Archbishops: If we can find so much money for banks, why can't we eradicate child poverty?

[morningpaper]

Williams and Sentamu on the current financial crisis::

"The archbishop acknowledged the need for stable financial systems if poverty was to be eradicated, but added: "One of the ironies about this financial crisis is that it makes action on poverty look utterly achievable. It would cost $5bn (£2.7bn) to save six million children's lives.

World leaders could find 140 times that amount for the banking system in a week. How can they tell us that action for the poorest is too expensive?"

Shocking and thought-provoking figures.

Should governments pour money to prop up a failing capitalist system while children go starving?

Interesting debate again from our two top beardy boys.

i was thinking the same earlier, really don't understand how this world works

Uplifting the economic situation of a few million poor children does nothing for boosting economic confidence in the goverment and banking systems

Much as I applaud the sentiments, if the economy goes down the pan I'm not sure where the next load of tax is suppose to come from. To pay for all the other things people need.

Gaghhh.... those words left a nasty taste.....

i was thinking this too.. and things like JK Rowling giving Labour £1million of her own cash.. i know it wasnt really to save banks, and yes, she probably does give a lot of her own money to children who are in need, but i doubt it tops £1million?