Do you have opinions on any of the issues Principal Voices is exploring: The environment, business innovation, economic development and transport? If so, we want to hear them. E-mail your views, including your full name and country of residence, to comments@principalvoices.com. A selection of these messages will be posted below.
If you in the developed countries would pay the true value of the Nike shoes or designer cloths that you wear, then people in developing countries would be richer and you would be a bit poorer. These products are made using slave labor in developing countries.
There should be a universal minimum wage. It's a crime that people working full time have appalling living standards in developing countries. With extremely high world unemployment, no world minimum wage can be established. Competition reduces the wages paid in developing countries to nearly nothing.
At least the multi-national companies should agree on a minimum salary for people in developing countries to counter the negative effects of competition. The increased production costs due to higher salaries would not be significant for people in developed countries and the multi-national companies would be doing their part in reducing poverty in these developing countries. Consumers would then be contributing indirectly toward the reduction of poverty. A. Camarata, Vienna, Austria
I am referring to your interview with Amartha Sen, Prof. of Economics and Philosophy at Harvard.
The interview begins with the question: "What are the root causes of poverty across the globe, and what solutions would you put in place to address this." I then read the interview a few times but could not find the answer. I will therefore try to answer the question myself.
Actually, one does not have to be a rocket scientist to see that the IT revolution and the introduction of robotics and much automation has increased productivity in most factories to such an extent that there simply is less and less work. In fact, I predict that that at some stage there will be an imbalance of too many products chasing too few people being able to afford them (depression!).
The solution to the problem would be to divide the "cake" of the available work more evenly over the population, i.e. we will all have to work less. I propose the introduction of a 32 hour or four day workweek. To prevent unfair competition this would have to be done on a global scale. I have been trying to get leaders all over the world interested in this idea or to get an opinion. But, typically, it seems that everyone is willing to talk about the problem (of poverty), but no one is willing to do something about it. This includes would-be leaders like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton – they always seem to be able to contact me but try reaching them! Henry Pool, Silverton, South-Africa
Corporations should take more responsibility for their part in causing inflation. Inflation became a major problem with the advent of the corporations. Corporations have the ability to control prices and wages more affectively then ever before. Corporations should be prohibited from indexing salaries and benefits to inflation and prohibited from increasing salary and benefits if inflation is above a certain amount (say 3%). If this is done then inflation could easily be brought under control and the system would be self- regulating. If corporate executives are losing real income due to inflation and cannot raise their salaries and benefits then, they must use profits to bring down prices and fight inflation. Corporate executives also have a lot of power over government officials so they will pressure government officials to keep government inflationary policies under control. Market forces work effectively for small businesses so if corporate businesses lower prices then they will have to also in order to compete. The Federal Reserve should not be concerned about inflation several years down the road. If congress or the president makes inflationary decisions then the Fed should counter with anti-inflationary measures. Otherwise they should only be concerned about stimulating the economy when supplies exceed demand and removing the stimulus when demand exceeds supply. Stimulating the economy when supplies exceed demand will reduce unemployment to near zero. A. Camarata, Vienna, Austria
Having examined the various drivers of economic development and growth as proposed by your article, it is surprising to note the obvious absence of the role Energy has to play in the growth process of Less Developed Countries. For there to be any meaning full growth in LDC, the World Bank and other multi national organisations would have to develop, inovative schemes to make modern form of energy available at affordable cost to the citizens of these countries. This way, small and medium size factories can spring up, hence creating employment for the locals. The women and children can channel more time and energy into more economically productive actives rather than fetching wood and other biomass forms of fuel.
Lanre Oloniniyi, Edinburgh
For any sustainable development,the efforts must come from within the community and the presence of a helping hand from without accelerates the process.To put the right effort ,the people must have the right education(the education that gives them the ability to identify the problems and to come up with solutions). All this happens in an environment of free thought offered by democracy alone.
So I believe that the priority investment shall be in right education,
that teaches open-mindedness and tolerence.The second priority shall be elimination of negative factors that hinder all round development ,such as corruption ,internal conflicts ,funds diversions ,wars etc. Educated and motivated people can help themselves here also.
Above all principles and practices must match. The helping hand will have to show the ways and means of achieving.
T.N. Murti, India
Forgiving the debt and removing trade barriers for poor countries will not reduce poverty even by a small amount.
The economies of poor countries are run by billionaires. These are the upper class. The middle classes are the workers. The poor classes are completely outside of the economic system. They have no income and can not buy the products and services produced by their economies. The commercial farmers produce all the food that the middle and upper classes need. The economies of these small countries, excluding the poor class, are actually doing quiet well. Debit relief and trade barrier reduction are ploys to increase the wealth of the richest in these poor countries.
It is the responsibility of governments to provide a minimum, livable standard of living for its citizens. They should do it by providing welfare, un-employment insurance, pensions, and make work projects. They should do it by printing money, borrowing, and taxing rich corporations. Taxing rich corporations should be directly related to the amount of unemployed to provide incentives for them to create jobs.
By providing a minimum income to the poorest in the country the government is setting a minimum Demand for products and services which is much, much, much higher then they currently have. This will create a significant boost to the economy which will result in a large number of jobs being created. It's to everyone benefit if they do it.
Using unemployment to fight inflation should be eliminated. Inflation is caused by the growing gap between the rich and the poor and the demand of the middle class to share in that increased wealth. The USA tolerates 5% unemployment and poor countries tolerate a much higher percentage. At least 5% of the people in the USA are outside the capitalist economic system, living in poverty, and depending on charity. This is unfair to the unemployed. Unfair to the poor class
Once the government provides a minimum income for its citizens Poverty in their country Has Been Eliminated. Sweat shops have been eliminated, child labor has been eliminated. Crime has been reduced. Health has been increased.
There is now a level playing field for all business to compete. Trade barriers can now be reduced. Poor countries can not benefit from seat shops and child labor. If debits are forgiven then all the people in the country benefit.
Do not forgive debt and reduce trade barriers until these countries provide for a minimum income for their people. This is the way make poverty history. A Camarata, Vienna, Austria
People who have money should look for ways of helping the poor to also develop themselves, and get a better life. Here in our country Uganda we are less developed, unemployemet is a common problem and there is no easy to deal away with it.
What I am suggesting is that instead of people donating to us they should try to teach us to be job creators not to be job seekers, the grants given to the people should be invested in some resources so that a very big number of people should dig for it through working hard in such invested resources.
Population increase is also a big problem here in Uganda due to poor family planning. And the government has not come up with good means of how to control the high birth rate. If this was controlled at least the unemployment problem would have been solved as that the small population is proportional to the number of jobs present.
What am appealing to merciful readers is that if money is there just come and invest in some resources here in Uganda because your investments will be gainfull to you and in turn helping our citizens in one way or another to get employed and develop. John Paul, Uganda
Over the two months culminating in the recent G8 summit in Scotland, the international community has been calling for more action and aid for poverty stricken Africa. But what really are the issues surrounding poverty in Africa?
Most barely dare to whisper the truth and fewer want to answer the main question:
"If rich nations truly seek a reduction of poverty of poverty in Africa, why don't they (we) deal with the REAL issues?" These issues are principally CORRUPTION, DISTRIBUTION, ACCOUNTABILITY and CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) subsidies in wealthy nations.
Every year African nations receive billions of Dollars, Euros, Kronor, Pounds and Yen in the form of donations. Even with decades of aid and support, Africa is getting poorer, more people are dying from war, hunger and AIDS than ever before while the rich nations make promises of: "The next decade is for Africa", "Never Again" or "We will wage a war on Poverty in Africa!"
There is much more to be considered when handing poor nations multi-billion dollar checks than easing the rich world's conscience for centuries of oppression and exploitation. Politicians and citizens of rich countries alike should consider the following issues in their "Crusade Against Poverty" (different CAP!).
Over 1/3 of the total GDP of the African continent disappears each year due to corruption! This 1/3 is measured both as actual money physically disappearing or money which never gets there in the form of investment for fear of loss. Corruption, which is very often reinforced by the attitude and actions of the rich country governments and especially multinationals doing business in Africa, is the number one reason for poverty. This is closely followed-up by improper and inefficient distribution of donated funds and resources, which is very closely related to and caused by corruption.
Accountability is one of the biggest issues surrounding African aid. The rich countries have been giving billions for decades to African nations in the form of donations (In addition to IMF and World Bank loans!). Many African nations depend on these foreign donations for more than 80% of their annual budgetary needs. Most of these same nations are "governed" by very oppressive dictators who buy arms, houses, cars or still worse, send the money right back to Europe and other rich countries into personal offshore bank accounts. Rarely does any of this money get to the people to pay for schools, hospitals, basic infrastructure or food. Why don't rich countries insist on and monitor accountability? If a tax payer from a rich country went to a bank seeking a mortgage or loan, he or she would have to show what the loan was for and present a business plan or budget to qualify for the loan. However, our governments do not take the same measure when handing billions of the tax-payers money to corrupt regimes.
A perverse contradiction between rich nations' desire for alleviating poverty in Africa and reality are CAP or agricultural subsidies. Aside from the fact that a grossly disproportionate amount of money goes to an equally disproportionately small group of people who contribute very little to domestic GNP (Gross National Product) in their respective countries, this persistent phenomenon is what denies the majority of Africans of any means of earning a living. CAP subsidies in the rich nations are socially and economically wrong for their own countries and especially damaging to the welfare of African nations.
What if rich countries took the bold and badly needed steps to get rid of universally damaging subsidies like CAP as well as to reduce tariffs on agricultural products from Africa? Nearly immediately, Africa and other developing nations would have an instant way to earn money directly and not be dependant on their leaders and current regimes.
It would provide a source of badly needed income to mainly rural Africa. Rich countries could then take the billions given in donations and the billions more spent on subsidizing French and American farmers and invest these funds in simple distribution channels and agricultural supplies like seed and fertilizer for African farmers. Micro-credits and related efforts have proven far more effective in reducing poverty and hunger and improving lives. The recipient governments could also tax incomes and businesses thus reducing their dependency on donor funds. Further still, the recipient governments would not only be held accountable by donors, but their own populations.
This will also have an enormous effect on the rich country's own citizens and state of affairs. Currently, due in large part to subsidies, most produce and agricultural products are artificially inflated prices while at the same time "producers" enjoy subsidies and tax breaks. Ironically, in places like France, Spain and Italy, Africans daily are making a dangerous trek to reach the shores of Europe in the hope of a new life picking strawberries and tomatoes for the subsidised European farmers! These same countries with CAP subsidies also rely heavily on immigration (legal and illegal) from the very countries whose people they are blocking the means to fend for themselves in their own homelands via tariffs and subsidies. If you give an African a chance to grow and export their own food, not only would the rich nations benefit from a drop in illegal immigration, but also they would enjoy an increase of excellent agricultural products at much more reasonable prices along with countless secondary benefits.
Ridding the international system of CAP subsidies and tariffs is a responsible and entirely possible step to reducing poverty in Africa. It would also add credibility to the words and speeches of the G8, silence the radical anti-globalisation groups because this is really what they are rallying against; how pro-globalization forces trumpet globalization and its benefits and yet we have CAP subsidies which stifle truly "global trade."
It is high time that the world, particularly the rich world speaks honestly. All sides of the argument understand the need for something new, for change and to recognize the fact that the 450 billion dollars so far donated has accomplished very little. In order for rich nations to help alleviate poverty in Africa, they first need to look at themselves, face the real issues and build credibility for their claims. The rich nations are still behaving in Africa as in the colonial days; exploiting, oppressing, creating division and worse still, creating a horrible state of dependency. If the rich nations of the world are serious about Africa, they have all the power to make the right choices and do what is really needed. I challenge the rich countries to be honest with their tax-paying citizens, with the rest of the world and most importantly with themselves. Poverty in Africa is not a problem of money, it is a problem of policy. We can change that. Jeremy Werner, Spain
Child labour is a problem in Uganda, one of the East African countries experiencing a lot of problems politically, socially and economically.
Uganda is greatly affected by wars. In its northern part people are dying and can no longer go farming. Children are left without food or shelter. Such children are forced to go and work so that they can earn a living for survival.
Poor management of the population by the government has led to unemployment of the parents of these children. The unemployment problem means that many children can no longer go to school and must instead work to survive.
Poor family planning and management has also added to the problem. The practice of polygamy is producing a lot of children whose mothers cannot manage to look after and care for both financially and socially, and as a result they are forced to go out and work at an early age.
Many children when they work are subjected to heavy labour which they cannot manage which affects their physical and mental development. This situation has retarded our development because a country with such citizens hardly develops.
We need to offer opportunities for our children to go to school can go to school so that we eradicate such child labour in Uganda. John Paul, Kampala, Uganda
I am a true blooded Filipino. I love my country. Although there's so much to do in alleviating poverty and offer to the world that the Philippines is a lovely place and has lots of economic opportunities. We have armies of capable, intelligent, caring and sensitive people to lead us out in poverty and economic, political and moral freedom. If we do this and eventually claim success on this in the near future, we can help other third world countries in whatever way we can. In so doing we will no longer depend solely on financial assistance from developed countries and instead rely on ourselves, break the chains of undevelopment which hopefully could positively influence other third world countries and then live in independence amongst the community of nations. Thank you. Noel Crucio, Cebu, Philippines.
The problem is not that outsourcing from developed countries to
developing countries is taking place, it is rather that the
corporations are in search of the lowest price they have to pay.
Globalization is good when all parties benefit and the poor in these
countries are able to have a higher standard of living. It is
exploitative when the multi-national corporations use them and then
move on to some other place when they demand higher wages and
conditions. There has to be some sort of responsibility on the part of
the multinational organizations. Janice Hagey-Schmidt, Los Angeles, California USA.
I am very grateful to God,and Paris Club for deeming
it necessary to grant us debt relief. However,it is important to note that Nigeria has all it takes to be economically bouyant,in terms of
mineral and human resources Nature has been fair to us as a nation.
Our leaders need to take advantage of both resources for economic advancement of our darling country. Well, I commend the economic measures of president Olusegun Obasanjo.My sincere advice is that he should move futher by encouraging indegenous manufacturees,by
way of granting them loans and other financial assistance
By so doing Nigeria shall be among the developed nations of the world soonest. Emmanuel D.C.Akor, Port Harcourt,Rivers State,NIGERIA.
Women represent 51% of the world's population yet are absent at the global economic table when it comes to the discussion of economic development. How can women around the world be brought into the conversation on economic development? Maureen Blanc, International Museum of Women, San Francisco, US
The major problem of the world is that politics don't wont to solve the problems of the Third World and don't wont to address the rules of terrorism. The point is Africa needs money. It need schools, education, water, waste infrastructure, education on health and sexual issues. Don't give them so much money. Lets build for them what they need, to avoid corruption that is present, learn and help them to earn their own money. Give them same possibilities to trade their products. Samo Borko, Maribor, Slovenia
Africa has exposed Western perfidy and caught the West out on every major development issue bang-to-rights.
1.Debt. The debt was willfully lent to dictators during the cold war so that the West could have a hold over them. The money was spent on arms to suppress African populaces, give contracts to European contractors and consultants and what remained was stashed in European bank accounts. We the ordinary people of Africa didn't ask for the money, it was not borrowed with our authority and we didn't receive it, we don't owe you a penny. Go get it from the dictators you lent it to. We'll give you a hand; most of it is in Switzerland, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg and London.
2.Trade: Practice what you preach. The rich world talks about development rounds whilst France is fighting tooth and nail to hang on to the CAP as we speak. This is what the fracas over the EU budget was all about. So to put it bluntly, you (the West) are lying; you'e got no intention of reforming trade. Food security is not an argument. Coffee is hardly an essential foodstuff in a time of war; neither is chocolate which coming from Africa into the EU is currently subject to 300 percent tariffs.
3.Corruption & good governance. It' a bit rich of people who financed, armed, supported and benefited from dictators for so long, (not to mention apartheid, segregation and slavery - some good governance that was), the very dictators who are now accused of corruption, to talk to us about good governance. Nevertheless even here we'e caught you out. To fight corruption you need democracy to make governments accountable. No enduring democracy ever emerged before the emergence of a prosperous middle class, with something to lose out of bad economic management/oppressive government.
Read European history. Read American history. A prosperous middle class with a vested interest in fighting corruption, because it harms their economic well being, is the only way it's ever going to happen. If the trade conditions are right people can, for a time, prosper despite bad/oppressive governance, to a point where they have the resources to fight corruption and the bad government it emanates from. Look at China. Once they reach a level of wealth where they don't have to spend every minute trying to survive and can spend some of it on political activity, they start to agitate for second-order human desires like personal freedom and good governance. People have to get past survival before they can afford to agitate for democracy. Even despite this, Kenya, right here, right now, has far more democracy and human rights than China, Kuwait, Russia and Saudi Arabia put together, yet remains far poorer than all, why? Most of our goods, in value added form, are prevented from entering their principal world markets by trade barriers, unlike Saudi oil or Chinese textiles (with its most favoured nation trading status with the US) into the US market for example. All the good governance in the world with no trade is like being a qualified heart surgeon without the license to practise. No damn good.
So this is my deal to the West. Don't give us aid (which isn't charity like the media makes it seem, it has to be paid back, with heavy interest). Don't give us debt relief from those illegitimate debts. Restore the level playing field in trade, which after all is in your own long term interest and we'll pay those illegitimate debts anyway, pull ourselves out of poverty, buy more goods from you giving your people job security and stop sending you illegal immigrants, do we have a deal? Amoroso Gombe, Nairobi, Kenya.
I find it very disturbing that one of the principal reactions of a significant proportion of the 'developed world' when it comes to domestic and international poverty is the flippant 'get a job'. I believe that it demonstrates a lack of comprehension of the nature of society's structure to simply assume that jobs are easy to find regardless of personal circumstance. I would suggest that the majority of those who tell the unfortunate, the disabled, the starving, the diseased and the repressed to 'get a job' should ask themselves whether they would be willing to hire them, and I suspect that the answer would be a resounding 'No'.
Poverty and disadvantage is not a choice, it is a trap that most fall into unwillingly, and like any good trap, it is one that it is hard to escape from unaided. It is the responsibility of a government (and the international community when the government is unable to do so itself) to provide its citizens with the ability to pursue opportunities, develop their skill and participate fully in society, regardless of circumstance. If the developed world too thoroughly abandons the concept of welfare, of both its own citizens and those of the developing world, it allows people to unjustly fall by the wayside of the system we have chosen for ourselves. Patrick Moody,Australian National University, Canberra AUSTRALIA
Until governments and individuals recognize the issues facing the world's poorest and most deprived as being as important as their own problems at home, indifference will continue to prevent an effective solution to growing inequality. A shift in the priorities of the world's rich, industrialized nations is needed to reverse the challenge of inherent human indifference towards the rest of mankind. Richard Patterson, South Africa
I have not heard any mention of countries effected by dictatorships and the resulting decline in the quality of life of its citizens. Let us look at Zimbabwe for example, the country is undergoing a virtual agricultural disaster, its citizens are thwarted from speaking out, the government has shut down the media, etc... Is this a result of some western (U.S.) policy or lack of aid? No, this is a result of a despotic leader who decided that his utopian country would be best built by kicking out white farmers and handing them over to the population who have not been educated in agriculture, thus a nightmare scenario where the entire economy is collapsing and the people of that country have no recourse other than to leave.
Please do not tell me that the answer to the worlds problems is the West throwing money at the poorer countries. The answer is freedom of press, freedom of individuals and freedom from tyranny. Michael DuFour, Somerville, New Jersey, U.S.A.
Reading this week that the AFL-CIO has had to downsize & is suffering from lack of vision, I realized that what needs to happen next is for the labor movement to globalize once again. As a consumer (and union member) here in the US, I cannot always avoid a foreign made product, but I can ask myself, "under what conditions might this product have been produced?" If at all possible, I avoid Chinese made goods for a variety of reasons, labor, currency, governmental. Here in the US, I try to shop where workers are treated well. American unions have had to, for the most part, abandon he "Buy American" battle cry - a global outlook would "raise all boats" and perhaps even strengthen the manufacturing business here at.
Tom Friedman speaks of a "flat world." What I see is a world flattened by the steam roller of monopolistic companies & governments; we seem to be reliving the days of the robber barons. It will take unions to raise the level of this "flat world." Juliana Sadock Savino, University Heights, Ohio, U.S.A.
The present day earth is administered by nation states. Nation states formulate their policies, mainly focused on human development, on the basis of studies and advice of economists some of whom are on your panel. Unfortunately economists produce numbers such as GDP, Standard of Living index etc. which contain gross errors. For example the GDP number does not show the degrading effect on the environment. Standard of living indexes are based on consumption patterns only, ignoring crime and noise pollution endured by people supposedly enjoying higher standards of living. This leads to erroneous economic policies at national levels. Also the only economic model currently available is the bicycle model where if you stop pedalling you fall down, which means each year more new houses must be constructed cutting down forest or filling marsh land etc. The end result is obvious - the global environment is stressed beyond its capacity to refresh itself, not to mention the plight of other species with whom we share the earth.
The problem since Adam Smith is that Economists, who are the principal advisors to nation states, are not held "accountable" to the same standards as normal accountants are. Accountants like engineers and doctors are licensed professionals and are subject to professional standards, hence they qualify their numbers with explanations in the income statements. An accountant can end up in jail for producing erroneous numbers. Economists just move to another university. B. Aikat , Ottawa, Canada
As a Canadian, I have lived, worked and traveled in Asia for the past 25 years. It is clear to me that the major issue facing the world is wealth distribution. There are numerous and far too many examples, but it is clear that paying someone $1 a day, while others have their hands in the till and steal millions, is completely unacceptable. And the fact that our lofty goal to redress this issue is by raising the bar to $2 a day by the year 2015 is disgusting. Add to that the people setting these targets represent the wealthiest nations only makes it more ludicrous.
Unfortunately, the situation is only getting worse as greed and profit at any cost seem to be the only accepted measure of success. Unabashed capitalism without any social conscience is clearly not working. Frank Benko, Singapore
Indeed Globalisation is a positive movement towards our economy, although negativities may arise. Globalisation has opened the doors to many business opportunities between countries thus allowing greater integration of culture, and appreciation and understanding of differences which bring forward greater unity among the world nations. Development in technology coupled with the effects of reduced trade barriers allows for greater distribution of resources. As previously mentioned, globalisation may have dampening effects on developing countries, such as the exploitation of labour. Even though there is a widening gap between the richer and poorer players, the 'trickling down' effect still exists, ceteris paribus. Although the larger players reap the majority of the benefits, without these opportunities bestowed by these multinational giants demand for third world labour would be reduced vastly. Despite the drawbacks of globalisation, it has also brought through many benefits in terms of trade, distribution of innovative technology and resources and resulted in closer ties and relations amongst nations worldwide Han Lin and Belinda Tran, Economic students Macquarie university, Sydney Australia
We must keep in mind that the inequality in distribution of income cannot be always attributed to the past and to colonialism. Whilst it is true that there was a certain amount of impact, the poor shall remain poor unless they put their destiny in their own hands, regardless of the amount of aid devoted to them. Tomaz Vargazon, Slovenia
The one sure method of changing the course of a people is to change the mindset from a "Me" to a "We". We need to challenge governments, peoples and corporations to create and nurture sustainable world markets characterized by minimized tariffs and taxes on import / exports. Private sector investment and training to assist developing nations to create their own markets and industries. While all of this private and public sector assistance is of dramatic help, it is not until the people of the wealthy nations begin to care more about the world we live in and less about what it will do for me will any real progress happen. Michael Cressler , Utah, USA
Any effort to eradicate poverty, or at least have a more equal distribution of income, certainly depends on the West. Everyone rushed to contribute to the relief effort following the Asian tsunami, but that is not enough. What is needed is a sustained effort on the part of the international community. Among the many factors which are standing in the way is the issue of trade. It's about time the West realizes that the world is highly integrated. If they wish to expand their markets they should open up to trade. Efficient producers in many parts of Africa are paying the price for the West's behaviour. Holding conferences and meetings is not enough! Action is needed. Imad Khalife, Lebanon
It is on record that the benefits accrued to Corporate America from October 2001 to September 2004 are some $400 billion. Whereas the total amount of credits & grants/aid given to developing world by the World Bank in its entire life of about six decades is exactly $400 billion.
In the face of such an anamoly of colossal magnitude, I do not think it possible that under-developed regions can ever change their fate without re-arrangement in the existing World Order. Muhammad Yar Qaisrani, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Your comments
General | Environment | Business | Economy | Transport
If you in the developed countries would pay the true value of the Nike shoes or designer cloths that you wear, then people in developing countries would be richer and you would be a bit poorer. These products are made using slave labor in developing countries.
There should be a universal minimum wage. It's a crime that people working full time have appalling living standards in developing countries. With extremely high world unemployment, no world minimum wage can be established. Competition reduces the wages paid in developing countries to nearly nothing.
At least the multi-national companies should agree on a minimum salary for people in developing countries to counter the negative effects of competition. The increased production costs due to higher salaries would not be significant for people in developed countries and the multi-national companies would be doing their part in reducing poverty in these developing countries. Consumers would then be contributing indirectly toward the reduction of poverty.
A. Camarata, Vienna, Austria
I am referring to your interview with Amartha Sen, Prof. of Economics and Philosophy at Harvard. The interview begins with the question: "What are the root causes of poverty across the globe, and what solutions would you put in place to address this." I then read the interview a few times but could not find the answer. I will therefore try to answer the question myself.
Actually, one does not have to be a rocket scientist to see that the IT revolution and the introduction of robotics and much automation has increased productivity in most factories to such an extent that there simply is less and less work. In fact, I predict that that at some stage there will be an imbalance of too many products chasing too few people being able to afford them (depression!).
The solution to the problem would be to divide the "cake" of the available work more evenly over the population, i.e. we will all have to work less. I propose the introduction of a 32 hour or four day workweek. To prevent unfair competition this would have to be done on a global scale. I have been trying to get leaders all over the world interested in this idea or to get an opinion. But, typically, it seems that everyone is willing to talk about the problem (of poverty), but no one is willing to do something about it. This includes would-be leaders like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton – they always seem to be able to contact me but try reaching them!
Henry Pool, Silverton, South-Africa
Corporations should take more responsibility for their part in causing inflation. Inflation became a major problem with the advent of the corporations. Corporations have the ability to control prices and wages more affectively then ever before. Corporations should be prohibited from indexing salaries and benefits to inflation and prohibited from increasing salary and benefits if inflation is above a certain amount (say 3%). If this is done then inflation could easily be brought under control and the system would be self- regulating. If corporate executives are losing real income due to inflation and cannot raise their salaries and benefits then, they must use profits to bring down prices and fight inflation. Corporate executives also have a lot of power over government officials so they will pressure government officials to keep government inflationary policies under control. Market forces work effectively for small businesses so if corporate businesses lower prices then they will have to also in order to compete. The Federal Reserve should not be concerned about inflation several years down the road. If congress or the president makes inflationary decisions then the Fed should counter with anti-inflationary measures. Otherwise they should only be concerned about stimulating the economy when supplies exceed demand and removing the stimulus when demand exceeds supply. Stimulating the economy when supplies exceed demand will reduce unemployment to near zero.
A. Camarata, Vienna, Austria
Having examined the various drivers of economic development and growth as proposed by your article, it is surprising to note the obvious absence of the role Energy has to play in the growth process of Less Developed Countries. For there to be any meaning full growth in LDC, the World Bank and other multi national organisations would have to develop, inovative schemes to make modern form of energy available at affordable cost to the citizens of these countries. This way, small and medium size factories can spring up, hence creating employment for the locals. The women and children can channel more time and energy into more economically productive actives rather than fetching wood and other biomass forms of fuel.
Lanre Oloniniyi, Edinburgh
For any sustainable development,the efforts must come from within the community and the presence of a helping hand from without accelerates the process.To put the right effort ,the people must have the right education(the education that gives them the ability to identify the problems and to come up with solutions). All this happens in an environment of free thought offered by democracy alone. So I believe that the priority investment shall be in right education, that teaches open-mindedness and tolerence.The second priority shall be elimination of negative factors that hinder all round development ,such as corruption ,internal conflicts ,funds diversions ,wars etc. Educated and motivated people can help themselves here also. Above all principles and practices must match. The helping hand will have to show the ways and means of achieving.
T.N. Murti, India
Forgiving the debt and removing trade barriers for poor countries will not reduce poverty even by a small amount.
The economies of poor countries are run by billionaires. These are the upper class. The middle classes are the workers. The poor classes are completely outside of the economic system. They have no income and can not buy the products and services produced by their economies. The commercial farmers produce all the food that the middle and upper classes need. The economies of these small countries, excluding the poor class, are actually doing quiet well. Debit relief and trade barrier reduction are ploys to increase the wealth of the richest in these poor countries.
It is the responsibility of governments to provide a minimum, livable standard of living for its citizens. They should do it by providing welfare, un-employment insurance, pensions, and make work projects. They should do it by printing money, borrowing, and taxing rich corporations. Taxing rich corporations should be directly related to the amount of unemployed to provide incentives for them to create jobs.
By providing a minimum income to the poorest in the country the government is setting a minimum Demand for products and services which is much, much, much higher then they currently have. This will create a significant boost to the economy which will result in a large number of jobs being created. It's to everyone benefit if they do it.
Using unemployment to fight inflation should be eliminated. Inflation is caused by the growing gap between the rich and the poor and the demand of the middle class to share in that increased wealth. The USA tolerates 5% unemployment and poor countries tolerate a much higher percentage. At least 5% of the people in the USA are outside the capitalist economic system, living in poverty, and depending on charity. This is unfair to the unemployed. Unfair to the poor class
Once the government provides a minimum income for its citizens Poverty in their country Has Been Eliminated. Sweat shops have been eliminated, child labor has been eliminated. Crime has been reduced. Health has been increased.
There is now a level playing field for all business to compete. Trade barriers can now be reduced. Poor countries can not benefit from seat shops and child labor. If debits are forgiven then all the people in the country benefit.
Do not forgive debt and reduce trade barriers until these countries provide for a minimum income for their people. This is the way make poverty history.
A Camarata, Vienna, Austria
People who have money should look for ways of helping the poor to also develop themselves, and get a better life. Here in our country Uganda we are less developed, unemployemet is a common problem and there is no easy to deal away with it.
What I am suggesting is that instead of people donating to us they should try to teach us to be job creators not to be job seekers, the grants given to the people should be invested in some resources so that a very big number of people should dig for it through working hard in such invested resources. Population increase is also a big problem here in Uganda due to poor family planning. And the government has not come up with good means of how to control the high birth rate. If this was controlled at least the unemployment problem would have been solved as that the small population is proportional to the number of jobs present.
What am appealing to merciful readers is that if money is there just come and invest in some resources here in Uganda because your investments will be gainfull to you and in turn helping our citizens in one way or another to get employed and develop.
John Paul, Uganda
Over the two months culminating in the recent G8 summit in Scotland, the international community has been calling for more action and aid for poverty stricken Africa. But what really are the issues surrounding poverty in Africa?
Most barely dare to whisper the truth and fewer want to answer the main question:
"If rich nations truly seek a reduction of poverty of poverty in Africa, why don't they (we) deal with the REAL issues?" These issues are principally CORRUPTION, DISTRIBUTION, ACCOUNTABILITY and CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) subsidies in wealthy nations.
Every year African nations receive billions of Dollars, Euros, Kronor, Pounds and Yen in the form of donations. Even with decades of aid and support, Africa is getting poorer, more people are dying from war, hunger and AIDS than ever before while the rich nations make promises of: "The next decade is for Africa", "Never Again" or "We will wage a war on Poverty in Africa!"
There is much more to be considered when handing poor nations multi-billion dollar checks than easing the rich world's conscience for centuries of oppression and exploitation. Politicians and citizens of rich countries alike should consider the following issues in their "Crusade Against Poverty" (different CAP!).
Over 1/3 of the total GDP of the African continent disappears each year due to corruption! This 1/3 is measured both as actual money physically disappearing or money which never gets there in the form of investment for fear of loss. Corruption, which is very often reinforced by the attitude and actions of the rich country governments and especially multinationals doing business in Africa, is the number one reason for poverty. This is closely followed-up by improper and inefficient distribution of donated funds and resources, which is very closely related to and caused by corruption.
Accountability is one of the biggest issues surrounding African aid. The rich countries have been giving billions for decades to African nations in the form of donations (In addition to IMF and World Bank loans!). Many African nations depend on these foreign donations for more than 80% of their annual budgetary needs. Most of these same nations are "governed" by very oppressive dictators who buy arms, houses, cars or still worse, send the money right back to Europe and other rich countries into personal offshore bank accounts. Rarely does any of this money get to the people to pay for schools, hospitals, basic infrastructure or food. Why don't rich countries insist on and monitor accountability? If a tax payer from a rich country went to a bank seeking a mortgage or loan, he or she would have to show what the loan was for and present a business plan or budget to qualify for the loan. However, our governments do not take the same measure when handing billions of the tax-payers money to corrupt regimes.
A perverse contradiction between rich nations' desire for alleviating poverty in Africa and reality are CAP or agricultural subsidies. Aside from the fact that a grossly disproportionate amount of money goes to an equally disproportionately small group of people who contribute very little to domestic GNP (Gross National Product) in their respective countries, this persistent phenomenon is what denies the majority of Africans of any means of earning a living. CAP subsidies in the rich nations are socially and economically wrong for their own countries and especially damaging to the welfare of African nations.
What if rich countries took the bold and badly needed steps to get rid of universally damaging subsidies like CAP as well as to reduce tariffs on agricultural products from Africa? Nearly immediately, Africa and other developing nations would have an instant way to earn money directly and not be dependant on their leaders and current regimes.
It would provide a source of badly needed income to mainly rural Africa. Rich countries could then take the billions given in donations and the billions more spent on subsidizing French and American farmers and invest these funds in simple distribution channels and agricultural supplies like seed and fertilizer for African farmers. Micro-credits and related efforts have proven far more effective in reducing poverty and hunger and improving lives. The recipient governments could also tax incomes and businesses thus reducing their dependency on donor funds. Further still, the recipient governments would not only be held accountable by donors, but their own populations.
This will also have an enormous effect on the rich country's own citizens and state of affairs. Currently, due in large part to subsidies, most produce and agricultural products are artificially inflated prices while at the same time "producers" enjoy subsidies and tax breaks. Ironically, in places like France, Spain and Italy, Africans daily are making a dangerous trek to reach the shores of Europe in the hope of a new life picking strawberries and tomatoes for the subsidised European farmers! These same countries with CAP subsidies also rely heavily on immigration (legal and illegal) from the very countries whose people they are blocking the means to fend for themselves in their own homelands via tariffs and subsidies. If you give an African a chance to grow and export their own food, not only would the rich nations benefit from a drop in illegal immigration, but also they would enjoy an increase of excellent agricultural products at much more reasonable prices along with countless secondary benefits.
Ridding the international system of CAP subsidies and tariffs is a responsible and entirely possible step to reducing poverty in Africa. It would also add credibility to the words and speeches of the G8, silence the radical anti-globalisation groups because this is really what they are rallying against; how pro-globalization forces trumpet globalization and its benefits and yet we have CAP subsidies which stifle truly "global trade."
It is high time that the world, particularly the rich world speaks honestly. All sides of the argument understand the need for something new, for change and to recognize the fact that the 450 billion dollars so far donated has accomplished very little. In order for rich nations to help alleviate poverty in Africa, they first need to look at themselves, face the real issues and build credibility for their claims. The rich nations are still behaving in Africa as in the colonial days; exploiting, oppressing, creating division and worse still, creating a horrible state of dependency. If the rich nations of the world are serious about Africa, they have all the power to make the right choices and do what is really needed. I challenge the rich countries to be honest with their tax-paying citizens, with the rest of the world and most importantly with themselves. Poverty in Africa is not a problem of money, it is a problem of policy. We can change that.
Jeremy Werner, Spain
Child labour is a problem in Uganda, one of the East African countries experiencing a lot of problems politically, socially and economically. Uganda is greatly affected by wars. In its northern part people are dying and can no longer go farming. Children are left without food or shelter. Such children are forced to go and work so that they can earn a living for survival. Poor management of the population by the government has led to unemployment of the parents of these children. The unemployment problem means that many children can no longer go to school and must instead work to survive. Poor family planning and management has also added to the problem. The practice of polygamy is producing a lot of children whose mothers cannot manage to look after and care for both financially and socially, and as a result they are forced to go out and work at an early age. Many children when they work are subjected to heavy labour which they cannot manage which affects their physical and mental development. This situation has retarded our development because a country with such citizens hardly develops. We need to offer opportunities for our children to go to school can go to school so that we eradicate such child labour in Uganda.
John Paul, Kampala, Uganda
I am a true blooded Filipino. I love my country. Although there's so much to do in alleviating poverty and offer to the world that the Philippines is a lovely place and has lots of economic opportunities. We have armies of capable, intelligent, caring and sensitive people to lead us out in poverty and economic, political and moral freedom. If we do this and eventually claim success on this in the near future, we can help other third world countries in whatever way we can. In so doing we will no longer depend solely on financial assistance from developed countries and instead rely on ourselves, break the chains of undevelopment which hopefully could positively influence other third world countries and then live in independence amongst the community of nations. Thank you.
Noel Crucio, Cebu, Philippines.
The problem is not that outsourcing from developed countries to developing countries is taking place, it is rather that the corporations are in search of the lowest price they have to pay. Globalization is good when all parties benefit and the poor in these countries are able to have a higher standard of living. It is exploitative when the multi-national corporations use them and then move on to some other place when they demand higher wages and conditions. There has to be some sort of responsibility on the part of the multinational organizations.
Janice Hagey-Schmidt, Los Angeles, California USA.
I am very grateful to God,and Paris Club for deeming it necessary to grant us debt relief. However,it is important to note that Nigeria has all it takes to be economically bouyant,in terms of mineral and human resources Nature has been fair to us as a nation.
Our leaders need to take advantage of both resources for economic advancement of our darling country. Well, I commend the economic measures of president Olusegun Obasanjo.My sincere advice is that he should move futher by encouraging indegenous manufacturees,by way of granting them loans and other financial assistance By so doing Nigeria shall be among the developed nations of the world soonest.
Emmanuel D.C.Akor, Port Harcourt,Rivers State,NIGERIA.
Women represent 51% of the world's population yet are absent at the global economic table when it comes to the discussion of economic development. How can women around the world be brought into the conversation on economic development?
Maureen Blanc, International Museum of Women, San Francisco, US
The major problem of the world is that politics don't wont to solve the problems of the Third World and don't wont to address the rules of terrorism. The point is Africa needs money. It need schools, education, water, waste infrastructure, education on health and sexual issues. Don't give them so much money. Lets build for them what they need, to avoid corruption that is present, learn and help them to earn their own money. Give them same possibilities to trade their products.
Samo Borko, Maribor, Slovenia
Africa has exposed Western perfidy and caught the West out on every major development issue bang-to-rights. 1.Debt. The debt was willfully lent to dictators during the cold war so that the West could have a hold over them. The money was spent on arms to suppress African populaces, give contracts to European contractors and consultants and what remained was stashed in European bank accounts. We the ordinary people of Africa didn't ask for the money, it was not borrowed with our authority and we didn't receive it, we don't owe you a penny. Go get it from the dictators you lent it to. We'll give you a hand; most of it is in Switzerland, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg and London.
2.Trade: Practice what you preach. The rich world talks about development rounds whilst France is fighting tooth and nail to hang on to the CAP as we speak. This is what the fracas over the EU budget was all about. So to put it bluntly, you (the West) are lying; you'e got no intention of reforming trade. Food security is not an argument. Coffee is hardly an essential foodstuff in a time of war; neither is chocolate which coming from Africa into the EU is currently subject to 300 percent tariffs.
3.Corruption & good governance. It' a bit rich of people who financed, armed, supported and benefited from dictators for so long, (not to mention apartheid, segregation and slavery - some good governance that was), the very dictators who are now accused of corruption, to talk to us about good governance. Nevertheless even here we'e caught you out. To fight corruption you need democracy to make governments accountable. No enduring democracy ever emerged before the emergence of a prosperous middle class, with something to lose out of bad economic management/oppressive government.
Read European history. Read American history. A prosperous middle class with a vested interest in fighting corruption, because it harms their economic well being, is the only way it's ever going to happen. If the trade conditions are right people can, for a time, prosper despite bad/oppressive governance, to a point where they have the resources to fight corruption and the bad government it emanates from. Look at China. Once they reach a level of wealth where they don't have to spend every minute trying to survive and can spend some of it on political activity, they start to agitate for second-order human desires like personal freedom and good governance. People have to get past survival before they can afford to agitate for democracy. Even despite this, Kenya, right here, right now, has far more democracy and human rights than China, Kuwait, Russia and Saudi Arabia put together, yet remains far poorer than all, why? Most of our goods, in value added form, are prevented from entering their principal world markets by trade barriers, unlike Saudi oil or Chinese textiles (with its most favoured nation trading status with the US) into the US market for example. All the good governance in the world with no trade is like being a qualified heart surgeon without the license to practise. No damn good.
So this is my deal to the West. Don't give us aid (which isn't charity like the media makes it seem, it has to be paid back, with heavy interest). Don't give us debt relief from those illegitimate debts. Restore the level playing field in trade, which after all is in your own long term interest and we'll pay those illegitimate debts anyway, pull ourselves out of poverty, buy more goods from you giving your people job security and stop sending you illegal immigrants, do we have a deal?
Amoroso Gombe, Nairobi, Kenya.
I find it very disturbing that one of the principal reactions of a significant proportion of the 'developed world' when it comes to domestic and international poverty is the flippant 'get a job'. I believe that it demonstrates a lack of comprehension of the nature of society's structure to simply assume that jobs are easy to find regardless of personal circumstance. I would suggest that the majority of those who tell the unfortunate, the disabled, the starving, the diseased and the repressed to 'get a job' should ask themselves whether they would be willing to hire them, and I suspect that the answer would be a resounding 'No'.
Poverty and disadvantage is not a choice, it is a trap that most fall into unwillingly, and like any good trap, it is one that it is hard to escape from unaided. It is the responsibility of a government (and the international community when the government is unable to do so itself) to provide its citizens with the ability to pursue opportunities, develop their skill and participate fully in society, regardless of circumstance. If the developed world too thoroughly abandons the concept of welfare, of both its own citizens and those of the developing world, it allows people to unjustly fall by the wayside of the system we have chosen for ourselves.
Patrick Moody,Australian National University, Canberra AUSTRALIA
Until governments and individuals recognize the issues facing the world's poorest and most deprived as being as important as their own problems at home, indifference will continue to prevent an effective solution to growing inequality. A shift in the priorities of the world's rich, industrialized nations is needed to reverse the challenge of inherent human indifference towards the rest of mankind.
Richard Patterson, South Africa
I have not heard any mention of countries effected by dictatorships and the resulting decline in the quality of life of its citizens. Let us look at Zimbabwe for example, the country is undergoing a virtual agricultural disaster, its citizens are thwarted from speaking out, the government has shut down the media, etc... Is this a result of some western (U.S.) policy or lack of aid? No, this is a result of a despotic leader who decided that his utopian country would be best built by kicking out white farmers and handing them over to the population who have not been educated in agriculture, thus a nightmare scenario where the entire economy is collapsing and the people of that country have no recourse other than to leave. Please do not tell me that the answer to the worlds problems is the West throwing money at the poorer countries. The answer is freedom of press, freedom of individuals and freedom from tyranny.
Michael DuFour, Somerville, New Jersey, U.S.A.
Reading this week that the AFL-CIO has had to downsize & is suffering from lack of vision, I realized that what needs to happen next is for the labor movement to globalize once again. As a consumer (and union member) here in the US, I cannot always avoid a foreign made product, but I can ask myself, "under what conditions might this product have been produced?" If at all possible, I avoid Chinese made goods for a variety of reasons, labor, currency, governmental. Here in the US, I try to shop where workers are treated well. American unions have had to, for the most part, abandon he "Buy American" battle cry - a global outlook would "raise all boats" and perhaps even strengthen the manufacturing business here at.
Tom Friedman speaks of a "flat world." What I see is a world flattened by the steam roller of monopolistic companies & governments; we seem to be reliving the days of the robber barons. It will take unions to raise the level of this "flat world."
Juliana Sadock Savino, University Heights, Ohio, U.S.A.
The present day earth is administered by nation states. Nation states formulate their policies, mainly focused on human development, on the basis of studies and advice of economists some of whom are on your panel. Unfortunately economists produce numbers such as GDP, Standard of Living index etc. which contain gross errors. For example the GDP number does not show the degrading effect on the environment. Standard of living indexes are based on consumption patterns only, ignoring crime and noise pollution endured by people supposedly enjoying higher standards of living. This leads to erroneous economic policies at national levels. Also the only economic model currently available is the bicycle model where if you stop pedalling you fall down, which means each year more new houses must be constructed cutting down forest or filling marsh land etc. The end result is obvious - the global environment is stressed beyond its capacity to refresh itself, not to mention the plight of other species with whom we share the earth. The problem since Adam Smith is that Economists, who are the principal advisors to nation states, are not held "accountable" to the same standards as normal accountants are. Accountants like engineers and doctors are licensed professionals and are subject to professional standards, hence they qualify their numbers with explanations in the income statements. An accountant can end up in jail for producing erroneous numbers. Economists just move to another university.
B. Aikat , Ottawa, Canada
As a Canadian, I have lived, worked and traveled in Asia for the past 25 years. It is clear to me that the major issue facing the world is wealth distribution. There are numerous and far too many examples, but it is clear that paying someone $1 a day, while others have their hands in the till and steal millions, is completely unacceptable. And the fact that our lofty goal to redress this issue is by raising the bar to $2 a day by the year 2015 is disgusting. Add to that the people setting these targets represent the wealthiest nations only makes it more ludicrous.
Unfortunately, the situation is only getting worse as greed and profit at any cost seem to be the only accepted measure of success. Unabashed capitalism without any social conscience is clearly not working.
Frank Benko, Singapore
Indeed Globalisation is a positive movement towards our economy, although negativities may arise. Globalisation has opened the doors to many business opportunities between countries thus allowing greater integration of culture, and appreciation and understanding of differences which bring forward greater unity among the world nations. Development in technology coupled with the effects of reduced trade barriers allows for greater distribution of resources. As previously mentioned, globalisation may have dampening effects on developing countries, such as the exploitation of labour. Even though there is a widening gap between the richer and poorer players, the 'trickling down' effect still exists, ceteris paribus. Although the larger players reap the majority of the benefits, without these opportunities bestowed by these multinational giants demand for third world labour would be reduced vastly. Despite the drawbacks of globalisation, it has also brought through many benefits in terms of trade, distribution of innovative technology and resources and resulted in closer ties and relations amongst nations worldwide
Han Lin and Belinda Tran, Economic students Macquarie university, Sydney Australia
We must keep in mind that the inequality in distribution of income cannot be always attributed to the past and to colonialism. Whilst it is true that there was a certain amount of impact, the poor shall remain poor unless they put their destiny in their own hands, regardless of the amount of aid devoted to them.
Tomaz Vargazon, Slovenia
The one sure method of changing the course of a people is to change the mindset from a "Me" to a "We". We need to challenge governments, peoples and corporations to create and nurture sustainable world markets characterized by minimized tariffs and taxes on import / exports. Private sector investment and training to assist developing nations to create their own markets and industries. While all of this private and public sector assistance is of dramatic help, it is not until the people of the wealthy nations begin to care more about the world we live in and less about what it will do for me will any real progress happen.
Michael Cressler , Utah, USA
Any effort to eradicate poverty, or at least have a more equal distribution of income, certainly depends on the West. Everyone rushed to contribute to the relief effort following the Asian tsunami, but that is not enough. What is needed is a sustained effort on the part of the international community. Among the many factors which are standing in the way is the issue of trade. It's about time the West realizes that the world is highly integrated. If they wish to expand their markets they should open up to trade. Efficient producers in many parts of Africa are paying the price for the West's behaviour. Holding conferences and meetings is not enough! Action is needed.
Imad Khalife, Lebanon
It is on record that the benefits accrued to Corporate America from October 2001 to September 2004 are some $400 billion. Whereas the total amount of credits & grants/aid given to developing world by the World Bank in its entire life of about six decades is exactly $400 billion. In the face of such an anamoly of colossal magnitude, I do not think it possible that under-developed regions can ever change their fate without re-arrangement in the existing World Order.
Muhammad Yar Qaisrani, Islamabad, Pakistan.
General | Environment | Business | Economy | Transport