the guardian article included tax evasion in their total to decide africa was being exploited

In simpler terms, Africa received $126 billion dollars from wealth generated by the taxation of Europeans (money taken directly from the pockets of ethnic Europeans and invested into African states) and individuals in Africa with considerable private asset wealth (described in this article as though it were the communal wealth of all Africans) voluntary left the continent.

THIS ---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQLl4xRsuvo

It is being exploited

By smarter Africans

This is the "plundering" and "exploitation" of Africa

god guardian is such a racist rag

Annika is such a narcissistic thot

why do they only count ethnic europeans taxes?

disgusting

White people giving them billions from the pockets of white people and wealthy individuals leaving Africa

what about taxes on chinese?

I mean yeah we are taking all their raw materials, but the thing is

i already know who wrote that article

@Leaf, what do you think "wealth repatriation" means?

what the fuck are they going to do with them

every single time

we're paying them for the materials

they wouldn't use them themselves

They didn't use the phrase "wealth repatriation" I did

so, the amount that we pay them, which leftists think is too small I guess(?)

is probably worth it to these people

what the fuck are they going to do with a Bauxite mine?

hmm?

<:udontsay:567120494516764695>

nukeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

china is starting to take our place in this process

what are they going to do with Uranium?

`It said African countries received $162bn in 2015, mainly in loans, aid and personal remittances. But in the same year, $203bn was taken from the continent, either directly through multinationals repatriating profits and illegally moving money into tax havens, or by costs imposed by the rest of the world through climate change adaptation and mitigation.`

It just means individuals with citizenship in African countries who possess citizenship in other countries left the continent with their own private assets and thus somehow deprived African people of wealth which isn't even theirs by failing to invest it into the commerical economy

What the fuck are you talking about, @Leaf

Which they are within their rights to do

There will be many more Blasians in the world within over the next 50 years

@BabygottBach their resources mean nothing without the proper tech to utilize it

what don't you get

@Leaf, where the fuck did you get 126 bil in aid?

It says loans AND aid.

(_o_)(_o_)

What I'm talking about is pretty obvious if you can read, I dont think I've used a single word with more than four syllables

*(o)(o)*

Ok loans and AID are how distinct?

It's free money to assist Africans

This is your "gotcha?"

i dont see how that guardian article is relevant at all

A loan is free money?

What in the fuck?

Yes, loans are free money lol

You have to pay it back

So?

Damn

Then it AIN'T FREE

Is your argument Africans should not have to reimburse their debts?

If you have to pay it back.

it is if there isn't interest

Freedom aint free

https://youtu.be/Gm2oq9eHi0g

It's also no aid.

But you can default on loans and not pay them back

Foreign aid is not to be paid back.

a loan without interest is aid, yes

https://twitter.com/ZoomerClips/status/1189337140674596872

It's a good thing that those aren't the sorts of loans the world bank and IMF give out then.

It's not

Hm free money which is provided with the intent of allowing the generation of more revenue ***only*** provided that the amount lended be reimbursed in the future is not aid whatsoever

This does not benefit anyone

Hmm, nice moving of the goalposts

Kek

What was the statement there

Or are you saying that if anything benefits you, it's free?

He didn't say anything retard

What goalposts were moved? A portion of the mass of wealth Europeans provide to Africans (***for free***) is provided in the form of loans

If x benefits me, x is free, even if I paid for it.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/07/one-principal-component-to-rule-them-all/#.Xbj8MehKiPo

Where is the goalpost shifted?

How can you call a loan FREE?

Because they did nothing for the wealth

`Hm free money which is provided with the intent of allowing the generation of more revenue only provided that the amount lended be reimbursed in the future is not aid whatsoever(edited)
This does not benefit anyone`

They did provide any service or resource

It is freely provided only with the promise of future reimbursement

You do realize they have to pay it back.

Yes

So what do you call it if the money is just given as charity?

Free?

Yes?

You have a broad definition of free.

Money given without immediate reimbursement in the form of goods or services is free money

no

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wdRQW8WmVI
Live free or coom hard

Yes

I disagree Leaf

lol

you take on a liability

money that is given out without reimbursement is free

equal to or greater than the capital which you gain

so its not free

unless its interest free

Its basically free, although as far as I know these loans generally do not involve rates of interest

@Leaf When was the last time you coomed?