money they will spend.
This will succeed only with Africans on their own.[/quote]I agree with some of what you ve said but you need to understand that this so called foreign aid is actually a racket run by western so called aid agencies in order to enrich the donor countries and the corrupt african heads of state who are also involved in this racket, a country like nigeria does not need foreign aid as it generates enough revenue to sustain its development. You should try reading a book written by an american economist the book is called economic hitman, it details how america and europe use its finanancial institutions to bankrupt african nations by offering them loans it doesnt need, nations who refuse to go down this debt black hole end up being isolated by way of economic trade blockades. Stubborn or nationalistic leaders who refuse to get involved in this scam are assassinated or overthrown. Foreign aid is a racket it is the west's new tool for perpetual enslavement of so called third world countries.

to show you the good prospects the british had for nigeria this is how they set us up to fail:

Zik - blackmailed and given a useless ceremonial post in order to keep him away from the presidency

Awo - framed on trumped up charges and charged with treason - clamped in jail

Enahoro - framed on trumped up charges, he escaped prison by leaving the country

Then the people who wanted our progress and development imposed an incompetent and clueless Balewa on the nigerian populace.

When five courageous majors in the nigerian army realised that the british colonial govt had taken nigerians for a ride they orchestrated a coup in order to redress this gross injustice - the rest is history as they say.

when our people ask questions like this i find it really sad - in my view questions like this indicate that the nigerian educational system has failed its people because it is not educating our people about our history and therefore we are walking around totally ignorant of who we are and why we are where we are today.

First of all in order to understand nigeria's history you also have to understand world history and where we as a nation fit in to the whole picture.

The idea that the british came to africa to develop or civilise africans is for want of a better word garbage.

the british came to africa for one purpose alone - trade and profit nothing more, not to develop or "civilise" africa as some brain washed dimwits have been saying but to subjugate, oppress and exploit the african populations.  Some people have mentioned countries like Zimbabwe and South africa, those countries were earmarked by europeans  for re settlement of their people because of their cooler climates, many of these european settlers were fleeing poverty and  persecution from their native countries hence their decision to relocate to africa.   The west african climate was too hot and humid for european settlement and this is why no west african countries fell under white minority rule most europeans simply couldnt stand the climate. 

Many people think the british left nigeria in 1960, perhaps they physically left in 1960 but if they insisted on handing over power to a hand picked group of puppets and if that same clique continues to remain in power to date, in my mind that means that they (the british) are still pulling the strings and controlling the nigerian economy.

the likes of Zik, Awolowo and Enahoro who agitated for independence were deliberately denied access to the presidency and instead you had puppets like Balewa , Gowon, Murtala Muhammed, Obasanjo, IBB, who seized power either through election rigging or by western financed coup d'etats.  With the exception of Murtala Muhammed who later turned against the west and embarked on a pan africanist programme all of nigeria's heads of state have been western controlled puppets. 

If it were that the west had the interest of africa or any other black nation at heart why is it that when Haiti freed itself from slavery in 1803 and became the first black republic france along with the rest of europe and america imposed a 60 year trade embargoe against it plunging the country into a downward economic spiral?

why was haiti forced to pay france compensation of 150 million francs  for the loss of its slaves? by the way haiti had to borrow this money from the US thereby plunging it into further debt.

why also did the EU america and australia impose draconian economic embargoes against Zimbabwe when Mugabe started accelerating the redistribution of land programme - taking land away from the white minority farmers and returning it to the rightful owners?

There are people on here deceiving themselves into beleiving that the whites came to nigeria  to "civilise" or develop the country  when in reality all they did was build GRA's for themselves, golf courses and social clubs which black africans were banned from entering - is that supposed to be development, and if so for whose benefit?

The british limited their so called development to the building of railway lines running from Kano all the way down to port harcourt in order to assist them in moving cash crops from the north down to the south for export - Lugard hated nigeria and nigerians and referred to nigerians as niggers so this whole misconception that these people held anything other than contempt for nigerians continues to baffle me.

the british hated the likes of zik, awo and enahoro because they saw them as intelligent and dangerous and more likely to upset the status quo, the northerners with their feudal system and docility were seen as a "safer pair of hands" hence the decision by the british to hand over power to them.

If whites had remained in nigeria it would have been a repeat of what happened in Kenya, Zimbabwe and South Africa where, the blacks would have been driven out into dilapidated slums and remote wastelands while the whites would have reserved choice areas of the country for themselves.

boy these old white women are a joke, what kind of self delusion is this?

what would make a young strapping 25 year old man fall in love with a 59 year old woman who actually looks 79??

these white women are completely deluded and shameless, 20 years ago she wouldnt have given this man a second glance now because none of her men want her she actually thinks that this poverty stricken gambian man is after her for genuine reasons, as someone said wonders shall never end!!!

bothfeet:
**i am suprised at how gullible people can be, especially when they hear what they want to hear, 1m paid to every professor should be a ridiculous amount to every sane mind, the man clearly meant 1m to paid to all his lecturers combined.

**secondly,i am not endorsing corruption, but in the spirit of realism; if the man looted the money at least he used it to start the first non-profit american standard, school in nigeria (and yes, they give scholarships), what lasting institutions have Tinubu,Odili, Anenih and the host of others that have been looting since looting was fashionable established??. Nigeria is past the point of redemption, what the country needs is a revolution. Until then all we will continue to do is choose between the lesser of two evils, because corruption is now a prerequisite for government participation, so until nigerians are ready to stop being cowards and embrace a revolution, i will continue to applaud any leader that steals my money to establish some, in fact any kind of lasting institution, #isaynomore

**now let the backlash begin

why do we need american run schools in nigeria?  Isnt the brainwashing and indoctrination that has been going on since 1901 when the british annexed and amalgamated nigeria not enough.  Havent we been damaged enough by all these years of miseducation.  What can americans teach young nigerian students, self pride, black pride, critical analysis, what

Okay so you say admission is by way of scholarship? again i ask what is it that these americans can do for nigerian students that nigerian lecturers can not do for them?   

This huge waste of stolen money could have been used to upgrade the atrocious state of the nigerian universities in order to guarantee future generations a decent standard of education.  IBB and his cronies ensured that future generations of young nigerians would end up with such a sub standard of education that they would be easily controlled, exploited and abused - his wish is coming true.

rman:
I can't believe people will come out and criticize this wonderfull write up.
Some can only see the name while some focused on his age.
He gave specifics that are true and most of the replies fail to recognise that in the post
All what the poster wrote are true and if you are too young to understand please don't just comment

It is so sad that Nairaland has turned into a site for immature minds

the writer made a comment about IBB's meritorious military career and i keep asking myself which meritorious career, what did he acheive as an army officer other than engaging in the genocide of igbos and being involved in almost every coup d'etat since the 1960's to date, what is so meritorious about that?

andyanders:
THIS IS ONE OF THE WORST COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD WHERE THEIR LEADERS STEAL MONEY AND NOTHING HAPPENS TO THEM. ATIKU STARTED STEALING WHEN HE WAS WITH THE CUSTOMS. HE GOT VERY CORRUPT WHEN HE GOT TO ROBBERS CAMP=PDP HE HAD MISUNDERSTANDING WITH OBJ, ANOTHER CORRUPT LEADER.
HOW COME ATIKU WILL PUBLICLY SAY THAT HE PAYS FROM HIS POCKET, SUCH AN AMOUNT MONTHLY. IN DEVELOPED COUNTRY, ATIKU SUPPOSED TO BE IN PRISON. OBJ BACK TO PRISON.

very true, i have said that the only thing that will stop these psychopaths in power is the death penalty, this is what needs to happen, first of all a revolution which will overhaul the entire system and then mass executions of all these animals, by the time at least 1,000 of them have been purged from the system you will see how nigerians will start shying away from stealing. This is what happened in china, cuba, north korea even cambodia - this is the only language these people understand.

the mistake many nigerians continue to make is that they think IBB actually has a heart, this is a man who singlehandedly torpedoed the nigerian economy causing untold hardship to millions of nigerians, how could any one with a heart amass huge wealth and at the same time watch while his fellow citizens languished in abject poverty?  It should be obvious to everyone including the writer of that letter that it will take a lot more than writing "heartfelt" letters to derail this man's ambition.  Remember that IBB is a former drug baron, it takes a certain type of ruthlessness to be engaged in such activities. 

Also i dont understand why the writer described his army career as "meritorious" how? which war was he involved in where he was able to demonstrate his military prowess and courage - was it the nigerian biafra civil war ? i hope that isnt the war the writer was praising him for because it should be apparent to the dullest miind that that was more of genocidal attack on the igbos as opposed to a conventional war.  Or is it his involvement in every nigerian coup d'etat to date that the writer was commending him for?

this guy is a f, king id.iot, what kind of stupidity is this? if the tables were turned this i.diot would count himself lucky  to get a job in mc donalds serving up fries and burgers, brain dead id.iot.!

hope you die in  a bomb blast self hating b.itch