I was watching the Christion Childrens Fund comercial of poor happy starving children in rags. Then a train crosses in from of the Missonary and I could not help but notice that gee this third world country is really NOT that bad off at least they have passenger trains. That train was doing like 50 mph too! So were was this train at and what county…[:D][:)]
New Jersey.
Bible Belt
How do you know they were poor, happy and starving? I see those same people at our mall all the time and they aren’t any of the three!
You should definitely watch less television - It’s obviously fried your brain!
They were trying to fool you, its actually an Amtrak AEM-7 hauling some Northeast Direct cars, its somewere along the Northeast Corridor! hehe
All staged, that was some back lot studio in california. you’ll also note that the train apparently was only 2 or 3 cars long and going about 50-60 mph.
Third world countries can have trains. Traffic jams are a sign of “advanced” civilizations.
I think it was Lionel!!! [(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]
underworld
[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]
Poor, “HAPPY” starving children ? ? A speeding passenger train makes these children “not that bad off” Just how does that work??? What kind of ad is this? ?
Reminds me of that artical in months Trains Mag on Etreaia The Trains are a Matter of national Pride… Could Be Brazil They have trains…
And Concrete ties too boot.Cant feed the children but can afford concrete ties.
It illustrated:
A) They were living literally right next to the tracks.
B) Life was passing them by…
How happy is that?
Wayne
They have televisions in boxcars now?
[:D]
They’re between every other set of shackles…[:p]
Sorry, hard for me to be sarcastic about this.
I remember that commercial.
It is a 3rd world country. The train was not U.S, but looked similar to equipment seen in South American countries. It is a case of rail lines being high priority, just like in the U.S an interstate highway is high priority.
I don’t have the stats in front of me, but this sounds familiar. In countries like Paraguay, Peru, and some sections of Brazil, agricultural and mineral products have to be moved to markets. Fuel prices are high, so moving bulk and less-than-carload items is often cheaper by rail. Some of these governments will prioritize upgrading rail lines as they are vital to the economy. Privitization is being tried out for some companies based on the 1990s privitization of some Mexican rail lines.
Passenger trains are still provided by the government, as transit buses are here in the U.S. But guys, these trains often couldn’t even hold a candle to a 20 year old Amfleet II car with wear and tear on it!
All in all, there are people and kids starving and living in misery in some of these nations. I know that the USA has been giving foreign aid for years, but its what those governments do with it is what should be questioned.
There have been rip-off scams in the past but, most of those t.v spots featuring missionaries are legitimate. Those of you that remember the 1960s show “Bonanza” have likely seen Pernell Roberts (played Adam Cartwright) doing missionary commercial spots. He’s not getting rich off of it.
A friend of mine, a lawyer, gave up a lucrative career and is helping out in the Dominican Republic. To me, she’s very selfless and dedicated!
The private donations given by citizens actually goes to help people in need. Some charities in the past abuse donations, taking as much as 80%. With missionaries, it’s the opposite with the majority going to where its n
Sorry Antonio, I agree that there are charities needing attention, but this commercial is only one of many of theirs that has inconsiticies. this is a scam orginization, that is not a third world country, considering half those kids shown are shown in other commercials of thiers, in so-called “other” third world countries.
“Christian Childrens Fund” is not a true charity, Unlike Unicef, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent, and Save the Children, as well as others. Save the Children is the best, as they do not discriminate between poor children in any country, they will, and have, helped children who fall far below the poverty line here in the US, as well as other countries.
After the tsunamis, MSN (homepage here) did a comparison of charitable organizations showing how many dollars it took to distribute 100 dollars to the people who need the help. If memeory serves me well, Red Cross was right up there along with Lutheran World relief as the best two organizations. In their cases, it only costs a couple of dollars to distribute $100 to those in need. In contrast, the article said it costs Save the Childred around $30 to distribute the same $100.
mike
I have know idea what was just said here?
Too much Shacklevision I guess…
I imagine you will offer some evidence of this.
The CCF has a rating of “A” by The American Institute of Philanthropy
They meet the Better Business Bureau’s standards for charitable fund raising.
Their distribution of funds statement states: For fiscal year 2004, CCF spent 80.7% of all contributions received for the benefit of children in our programs. CCF spent 8% on management and administration expenses and 11.3% on fundraising
I don’t have any preferences regarding this charity over others like Save the Children, but I also don’t have one regarding Coke & Pepsi. It does interest me though when someone makes a blanket condemnation of something without offering evidence.
Wayne