In Reply to: Lets get out there and do it! posted by Cathy on October 08, 1996 at 02:52:12:
> Unlike in the US, where a billion means 'a thousand million', the
> traditional UK definition of a billion is 'one million million
> i.e. 1,000,000,000,000 (should be 12 0's) (check the Oxford dictionary
> if you don't believe this). In 1987 world population reached
> 5,000 million (this site says the factsheet was written in 1986).
> 20,000,000,000,000 divided by 5,000,000,000 = 4,000. In other words
> not $4 per person per year, but $4,000 per person per year. Sounds to
> me like it would be quite possible to feed someone for a year on
> that amount.Point well made, and taken. Unfortunate that silly inconsistantcies such
as these should exist in the first place.> It's one thing to make use of resources, its another to destroy
> them, and that's what's going on right now.I'm afraid I don't understand what you folks are referring to here.
Where are natural resources being destroyed with being made use of?> We don't want charity. We want what is rightfully ours.
What, exactly, is it that's rightfully yours but being withheld
or taken by someone else?> I notice the orginal poster hasn't attempted to
> reply (can't take the heat).No, Arnold, I hadn't bothered to check back here since I posted.
I hadn't intended to, but came across it again in a search for
another topic. "Can't take the heat?" Give me a break! What
heat? This is just a debate between a bunch of, for the most
part, outsiders who have no stake in, and no affect on, the
outcome of this or any other legal battle.