SPIEGEL: Stop? The industrialized nations of the West want to eliminate hunger and poverty. Shikwati: Such intentions have been damaging our continent for the past 40 years. If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape. Despite the billions that have poured in to Africa, the continent remains poor. SPIEGEL: Do you have an explanation for this paradox? Shikwati: Huge bureaucracies are financed (with the aid money), corruption and complacency are promoted, Africans are taught to be beggars and not to be independent. In addition, development aid weakens the local markets everywhere and dampens the spirit of entrepreneurship that we so desperately need. As absurd as it may sound: Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa's problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid. SPIEGEL: Even in a country like Kenya, people are starving to death each year. Someone has got to help them. Shikwati: But it has to be the Kenyans themselves who help these people. When there's a drought in a region of Kenya... link
Africa is, except for certain abnormalaties, destined to be poor (at least for the short-term). For the most part they do not have the resources for a resource-based economy, nor the infrastructure (not just physical, but also in terms of standing education, etc) to run either a technologically-based or a manufacturing economy. However, because of AID, they are destined to be hungry. It is merely a form of government-sanctioned dumping, and is stunting the growth of a domestic African food supply.
Are you sure? Almost every valuable natural resource can be found throughout different parts of Africa(oil,gold,diamonds and nearlly every valuable mineral). Many African countries do have this potential. The problem is that the revenues from Africa's resources have been squandered by corrupt governments. The same corrupt governments that keep asking for Aid and loans. LOL
Some countries have enough varied resources - they are the abnormalities. Most of these lack the necessary infrastructure to develop them without extreme foreign investment, which tends to take away from their benefits. This has nothing to do with agriculture, the industry most affected by AID.
I think some studies show that under certain circumstances, huge natural resources can be a hindrance to development. e.g. oil in Nigeria. A single, easily controlled and highly valuable resource increases the likelihood of civil wars, and increases corruption for the same reasons as aid - nobody bothers trying to develop a real economy, they just fight over the oil. Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Korea had no resources.
I guess South Africa could fall into either catagory - Not really a victim of civil war, but Whites robbing the people who earned it's vast resources as a birthright.. The infrastructure is definately what sets it apart from the other African nations, or is it that it's still dominated by white influences? This isn't really off topic, but does anybody know if South Africa gives any kind of aid to it's neighbours?
Africans should run athletics academies. Every olympics the Kenyans and Ethiopians storm to marathon and long distance running gold medals. That is some stamina. If only there was a way to channel heat as well. For example all the western nations spend a fortune on gas and oil for heating. If only some of that sunshine could be captured and passed on. Africa would turn from one of the poorest continents to one of the richest. The truth is African countries aren't built for people to live in mass quantities. All the animals struggle there. Every year water dries up and Crocodiles find it hard to survive as do many mammals. So why would humans be any different.
As far as Nigeria and it's oil,here's two interesting breakdowns: The Oil Peril to Development By Gordon Johnson Oil money when it is controlled by the government tends to increase rent seeking. When government owns the oil and controls the oil revenues, the currency of an oil-rich nation sometimes tends to be in demand and over-valued, which makes foreign goods cheap. Local manufacturers and farmers then become uncompetitive on global markets and even in their own domestic markets. This effect, known as the “Dutch disease,” inhibits investment and job creation. In many respect the implications of oil revenue pouring into government hand are huge. Reliance on oil diminishes economic diversity because investors focus on oil related sectors of the economy. The economy becomes increasingly dependent on oil, and on uncertain and volatile world oil prices. Oil revenues flowing into the government weaken the private sector and stifle the middle class who are the foundation stones of democracy and economic freedom. Entrepreneurs go into government rather than the private sector because, in the words of Willie Sutton, the famous American bank robber, “That’s where the money is.” When individual initiative is stifled, income gaps widen. Rich elites get richer. The poor become wards of the state and bend to government dictates. Oil wealth feeds incompetence, centralization of power, crony capitalism and continually increasing spending by government at a rate that eventually becomes both unstoppable and unsustainable... LINK -------------------------------------------------- RAY SUAREZ: Well why hasn't that wealth coming out of the ground benefited the people of the Delta region? STEVE INSKEEP: Well, it depends who you ask. The oil companies will say first off that they don't employ that many people, and so there are millions of people who would like a job in Nigeria; there's only tens of thousands who can work for the oil companies. That's part of the explanation; there is something to that. Another part of the explanation is that money paid to Nigeria's government in taxes - and the Nigerian Government will admit this -- a lot of the money over the years has been stolen. Nigeria has a tremendous corruption problem, and the money that's disappeared is probably in the billions -- not the millions -- over... LINK
I'am not sure if it's the natural resources that are the problem but how the governments handle the economy. Many post-colonial African countries have either nationalized various industries or their governments have alot of intervention in their economies. This seems to have created a situation where the power and wealth is had by those in the government. So you end up with more fighting(civil wars) to gain access to the wealth,that again,is controlled by government.
Yes but it is very difficult to nationalise a broadly diversified economy. Oil is an easy target. I'm saying that there is a relationship between how the government develops and the availability of cash cow industries like oil.
Opening up the market and bring in competition to the country. Create an open and stable environment and bring in more foreign investment and create job opportuntites for the people. Promote people to learn for life and keep upgrading themselves. Keep comruptions away with tough laws. Actually they are more to be done but this is just some of it...
i agree with a lot of that but it is extremely hard for third world nations to compete in the current world economy because when they were 'invited' to take part in the 60's the system was developed without them it was and continues to be extremely hard for third world nations to really compete in global capitalism.
This ignores the fact that so many developing countries have and are succeeding in the global economy.
