www.hhsdebate.org

And Aman, just semantics, but you can't have just one subsection. You need at least two, be it a/b or i/ii.

On a lighter note, i would just like to say that Argentina is also a sponsor of this bill.

Argentina also strongly supports child education, however, inaddition to NGO's, they have a higher need for education before primary school. Argentinian children have an astronomically high admittance into school, however, many children are forced to stay back or drop out, because they don't have basic education. (Imagine going to first grade, learning about 1-2-3's, without having gone to kindergarten.)

Sonali: We have 2 resolutions, which one are you a sponser of? So that i can list you down as a sponsor if it is 5-2.

I believe i talked to you in class about the bill Argentina sponsors, but to clarify Argentina is a sponsor of 5-2

Guys, don't try and bomb Austrialia off the map for suggesting this, but what if we combine the two resolutions. In some ways, they are very simular and bring diffrent ideas to solve the problem to the table. Here is how it should work:

From 5-1: Take sections 2 and 5
From 5-2: Take sections 2, 3, 4, and 5

Now, I know what the sponsores of 5-1 are thinking: "Hey, you forgot section 4, you need section 4!" No offense, but section 4 is stupid. While Austrialia agrees that gender equality is important, cutting of aid to some of these countries like being suggested is a terible idea, especially those countries that are dependent on that aid. Also, you have to relize that it is not only gender you have to worry about here. You also have to keep in mind race and religion, which you left out. Sponsores for 5-2, by the way, when your talking about institution in section 2b, do you mean the country or the education provider itself?

You can add the preumblatory clauses but you get the jest.

Justin, answering your question, the word 'institutions' is in the terms of an educational institution. Not the country.

Secondly, i think the sponsors of both resolutions can talk about combining the resolution. We still have to hear about France's one. (Sorry Ben, no sponsors have answered back yet) so lets wait and see if the sponsors would like to consider the idea.

Being a sponsor of Resolution 5-2 myself, I am open to negotiations to talk about combining the two resolutions. However, we still need a complete consensus to decide if it can be done or not.

First off, institution can be used in several diffrent ways, so I didn't know which one you ment. Austrialia won't turn this into an USA vs UK battle (Eric vs George) by dragging this on, but it was just a point for clarification. Austrialia would also like to extend its support for combining the two resolutions. The one that was previously proposed by Austrialia could be used as a basis.

Just a response back to Aman:

Yes, Canada, being a well-developed nation, can afford micro-credit loans. But, the point of micro-credit loans is to help smaller nations such as 3rd World Countries. It doesn't have to do with the country's state of development: A poor nation's residents can successfully take microcredit loans and repay them; the time may be longer, but it will work.

Shree: Are there any specific statistics, studies or statements from expert economists that actually state that the micro-credits are proven to work in such states. If there are, then i think we would like to see them.

Speakers (should have done this before...)
5-1
Pro:
Con:

5-2
Pro:
Con:

I know we already got some people to speak, please remind me who you are. I think Vaibhav (Turkey) and Sonali (Argentina) volunteered- or were volunteered- whatever.

Austria and Canada, instead of having that little flame war up there, you and the other sponsors of 5-2 should try and work something out with 5-1 sponsores. I should say your about to have a USA vs UK (Eric vs George) monment, but thats beside the point. If we work together on a united front, we can see that both major ideas that solve the problem come through and pass because both sides have really good ideas and proposoles. For example, 5-1 gives some really good ideas of areas that spiecifcally need alot of aid education wise. On the other hand, 5-2 gives a good outline of organizations that can be used and takes good notes for consideration of what people are not reciving education for. Austrialia would like to see a combined resolution and a united front for it or at least both resolutions passed in conjunction. Its the politics that were getting into that causes lose for a united front and causes problems amoung the UN. I just want you to think about this.

We are not having a "flame war." I am just requesting some statistics to prove what Shree said. Since this is part of an amendment, i think both speakers should have a chance to speak just like in debate. However, we should give equal respect to the amendment given by Justin and debate it.

Sorry to say Shree, but I agree with Aman

SRaghavan wrote:....the time may be longer, but it will work.

Even if it doesn't take a long time for these countries to pay back these micro-credit loans, do we still want these third world countries to have this looming debt over their heads as they try to forge a strong national economy. Starting with a debt is not something that would be beneficial to these countries. Though the flow of money is important to the economy, we need to figure out a more substantial way to promote their economies, and the schooling of these children is one of the best ways to do this.

I hate to say this Shree, but Aman is right and Ben gave perfect eveidence to prove it. I mean, were suposed to be helping these people gain a better education, which will lead to creation of other things like creation of more buisnesses and jobs if done correctly. The micro-criedit loan system will only creat more problems and cause these poorer countries to have their debt increased and would also create more of a burden on that countries monitary expenses. With that said, this is why Austrialia would like to suggest that Section 1 of 5-2 be stricken from the resolution. Also, if we do combine resolutions, Austrialia would not like to see that in there as well. Second off all, Aman, it is not an amendment, it is a suggestion to discuss the proposole of combining the two resolutions and an outline of the amendments from both resolutions I think may be suitable to helping combine. We could also see if we could have both of these resolutions be passed in conjunction, but thats a diffrent senario. Countries need to work together and I think combining these two resolutions would be a good example.

Justin, as I have said before, I am in favor of combining the resolutions. But I am still awaiting confirmation by the sponsors. If they reply ay or nay, we can move on.

Jfanders wrote: Countries need to work together and I think combining these two resolutions would be a good example.

I have no idea what that means? ^^

Does that mean that to prove to the world that countries work together and that we MUST combine the resolutions to give an example?