http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/663057 (http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/663057)
I think the guy is right. Nothing except hot, polluted, air comes out of these guys.
And on a more local note, it seems Canada's PM Harper was late for the group picture again. What is he doing all the time? Puking the sacramental wafer?
Back in 1988 when Toronto hosted the G7 summit, the leaders of the seven top industrialized countries pledged to help the world's poorest nations and called for major action to clean up the environment.
That was the guts of an eight-page communiqué issued by the leaders, including Brian Mulroney, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, that was filled with self-congratulatory praise and glossed over the major controversies that threatened to disrupt the summit.
Tomorrow in L'Aquila, Italy, the leaders of what is now the G8 will issue a similar communiqué, much of it written weeks ago by faceless bureaucrats, filled with the same vacuous rhetoric and empty pledges to help the poor, protect the environment and solve many of the world's other problems.
But the fact that the G8 leaders meeting this week in Italy are struggling with the same issues as they were in 1988 is a clear sign these summits, which cost more than $500 million to stage, are too often a waste of time and energy.
Indeed, in the 21 years since the Toronto summit, the gap between the richest and poorest nations has continued to increase; global warming has become a worsening problem; and some of the G8 policies, notably the move to unfettered free trade and globalization, may actually have exacerbated the current economic meltdown.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has it right.
She said last week that the G8 is no longer the right place to deal with the world's problems.
"The summit in L'Aquila will make clear that this G8 format is no longer sufficient," Merkel said, arguing that the problems the world faces cannot be solved by the cozy private club on its own.
Paul Martin, who attended 10 summits both as Canada's prime minister and finance minister, is even more blunt than Merkel.
"The time has passed where the G8 can take the world for granted," he says. The problem is that the meetings "are not designed to facilitate the kinds of informal political debates that must occur between political leaders. They are designed to accommodate pre-cooked set piece speeches."
So true.
In Italy this week, the G8 leaders will meet together for just three hours. They will spend almost as much time reading prepared statements and staging photo ops.
For his part, Martin is pushing a new body comprised of the world's top 20 leaders to replace the G8, which now includes only the United States, Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, France, Italy and Canada.
Others say the body should be even bigger, arguing that smaller groups are too exclusive.
Despite these complaints, the G8 has rejected almost all efforts to alter the summits, ranging from increasing membership, improving the agenda and – horrors – abolishing them entirely.
The members have ignored and excluded major new players, notably China and India, Brazil, Mexico, South Korea and South Africa.
Such stubbornness is inexcusable. How can you possibly deal with today's world issues without these countries, especially China and India, at the table?
Next year's G8 summit will be held June 25-27 at Deerhurst Resort in Huntsville. Like the summit this week in Italy, it will be carefully scripted, right to the minute.
And like Italy, the Huntsville summit will likely produce a totally meaningless final document.
Maybe instead of staging the next summit, the leaders could simply recycle the eight-page communiqué from the 1988 summit.
The issues won't have changed, and, unless major changes are made in how the outdated summits are run, nor will the G8's ability and desire to deal with them.
Here's link to article about Harper stashing the Holy Wafer....bloody anti-Catholic.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/663208 (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/663208)
Quote from: Josephus on July 09, 2009, 09:12:48 AMand some of the G8 policies, notably the move to unfettered free trade and globalization, may actually have exacerbated the current economic meltdown.
idiocy like this makes me want that anti-hairpulling pill.
The G8 doesn't represent the world. It represents civilization, although that weakened a bit once they brought Russia on board. I suppose the G7 represents civilization, and Russia is there to speak for the barbarian world.
And by the way, just because climate change is a big deal right now doesn't mean that huge strides haven't been made in environmental policy and awareness. The writer of the article is obviously scum. As if the fact that he writes for the Star wasn't enough to convict him already.
The money would be spent somewhere else anyway.
Josephus, if the Prime Minister was Liberal or (God Forbid NPD :P) the Star would be trumpeting how important these meetings are.
You guys are all so cynical. :D
But wait...isn't Obama over there?
whatever. the leaders of the industrialised world still have to meet, so you may as way have meetings under the public spotlight rather than in secrecy.
if a country's leader is not held accountable for his or her decisions, then it's a domestic political failure.
meetings suck, but that's how things work in a complex modern democratic society. most people dislike meetings, which is why we need specialists (in the case: politicians) to go to them.
I am pretty sure I pocketed a wafer once. sounds like something I would do. I never had an opportunity to steal wine though.
anyhow, good for Harper. ;)
I'm surprised the Star would raise a stink about the PM not respecting Catholic ceremonies. 'Opiate of the masses' and whatnot.
The list of "major new players" in the article includes Mexico and South Africa. :huh:
Quote from: alfred russel on July 09, 2009, 10:57:38 AM
The list of "major new players" in the article includes Mexico and South Africa. :huh:
They need to include someone from Africa, or else they're racist.
I read an article somewhere, though I can't remember where, that suggested that the G8 should become secondary to the G20 which is more important in terms of economics now. So G8 stuff should feed directly into meetings with the G20. I mean three of the G8 members now have a common currency, one (Italy) is an irrelevance, no-one seriously thinks that in terms of global economics Russia really matters as much as, say China and India, both of whom are in the G20. I think it sounds right to me.
Quote from: Neil on July 09, 2009, 10:02:30 AM
And by the way, just because climate change is a big deal right now doesn't mean that huge strides haven't been made in environmental policy and awareness. The writer of the article is obviously scum. As if the fact that he writes for the Star wasn't enough to convict him already.
I was thinking the same thing.
By the way anybody find it hilarious it was implied the poor countries have all remained poor...but wait you are ignoring all the poor countries that are now rich!
Oh and the left never gets tired of beating the drum about how horrible globalization and free trade are. Protectionism and provicialism seem to be their winning formula for a better economic tommorow.
Umm, $500 million is supposed to be a costly price tag? America routinely drops more than that without batting an eye. :huh:
I agree with sask. They have to meet sometime, it might as well be this way. Besides, if they're off gallivanting about at summits they aren't at home passing laws. And that's just good for everyone.
It's funny that he quotes Angela Merkel. Her modus operandi is to go for as many photo ops as possible, instead of actually doing any policy work. If it was up to her, they would have one of these meetings every few weeks so she can pose with the world leaders and show the Germans what a wonderful diplomat she supposedly is.
sexiss
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 09, 2009, 11:24:55 AM
I agree with sask. They have to meet sometime, it might as well be this way. Besides, if they're off gallivanting about at summits they aren't at home passing laws. And that's just good for everyone.
On that I agree 100 per cent. Especially when it comes to Harper.
Quote from: Valmy on July 09, 2009, 11:05:42 AM
Oh and the left never gets tired of beating the drum about how horrible globalization and free trade are. Protectionism and provicialism seem to be their winning formula for a better economic tommorow.
Are you going to make up your mind about free trade, or is this one of this instances where it's okay for us to engage in protectionism, but not others?
Quote from: Habbaku on July 09, 2009, 01:26:17 PM
Are you going to make up your mind about free trade, or is this one of this instances where it's okay for us to engage in protectionism, but not others?
I would vigoriously defend myself here but I am not sure what you are talking about. I am all about the free trade.
Is this where I mistakenly defended the American System as a infrastructure project forgetting the tariff angle and grumbler bashed me for it? Because I sorta figured that would be buried in that thread and forgotten.
Quote from: Valmy on July 09, 2009, 01:28:06 PM
Is this where I mistakenly defended the American System as a infrastructure project forgetting the tariff angle and grumbler bashed me for it? Because I sorta figured that would be buried in that thread and forgotten.
Yes. And you were wrong. :P
Quote from: Neil on July 09, 2009, 10:02:30 AM
The G8 doesn't represent the world. It represents civilization, although that weakened a bit once they brought Russia on board. I suppose the G7 represents civilization, and Russia is there to speak for the barbarian world.
So you are saying that the G8 speaks for both the Civilized and Barbarian World? If so, who is there who is not represented? So why do you state that the G8 doesn't speak for the world?
Quote from: Habbaku on July 09, 2009, 02:09:21 PM
Yes. And you were wrong. :P
I know :blush: Languish has the memory of a herd of nerdy elephants.
I still think the infrastructure was good though.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 09, 2009, 11:24:55 AM
I agree with sask. They have to meet sometime, it might as well be this way. Besides, if they're off gallivanting about at summits they aren't at home passing laws. And that's just good for everyone.
+1
Quote from: Viking on July 09, 2009, 02:09:43 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 09, 2009, 10:02:30 AM
The G8 doesn't represent the world. It represents civilization, although that weakened a bit once they brought Russia on board. I suppose the G7 represents civilization, and Russia is there to speak for the barbarian world.
So you are saying that the G8 speaks for both the Civilized and Barbarian World? If so, who is there who is not represented? So why do you state that the G8 doesn't speak for the world?
neil = owned.
Why is Italy irrelevant?
I thought they were a rich country.
The G8 is there for the interests of the G8. Why is there an expectation that they somehow have to work for the good of the world?
Quote from: Josephus on July 09, 2009, 12:53:16 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 09, 2009, 11:24:55 AM
I agree with sask. They have to meet sometime, it might as well be this way. Besides, if they're off gallivanting about at summits they aren't at home passing laws. And that's just good for everyone.
On that I agree 100 per cent. Especially when it comes to Harper.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: Monoriu on July 10, 2009, 01:15:33 AM
The G8 is there for the interests of the G8. Why is there an expectation that they somehow have to work for the good of the world?
To make this clear.
The G7 is there to preserve capitalism and guide the free market. It there to make it possible for the largest free market economies to act in concert leading by example with a decision making procedure which has few enough voters to make every vote unilateral. The G7 is here to solve problems like the current credit crisis, and I must point out a de-facto "G-7" meeting was held in Washington in November 2008 where the G-7 plus 12 large trading economies (many of them market economies) did have a "G-7" style discussion about how to deal with the credit crisis. In effect the G-20 has superseded the G-8. This was done without "inviting" new members, but rather it was done by the relevant international players meeting. G-20 countries are 85% of the world economy and 80% of world trade.
The G-8 however is turning into a monstrous irrelevance. It has been rendered impotent by first of all inviting Russia to join hoping that membership would coax Russia into the direction of an open society, this has failed and since the G-# concept requires unanimity this make decision making impossible with a pseudo dictatorship in the group. But look above at what I said about the G-20, they have Russia in it, but they talk about things that matter like exchange rates and trade policy and tariffs. The G-8 has to deal with Bono and his Ilk talking about development and AIDS and Malaria and Clean Water and Global Warming. Which just results in meaningless pre-planned statements where the whole point of the exercise is to have a good photo opportunity and to look good when making a statement about something the politicians who rule when you are dead will have to deal with.
If anybody destroyed the G-8 it was Bono and the Global Warming/AIDS/Development etc.etc. activists who demanded that the G-8 members in unison did something they couldn't be arsed to do individually.
But if they stop having G8 meetings (G8? Pah, 7 forever) where will the anarchists go? :(
Quote from: garbon on July 09, 2009, 11:18:20 AM
Umm, $500 million is supposed to be a costly price tag? America routinely drops more than that without batting an eye. :huh:
Thats really not something to boast about ;)
Quote from: Viking on July 09, 2009, 02:09:43 PM
So you are saying that the G8 speaks for both the Civilized and Barbarian World? If so, who is there who is not represented? So why do you state that the G8 doesn't speak for the world?
Well, I suppose you could say that. The civilized states are over and above the barbarian states, and so what they command the animals are required to obey. That said, the G8 have their own interests at heart, not the world's.
Quote from: Siege on July 10, 2009, 12:25:54 AM
Why is Italy irrelevant?
I thought they were a rich country.
Italy is the weakest rich country imaginable, and puts all of its GDP into mismanaging itself. It is even worse than Spain.
If the G8 was scrapped, images such as these would be sorely missed:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fd.yimg.com%2Fa%2Fp%2Frids%2F20090709%2Fi%2Fr3356552547.jpg%3Fx%3D400%26amp%3By%3D340%26amp%3Bq%3D85%26amp%3Bsig%3D_dbUibuGcHSmlg8QoaQV7A--&hash=8eadd860049298bd52988f925193cf54bf4bd0a9)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2Ffille-g8.jpg&hash=1d471ee96964b58f89516fc1aee13912b8652caa)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv325%2FSekenr%2F20090709-1_medved.jpg&hash=d0b7514f312dc674d0ed6ffaca19ca7fb3d3be23)
Looks like Harper's about to get a BJ. You'd think he'd actually like those photo ops.
What's happening in that bottom pic? Looks like someone is having a spaz attack
{no offence intended to any real spastics on or about this forum}
Is the broad with the ass someone's wife or a flunkie?
Looks like blue is the new red when it comes to ties.
Thank God the three button suit is dying off.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkreuzer33.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F08%2Fbush-volleyball.jpg&hash=9796db05573e408bbf2023806bacdcd4d5627e5b)
heh heh
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 10, 2009, 08:48:14 AM
Is the broad with the ass someone's wife or a flunkie?
She's a Brazilian teenager that was there for some kind of UNICEF gig.
I read that she was some kind of flunkie. She was removing the stickies which told the World's Greatest Leaders + Harper where to stand for the picture.
Quote from: Josephus on July 10, 2009, 10:41:26 AM
I read that she was some kind of flunkie. She was removing the stickies which told the World's Greatest Leaders + Harper where to stand for the picture.
I think Yi meant the one from the first pic, but you're right for the one in the second pic.
Quote from: The Larch on July 10, 2009, 10:44:27 AM
I think Yi meant the one from the first pic, but you're right for the one in the second pic.
Nothing wrong with the hams on the flunkie, for that matter.
awesome pix. :bowler:
Quote from: The Larch on July 10, 2009, 10:44:27 AM
Quote from: Josephus on July 10, 2009, 10:41:26 AM
I read that she was some kind of flunkie. She was removing the stickies which told the World's Greatest Leaders + Harper where to stand for the picture.
I think Yi meant the one from the first pic, but you're right for the one in the second pic.
Oh right. That oen is hot. If I were Obama, in the great Democratic tradition, I'd make her my intern right away
Quote from: The Larch on July 10, 2009, 10:20:05 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 10, 2009, 08:48:14 AM
Is the broad with the ass someone's wife or a flunkie?
She's a Brazilian teenager that was there for some kind of UNICEF gig.
and there I was thinking this was one of the underage hookers Silvio ordered....
Quote from: The Larch on July 10, 2009, 10:20:05 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 10, 2009, 08:48:14 AM
Is the broad with the ass someone's wife or a flunkie?
She's a Brazilian teenager that was there for some kind of UNICEF gig.
If there is grass on the field, play ball.
Quote from: garbon on July 09, 2009, 11:18:20 AM
Umm, $500 million is supposed to be a costly price tag? America routinely drops more than that without batting an eye. :huh:
Yeah, that seems to be working out great for California. :P