World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I can hear the echoes of people saying “why should I care about US politics?”
This is one example. The biggest problems we face as humanity can only be solved with a global effort.
We should get to the point of being knowledgeable about the WHOs function, current financial support and reasons thereof, and what we can do to support its functions. Focusing on what another country does or does not, even if related to a common resource it's a waste of time at best.
.... Except what a country does or does not do directly impacts the WHOs functions and financial support, so.... Kind of important.
There are many contributors, some substantially more than others, and any of them leaving will have an impact on the efficacy of the WHO.
For a program that has such a profound impact, that seems like such a small budget. It’s a shame that the US cuts $116M to save precious money, while maintaining $16 billion in, for example, petroleum subsidies.
It is.
Its a shockingly stupid decision. Not surprising considering the administration, but incredibly stupid.
Exactly. $116M is absolutely inconsequential to the budget and by extension the American people. What the WHO produces has a huge impact on all people, including, yup American people. So the American people are only losing here.
Everyone loses. That's the painful part.
These contributions are so small. I wouldn't mind if my own country increased their contributions to WHO by 20% to make up for this shortfall.
The biggest problem is that the WHO is a worldwide health organization. Without cooperation from the States, there could be huge health impacts elsewhere that could have been otherwise averted. Will other countries also pull out?
That’s what I was thinking except I was thinking about the military. Why are the numbers for health so much lower than for war. It’s not a little lower it’s multiple zeroes lower and that’s not just the US. The UK is paying $22m to the WHO but has a military budget more than 3,000 times larger!
Wait, those numbers are freaking tiny as fuck...
Yeah I'm kind of surprised and in a way reassured.
Whatever the US contribution of $100m was doing it wasn't fending off the next pandemic.
I live in a very small city in nowhere Australia and we just spent $100m on a highway upgrade.
I wonder how the amount that should be paid is divvied out. Or if it is all just voluntary. I was thinking Europe was quite outsized, so it could be by wealth, but also Japan seems quite large and Russia fairly tiny.
They explain on their site here.
There is membership/assessed, which goes by each member country's wealth. There are also voluntary contributions, which comes in a few forms - core, which have no specific requirement on use, strategic donations which have general goals and can be applied to anything in that field/theme, and specified, which go to specific projects or efforts.
There is also a budget portal which details how money is spent.
The simplest way would be for the remaining countries to raise their contribution. And perhaps have a review of the executive salaries.
As per the map you uploaded, USA created a problem: can we do anything about it as non-Americans? No we can't. Let's then assess the situation, inform better the public about the WHOs function, and sit with as many of all the other countries to work to a joint solution.
Giving me news about US "actions" and internal discourse, for everyone outside of the US, is inaction-causing noise at best, propaganda at its worst. What should be communicated is the existence of a void and its possible consequences.
What about China filling the void being a possible consequence for example? Is it a possibility? Is it good or bad? Should we talk to China about it or not?
If I keep thinking about Trump and his henchmen I won't ask myself those questions.
You do realize that OPs article is about a US “action”? You’ve now been informed and might be able to take action like voting accordingly, writing to your representatives etc.
Or, as per my initial comment, you could’ve ignored US news and would be none the wiser.
Edit: one more thing, you know the US-made/Tesla boycotts happening all over the world? They’d not be happening if everyone ignored US politics.
I do not vote representatives based on US policy here in Europe. I vote them because of what I expect them to do based on a current situation in light of the lessons history gave us.
The Tesla protests and torching may be useful now, but if we have nothing to replace those people with, even worse alternatives may come to fill the void.
As a EU citizen, my main focus is to build an alternative, not to protest and counteract a foreign dictator.
Which other countries can also create if contributions are altered.
Being aware of the how and why of national politics impacting international politics is a good thing. Suggesting otherwise is just putting blinders on.
I am suggesting being aware of the problems, of the functions of the institutions and to do something. Other countries could also work to make WHO even better despite the absence of the USA (or thanks to it).
The WHO also has a lot of its budget tied to Melinda and Bill, two American billionaires, 390$B in 2022, so much more than the US as a whole and that is a much bigger problem, if you ask me.
Do we really want global health functioning on this basis, or should we use the shock to rediscuss the assumptions?
Where did I say we should focus on another country? Why does everything have to be black and white?
There are shades in between ignoring and focusing on you know?
"I can hear the echoes of people saying “why should I care about US politics?”"
I am one of those.
Here on Lemmy there is so much US noise, I even started to downvote some posts and comment who are, in the end, just bitching around about a failed government when the problem I see in the US is actually a failed culture.
This post's original message may be a useful one, but not if you are focusing on what US did and should do, but rather what the rest of us can do in spite of the situation created.