Hacker News Reader

Comment by csomar | Hacker News Reader

Poverty before revolution in Tunisia was stable at 15%. Just after the revolution, it's predicted to be, actually, more than 35%. Can we really trust the information provided since many of the poor countries (if not all) are living under authoritarian regimes?

View on HN

The short answer is yes. Generally speaking poor countries get aid based on how poor they are. So the incentive is to make yourself poorer than you actually are and not richer. However, foreign aid organizations, like the World Bank, where the numbers come from in this case, are not stupid and they are thinking about this issue.

That's it. And even if the poverty was still the same or better, what we as a whole get after such interventions is excess amounts of hate. Better let the countries alone, you Barak

I don't quite get your point. America did not make an intervention in Tunisia. However you are right, better leave the country choose their own way.

But America/NATO did Intervene in Iraq and Libya and conditions there are miserable now.

Iraq is in far worst condition after US invasion and occupation than it was before.

In fact I believe things were far better under Saddam then they are now.

You really believe they did just fell down, one after another, starting with Tunisia? I envy your good spirit.

OK, I have a question: What evidence would persuade you that your current idea about this is wrong?

Is it the HN version of "go kill yourself" that intelligent people should use?

In a sense, yes. It's a very nice response in all kinds of arguments, and a question you should ask yourself often. The weaker the threshold of evidence you can offer that would change your position, and the discussion partner not being able to provide that evidence, the stronger your position.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com