Shawn Wilton wrote:
> I still think the money would serve a more useful purpose to provide food,
> medicine and schools/education.  For nations that have the necessary
> food/medicine/education, then sure, cheap access to technology is
> beneficial.

Of course, ideally you'd want the childrent to be clothed, fed, and 
sheltered before you provide the technology. Unfortunately, you have corrupt 
governments on one hand, and murderous warlords on the other. When you 
provide money to the governments, how much of it do you think trickles down 
to the schoolchildren? And food/medicine are too easily exchanged for money 
(=guns, ammunition, soldiers).

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that developed countries should give 
laptops to children dying of hunger and malaria, without tending to their 
physical needs first. I simply disagree with the notion that the money spent 
on laptops will be wasted.

Why not, instead of sending grants (and having them end up in some cronie's 
pocket), provide the country's schoolchildren with $100 laptops? I really 
like the idea, because education is an investment into the country's future 
(you get more out than what you put in). Deliveries of food and medicine 
provide only short-term relief, and create dependence on the donor.

Best regards,

Vitaliy

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist