These organisations waste billions every year ,if they were a manufacturing facility they would go bust due to inefficiency , that is even before you look at the structuring/ wages paid.
The charity sector is also very disorganised with a management structure which would not be tolerated in manufacturing/ private sector.

InsiderTrader • April 15, 2020 10:34 AM BST
I think if we had had full information from the start it would have helped

well that is mainly down to china not the WHO

Why has the WHO faced criticism?

It is not the first time the WHO's response to the outbreak has come under scrutiny.

On 14 January, the organisation tweeted that preliminary Chinese investigations had found "no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission" of the new virus.

Mr Trump and others have used the tweet to attack the WHO for simply
believing China, despite evidence to the contrary. But about a week
after that tweet, on 22 January, the agency released a public statement saying that human-to-human transmission did appear to be taking place in Wuhan.

At the end of January, on the same day it declared a public health
emergency, the WHO said that travel restrictions were not needed to stop
the spread of Covid-19 - advice that was eventually ignored by most countries, including by the Trump administration the next day.

In March, the UN agency was also accused of being unduly influenced by China after a senior official refused to discuss Taiwan's response to the outbreak.

Meanwhile, some health experts also say that the WHO's guidance on face masks has led to public confusion.

Other frequently-made criticisms of the WHO more generally are that it is
constrained by politics and a sprawling bureaucracy. It came under
particular fire for its response to the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West
Africa and how long it took to declare a public health emergency, leading the organisation to announce reforms in response.

The WHO probably does have problems and needs reforms (or a new organisation to replace it), but at this point in time it stinks of a move to not take responsibility for own failings.

^^^all these global organisations tend towards political appointments and nepotism in the wider sense, that doesn't mean that they don't do some good and doesn't justify trump's attempt to destabilize the organisation during a pandemic.

What good has the WHO done during the Covid-19 outbreak?

^^They quickly created a test that worked, trump refused to use it and created one that didn't work

Why did he state that "CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart."
Did he lie ?

Angoose
15 Apr 20 10:17
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 14,532 | Blogger: Angoose's blog
Why did he state that "CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart."
Did he lie ?

^

It was an opinion at the time. I am not sure you can call on opinion a lie.

Things have come to light later (such as the Taiwan warning) that suggest the WHO has not been brilliant or smart in my opinion. They may have worked hard. I do not know.

What do you think Angoose. Has the WHO been smart?

WHO should have listened to Taiwan.

Why do you keep saying that?  There are obvious political tensions between taiwan and china so anything that taiwan says about china has to be considered in that light.  As I have to keep repeating, the WHO can only act on the evidence they have and that came from China until WHO investigators were allowed in.

He hasn't ended it, just suspended it pending a review. I don't agree with the timing but they definitely need to be investigated. Not recommending travel being cut off, from China especially, was grossly negligent at best and criminal at worst. The head guy is a politician and quite a dodgy one too with a long standing relationship with China from his days as an Ethiopian politician.

Not a big Trump fan but as a non-US citizen/resident the most important thing for me is US foreign policy and he is the first non-warmonger President in my iifetime, which is good for the world.

He also needs to start a war of some sort to win the election and I'd rather see him do it this way than start or prolong a real one, which numerous Presidents have done when in trouble or looking to get re-elected. No President at war who has stood for re-election has failed to get re-elected. I'm surprised he hasn't looked to attack China and the WHO sooner than now. He initially focused on blaming China but then went quiet on it. And there is a very good chance that China and WHO were complicit in suppressing human to human transmission until after the trade deal with China was signed on 15 Jan. They confirmed it 5 days later even though Taiwan had warned of it 3 weeks earlier. The timing of that looks very dodgy and needs to be looked at.

N-east Correspondent • April 15, 2020 11:26 AM BST
Why did it take WHO til 12th March to actually declare it a Pandmemic.

Pandemic is simply a technical term based on the spread between countries.  So can't see how that is relevant to anything.

I see you swerved my direct question..

Angoose
15 Apr 20 10:27
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 14,535 | Blogger: Angoose's blog

    Apr 15, 2020 -- 10:23AM, InsiderTrader wrote:


    Angoose15 Apr 20 10:17Joined: 18 Jul 02| Topic/replies: 14,532 | Blogger: Angoose's blogWhy did he state that "CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart."Did he lie ?^It was an opinion at the time. I am not sure you can call on opinion a lie.Things have come to light later (such as the Taiwan warning) that suggest the WHO has not been brilliant or smart in my opinion. They may have worked hard. I do not know.What do you think Angoose. Has the WHO been smart?


It is possible that Trump's current "opinion" is also wrong ?

^

He has taken an action based on his opinion - yes it could be wrong.

Angoose, Do you think the WHO has been smart over this outbreak?

dave1357 15 Apr 20 10:31 

Pandemic is simply a technical term based on the spread between countries.  So can't see how that is relevant to anything.




dave, every time the news was on they mentioned that the WHO had 'not yet declared it a pandemic'. Clearly a term which, when announced, would trigger upgraded action, unless I was mistaken.

To determine whether or not the WHO has been "smart" in regard to its handling of the COVID-19 outbreak, you first require to understand what the role of the WHO is and measure its performance against that role.

WHO works worldwide to promote health, keep the world safe, and serve the vulnerable.

Our goal is to ensure that a billion more people have universal health coverage, to protect a billion more people from health emergencies, and provide a further billion people with better health and well-being.

For universal health coverage, we: 
- focus on primary health care to improve access to quality essential services
- work towards sustainable financing and financial protection
- improve access to essential medicines and health products
- train the health workforce and advise on labour policies
- support people's participation in national health policies
- improve monitoring, data and information.

For health emergencies, we:
- prepare for emergencies by identifying, mitigating and managing risks
- prevent emergencies and support development of tools necessary during outbreaks
- detect and respond to acute health emergencies
- support delivery of essential health services in fragile settings.

For health and well-being we:
- address social determinants
- promote intersectoral approaches for health
- prioritize health in all policies and healthy settings.

Through our work, we address:
- human capital across the life-course
- noncommunicable diseases prevention
- mental health promotion
- climate change in small island developing states
- antimicrobial resistance
- elimination and eradication of high-impact communicable diseases.

Having never read that high level overview description of the WHO before today, I am in no position to arrive at an informed opinion as to whether or not they have been "smart".

I suspect that this will be the case for every other contributor to this thread.

I can, however, offer an opinion on whether Trump has chosen to use the WHO as a domestic distraction.
There is ample evidence of similar behaviours that allow a reasonable opinion to be formed.

https://time.com/5791661/who-coronavirus-pandemic-declaration/

During multiple prior press briefings, WHO officials maintained that COVID-19 had “pandemic potential,” but stopped short of declaring it one. The agency did, in January, call it a public health emergency of international concern, a slightly different label that refers to an “extraordinary event” that “constitute[s] a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease.”

trump is the one attempting to damage the organisation

btw you still haven't answered afaik

And how does neutering the WHO at the height of a pandemic help getting the world back to normal?

From the bbc...

International rejection of Trump's WHO decision grows
China and Germany have added to international condemnation of the decision by President Trump to US halt funding for the World Health Organization (WHO).

A foreign ministry spokesman said China was "seriously concerned" about the decision, which he said came during a "critical moment" in the pandemic.

Germany's Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said "blaming doesn't help".


He added that one of the best ways to work to stop the spread of the virus was to strengthen the UN and the WHO in the development and distribution of tests and vaccines.

The EU foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, said he "deeply regretted" the move, adding: "There is no reason justifying this move at a moment when their efforts are needed more than ever to help contain [and] mitigate the coronavirus pandemic."