The World Bank Encourages Starvation in Africa
There are so many levels on which to attack this story, but since the World Bank is so much in the news, let's single them out. Given that Robert Mugabe had such good outcomes with seizure of farmland in Zimbabwe, South Africa is trying its hand at it as well, and is being egged on by the World Bank.
The inequality of land ownership poses a threat to political stability in South Africa, says Rogier van den Brink, a World Bank economist who helped the government select its target of redistributing 30 percent of arable land by 2014.
``Our story was and still is that the land problem of the magnitude of South Africa is like an accident waiting to happen,'' Van den Brink says. ``From world history, if you have an unequal distribution of this magnitude, at some point, some politician will run with it.''
This is the brand of economics that Mr. Van den Brink and the folks at the World Bank bring to the world, in which, apparently, expropriation of property is beneficial because "inequality of land ownership" just isn't sensible. Well naturally. As any student of economics will tell you, the works of all the great economists, from Ricardo and Smith to Marshall, Keynes, and Friedman, are simply littered with references to the racial makeup of land ownership. Obviously, you just can't understand the notions of efficient allocation of scarce resources without understanding what politicians tend to "run with."
Of course, I jest. It seems that Mr. Van den Brink is some sort of historian/political scientist/moralist rather than an economist; and, while he is safe in his mental cocoon convinced that he is sparing South Africans some sort of impending despotism, the likely outcome of these redistributionist policies will be food shortages at best and mass starvation at worst. Naturally, when people go hungry they get mad, so Mr Van den Brink is actually increasing the odds of political instability.
Joseph Stiglitz was right, the World Bank is full of relative dummies. It would be amusing if lives weren't in the balance. If Africa really wants to lift itself out of its vicious cycle of poverty and human suffering it might start by banning the likes of the World Bank.
More on how to manufacture starvation here.
The inequality of land ownership poses a threat to political stability in South Africa, says Rogier van den Brink, a World Bank economist who helped the government select its target of redistributing 30 percent of arable land by 2014.
``Our story was and still is that the land problem of the magnitude of South Africa is like an accident waiting to happen,'' Van den Brink says. ``From world history, if you have an unequal distribution of this magnitude, at some point, some politician will run with it.''
This is the brand of economics that Mr. Van den Brink and the folks at the World Bank bring to the world, in which, apparently, expropriation of property is beneficial because "inequality of land ownership" just isn't sensible. Well naturally. As any student of economics will tell you, the works of all the great economists, from Ricardo and Smith to Marshall, Keynes, and Friedman, are simply littered with references to the racial makeup of land ownership. Obviously, you just can't understand the notions of efficient allocation of scarce resources without understanding what politicians tend to "run with."
Of course, I jest. It seems that Mr. Van den Brink is some sort of historian/political scientist/moralist rather than an economist; and, while he is safe in his mental cocoon convinced that he is sparing South Africans some sort of impending despotism, the likely outcome of these redistributionist policies will be food shortages at best and mass starvation at worst. Naturally, when people go hungry they get mad, so Mr Van den Brink is actually increasing the odds of political instability.
Joseph Stiglitz was right, the World Bank is full of relative dummies. It would be amusing if lives weren't in the balance. If Africa really wants to lift itself out of its vicious cycle of poverty and human suffering it might start by banning the likes of the World Bank.
More on how to manufacture starvation here.
posted by Donny Baseball at 11:36 AM
1 Comments:
You seem pretty world-savvy and you are also right. But who still believes in Bretton Woods institutions' ability to solve modern problems? While the permanent members of the security council continue to be the leading providers of arms to the world, any action on behalf of the UN or any other related organisation is simply a F.ARSE!
Post a Comment
<< Home