Education is the mechanism for creating a skilled labour force. Employed labourers earn money. Money lifts people out of poverty. Money's value is based on its scarcity. If everyone had money, money would have no value. For your money to have value, someone must have no money. For you to be out of debt, somewhere must exist corresponding debt. Thus, money creates poverty. If education creates money, then education creates poverty. This is Adam Smith 101.
Furthermore, as there are inherently more workers than jobs under capitalism, and as there is an inherent systemic drive toward laying off workers (in global aggregate, whilst increasing production), education cannot "stop people living in poverty".
You simply think "education ends poverty" because education, in the Third World, is a pre-requisite to capitalist investment (and vice versa) and so a pre-requisite for a nation's transition into "modernism".
As the First World will now increasingly show: eduaction won't mean jack s**t. You will have hundreds of educated persons competing for the same job.
Ah, those Muslims. The new bogeyman of the 21st century.
More people die from peanuts than Muslims, but still, you gotta BE AFRAID! BE REAL SCARED! Afterall, our zillion dollar military industrial complex might not be able to protect you from those broke crazies and the guns we gave 'em!
You would think someone on a West Indies forum would learn about their own regional history and see that the slogans now applied to nutty Islamofascists were once applied to them too.
I notice that those who hate places like Saudi Arabia, never condemn their government's own 90 year alliance with it (look how the West is currently using its buddies in Saudi Arabia to crush the Russian economy). The Western love affair with the Saudis is so deep, that the Saudi Arabian identities of the 9/11 "terrorists" is routinely ignored. Can't stir up trouble for our own private theocracy. Who else will do our regional dirty work?
Similarly, those who diss Iraq never talk about the way its first democratic elections were thwarted and the nation given wholesale to that CIA pupppet, Saddam Hussein. Or how we in the West used Saddam as a proxy to wage an almost decade long war on Iran, a country who we itself couped and turned from a secular democracy into a theocracy. If the US hadn’t overthrown the progressive Iranian government, the fundamentalist Mullahs - one of whom was himself "our" puppet - would have never taken over. Iran had been known for thousands of years for tolerating Christians and other religious minorities. This changed overnight because the West deliberately backed the wrong horse. Similarly, if "we" hadnt backed the Kings of Libya, democratic movements there would not have failed in the 1960s and so necessitated a military coup (and so Gadaffi).
As Ketchim said: history repeats itself. The French and Russian revolutions should have taught us something: when the West sides with Kings, Monarchs and Feudalists to crush the masses, the RESULT IS ALWAYS A PSYCHOPATH IN POWER. Either they directly fund a psycho to oust a populist, democratically elected leader, or a psycho naturally arrises (what historicans call "Bonapartism") because only a savage madman is strong enough to fend off outside interference.
People who are hysterically afraid of Muslims also typically ignore how 80 years worth of attempted regime changes in Syria led directly to Assad's dictatorship. Ironically, these same people never complain about Turkey on Syria's border (those are "good muslims" apparently) or the "evil muslims of Isis" when they were the "friendly terrorists" we created, armed and funded for the past 8 years to take down Syria.
People moan about Hamas, but ignore that it was created by Israel specifically to destroy the PLO (the Palestinian Liberation Organisation - famously led by a Muslim with a Christian wife) precisely beause the PLO had gained UN, World Court and international support. Now that Hamas is likewise internationally recognised as a legitimate political body, Israel is funding extremists groups to kill it. Good job there little buddy.
Those who hate places like Libya, Somalia, groups like Isis, Al Shabbas, the Taliban, Al Queda (our chief allies in Yugoslavia, Afgahnistan and Macedonia) etc themselves know nothing about these groups/nations or our alliances with them or how we created them.
Hilariously, moral indignation is hurled by people at "terrorists", when their our own banks (the largest Bank in the UK is majority owned by the monarchs of Qatar) - the place where you keep your money and whom you profit - are owned by the royals of places like Qatar and Bahrain, chief supporters of terrorist groups, who terrorise ordinary muslims and who would have been voted/pushed out if we didn't keep squashing progressive movements in favour for rich dudes with oil. People complain about "human rights abuses", yet more people are beheaded in theocracies "we" are allied with and whom "we" fund and support. Wahhabism, and the pitting of Sunnis against Shiites, is itself an entirely bogus bit of sectarianism caused by us to Balkanise the mid-east. Stop giving money and weapons to Sunnis to kill Shiites. Stop it.
There is no Muslim bogeyman out to take over the world. Anyone who believes this is a dumbass or a FOX news junkie. There are small groups of Islamic nuts which Big Nations directly or indirectly create to do their dirty work. When the job is done, the "civilized" nations cast the crazies aside, and use the crazies as a pretext to stay and maintain defacto control. None of these "muslim countries" would have developed so poorly had they not been subjected to a deliberate policy of destabalization and looting in the post-WW2 years. Look at any country with big Islamic populations (Singapore, Malaysia etc) which were allowed to develop without outside meddling, and you will not only find a moderate, quickly developing nation, but one with no oil.
