What does "eight times poorer" mean?
Purchasing power parity per capita per year?
(by this measure, Cameroon is 24 times as poor as the US, perhaps not what the article was going for)
Why Poor Countries Are Poor
51–60 of 142 posts
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#52This article is (almost) accurate. I live in Romania ... and of course, we are doing a lot better than Cameroon, the country got accepted in EU, and the average salary is something like $25-$30 / day (and people with college degrees do better than that). But the corruption has reached unimaginable levels ... and it's not just the government, it's everyone. For example, we have a public health system, and while I paid…
Yes, sorry but as another EU citizen, I have to say I'm not sure we should have accepted Romania into the EU before this problem is fixed. Do you think it's helping against corruption or is any incentive now gone? Do you think it's getting better with rising income? (this was not meant against romanians it's just that EU institutions are pretty far away from EU projects and are usually terrible at detecting corruptio…
> I'm not sure we should have accepted Romania into the EU before this problem is fixed.
If I lived anywhere else, I'd have the same opinion :)
> Do you think it's helping against corruption or is any incentive now gone?
Actually, it's helping, since we are monitored and we get warnings and sanctions now and then ... one of the main concerns being corruption. I don't think that the end-result can be predicted though, we'll see ... although since we entered the EU, I can see things improving.
Unfortunately with this economic crisis, we're back to square one.
> it's just that EU institutions are pretty far away from EU projects and are usually terrible at detecting corruption
My impression is that they are pretty good :-) ... I've heard of reports more accurate than what is published in our media.
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#53One conclusion to be drawn is that many countries were better off under colonial rule.
"One conclusion to be drawn is that many countries were better off under colonial rule"
Umm no. That depends on defining "better off" as "ruled by invaders from another country but with some economic or social benefits(probably)".
Just try offering colonial rule to former colonies, who have experience of being "better off". People might joke about that, but an independent country's citizens would fight to the death against any attempt at colonization. Which means they do think they are better off without colonial rule. Unless you think millions of people don't know what is "better off" for them, your notion is hard to sustain logically.
Unless you want to volunteer to be colonized by China (say)? They seem to be good at economic development, which seems to be your metric for "better off".
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#54This article is (almost) accurate. I live in Romania ... and of course, we are doing a lot better than Cameroon, the country got accepted in EU, and the average salary is something like $25-$30 / day (and people with college degrees do better than that). But the corruption has reached unimaginable levels ... and it's not just the government, it's everyone. For example, we have a public health system, and while I paid…
For example, we have a public health system, and while I paid something like $15000 last year in taxes (a big amount for us), my wife got pregnant, she's having problems ... and we've had to bribe a doctor to even speak to us, not to mention they demand big bribes for doing a clean caesarean section, and my wife needs it. The poor souls that don't have money for bribes simply get fucked. How is that not the governmen…
We have a mixed (and reasonably good) system. You can go to any private clinic you want. It will be expensive, but a much more pleasant experience.
Or you can stay with the public system, but in this case you will definitely encounter bribes. The cause is pretty simple: the salaries in public health are way lower then they should be. Most pacients understand that and view the bribes as a normal form of compensation.
The system is mixed in more ways than one. Many good doctors work both ways. They spend time in the public hospitals to gather pacients, which they then bring to their private clinic.
Also the numbers mentioned by the grandparent seem a bit large. I'd say the average daily income is below $15. AFAIK, a good birth in a private hospital is around $1500, so he probably should have gone this way from the beginning.
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
For example, we have a public health system, and while I paid something like $15000 last year in taxes (a big amount for us), my wife got pregnant, she's having problems ... and we've had to bribe a doctor to even speak to us, not to mention they demand big bribes for doing a clean caesarean section, and my wife needs it. The poor souls that don't have money for bribes simply get fucked. How is that not the governmen…
> How is that not the government? If there weren't a public health system, there would be more doctors and they wouldn't be able to bribe you. You could just go to someone else. It doesn't work like that, the system is more relaxed than in other countries ... you can go to any doctor you want. Surely, competition seems like the answer, but there's something larger at play here ... I once heard of a woman in labor tha…
>>No really, we have a mostly working democracy and capitalism ... not helping much ;)
In a few decades this will probably be formalized and down to a science, with advice etc:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_governance
But by that time, technical development will have created totally new sets of problems. :-)
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, sorry but as another EU citizen, I have to say I'm not sure we should have accepted Romania into the EU before this problem is fixed. Do you think it's helping against corruption or is any incentive now gone? Do you think it's getting better with rising income? (this was not meant against romanians it's just that EU institutions are pretty far away from EU projects and are usually terrible at detecting corruptio…
> I'm not sure we should have accepted Romania into the EU before this problem is fixed. If I lived anywhere else, I'd have the same opinion :) > Do you think it's helping against corruption or is any incentive now gone? Actually, it's helping, since we are monitored and we get warnings and sanctions now and then ... one of the main concerns being corruption. I don't think that the end-result can be predicted though,…
I just saw something related in the news, apparently corruption in Afghanistan is on the scale of 23% of GDP. I can imagine that changing an economic system with that much corruption to something better is hard, since everyone depends on how things are now. Imagine what would happen if everyone's salary was suddenly cut to three quarters...
Actually, that's more or less what's happening in the Baltic countries now. The economic crisis has hit hard there, and the government is taking rather drastic measures to handle it.
Sources: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/01/20/Corruption-biggest... and http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4320882,00.html
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
For example, we have a public health system, and while I paid something like $15000 last year in taxes (a big amount for us), my wife got pregnant, she's having problems ... and we've had to bribe a doctor to even speak to us, not to mention they demand big bribes for doing a clean caesarean section, and my wife needs it. The poor souls that don't have money for bribes simply get fucked. How is that not the governmen…
We have a mixed (and reasonably good) system. You can go to any private clinic you want. It will be expensive, but a much more pleasant experience. Or you can stay with the public system, but in this case you will definitely encounter bribes. The cause is pretty simple: the salaries in public health are way lower then they should be. Most pacients understand that and view the bribes as a normal form of compensation.…
> the salaries in public health are way lower then they should be
I understand that, but the way I view it ... it's not my fault they got into this. And while it's mostly a functional system (AFAIK, the US health system is horrible), it kind of bothers me that I pay lots of taxes without getting a return.
> AFAIK, a good birth in a private hospital is around $1500, so he probably should have gone this way from the beginning.
Well, my wife is having complications ... we first went to a private clinic, and the doctor consulting us just shook his head with no advice for us, other than "wait and see what happens" ... and in a private clinic, it's more like $2000 for a normal birth ... and I've heard of a case when the doctor demanded a bribe anyway.
So to get proper treatment in this case ... we've had to go to the hospital in Giulesti, which has some of the best doctors available.
Now, of course, the doctor we ended up with (Puia Sorin in case you are interested :)), which is renowned for "delivering babies" :) ... treats his patients equally, the only problem being that he's too busy to take on new patients (fortunately, there are still some decent people left).
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
That still holds. The problem is that it's been taken to its logical conclusion: all dysfunctional countries have been conquered by their competent neighbors, which means that there are large landmasses that contain exclusively competent nations (North America, Europe, Australia/Oceania, and soon Asia) and large landmasses that contain exclusively dysfunctional ones (Africa, Arabia, and South America). There are natu…
maybe one of you could show at least one example of a "competent" nation conquering disfunctional ones before building your complete world view on it.
Roman Empire? Pretty much all empires through history? Of course "competent" can be interpreted a lot of different ways.
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
That still holds. The problem is that it's been taken to its logical conclusion: all dysfunctional countries have been conquered by their competent neighbors, which means that there are large landmasses that contain exclusively competent nations (North America, Europe, Australia/Oceania, and soon Asia) and large landmasses that contain exclusively dysfunctional ones (Africa, Arabia, and South America). There are natu…
maybe one of you could show at least one example of a "competent" nation conquering disfunctional ones before building your complete world view on it.
> maybe one of you could show at least one example of a "competent" nation conquering disfunctional ones before building your complete world view on it.
Countries with a mix of a stable economy, advanced technology, and organized military regularly conquered their neighbors that didn't have those things. Countries with the tech/military but not the stable economy (USSR, for instance) could have a brief go at it, but inevitably came down upon themselves.
What sort of examples were you looking for? Nations with the combination advanced technology relative to their neighbors and a well organized military have done a lot of conquering throughout history, and those with stable economies held onto their new possessions. There's so many examples I wouldn't know where to start. Rome and all of its possessions would be a decent place, or one of the many functional or dysfunctional Russian Empires, or the Unification of Japan under the Oda, Toyotomi, and Tokugawa daimyos, or Manifest Destiny in the United States...
Those are just a few to come to mind with the economy/tech/military edges, but there's quite literally hundreds, from little tiny islands taking over other little tiny islands in Oceania to the various international powers/empires. Maybe the question is with the word competent? You do need a healthy economy, advanced technology, and stable military, which in turn requires some sort of decent courts, checks and balances on military rule, some science and production happening, and so on. Complicated question - could probably go on more if you clarified a bit.
Re: Why Poor Countries Are Poor
#60I think the first step in overcoming poverty is for all of us to propagate a value system where citizens are held responsible for their countries.
For example, if India is poor and backward, then I am responsible for contributing to its poverty and backwardness, and so are all other Indians.