I am not an economist, but thinking about this briefly .. could it be, the west needs to suffer economically for developing parts of the world to prosper? Are finite economics still relevant in the 21st century?
No. The economy is, by and large, not a zero sum game. Otherwise, why are N billion people by and large better off than however many people there were 200 years ago?
For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
31–40 of 160 posts
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't be so optimistic. The globalization project hasn't ended yet. Who will control the world is to be seen. And whether the nations will be left with the wealth they had acquired is as clear as the Libyan's future at the moment.
Don't be so vague, say what you mean, back it up with evidence.
Look around yourself in your country. Are people good enough there and no "occupy wall street" actions taking place?
I know how the things are in the helped to be "developed" countries, and one from one of those.
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#33This is a tiny change. Almost half of the world still lives for less than $2.00 per day. Amazing that we can look at those statistics and think that there is significant progress or not be distressed by the inequality. If you honestly assess this fact that almost half live for less than $2.00 per day versus the "first world" consumption then you will come to the conclusion, as I have, that civilization is a myth. Thi…
It comes down to this: if you think that economics is a zero-sum game, then yes, it is unjust. First world consumption comes at the expense of the poor elsewhere, the rich are leeches sucking money from the rest of the economy, and 35 hour work weeks create jobs. Good news is all signs point to economics not being a zero-sum game, and thus most of the responses you are getting are likely correct - your premise is fla…
There is a continuum between two extremes - at one extreme, you have a zero sum relationship, where the total output (as measured by some sensible metric) is capped and it gets divided up, through to a view where there are unlimited resources and no constraints on growth, and the activities of people are synergistic but not competitive.
Both ends of the continuum are easily shown to be fallacious, but your argument only holds if you assume the unlimited resource end of the continuum is true.
The reality is that there are finite resources, and physical, biological and sociological limits how fast and efficiently they can be sustainably exploited. That said, there is clearly a lot of room for improvement in how efficiently we use resources - as many Internet startups are doing - as well as how sustainably we use them.
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. The economy is, by and large, not a zero sum game. Otherwise, why are N billion people by and large better off than however many people there were 200 years ago?
I see your point, but then isn't wealth always relative? If scarcity isn't used as a yard stick for money creation how can inflation be avoided?
Edit: status is relative - if everyone else has a Ferrari, and I only have a Fiat, I probably feel poorer. However, I still have a car that is better, faster, and safer than anything that existed 100 years ago.
Edit#2: the above is one reason that worrying about what you have in an objective sense is a lot healthier than worrying about status/relative wealth.
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#35I have been to Uganda a few years ago to work on a voluntary project. If you see numbers like the number of people living under $1 per day and you see the images on TV you come to think of people in Africa just as pitiful. However, I got the feeling that the people in Uganda are actually more happy than the people in Northern Europe. Maybe wealth is actually inversely correlated with happiness?
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#36Their point is moot and I don't get their intention. They use figures from 2005 and 2008 so they can't legitimately try to relate the economic downturn to improvements in worldwide poverty.
They have good points. You must have missed econ 101.
First sentence:
"THE past four years have seen the worst economic crisis since the 1930s and the biggest food-price increases since the 1970s. That must surely have swollen the ranks of the poor."
I'd expect them to at least address the point they are trying to make but nothing in the article supports it. The source of the article (the data) ends in 2008 so that's way too short to make any conclusion on the impact of the economic downturn.
Economies have some level of inertia and I'd say that it's inversely proportional to the said economy's dynamism.
They admit it themselves:
"This implies that the long-term rate of poverty reduction—slightly over one percentage point a year—continued unabated in 2008-10, despite the dual crisis."
Same for 2011, I'd say poor countries have seen very little investment coming from Europe in late 2011 as most economic resources were shed in the debt crisis and protection plan.
"A lot of the credit goes to China"
Absolutely true. Outside China, I have personally witnessed huge changes happening thanks to China and its economic power and fearless investments. They literally blow in Laos' economies and are largely responsible for Myanmar current boom, spending money where their mouth is.
In the end, the article does a great job at showing one of China's good side but they certainly aren't proving their initial claim.
For people with short memories, China is doing what Europe and the North America was doing during the post-WWII era. I bet they are going to make the same mistakes and it's already common knowledge they have started (they bribe foreign officials easily and generously).
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#37I have been to Uganda a few years ago to work on a voluntary project. If you see numbers like the number of people living under $1 per day and you see the images on TV you come to think of people in Africa just as pitiful. However, I got the feeling that the people in Uganda are actually more happy than the people in Northern Europe. Maybe wealth is actually inversely correlated with happiness?
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't be so vague, say what you mean, back it up with evidence.
Like everything in capitalism, third world improvements is just an investment. The debt is due already for some nations and soon the next batch will follow the "debt settlement". Look around yourself in your country. Are people good enough there and no "occupy wall street" actions taking place? I know how the things are in the helped to be "developed" countries, and one from one of those.
But who wins the global world is yet to be seen.
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Almost half of the world still lives for less than $2.00 per day." Simply untrue. http://rs.resalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/worldin... "Amazing that we can look at those statistics and think that there is significant progress" http://www.gapminder.org/world/ (hit "Play") "This is incredibly unjust." "To help clarify the matter, get rid of everyone else and put our worker on a desert island, hunting and ga…
I like reading PG's essays but this one is a nonsense to me. What we (people) don't like about the rich is not their ability to make money, but their ability to corrupt the gvmt and screw the poor. All in the sake of more money.
You are entitled to your opinion, but your response doesn't even address the reason the poster referenced the article. Instead, you launched into some diatribe about evil rich folk. Reading the full article probably won't change your opinion, but it does address this "us vs. them" mindset you are in to some degree. It also contains well-reasoned arguments for variation in income, including the one the grandparent post mentioned.
From PGs article: But since for most of the world's history the main route to wealth was to steal it, we tend to be suspicious of rich people
Re: For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere
#40Trouble is, every one has an agenda and its really hard to ever know the truth. I have no idea if this is self serving fantasy or reality.