Skip to main content

Thoughts...


To me a recent discussion I got into raises some questions that might make a nifty study to undertake. Such a study might ask;


  • What share of the populations of what developing countries work either making things that are exported to the developed world or are employed by developed world companies?
  • What alternatives to this work are available?
  • Are the old ways pre-employment still available?
  • Over what time scale have people's material circumstances changed?
  • How have those circumstances changed?
  • And what are the likely future trends for such people?


Those are crucial questions in identifying who is living under what circumstances and to correctly identify the reasons for those circumstances. But since a £40k grant from a major university hasn't just fallen into my lap I ain't going to be doing any such thing.



DEATH

Some basis for claims about how many people die worldwide for what reasons every year;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate

A graphical breakdown of total 20th Century mortality by cause;
http://infobeautiful3.s3.amazonaws.com/2013/03/iib_death_wellcome_collection_fullsize.png

I don't see where the correlation between large numbers of annual human deaths on Earth and the existence of capitalism rests. Everywhere it's been tried there is a weak correlation but it's negative - that is capitalistic places see less death, at least after a few decades' worth of economic development off the back of that same capitalism;



SPREADSHEET LIVING

Humans are heterogeneous, human actions are heterogeneous, and land and capital are heterogeneous.

Therefore totting up quantities of stuff - and of, say, people in poverty or numbers of people who die of starvation per year - that exist on Earth and saying one of these aggregates can alleviate the other does not represent the real-world challenges of implementing such a solution - otherwise central planning would work.

Otherwise such things would have been solved by charitable giving and government foreign aid by now.



POVERTY

A report on the effects of Zimbabwe's socialist land reforms on agricultural productivity - that is, actual production of food that humans can eat. One of the sub-articles deals with the on-the-ground consequences for food production and mass starvation of imposing a commons in land;
http://www.cgdev.org/page/scorched-earth-zimbabwe-and-after-satellite-photos

A fabulous news story elucidating the same point as the link just above;
http://www.zimbabwesituation.com/news/zimsit_agriculture-tale-zimbabwes-sleeping-giant/

Poverty rate lower than ever because of capitalism, including in Africa - will be extinct in 25 years tops absent WW3;
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/10/05/for-the-first-time-less-than-10-percent-of-the-world-is-living-in-extreme-poverty-world-bank-says/

Dambisa Moyo explains why government to government aid is a non-starter - points out that $1 trillion has been spent on it to no long-term positive effect at all;
http://dambisamoyo.com/publications-articles-videos/books/dead-aid/
http://www.cfr.org/world/aid-dead-discussion-dambisa-moyo-foreign-aid-development/p34548



ESCAPE

M-PESA offers an easy way for farmers in Kenya & Tanzania to get access to credit to improve their farms through eg. fertilisers and machinery;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-Pesa

The European Union Common Agricultural Policy is one of the biggest obstacles to more productive agriculture in Africa;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Agricultural_Policy#Anti-development

Clearly any attempt to turn the continent into a commons ain't going to work QED Zimbabwe farming commons;
http://www.cgdev.org/page/scorched-earth-zimbabwe-and-after-satellite-photos

Africans are not somehow magically different from other people. They will escape poverty in their own ways ('their own ways' meaning each person will find their own way) and the best thing an outsider can do is;
a. let them by leaving them alone
b. donate to a charity that doesn't interact with Western or African governments
c. invest in African enterprise



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Zeitardation

A Youtuber called axe863 made a video in which he used scientific, mathematical and statistical common-sense to deliver the KO that the Venus Project and Zeitgeist Movement so richly deserved. If his approach seems weird and unconventional it's because he's not attacking from a tradition neoclassical or Keynesian perspective. Axe863's poison is complexity economics, something a good deal more dangerous to ideas like TVP and TZM. [ 2 ] Now to a couple of comment threads from below the video that I thought could od with being replicated just in case they get deleted at source! ~~~ AstralLuminary 1 year ago Why can't we generalize the consumption patterns of middle-income people in the western world, set our constraints equal to the amount of localized resources, and the rate of resource recovery, derive a population growth model that would be sustainable to said consumption patterns, and derive the necessary quantifiable amount of work required to expen...

RIP Macroeconomics

This post has no intellectual rigour, but I'm posting it anyway, because neither does macroeconomics. Most economists love spending all day doing macro, preferring it to the prosaic small-scale world of microeconomics. This is where the brazen hypocrisy of many heterodox folks will make itself known, as they decry the fallacies of composition rife within neoclassical economics and then go away and commit the same daft mistakes themselves (sometimes quite well disguised) using aggregates of demand, supply, and labour time. Further friction for modern economists can be had when contending with the tripartite division of economics into land, labour, capital, and the action of classes (the 'class' praxis) of the owners of those three economic resources. So, to all of macroecon... you're drunk. Go home and rethink your life.* * Yes I know I just committed a fallacy of reification.

Foreign Policy hates you...

In Foreign Policy a hardcore fluff piece * talks about young Americans falling out of love with capitalism. The closing paragraph is very artful but also insipid and inaccurate. Read it and weep! ~~~ * A fluff piece that does a very bad job of grappling with a subject that is actually important.