Imagine if the trillions and trillions of dollars, euros, yen and all the rest had not been spent on regime change, and support of dictators, and destabilization of popular democracies, and war and killing.
Imagine, instead, that the money had been spent building roads and sewer plants and water treatment facilities. That it had been spent creating jobs for every man and woman on Earth who wanted one. That we had spread that money around, helping to create other wealth in other parts of the world that had never seen wealth, except through the thick walls of seperation.
Imagine, also, that we had been spending money and research on how to cope with Global Climate Weirding. We wouldn't need to be spending so much now on dealing with the refugees coming from Syria and other places around the Globe.
Now that truly would be a Global Market Place of Great Distinction. Something every capitalist and every socialist on Earth could be happy with and proud of.
Imagine, instead, that the money had been spent building roads and sewer plants and water treatment facilities. That it had been spent creating jobs for every man and woman on Earth who wanted one. That we had spread that money around, helping to create other wealth in other parts of the world that had never seen wealth, except through the thick walls of seperation.
Imagine, also, that we had been spending money and research on how to cope with Global Climate Weirding. We wouldn't need to be spending so much now on dealing with the refugees coming from Syria and other places around the Globe.
Now that truly would be a Global Market Place of Great Distinction. Something every capitalist and every socialist on Earth could be happy with and proud of.
We cannot continue to subsidize people that have kids without being able to care, love, cloth, feed, or house them. That is true in the US (people having the largest number, have the fewest resources and live on welfare) as well as the rest of the world.
But to talk about 'agendas' from the UN is an absolute joke. The UN is incapable of anything other than meeting at their offices in NYC. They offer nothing but babble in the real world and every single member is interested in 'what's in it for my country' OR ' how can I screw the country I hate' (US).
Disband the UN or hold it accountable for 3 activities, humanitarian rights, humanitarian rights, humanitarian rights. The UN was established post war, but now thinks it needs to tell countries what to do with any and everything it decides. ATL was forced to continue to pay for just over 100 illegal immigrants for dialysis treatment from Mexico, and the UN said we had to keep caring for them. I don't want anyone to die, but I fail to see how that was any of the UN's business.
On the other hand, little girls are raped across the globe. Little girls have their genitals mutilated. And the UN does nothing. Wars break out between religious sects and millions cross to Europe. The UN does nothing. Nothing about smugglers, rapists, sex trade, elephants, nothing.
The UN should be dissolved or held responsible to it's only mission - humanitarianism.
But to talk about 'agendas' from the UN is an absolute joke. The UN is incapable of anything other than meeting at their offices in NYC. They offer nothing but babble in the real world and every single member is interested in 'what's in it for my country' OR ' how can I screw the country I hate' (US).
Disband the UN or hold it accountable for 3 activities, humanitarian rights, humanitarian rights, humanitarian rights. The UN was established post war, but now thinks it needs to tell countries what to do with any and everything it decides. ATL was forced to continue to pay for just over 100 illegal immigrants for dialysis treatment from Mexico, and the UN said we had to keep caring for them. I don't want anyone to die, but I fail to see how that was any of the UN's business.
On the other hand, little girls are raped across the globe. Little girls have their genitals mutilated. And the UN does nothing. Wars break out between religious sects and millions cross to Europe. The UN does nothing. Nothing about smugglers, rapists, sex trade, elephants, nothing.
The UN should be dissolved or held responsible to it's only mission - humanitarianism.
Too bad there are no incentives for people to not have children. Thank God there are hetero and gay people who don't want or choose not to have kids.
The childless ought to be thanked for not contributing to over-population. Why is it that so many people who can least afford it have the most children? That ought to be addressed as well and also the nations that are bursting with over-population need to be called on the carpet. The RCC should also be called on the carpet for being advocates of over-population and against birth control.
The childless ought to be thanked for not contributing to over-population. Why is it that so many people who can least afford it have the most children? That ought to be addressed as well and also the nations that are bursting with over-population need to be called on the carpet. The RCC should also be called on the carpet for being advocates of over-population and against birth control.
UN GOALS are important for their breadth and scope; they are also aspirational. i think it is important to look to disruptive technologies to see where progress can be achieved by implementing the use of inexpensive technology to bring about social change. For example, in India, African and elsewhere, there is a program to provide off-grid electricity using solar panels and rechargeable batteries to provide light for reading and safety. Similar advances have been made in recharging centers for cell phones, which, in turn, can be used in a 'micro' business model for sharing phones for a fee in isolated villages. Switching to sustainable power cuts down drastically on pollution caused by burning kerosene. Another application would be to develop the manufacture of efficient stoves in off the grid locales. Now, fuel is burned openly, giving of toxic fumes, endangering the lives of women and children primarily. A locally constructed stove that vents the smoke outdoors and increases fuel efficiency would protect the health and lives of many and put less pressure on the forests to provide wood for fuel. Bill and Melinda Gates favor investing where they have the biggest impact. The UN would do well to study their model, to see how it can be applied more broadly. Inventions such as vaccines that do not require refrigeration to medical labs on a chip could bring high tech to remote locations and materially improve the quality of life and longevity. Contrarian projects help.
The poorest of the poor areas of the world must control their birthrates, and soon. It is patently unfair and unsupportable to expect the robust economies of the world to support poor masses even to their own detriment. This is a recipe for the nullification of the progress that we have seen since the enlightenment since these poor masses tend to be uneducated and suffer from religious beliefs that are, at their core, counter to all that we hold dear.
There might come a time, and perhaps in the not too distant future, where we have to make a series of very hard choices between support of vast numbers of poor and the core values of our society.
There might come a time, and perhaps in the not too distant future, where we have to make a series of very hard choices between support of vast numbers of poor and the core values of our society.
5
The Sustainable Development Goals are ambitious, and I think one crucial factor that was left out of the editorial is that this was the product of an unprecedented stakeholder collaboration that lasted years, including civil society, the public and private sectors, and local government. I certainly agree that the number of goals is cause for concern, but I respectfully disagree that climate change, conserving oceans, and sustainable land use could have been consolidated. The prevailing discussions surrounding climate change have focused chiefly on adaptation and mitigation, encompassing issues so contentious that the deplorable state of our oceans and fisheries has largely been ignored. I think a separate domain is thus appropriate. The same applies to land-use change, which speaks to agriculture and deforestation, equally ignored in these discussions.
What I also like about the SDGs is that, unlike the MDGs, they are applicable to the developed world. Americans should follow the UN SDG development agenda given that the United States, notably, has a high proportion of poverty and child hunger compared to the rest of the developed world, which really comes to show how "exceptional" we truly are.
What I also like about the SDGs is that, unlike the MDGs, they are applicable to the developed world. Americans should follow the UN SDG development agenda given that the United States, notably, has a high proportion of poverty and child hunger compared to the rest of the developed world, which really comes to show how "exceptional" we truly are.
I'd like to see more discussion of a formal set of global metrics which de-emphasize economic growth in favor of improved quality of life. This would of course include public health, violence/warfare, and environmental stabilization and restoration.
7
The world cannot expect change for the better if fundamental rules of society are not followed. Do not have children that you cannot feed. Elect leadership that is not corrupt. The UN knows how to ask for (demand) donations, but it has no idea how to implement change.
5
why do we have a UN at this point? And does anyone really think that UN proclamations, goals, rhetoric, etc. has anything to do with the global economy or global development? Waste of space on the east side of Manhattan. Raze the UN and all the diplomatic residences surrounding it and put up some modern towers that can be used for housing corporations that can make real change happen in the world.
2
In the case of Goal 16, what's described as vagueness would better be termed "flexibility." Of all the goals, perhaps no other has so much need to be described by the host countries themselves, in response to local needs, without a fixed definition appearing to be imposed from the "Global North." The way this is phrased allows for
The reason that negotiation process, and the "flexible" result, is so necessary is expressed quite articulately by the authors of this piece, in apparent unawareness that they have done so: there are few more effective ways to undermine, prevent or outright destroy development gains across the board than warfare. The inclusion of Goal 16 is a strong statement that rather than writing countries off because they are in conflict, the global community must find ways of ensuring we all, worldwide, do as much as possible to reduce such dynamics so that the greatest possible number can live and benefit. There is no other reasonable choice.
That's difficult now, to be sure--as the authors point out, this is an extremely ambitious agenda. It should be--it HAS to be. Looking at issues like the effect of conflict on development, that need becomes even more critical, because we have increasing bodies of research that suggest for example that by 2025 (ODI, http://www.odi.org/publications/6687-creative-destruction-aid-industry-d... ), 80% of the world's poorest will live in conflict-affected and fragile countries.
The reason that negotiation process, and the "flexible" result, is so necessary is expressed quite articulately by the authors of this piece, in apparent unawareness that they have done so: there are few more effective ways to undermine, prevent or outright destroy development gains across the board than warfare. The inclusion of Goal 16 is a strong statement that rather than writing countries off because they are in conflict, the global community must find ways of ensuring we all, worldwide, do as much as possible to reduce such dynamics so that the greatest possible number can live and benefit. There is no other reasonable choice.
That's difficult now, to be sure--as the authors point out, this is an extremely ambitious agenda. It should be--it HAS to be. Looking at issues like the effect of conflict on development, that need becomes even more critical, because we have increasing bodies of research that suggest for example that by 2025 (ODI, http://www.odi.org/publications/6687-creative-destruction-aid-industry-d... ), 80% of the world's poorest will live in conflict-affected and fragile countries.
"...Several goals, including those on sustainable consumption and production (No. 12), climate change (No. 13), conserving oceans (No. 14) and sustainable use of land (No. 15) cover a lot of the same ground..."
-------------
"Sustainable," in its 1980's meaning, announced by the Bruntland Commission, meant that the Earth's resources, land, sea or air, would not be beggared by committing to that LEVEL of consumption.
The term has become attached to "development" without a necessary ancillary concern for population growth - which I cannot find anywhere in this editorial. Or is that too "planned parenthood", anywhere on this finite planet ?
-------------
"Sustainable," in its 1980's meaning, announced by the Bruntland Commission, meant that the Earth's resources, land, sea or air, would not be beggared by committing to that LEVEL of consumption.
The term has become attached to "development" without a necessary ancillary concern for population growth - which I cannot find anywhere in this editorial. Or is that too "planned parenthood", anywhere on this finite planet ?
6
Slowing economic growth is precisely what one would expect, especially in Africa and Asia given that these nations are overpopulated, have more people than resources necessary for an adequate standard of living, and that this over carrying-capacity of humans on earth is simply spreading - not being solved by the mass migration that this paper and most of the 1% controlled, "growth" obsessed media advocates. The recent celebrity denial of the Pope, following the script of the globalist 1% he is in collusion with, denial that adding 80 million resource consumer-polluters to the world's population every year is unsustainable, the fantasy that all we need to do is "share" ever more degraded/declining resources with ever more people will make reaching these elite egoist goals increasingly difficult. But of course this makes sense for global elites only care about the next quarter's profit statement. Because they can escape any collateral environmental and social damages that their manipulations to gain ever more billions of serf workers and customers creates, while skimming an ever larger amount of "rent" wealth and power off the GDP of a rising sea of suffering humanity.
10
Unfortunately, the article does not mention the elephant in the room that is impeding a further reduction in world poverty: the sky high fertility rates in Subsaharan Africa
10
They can double down and be ambitious all they want. Without population stabilization, the growing list of once-developed countries sliding into chaos (eg. Syria) will put a damper on their goals.
12
None of these "targets" will ever be reached with growing populations. Much more work has to be done to limit population growth. Education and freely available contraception is absolutely essential.
16
Yawn. Poverty has been reduced because of free markets and trade. China and India are the biggest examples, but in the past South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan showed through action and not UN help how to dramatically reduce poverty. The U.N. "doubling down" is only going to suck more cash. If Latin America and Africa want to get out of poverty they need to adopt free markets and get rid of government corruption. Throwing money at people is not a long term solution.
6
China's growth has only been slowed to 5%. This can hardly be called stagnation.
2
This is yet another scheme for wealth transfer from rich countries to poor. The UN is a political institution that often acts contrary to the Unite States interests. It is an organization whose time has past. It is time for the US to withdraw its membership and funding.
2
So, to restate your opinion: The United States often acts contrary to global interests?
We export aggressively marketed cigarettes to the world to protect the shareholders of the tobacco companies that lied to us for decades.
We've overthrown more than a few governments - how well did that Mossadegh takedown in Iran do for us in the long term? Are we making money from that yet?
The Koch brother's companies are stacking up petcoke in the open on wharfs on the South Side of Chicago, where they hold it until they ship it overseas to nations who don't yet have pollution regulations we do. So it blows noxious dust over our people before doing pollution transfer to other nations.
Look, Rob, we do a lot of good in the world, but acting contrary to the United States interests is something that happens here in the US, too. Or don't you remember the GOP shutdown fight getting our national credit rating downgraded?
I'm thinking that contributions the US can make, provided there's oversight of spending, is an investment in future customers. Does that approach work for you? We help provide electricity, for example, and before you know it, people want to buy gadgets and music and movies. We make a lot of music and movies that people without electricity simply can't buy.
We export aggressively marketed cigarettes to the world to protect the shareholders of the tobacco companies that lied to us for decades.
We've overthrown more than a few governments - how well did that Mossadegh takedown in Iran do for us in the long term? Are we making money from that yet?
The Koch brother's companies are stacking up petcoke in the open on wharfs on the South Side of Chicago, where they hold it until they ship it overseas to nations who don't yet have pollution regulations we do. So it blows noxious dust over our people before doing pollution transfer to other nations.
Look, Rob, we do a lot of good in the world, but acting contrary to the United States interests is something that happens here in the US, too. Or don't you remember the GOP shutdown fight getting our national credit rating downgraded?
I'm thinking that contributions the US can make, provided there's oversight of spending, is an investment in future customers. Does that approach work for you? We help provide electricity, for example, and before you know it, people want to buy gadgets and music and movies. We make a lot of music and movies that people without electricity simply can't buy.
3
I am stunned that b fagan somehow forgot George Soros' cancerous presence in world financial markets. Each of his billions of dollars probably created ten in damages to the everyday people b fagan wishes to protect from users. Go ask the Bank of England and various greenmail victims of his.
Compared to Soros, the Koch Bros. are the sort of enlightened builders we can only wish were involved in politics.
Compared to Soros, the Koch Bros. are the sort of enlightened builders we can only wish were involved in politics.
Last week I heard a journalist from NY Times Magazine on an NPR talk show. She repeatedly characterized President Obama as 'hapless' and cast similar aspersions on his tenure. Then I thought about the NY Times had promoted Bush's Iraq War -- the war that started all the current troubles with ISIS. And I thought: why do I subscribe to the NY Times? Really? I have been a digital subscriber since it was first possible. But I will cancel my subscription in the near future. The Times did a lot of damage in the world with its support for the invasion of Iraq and I see no indication that you learned anything at all from that.
2
There is no mention of Clinton Global Foundation. Perhaps, major conflict of interest with Hillary running for President, one good reason why she should not be President. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/clinton-foundation-snubbed-pope-el...
4
A real missed opportunity that this piece does not make clear that this is a universal agenda, for all countries. How will the US tackle poverty, address climate change, make consumption and production patterns sustainable, and combat discrimination and violence against women?
14
The U.S. has spent $22 trillion on poverty programs since 1965. Also to say violence against women isn't addressed is absurd. Police spend the majority of their time dealing with domestic violence. Both domestic violence and rape are serious crimes that are routinely prosecuted. This isn't to say more needs to be done, but asking the question you ask doesn't make sense.
3
Dave, I want to know what the US is doing domestically to address the SDGs.
In addition to needing more focus on food security, what the world needs is a global renewable energy revolution to move us away from a fossil fuel-based economy, with all the negatives that entails (e.g. war, pollution, drought, wealth inequality, market instability etc), to one which will create jobs and stimulate innovation. Doing so will consequently clean the environment and enable people to satisfy their own health, education and other basic human needs. Relying on archaic energy solutions, and on the military to solve the world's problems, will be our demise long before we can measure how well the SDGs have been achieved...
2
Another scheme of the UN to pick the pockets of the developed world. Best we just say no an do our own thing. Why give another dime for the UN to administer when they are, and have always been, deep into corruption themselves. Until these developing countries get rid of their corruption they will never become productive and inclusive. That's the truth.
11
"Just say no an (sic.) do our own thing" - unfortunately, that seems to be the attitude of a majority of the American People. It is interesting for me to see that at this time there are 15 comments regarding the editorial about world affairs and hundreds for the ones concerning the United States only,
1
The only goal that would make a real difference in the quality of life on earth would be to provide sex education and birth control for free to everyone. Since the UN doesn't do this, all the rest is window dressing.
19
I agree that there are too many vaguely focused goals in a very tough socioeconomic environment. Focusing on the most basic human needs should always come first.
There is nothing more essential to human life than food and water. About a billion humans lack access to clean fresh drinking water. Another billion people do not have sanitary waste sewage and storm disposal. About 800 million persons are starving or malnourished.
Determining which nations should take the lead in addressing these problems is pretty easy. The European Union with 28 nations has 503 million people with a nominal GDP of $ 18.5 trillion. That is about 7% of humanity and 24% of human economic treasure. With 320 people and a nominal GDP of $16.8 trillion, America has 5% of the planet's people with 22% of the world's wealth generation. Moreover, the EU and America lead the world in technological and scientific achievement.
While China has the nominal 2nd GDP economy it is currently only a little more than half that of America's. And with 17% of the human race on a per capita basis that places China deeply in developing country range. Japan with the nominal 3rd GDP has the opposite problem with a population only a tenth the size of China's.
There is nothing more essential to human life than food and water. About a billion humans lack access to clean fresh drinking water. Another billion people do not have sanitary waste sewage and storm disposal. About 800 million persons are starving or malnourished.
Determining which nations should take the lead in addressing these problems is pretty easy. The European Union with 28 nations has 503 million people with a nominal GDP of $ 18.5 trillion. That is about 7% of humanity and 24% of human economic treasure. With 320 people and a nominal GDP of $16.8 trillion, America has 5% of the planet's people with 22% of the world's wealth generation. Moreover, the EU and America lead the world in technological and scientific achievement.
While China has the nominal 2nd GDP economy it is currently only a little more than half that of America's. And with 17% of the human race on a per capita basis that places China deeply in developing country range. Japan with the nominal 3rd GDP has the opposite problem with a population only a tenth the size of China's.
1
I agree with the first two paragraphs in your letter stating that the most basic human needs, food, water and sewage systems should come first in setting goals for development, However, the quoted statistics are difficult to compare, and the fact that the United States with fewer people has a GDP almost as high as that of the European Union with a much greater population means to me that it should be more feasible for the US to share more of its wealth. The Sustainable Development Goals are the result of years-long work by all members of the UN and have been signed by all, a significant and laudable progress in cooperation.
1
@ Gisela
But America is too crippled by political partisan misgovernment to do anything meaningful empathetic and humane. The UN is viewed by some partisans as among the problems that America faces in return for American financial support.
But America is too crippled by political partisan misgovernment to do anything meaningful empathetic and humane. The UN is viewed by some partisans as among the problems that America faces in return for American financial support.
1
Progress on these goals would itself grow the world economy.
It would grow it in a good way too, as opposed to growing it by mobilization for war or dominance of others economically.
It would be self reinforcing. In fact, it could be many of the things the Bushies promised us we'd get from the Iraq War.
Notably it can't work in exactly the countries they "improved" with their methods.
It would grow it in a good way too, as opposed to growing it by mobilization for war or dominance of others economically.
It would be self reinforcing. In fact, it could be many of the things the Bushies promised us we'd get from the Iraq War.
Notably it can't work in exactly the countries they "improved" with their methods.
7
The fifth United Nations goal is the most important because it impacts over one-half the world's population - women:
ACHIEVE GENDER EQUALITY AND EMPOWER ALL WOMEN AND GIRLS
That should read, "Help Women Empower Themselves through Education and Small Business Support." NOW is the time.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics
ACHIEVE GENDER EQUALITY AND EMPOWER ALL WOMEN AND GIRLS
That should read, "Help Women Empower Themselves through Education and Small Business Support." NOW is the time.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics
5
If not on the front of peacemaking and conflict management the UN has at least succeeded on its development agenda, first on the MDGs, and now hopefully it should do the same on the newly targeted SDGs. It's incumbent on the national governments and the internationa community to rally round the UN to help achieve the universal goals of sustainable development set by it.
3
Everything is connected.
The period during which U.N. development goals achieved such successes still enjoyed the support of a world that was relatively stable because the remnants of American military presence and activity – not necessarily war – were still in place. However, over the past few years that has changed, the world has become far less stable almost everywhere, and it’s likely that both attention and resources will be consumed not in satisfying U.N. goals but in the adventurism of buccaneers, tyrants and religious movements that have gained such ascendancy in the absence of forces that once effectively countered them.
The U.N. certainly should have picked fewer and more targeted goals – and those goals should have centered on re-establishing a foundation of global political stability, without which development cannot be enhanced but indeed deteriorates.
The period during which U.N. development goals achieved such successes still enjoyed the support of a world that was relatively stable because the remnants of American military presence and activity – not necessarily war – were still in place. However, over the past few years that has changed, the world has become far less stable almost everywhere, and it’s likely that both attention and resources will be consumed not in satisfying U.N. goals but in the adventurism of buccaneers, tyrants and religious movements that have gained such ascendancy in the absence of forces that once effectively countered them.
The U.N. certainly should have picked fewer and more targeted goals – and those goals should have centered on re-establishing a foundation of global political stability, without which development cannot be enhanced but indeed deteriorates.
2
Would you kindly name the buccaneers, tyrants and religious movements?
Is this post include a a backhanded compliment to the US Armed Forces and post-WW 2 global political strategy?
And is the UN actually relevant and necessary these days? There is no political stability as we knew it and it is just getting worse (what with all the unnamed buccaneers, tyrants and religious movements.
In 1903, George Bernard Shaw wrote "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.” Let's amend that "those who can accomplish something do so, and those who cannot are posted to sit at the UN". And the rest that cannot actually get anything done themselves write for the NYT, and worse, they wake up early to comment online at the NYT (myself included!!)
Oh, and let's not forget the hypnotized and "organized" who are battered daily to give money to the various Obama and Democrat entities and actually do so. Oh, and then there is the Hillary Clinton campaign, and worse yet the Clinton Foundation. A short list would be this - countries that HRC "visited" (also know as an "accomplishment" to the hypnotized sycophants) that did NOT give money to the Clinton Foundation.
Is this post include a a backhanded compliment to the US Armed Forces and post-WW 2 global political strategy?
And is the UN actually relevant and necessary these days? There is no political stability as we knew it and it is just getting worse (what with all the unnamed buccaneers, tyrants and religious movements.
In 1903, George Bernard Shaw wrote "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.” Let's amend that "those who can accomplish something do so, and those who cannot are posted to sit at the UN". And the rest that cannot actually get anything done themselves write for the NYT, and worse, they wake up early to comment online at the NYT (myself included!!)
Oh, and let's not forget the hypnotized and "organized" who are battered daily to give money to the various Obama and Democrat entities and actually do so. Oh, and then there is the Hillary Clinton campaign, and worse yet the Clinton Foundation. A short list would be this - countries that HRC "visited" (also know as an "accomplishment" to the hypnotized sycophants) that did NOT give money to the Clinton Foundation.
2
Jonathan:
Come on. How about Vladimir Putin, Bashar al Assad, Kim Jong-un, Ali Khamenei, Robert Mugabe, Omar Al-bashir, the Castro brothers, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Dilma Rousseff, Nicolás Maduro and before him Hugo Chávez, arguably the heads of most of the Sunni Islamist nations as well as Abdel Fattah el-Sisi ... just to give a partial list.
How about ISIS, Boko Haram, Qaeda and the "bad" (funny) Taliban.
No, this isn't a back-handed complement to "the US Armed Forces and post-WW 2 global political strategy": it's merely a global illustration of what happens when that strategy and commitment are abandoned by a U.S. president to better afford domestic free cheese.
You don't like the U.N. Well I'm not wild about it either, but it does feed some people, when it's not too dangerous to do so, Other than that ...
Come on. How about Vladimir Putin, Bashar al Assad, Kim Jong-un, Ali Khamenei, Robert Mugabe, Omar Al-bashir, the Castro brothers, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Dilma Rousseff, Nicolás Maduro and before him Hugo Chávez, arguably the heads of most of the Sunni Islamist nations as well as Abdel Fattah el-Sisi ... just to give a partial list.
How about ISIS, Boko Haram, Qaeda and the "bad" (funny) Taliban.
No, this isn't a back-handed complement to "the US Armed Forces and post-WW 2 global political strategy": it's merely a global illustration of what happens when that strategy and commitment are abandoned by a U.S. president to better afford domestic free cheese.
You don't like the U.N. Well I'm not wild about it either, but it does feed some people, when it's not too dangerous to do so, Other than that ...
It is not just the slow down of the global economy that will challenge the achievement of the newly formulated SDGs ... it is the acceleration in the deterioration in our global environment due to climate change. Secondly, NOT everything is included in the SDGs, just as the most important goal was not included in just finished MDGs: that is, the exigency for good governance to achieve societal goals.
While there is a lot of nice sounding phrasing in the new SDGs, as you note, the principal factors preventing inclusiveness, income equality, etc., is a lack of transparency, accountability and responsiveness by concerned governments to their citizens, or poor governance, the principal symptom being ingrained corruption ... but calling a spade a spade, in this case has required a fortitude by the concerned parties that does not exist. And, so one wonders, how the world takes the next step to sustainable global development, particularly in light the slowing economy and looming environmental disaster.
While there is a lot of nice sounding phrasing in the new SDGs, as you note, the principal factors preventing inclusiveness, income equality, etc., is a lack of transparency, accountability and responsiveness by concerned governments to their citizens, or poor governance, the principal symptom being ingrained corruption ... but calling a spade a spade, in this case has required a fortitude by the concerned parties that does not exist. And, so one wonders, how the world takes the next step to sustainable global development, particularly in light the slowing economy and looming environmental disaster.
2
We will not be able to make the drastic changes needed to shift the world economy out of neutral if we do not deal with the transformation of an elitist financial and monetary system that is still controlled by the Group of 7 and less so by the Group of 20.
Some progress was made with the MDGs in the last 15, not five, years. Do we have to wait another 15 years to have some progress made with the SDGs? Rome is burning: climate disruption and social fragmentation of our common home.
We have to strengthen the integration vision of social and ecological reality and we have to start dealing with the transformation, not reform, of the monetary, financial, economic and commercial systems. One way of simultaneously combating the looming climate catastrophe and advancing low-carbon, climate resilient development is to transform the international monetary system which as glue binds the other global systems together. This transformation will happen if it is based on a monetary standard of a specific tonnage of an important substance per person such as carbon. I have proposed the monetary standard of a specific tonnage of CO2e per person in my 2012 book “The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation” where the conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of such carbon-based international monetary system are laid out. They are imperfectly updated at www.timun.net.
Some progress was made with the MDGs in the last 15, not five, years. Do we have to wait another 15 years to have some progress made with the SDGs? Rome is burning: climate disruption and social fragmentation of our common home.
We have to strengthen the integration vision of social and ecological reality and we have to start dealing with the transformation, not reform, of the monetary, financial, economic and commercial systems. One way of simultaneously combating the looming climate catastrophe and advancing low-carbon, climate resilient development is to transform the international monetary system which as glue binds the other global systems together. This transformation will happen if it is based on a monetary standard of a specific tonnage of an important substance per person such as carbon. I have proposed the monetary standard of a specific tonnage of CO2e per person in my 2012 book “The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation” where the conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of such carbon-based international monetary system are laid out. They are imperfectly updated at www.timun.net.
It would seem to me that the UN no matter what goals it thinks was achieved, failed in its purpose of PEACE. Of course it got a lot of help from America and its allies, Russia and its allies, and Middle East coalitions of insurgents and terrorists from around the world. What a world, what a world.
1
You have high standards. Steven Pinker (among others) has argued that we live in the most peaceful period in human existence. Albeit with much more in depth news coverage when violence does erupt.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/history-and-the-decline-of-hum...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/history-and-the-decline-of-hum...
2
How perfectly ironic it is that the best effort for world peace the UN will ever have engaged in required the Soviets and Communist Chinese not to have been present in 1950 with the Muslim world not involved in the results.
That will never happen again. Had the UN closed its doors in 1955 the world might even be a freer place today.
That will never happen again. Had the UN closed its doors in 1955 the world might even be a freer place today.
This week's Tattooine bar scene at the UN once again reminds us that it is the last place good things for humanity are likely to be recomended.
Development is to be decided by the people of each country after freedom of choice in a diverse marketplace free of government intervention has been established and allowed to operate. Development decisions THEN will be the most effective AND economically sustainable.
Concentrating such decisions in any simgle chamber is as stupid for the nations of the world as it is for the states of the US. This party needs to end, and if the whole thing has to be dispatched from NYC, it will be completely forgotten there within a year.