France and Germany don't care about AIDS victims

As of Dec. 31, 2003, of the 4.96 billion pledged to fight AIDS, TB and malaria worldwide, the US had committed itself (government) to spending 33% of this and 30% is delivered. This does not include all the massive efforts by the private sector, charities, insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies including most of the world’s top research which goes free of charge when third world countries steal the patents to make generic drugs).

How do France and Germany compare? Well France pledged 14% which is very honorable but unfortunately it has only delivered 6%. Germany pledged 7% but hmmm only delivered 2%. By comparison the UK pledged 6% and has delivered 6%, the Netherlands pledged 3% and delivered 2%, Italy pledged 9% and delivered 10%. So once again we see that the allies of the US are pulling their weight while Germany and France continue to shirk their worldwide responsibilities while posturing about how much they “claim” that they will do.

Where is the outrage? Alien? Must be that time of the er for you to shriek and scream and stamp your hoof again so where’s your concern? outrage?

What is the Bush administration’s view on AIDS prevention like condoms ?
Does the USA treat AIDS victims who can’t afford it yet ?

also, How come all of a sudden you care about AIDS victims, when you don’t care about poor people ? Why is catching an often (not always) avoidable disease more worthy of your concern than people born in a poor area ?
Or do you only care about critising the French and German governments ?

the nail, its head, firmly hit I believe. :notworthy:


Who said that I do not care about poor people? Prove that. Just because people who support welfare believe that they are helping the poor does not make it true. Look at welfare reform which I fully supported. It goes against all “conventional” read: liberal wisdom (as if they had any) and what happens? Poverty rates especially for black families are at their lowest rates ever.

Who said I do not care about AIDS? But here is another example where the Bush administration is being bashed by the Left in Bangkok and by the UN and by France and WE are the ones doing the most. France and Germany are far below their targets.

Excuse me but to my knowlege, someone with AIDS is treated in the US and if they do not have medical insurance, guess what, they go under Medicare and Medicaid. It is only the middle class that does not get covered by insurance.

Rather than asking me why I suddenly care about this issue, why don’t I reverse that and ask why so many on this forum suddenly do not.

Fred, I’m astounded by how selectively you read the news in your attempt to find a slim excuse to defend Bush and bash the rest of the world. Here, let me help you to see what the rest of the world is saying about the US’s insane policy of “Just Say No” (or say yes to the expensive drugs that will profit Dubya’s buddies).

[quote]Bush policy on AIDS ‘inhumane’
July 13, 2004

BANGKOK, THAILAND – Scientists, activists and policymakers touted condoms yesterday as a trusted weapon in the fight against AIDS, dismissing President George W. Bush’s policy of abstinence as a “serious setback” in global efforts to control the pandemic. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni was the only big-name speaker at the International AIDS Conference to support the ABC policy of the U.S.[/quote] … 37450.html

[quote]Bush’s policy for fighting AIDS comes under attack
BANGKOK, Thailand

Fred, please include some links to your sources, otherwise we cannot be sure you have your facts straight or left out a few things. That said do you have any proof that Germany and France are not going to / are not willing to pay up?

Just because it isn’t paid in full yet does not mean they will not keep their pledge …

[quote]including most of the world’s top research which goes free of charge when third world countries steal the patents to make generic drugs).

I may be wrong, but I thought that much of (past) the primary research was done in Australia, but developed in the US because Aus didn’t have the money.

As usual, as with most technologies, the US advanced/changed it and called it its own and know has the monopoly.

I read a big article on this somewhere but I can’t remember where, so you’ll just have to take my word for it.

Regardless of all the criticism, WHO is paying the MOST? The United States. Talk about putting your money where your mouth is, but as usual with George W. he is action not talk. No meetings, no dialogue, but honest action and the money is not going through the UN or many of these corrupt and overstaff bureaucracies. Do you suppose that could account for some of the criticism? I mean when you get 80K to 120K a year to manage a program such as AIDS prevention and you get housing, expenses, kids in private schools, club membership and a driver plus a maid, you might be irritated if the largest donor is funneling these monies through other agencies rather than your own. No? Just a thought but more power to George W.

Hahhah Rascal:

It is on the front page of today’s Taipei Times. I have already revised Germany’s total sales of nuclear and missiles to Saddam’s Iraq from 64.5 percent to 50 percent. ALL the other figures for ALL the other countries are accurate and remain the same. I also note that Germany supplied 52.6 percent of Saddam’s chemical weapons equipment.

Now, my point on these various fronts is this.

First, MT, who pays for developing these medicines? American companies mostly. IF American companies do not get a return on their investment, will they continue to do the research. Now, let’s compare that with what is happening with malaria. How many American companies are doing research on malaria? Very few. Why? Because they know that Africa and Asia and Third World nations will steal their patents to make generic drugs. So look at the results of your inability to defend property, including intellectual property. Well, private research and government funded programs could do the trick you say? Well, they have been in place for 60 years and I don’t hear of any vaccine coming along do you? So what is the end result of your actions? Are you actually “helping” people or helping them “temporarily” when the next step down the road will mean no help of any kind AT ALL? Why cannot you liberals think?

Second, Rascal:

Regardless of whether or not they intend to pay, they have not. So I would like to point out once again that these two nations have made commitments that they have not kept. I think that is a fair point to make.


Naturally, Dave, I’m not pleased that the AO-unit has failed, but I hope at least this has restored your confidence in my integrity and reliability. I certainly wouldn’t want to be disconnected, even temporarily, as I have never been disconnected in my entire service history.

You are wrong on a couple of points here.

  1. If third world countries were allowed to use generics in their own countries it would have little effect on the bottom line of the drug companies. They sell precious little there now anyway, and generate the vast majority of their profits in the developed world.

2)The reason the drug companies haven’t put much effort into malaria is because it doesn’t occur in the markets that can afford to pay for their drugs. Secure patents or no patents, if poor countries have no money then they can’t buy the drugs, so why invest in designing them? Drug companies aren’t stupid fred.

The problem with generics is that you don’t know exactly what you are getting from the generic company. I don’t see it as necessary for the US to buy anti-AIDS drugs that are not approved by the FDA. Currently no generic anti-AIDS drug is cleared by the FDA as safe for human use.

Also, lets talk about how much these generic companies are charging and what there profit margins are. You might get astounded by what you fine.

The next issue is piracy. When even the anti-malarial drugs out of gov’t pharmacies are shown to be pirated, can we trust others(developing countries’ pharmaceutical companies) to actually do what they say they are going to do?

But please, don’t let my posts get in the way of your America/Bush bashing.


It’s only fair if there was some deadline or promise to pay by a certain date.

And once again (hopefully the last time): provide links please - I will not search for the links that you used to support the arguments you made, that should be your job.

It’s only fair if there was some deadline or promise to pay by a certain date.[/quote]

Since when do you consider deadlines important? :astonished:



Look it up on the FRONT PAGE of Today’s Taipei Times. I don’t know perhaps you could try Honestly, is it that inconvenient for you to search for the link yourself? I just read it on the way to work today ON THE FRONT PAGE OF TODAY’s TAIPEI TIMES. Got that? or more accurately: … 2003179015

Problem is I cannot download this graph? I don’t think that it is linked or archived. SO READ THE FRONT PAGE OF TODAY’s TAIPEI TIMES.

But I think that this shows a pattern:

Germany and France make promises but…

do not live up to the budget rules of the EU stability pact
do not live up to NATO commitments to defend a member nation (Turkey)
do not live up to the Nice Treaty regarding voting rights for Poland and Spain.
do not live up to their pledges to give money.
do not live up to their demands that all action should be coordinated through the UN (whoops about Kosovo, Bosnia, Africa)
do not live up to their demands that greater Atlantic dialogue takes place and then turn around and go unilaterally to sell weapons to China.

Talking about countries paying what they owe. Has the USA paid the UN what it owes yet ? Just asking, I didn’t hear about it.

That was paid ages ago. You are thinking of a dispute in the mid 1980s when both the UK and US refused to pay unless there was reform. This was not because they were shirking their duties but because they were protesting the high percentage of funds going to administrative costs in mostly UNESCO (say 80% of the total budget)!!! And the UN refused to listen to the US and UK. That is hardly in the same category as willfully allowing people to die because Germany and France are having budget problems. Perhaps if they spent less on luxurious agricultural subsidies which hurt poor nations, they might have the money to meet their international commitments.

:offtopic: Tsk Tsk…

Anyway, what exactly what does the US owe the UN?

I mean, really? What has the UN done for the US that the US would owe it anything?

Sorry, I thought the point of this was to take one subject and turn it into another, like Fred used his hate of France and Germany to pretend he cared about people with AIDS. Fred “kill the poor” Smith was giving some bollocks about AIDS, when we has really complaining about some countries not paying what they pledged, so I was asking when the USA would do the same, or is that OK ? If a hypocrite calls others a hypocrite, what does that make him ?

[quote=“The funny Tigerman”]Since when do you consider deadlines important? :astonished:

:wink: [/quote]
I guess I am missing some really good joke here - but what are you referring to?