Updated 7/17/2011
Have you heard of the saying...'first they came for the Jews, then the Catholics, then the gays...and finally they came for me?"
No longer are SALs confined to lesser developed countries. Today, after the 2007-8 economic crisis, we are seeing quite advanced countries such as Iceland, Greece and Ireland, in line for the same treatment: loans with conditions.
See this from the IMF:
IMF Approves €30 Bln Loan for Greece on Fast Track
May 9, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2010/new050910a.htm
IMF and EU loans come with conditions: the cutting of social benefits to Greeks. We are witnessing vast protests in Athens this week due to this type of austerity measure. See this:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/28/news/international/greece_debt_crisis/
At this point, you might be interested in this:
http://www.myloansconsolidated.com/2011/06/26/gerald-celente-people-are-never-going-to-be-free-until-we-break-the-banks/
Say you have a mortgage, but you have fallen into financial difficulties. Your house then defaults back to the bank. This is, in a nutshell, how banks acquire physical assets. On the international stage, banks and countries that loan, can acquire physical assets if loans aren't paid back. In the future, I expect to see large chunks of US real estate being acquired by China and other countries which are in a more stable financial situation.
Greece's debt was at 127% of its GNP when it decided to take out more loans. The US' debt is at roughly 90% of its GNP. The so-called solutions are a) to pile on more debt to pay for the interest on the old debt; b) 'austerity' measures for the masses; and c) buying up the debtor country's physical assets.
I liked how Robert explained the blame game, as countries fail to repay their debt:
'It's remarkable that IOs like the IMF and WorldBank continue to champion SAPs as the vehicles for economic growth, given the obvious failures since the 1980s. Ha-Joon Chang's summarized the typical attitude of the IMF/WorldBank in his lecture. He talked about how, when SAPs were producing bad results early on, people kept saying, "we just need more time." Over time, when the programs still failed to produce positive results, they said its because countries did not abide by recommendations. Then, if a country did follow the recipe but the policies were unsuccessful, IMF/WorldBank folks would say the country's government was corrupt, that their culture is incompatible with the programs, or that the country suffered from bad geography. How long does it take before someone can step back and admit that the policies might just be wrong?'
|
|
How did LDCs get into this position in the first place? The causes can be traced back to European colonization of pre capitalist countries from the 15th century to the 19th century. The colonization disrupted and virtually ended, pre-capitalist economies which were largely based on subsistence agriculture. A capitalist economic model was imposed on these militarily weaker societies by the French, British, Germans, Japanese. These countries then became the resource basket for the wealthy. For example, Congo's agricultural crops were decimated to make way for the rubber industry.
Independence came after WWII, but it could be called an imperfect de-colonization. So while LDCs achieved a formal separation from imperialist powers, financial structures were set up to retain their dependency.
That's how the core dependency theory explains the situation. A class analysis does a better job to explain why the working masses will bear the brunt of a state's debt, whether it's a LDC or a powerful state like the US.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Technological Innovation and Capitalism
This week in INTL 5400, you discussed the differences between comparative and competitive advantage. Briefly, comparative advantage belongs to the liberalism school of thought. It promotes free trade, product specialization and cheap prices. Competitive advantage belongs to the realist school of thought, which promotes protectionism and government intervention that increases national security. As some of you noted, Japan’s economy reflects aspects of both theories. Most countries tend to blend aspects of both theories.
Both theories operate within the paradigm of capitalism, which promotes the private acquisition of capital, mass production and consumption, and intense use of technology. This is the modernist approach.
By now, you’ve understood that ‘political economy’ is the study of the political distribution of power as expressed through the economy. This has raised philosophical issues about who controls what resource, and who benefits from that control. In fact, there is a bachelor’s degree in the UK called Politics, Philosophy and Economics (PPE).
The question has become, in this day and age of protests against food prices and unemployment, is capitalism the most efficacious way of a) distributing resources, and b) promoting advancements in technology that improve our quality of life?
In Week 7, you will be studying these protests and how they are linked to economies that rely on food imports. In Week 8, we will look at the issue of global water.
Technological innovations are usually believed to be an outcome of capitalism. The idea is to produce advanced machines that lower labor costs, make cheaper widgets which then sell on a massive scale.
Historically we know that other economic models spur innovation. For example:the Romans focused on engineering, the Islamic Renaissance from 900 to 1200 CE, gave us much of our modern medicine and mathematics. The European Middle Ages spurred advancements in building construction.
Technological innovations also arise from:
1) Creativity combined with altruism. For example, the alternative energy industry in the US has been innovating for decades, but with very little promise of profit. It has to contend with the power of the oil lobbies, and lack of US government support. We will learn in Wk 5 that China’s government is financing research and development in this field.
2) Necessity is the Mother of Invention. Here we can look at prehistory: the success of agriculture is largely due to inventions by what have been mis-named ‘primitive’ societies.
3) Military Matters. Here is where you see protectionism at work. Most governments pour money into military research and development, which have benefits for civilian society. For example: the Internet. Marilyn Waring, as you know, critiques the ‘benefits’of weapons.
Both theories operate within the paradigm of capitalism, which promotes the private acquisition of capital, mass production and consumption, and intense use of technology. This is the modernist approach.
By now, you’ve understood that ‘political economy’ is the study of the political distribution of power as expressed through the economy. This has raised philosophical issues about who controls what resource, and who benefits from that control. In fact, there is a bachelor’s degree in the UK called Politics, Philosophy and Economics (PPE).
The question has become, in this day and age of protests against food prices and unemployment, is capitalism the most efficacious way of a) distributing resources, and b) promoting advancements in technology that improve our quality of life?
In Week 7, you will be studying these protests and how they are linked to economies that rely on food imports. In Week 8, we will look at the issue of global water.
Technological innovations are usually believed to be an outcome of capitalism. The idea is to produce advanced machines that lower labor costs, make cheaper widgets which then sell on a massive scale.
Historically we know that other economic models spur innovation. For example:the Romans focused on engineering, the Islamic Renaissance from 900 to 1200 CE, gave us much of our modern medicine and mathematics. The European Middle Ages spurred advancements in building construction.
Technological innovations also arise from:
1) Creativity combined with altruism. For example, the alternative energy industry in the US has been innovating for decades, but with very little promise of profit. It has to contend with the power of the oil lobbies, and lack of US government support. We will learn in Wk 5 that China’s government is financing research and development in this field.
2) Necessity is the Mother of Invention. Here we can look at prehistory: the success of agriculture is largely due to inventions by what have been mis-named ‘primitive’ societies.
3) Military Matters. Here is where you see protectionism at work. Most governments pour money into military research and development, which have benefits for civilian society. For example: the Internet. Marilyn Waring, as you know, critiques the ‘benefits’of weapons.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
ARE POPULATION GROWTH RATES TO BLAME FOR GLOBAL POVERTY?
UPDATED OCTOBER 30, 2011
First of all, what are global population rates? Scary stories abound...usually headlined The Population Bomb. We are overpopulating the planet, apparently. But is that true?
A hidden revolution is going on around the world, and it's down to women being educated and controlling how many children they have. UN statistics say that the average woman today has 2.5 children. In Iran it's about 1.8. In India, it's 2.8. In Brazil it's 2.2. Also, see this: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110511/full/473125a.html.
The global population could very well go into reverse by the middle of the 21st century. That means, a glut of older people and not enough young people.
The UN Population Division in 2002, predicted a population decline, and many countries are not replacing their populations. See: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2002/WPP2002-HIGHLIGHTSrev1.PDF.
It remains to be seen if poverty will be reduced along with the global population, as it is currently believed.
What we do know is that there is over consumption by advanced countries.
“The richest 20 percent of humanity consumes 86% of all goods and services, while the poorest fifth consumes just 1.3 percent.” (Shah, Global Issues, 2011).
“The population of the U.S. tripled during the 20th century, but the U.S. consumption of raw materials increased 17-fold”.1 (Factoids, 2011).
Today we are in a period called ‘neo-colonialism” which refers to the institutional ways that the rich nations impose unequal economic relations on the former colonies. This is done through loans by rich countries that impose conditions that aren’t healthy for poor populations. These conditions (called STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAMS or SAPs) often include the privatization of state services such as health and education, which puts them out of the reach of the poor. SAPS introduce cheap goods that undercut local production, or insist on cash crops like coffee for Western markets, rather than food stuffs to feed the population.
Western governments fail to offset over-consumption by Western nations.
Let's look at a case study: Niger.
The current population of Niger is 16,468,886 with a population growth rate of 3.643%. (CIA Fact book) The estimated life expectancy for the total population is 53.4 years with 14.11 deaths/1,000.(CIA Fact book)
Here is my question: Is a growth rate of 3.6 percent so terrible that it justifies the very high mortality rate and the extreme poverty of Niger? It's actually very similar (3.28) to the rate of the population growth of United Arab Emirates, which isn't known for its high poverty levels, and people can expect to live to 76 years of age, in the UAE.
See these statistics about population growth rates globally:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2002rank.html?countryName=Japan&countryCode=ja®ionCode=eas&rank=215#ja
My personal belief is that a woman and her partner, should both make decisions about reproduction. Clearly, there is a reason to restrict multiple and frequent births, given the impact on women’s health, but this needs to be balanced by a study of resource availability on a global scale. Before Malthusian type policies are enacted, it would be best to that advanced countries start consuming at a more sustainable rate.
First of all, what are global population rates? Scary stories abound...usually headlined The Population Bomb. We are overpopulating the planet, apparently. But is that true?
A hidden revolution is going on around the world, and it's down to women being educated and controlling how many children they have. UN statistics say that the average woman today has 2.5 children. In Iran it's about 1.8. In India, it's 2.8. In Brazil it's 2.2. Also, see this: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110511/full/473125a.html.
The global population could very well go into reverse by the middle of the 21st century. That means, a glut of older people and not enough young people.
The UN Population Division in 2002, predicted a population decline, and many countries are not replacing their populations. See: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2002/WPP2002-HIGHLIGHTSrev1.PDF.
It remains to be seen if poverty will be reduced along with the global population, as it is currently believed.
What we do know is that there is over consumption by advanced countries.
“The richest 20 percent of humanity consumes 86% of all goods and services, while the poorest fifth consumes just 1.3 percent.” (Shah, Global Issues, 2011).
“The population of the U.S. tripled during the 20th century, but the U.S. consumption of raw materials increased 17-fold”.1 (Factoids, 2011).
Today we are in a period called ‘neo-colonialism” which refers to the institutional ways that the rich nations impose unequal economic relations on the former colonies. This is done through loans by rich countries that impose conditions that aren’t healthy for poor populations. These conditions (called STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAMS or SAPs) often include the privatization of state services such as health and education, which puts them out of the reach of the poor. SAPS introduce cheap goods that undercut local production, or insist on cash crops like coffee for Western markets, rather than food stuffs to feed the population.
Western governments fail to offset over-consumption by Western nations.
Let's look at a case study: Niger.
The current population of Niger is 16,468,886 with a population growth rate of 3.643%. (CIA Fact book) The estimated life expectancy for the total population is 53.4 years with 14.11 deaths/1,000.(CIA Fact book)
Here is my question: Is a growth rate of 3.6 percent so terrible that it justifies the very high mortality rate and the extreme poverty of Niger? It's actually very similar (3.28) to the rate of the population growth of United Arab Emirates, which isn't known for its high poverty levels, and people can expect to live to 76 years of age, in the UAE.
See these statistics about population growth rates globally:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2002rank.html?countryName=Japan&countryCode=ja®ionCode=eas&rank=215#ja
My personal belief is that a woman and her partner, should both make decisions about reproduction. Clearly, there is a reason to restrict multiple and frequent births, given the impact on women’s health, but this needs to be balanced by a study of resource availability on a global scale. Before Malthusian type policies are enacted, it would be best to that advanced countries start consuming at a more sustainable rate.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
SEX TRAFFICKING DESTINATION COUNTRIES
This week, I’ve come across a report that makes these basic points about the global sex trafficking trade: “The culture, particular mass media, is playing a large role in normalizing prostitution by portraying prostitution as glamorous or a way to quickly make a lot of money" (Hughes, Donna M, "The Demand: Where Sex Trafficking Begins",2004.)
My comment: Films like PRETTY WOMAN come to mind. Many US-made films propagate the myth of the ‘happy prostitute’. The Western media in general objectifies women’s sexuality to sell commodities to men, such as cars. Therefore we should not just blame the culture in ‘backward’ countries but also the mass media in Western countries.
The National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence in the US (http://www.ncdsv.org/ncd_linksprost.html) estimates there are between 100,000 and 150,000 under-aged sex workers in the US who generate billions of dollars in revenue for their pimps. The US is also a destination country to which prostitutes around the world, are sent to work.
Hughes' report focuses on ‘destination countries’: ‘In destination countries, strategies are devised to protect the sex industries that generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year for the state where prostitution is legal, or for organized crime groups and corrupt officials where the sex industry is illegal.” “I believe that only by going to the root causes, which are corruption and the demand in destination countries, will we end the trafficking of women and children.”
The full report is accessed at http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/demand_rome_june04.pdf.
SO, WHICH ARE THE ‘DESTINATION’ COUNTRIES?
The most common destinations for victims of human trafficking are Thailand, Japan, Israel, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Turkey and the US (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “UNODC launches Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking”, 2007).
Note that the majority of these countries are supposedly the ‘advanced’ nations. What does that say about their culture? From WIKIPEDIA (see source): “Of the 45,000 to 50,000 that are brought to the U.S., 30,000 come from Asia, 10,000 from Latin America and 5,000 from other regions e.g., the former Soviet Union. The primary Asian source countries to the U.S. are China, Thailand and Vietnam. Although trafficking into the U.S. and Europe has gained a lot of attention in recent years, anti-trafficking advocates in Asia have been addressing these issues on the continent for decades (FIROZA CHIC DABBY, TRAFFICKING: CONSIDERATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BATTERED WOMEN’S ADVOCATES, Revised September 2008, apiahf.org.)
The major sources of trafficked persons include Thailand, China, Nigeria, Albania, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine ("The Emancipation Network". Tenstudents.com. http://tenstudents.com/Source_Destination.html. Retrieved 2011-03-22.)
My solutions?
1. ERADICATE POVERTY WORLDWIDE. Only the fair distribution of wealth globally, will fund education, health and other social services for women. I know you've heard this before, but it bears repeating.
2. INCREASE RESOURCES TO COMBAT SEX TRAFFICKING. THE US SPENDS $20 PER HUMAN TRAFFICKING VICTIM BUT 350 TIMES THIS AMOUNT TO COMBAT DRUG TRAFFICKING (http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/896).
3. CHANGE THE PATRIARCHAL VALUE SYSTEM WORLD-WIDE.
MY THEORIES? SOCIALIST FEMINISM explains the underside of poverty, and how women are particularly affected. RADICAL FEMINISM explains the global nature of patriarchy, the rule of male elites over women and subordinated men. COMMENTS WELCOMED.
My comment: Films like PRETTY WOMAN come to mind. Many US-made films propagate the myth of the ‘happy prostitute’. The Western media in general objectifies women’s sexuality to sell commodities to men, such as cars. Therefore we should not just blame the culture in ‘backward’ countries but also the mass media in Western countries.
The National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence in the US (http://www.ncdsv.org/ncd_linksprost.html) estimates there are between 100,000 and 150,000 under-aged sex workers in the US who generate billions of dollars in revenue for their pimps. The US is also a destination country to which prostitutes around the world, are sent to work.
Hughes' report focuses on ‘destination countries’: ‘In destination countries, strategies are devised to protect the sex industries that generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year for the state where prostitution is legal, or for organized crime groups and corrupt officials where the sex industry is illegal.” “I believe that only by going to the root causes, which are corruption and the demand in destination countries, will we end the trafficking of women and children.”
The full report is accessed at http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/demand_rome_june04.pdf.
SO, WHICH ARE THE ‘DESTINATION’ COUNTRIES?
The most common destinations for victims of human trafficking are Thailand, Japan, Israel, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Turkey and the US (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “UNODC launches Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking”, 2007).
Note that the majority of these countries are supposedly the ‘advanced’ nations. What does that say about their culture? From WIKIPEDIA (see source): “Of the 45,000 to 50,000 that are brought to the U.S., 30,000 come from Asia, 10,000 from Latin America and 5,000 from other regions e.g., the former Soviet Union. The primary Asian source countries to the U.S. are China, Thailand and Vietnam. Although trafficking into the U.S. and Europe has gained a lot of attention in recent years, anti-trafficking advocates in Asia have been addressing these issues on the continent for decades (FIROZA CHIC DABBY, TRAFFICKING: CONSIDERATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BATTERED WOMEN’S ADVOCATES, Revised September 2008, apiahf.org.)
The major sources of trafficked persons include Thailand, China, Nigeria, Albania, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine ("The Emancipation Network". Tenstudents.com. http://tenstudents.com/Source_Destination.html. Retrieved 2011-03-22.)
My solutions?
1. ERADICATE POVERTY WORLDWIDE. Only the fair distribution of wealth globally, will fund education, health and other social services for women. I know you've heard this before, but it bears repeating.
2. INCREASE RESOURCES TO COMBAT SEX TRAFFICKING. THE US SPENDS $20 PER HUMAN TRAFFICKING VICTIM BUT 350 TIMES THIS AMOUNT TO COMBAT DRUG TRAFFICKING (http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/896).
3. CHANGE THE PATRIARCHAL VALUE SYSTEM WORLD-WIDE.
MY THEORIES? SOCIALIST FEMINISM explains the underside of poverty, and how women are particularly affected. RADICAL FEMINISM explains the global nature of patriarchy, the rule of male elites over women and subordinated men. COMMENTS WELCOMED.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
WHAT IS NATIONAL SECURITY? NATIONAL DEFENSE AND/OR NATIONAL HEALTH?
I better declare my bias. I am a naturalized American, and was raised in the world’s first national health care system, in the United Kingdom. My father was a pioneering doctor in this system which was established right after World War II. Rather than practice as a private doctor, and make pots of money, my father cared for four generations of poor families in one of London’s working class districts, and was paid as a civil servant. Here in the US, I call myself part of the ‘intellectual working class’ because I don’t have job security, employee health insurance or retirement benefits. Recently I broke my arm which meant an out of pocket cost of $5000 because I could only afford the least expensive insurance rate. I can’t afford to replace two missing ‘smile’ teeth (not a good look!) So, this is a topic dear to my heart.
Carolyn wrote “Across the United States, women are forced to forego both preventative and urgent medical and dental care due to economic considerations. “Uninsured women account for 20% of the population of women ages 18 to 64”,(Women's Health2, 2010)
It was good to hear from our military colleagues that they are receiving comprehensive health care.
Sometimes I wonder if we as Americans are being asked to choose between the world’s largest military or universal health care and education.
A student wrote
‘It is more difficult to sustain healthcare coverage in a federal system where states legislation can differ and difference of level of states’ income is so wide
Military taxes are raised federally. It makes sense when you consider that a nation has to pay for its defense, as one entity within physical borders. But, as Carolyn wrote ‘A nation's health underpins its ability to remain competitive in the global sociopolitical arena.’ So, shouldn’t health costs be raised federally too? Medicare is a federal expense.
This raises the issue of how one defines ‘national security’. Should it be about war- preparedness and fighting, or should it also be about ensuring that the population is relatively healthy?
Carolyn wrote “Across the United States, women are forced to forego both preventative and urgent medical and dental care due to economic considerations. “Uninsured women account for 20% of the population of women ages 18 to 64”,(Women's Health2, 2010)
It was good to hear from our military colleagues that they are receiving comprehensive health care.
Sometimes I wonder if we as Americans are being asked to choose between the world’s largest military or universal health care and education.
A student wrote
‘It is more difficult to sustain healthcare coverage in a federal system where states legislation can differ and difference of level of states’ income is so wide
Military taxes are raised federally. It makes sense when you consider that a nation has to pay for its defense, as one entity within physical borders. But, as Carolyn wrote ‘A nation's health underpins its ability to remain competitive in the global sociopolitical arena.’ So, shouldn’t health costs be raised federally too? Medicare is a federal expense.
This raises the issue of how one defines ‘national security’. Should it be about war- preparedness and fighting, or should it also be about ensuring that the population is relatively healthy?
Friday, April 1, 2011
THE US: HOME OF ELITES OR BEACON TO THE WORLD?
A student wrote “The United States has been a beacon to the world on how economic freedom brings more wealth, prosperity, and opportunity to its people. “
Supporting that contention, the UN Human Index Development report for 2010 indicates that the US is rated fourth highest in development among approx. 190 countries in the ratings when averages are taken. See: http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/.
However, when categories are broken down, another picture appears. For example:
U.S. is ranked 30th (out of approx. 190 countries) in global infant mortality (deaths of children under age 5). Infant mortality rates are used to ascertain wellbeing and prosperity of a population. Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/04/us-usa-infants-mortality-idUSTRE5A30PM20091104
Given that the US’ GNP is one of the highest in the world, this indicates a pyramid structure of wealth which flattens out when you take averages.
In terms of poverty levels by race, the US Census Bureau in 2008 came up with the following:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0714.pdf
Table 714 shows that Hispanics and African Americans have higher poverty levels than Whites, with such estimates staying steady over the last 30 years.
Approximately 43.6 (14.3%) million Americans were living in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million (13.2%) in 2008 ( "Poverty rate hits 15-year high",Reuters. September 17, 2010).
In terms of the distribution of income, the US ranks one of the lowest in the advanced industrialized countries. The CIA reports that the US ranks 45th in 2008 (dropping from 40th in 1997). Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html. For comparison, income distribution in Rwanda was 46.8 in 2000. Indonesia was 37th in 2009. Denmark was ranked 29th in 2007.
Today, according to one 2007 estimate, the richest 1 percent in the US account for 24 percent of the nation's income (http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-UStopincomes-2007.pdf).
This indicates an elite in operation. I think you see this best in Congress. There are no less than 261 millionaires in Congress, that’s about half. See this: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20023147-503544.html.
Ratings, data compilation and statistics can be tricky. Sometimes, sources contradict one another. According to the CIA Factbook, the US enjoys 99 percent literacy:
United States
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 99%
male: 99%
female: 99% (2003 est.)
But contradicting this, the NAAL (National Assessment of Adult Literacy) administered tests which revealed in 2008 that an estimated 14% of US residents would have extreme difficulty with reading and written comprehension (http://www.caliteracy.org/rates/). It’s not clear whether which of those tested were born in a country other than the US.
To overcome this type of discrepancy, students, academics and statisticians look for a range of estimates.
Supporting that contention, the UN Human Index Development report for 2010 indicates that the US is rated fourth highest in development among approx. 190 countries in the ratings when averages are taken. See: http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/.
However, when categories are broken down, another picture appears. For example:
U.S. is ranked 30th (out of approx. 190 countries) in global infant mortality (deaths of children under age 5). Infant mortality rates are used to ascertain wellbeing and prosperity of a population. Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/04/us-usa-infants-mortality-idUSTRE5A30PM20091104
Given that the US’ GNP is one of the highest in the world, this indicates a pyramid structure of wealth which flattens out when you take averages.
In terms of poverty levels by race, the US Census Bureau in 2008 came up with the following:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0714.pdf
Table 714 shows that Hispanics and African Americans have higher poverty levels than Whites, with such estimates staying steady over the last 30 years.
Approximately 43.6 (14.3%) million Americans were living in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million (13.2%) in 2008 ( "Poverty rate hits 15-year high",Reuters. September 17, 2010).
In terms of the distribution of income, the US ranks one of the lowest in the advanced industrialized countries. The CIA reports that the US ranks 45th in 2008 (dropping from 40th in 1997). Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html. For comparison, income distribution in Rwanda was 46.8 in 2000. Indonesia was 37th in 2009. Denmark was ranked 29th in 2007.
Today, according to one 2007 estimate, the richest 1 percent in the US account for 24 percent of the nation's income (http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-UStopincomes-2007.pdf).
This indicates an elite in operation. I think you see this best in Congress. There are no less than 261 millionaires in Congress, that’s about half. See this: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20023147-503544.html.
Ratings, data compilation and statistics can be tricky. Sometimes, sources contradict one another. According to the CIA Factbook, the US enjoys 99 percent literacy:
United States
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 99%
male: 99%
female: 99% (2003 est.)
But contradicting this, the NAAL (National Assessment of Adult Literacy) administered tests which revealed in 2008 that an estimated 14% of US residents would have extreme difficulty with reading and written comprehension (http://www.caliteracy.org/rates/). It’s not clear whether which of those tested were born in a country other than the US.
To overcome this type of discrepancy, students, academics and statisticians look for a range of estimates.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
LETTTER FROM HAITI
by Katie Curran
Ms Curran is in Haiti to train young film-makers.
I wanted to say hi and also let you know more about the situation here in Haiti, at least from my perspective. It’s pretty bad. Actually, it’s horrific, in many ways. I am very grateful to be able to focus on working with the kids here (I call them kids but most are in their 20s) five days a week – they’re fun, smart, very talented, and I hope they can really push for independent media here, which I think is of utmost importance, for Haitians and the world.
The conditions are probably worse than you can imagine, for the majority of Haitians. It was ranked as the most impoverished country in the Western Hemisphere before the earthquake, and conditions have only worsened. 1,300,000 people were left “homeless” after the earthquake (I put that in quotes, because the shacks so many were living in qualified as homes) and there are still 1,050,000 homeless. They are in camps all over Port-au-Prince and the surrounding areas (many neighborhoods have more tents than other buildings). There are a few that are bearable (like the one that is across the street from me), but a recent human rights survey I read described the conditions as close to unlivable (and from what I’ve seen, I agree).
The sanitation is one of the worst problems – though many organizations (over 10,000 NGOs in Haiti) have tried to implement compost toilets, the efforts only scratch the surface. Toilets are overflowing to the point where people are shitting in plastic bags and with no trash services, the bags are just thrown in ravines. The water situation is obviously so bad that it led to cholera. Sanitation conditions of the entire city are absolutely deplorable. Streets are covered with trash and just flow with the water when it rains. Every single ravine is clogged with trash.
The cost of living here is higher than the U.S. People averaging a dollar a day face tuna fish packages that are $4(maybe $2 in the U.S.), $8 orange juice ($4 in the U.S.), $5 for a box of $2 American cereal. A room for rent in a clean house is about $500 a month. I have NO idea how people are surviving.
The political situation is tenuous, to say the least. Protests are a regular occurrence, but they haven’t been very big lately. As you probably know, the president responsible for mass murders and torture has returned, and I didn’t find out until today that I was actually at the same event as him last night (more on that later). The state hasn’t filed any charges against him, though a few individuals have. Though Duvalier/Baby Doc was a relentless dictator, poverty is actually worse now then when he was in office, and many people are supporting him because anything seems better than what they have now – especially the younger ones that didn’t live through his reign. Aristide is supposed to come back, but I’ve heard various rumors as to whether he will, all surrounding stupid bureaucracy about his passport. Lavalas (his party) has been holding press conferences (I live in the same house as the other Haiti Reporter teachers and with other independent journalists who have been reporting on the press conferences). I’ve received very different opinions on Aristide (from rational people that have lived here a long time). The kids, except for a few, are not super interested in politics and I don’t blame them – people say that the country was just broken when Aristide came back(the second time) and spoke nothing of the economic justice he promised, as he had before the US supported coup that ousted him (as the first democratically elected president of Haiti). The kids, in general, like reporting on Haitian culture, the people who have stayed strong against the odds, and the good parts of Haiti, which I totally understand and support. (By the way, I’m writing mostly about the negative stuff because it is so overpowering, but I don’t mean to leave out the amazing things – like the incredible artistic talent, the inner strength and courage and the kindness of so many Haitians – this is, after all, the first slave rebellion that overthrew slavery and colonization). But the kids typically don’t lean towards overtly political stories (their stories, by the way, have been great so far – I’ve been blown away by what they’ve accomplished in 2 months). I think many of them see “politics” not as something that can be of regular people coming together to take control of their own lives, but as the rich, consistently corrupt men that stay at fancy hotels and take power through illegitimate elections (of which they recently had and is still being disputed) and are supported by various members of the military, state police, UN and “paramilitaries” (sometimes referred to as street gangs). Everyone, for the most part, hates the UN and police – the UN is constantly rolling around in their tanks and trucks with machine guns, often pointed directly at people, and the state police are also everywhere. The country is pretty much occupied by the UN soldiers who seem free from any state or international oversight (constantly using live ammunition at protests, etc.).
I have had some interesting insights as a foreigner, ones that I didn’t have last time I came (late spring of 2009).One of the journalists staying here has a lot of connections in the NGO and journalist world, most of which I’ve found to be pretty disgusting. A few of us went to a party at a big house of an NGO in the richest neighborhood of Port au Prince. The (terrifying) motor ride we took to get there drove us by thousands of tents, and once inside the gate EVERYONE was white (except for security) and all dressed up like they were in New York and EVERYONE worked for an NGO or media conglomerate. Then, last night, a few of us went to a“jazz festival”. I was told today that Duvalier was among the guests that included, again, all the NGO people (they all know each other), journalists and ambassadors of all the first-world countries – US, Canada, Spain, etc. It was a group of people that under any other circumstance I would be protesting their political and economic castrations, rather than mingling with them. It was disgusting. When I say NGO, I include not only people from all the different aide organizations (many of whom are paid outrageous salaries to be here) but the World Bank and Organization of American States. I met a guy last night that worked for the OAS in finance, and I said something like, “you all have got to change your economic approach -- capitalism has obviously not worked and its starving people and making everything worse”. And he said, “I totally agree. If you want to see capitalism at it’s best, come to Haiti”. I was quite amazed that he admitted that.
I have never been in a place of such economic disparity. (There are mansions here bigger than the ones on Long Island.)
One of the problems with Haiti is that organizations have either purposefully sidestepped the Haitian state with the good intentions (as obviously the state has not been trustworthy with its funds) or bypassed it out of their own interest. The results are completely disorganized and in-cohesive attempts to improve Haitian living conditions by organizations of every type working independently of each other (resembling hundreds of people trying to stop a gigantic surge of water with small and misshapen plugs) and with no coordination, and economic interests run wild (often
under the auspice of an NGO title). Some of the organizations have done a lot of good, and maybe the situation would be much worse without them, but the lack of coordination and community is a lot of wasted resources at best and contributing to the problems at worst.
The bottom line is that the underlying, root causes are not being addressed and a lack of political structure holds nothing together – I would label the biggest problems as neo-liberal capitalism/globalization, international political destabilization (to support capitalism run riot)and a lack of democracy. I’m pretty convinced that the best use of money/donations is investing in community, grassroots organizations working for political empowerment,education and economic justice, even though it’s tempting to just give money to anybody, anywhere, as that might buy them a meal. Until the political system changes, not much of anything else will change.
Ms Curran is in Haiti to train young film-makers.
I wanted to say hi and also let you know more about the situation here in Haiti, at least from my perspective. It’s pretty bad. Actually, it’s horrific, in many ways. I am very grateful to be able to focus on working with the kids here (I call them kids but most are in their 20s) five days a week – they’re fun, smart, very talented, and I hope they can really push for independent media here, which I think is of utmost importance, for Haitians and the world.
The conditions are probably worse than you can imagine, for the majority of Haitians. It was ranked as the most impoverished country in the Western Hemisphere before the earthquake, and conditions have only worsened. 1,300,000 people were left “homeless” after the earthquake (I put that in quotes, because the shacks so many were living in qualified as homes) and there are still 1,050,000 homeless. They are in camps all over Port-au-Prince and the surrounding areas (many neighborhoods have more tents than other buildings). There are a few that are bearable (like the one that is across the street from me), but a recent human rights survey I read described the conditions as close to unlivable (and from what I’ve seen, I agree).
The sanitation is one of the worst problems – though many organizations (over 10,000 NGOs in Haiti) have tried to implement compost toilets, the efforts only scratch the surface. Toilets are overflowing to the point where people are shitting in plastic bags and with no trash services, the bags are just thrown in ravines. The water situation is obviously so bad that it led to cholera. Sanitation conditions of the entire city are absolutely deplorable. Streets are covered with trash and just flow with the water when it rains. Every single ravine is clogged with trash.
The cost of living here is higher than the U.S. People averaging a dollar a day face tuna fish packages that are $4(maybe $2 in the U.S.), $8 orange juice ($4 in the U.S.), $5 for a box of $2 American cereal. A room for rent in a clean house is about $500 a month. I have NO idea how people are surviving.
The political situation is tenuous, to say the least. Protests are a regular occurrence, but they haven’t been very big lately. As you probably know, the president responsible for mass murders and torture has returned, and I didn’t find out until today that I was actually at the same event as him last night (more on that later). The state hasn’t filed any charges against him, though a few individuals have. Though Duvalier/Baby Doc was a relentless dictator, poverty is actually worse now then when he was in office, and many people are supporting him because anything seems better than what they have now – especially the younger ones that didn’t live through his reign. Aristide is supposed to come back, but I’ve heard various rumors as to whether he will, all surrounding stupid bureaucracy about his passport. Lavalas (his party) has been holding press conferences (I live in the same house as the other Haiti Reporter teachers and with other independent journalists who have been reporting on the press conferences). I’ve received very different opinions on Aristide (from rational people that have lived here a long time). The kids, except for a few, are not super interested in politics and I don’t blame them – people say that the country was just broken when Aristide came back(the second time) and spoke nothing of the economic justice he promised, as he had before the US supported coup that ousted him (as the first democratically elected president of Haiti). The kids, in general, like reporting on Haitian culture, the people who have stayed strong against the odds, and the good parts of Haiti, which I totally understand and support. (By the way, I’m writing mostly about the negative stuff because it is so overpowering, but I don’t mean to leave out the amazing things – like the incredible artistic talent, the inner strength and courage and the kindness of so many Haitians – this is, after all, the first slave rebellion that overthrew slavery and colonization). But the kids typically don’t lean towards overtly political stories (their stories, by the way, have been great so far – I’ve been blown away by what they’ve accomplished in 2 months). I think many of them see “politics” not as something that can be of regular people coming together to take control of their own lives, but as the rich, consistently corrupt men that stay at fancy hotels and take power through illegitimate elections (of which they recently had and is still being disputed) and are supported by various members of the military, state police, UN and “paramilitaries” (sometimes referred to as street gangs). Everyone, for the most part, hates the UN and police – the UN is constantly rolling around in their tanks and trucks with machine guns, often pointed directly at people, and the state police are also everywhere. The country is pretty much occupied by the UN soldiers who seem free from any state or international oversight (constantly using live ammunition at protests, etc.).
I have had some interesting insights as a foreigner, ones that I didn’t have last time I came (late spring of 2009).One of the journalists staying here has a lot of connections in the NGO and journalist world, most of which I’ve found to be pretty disgusting. A few of us went to a party at a big house of an NGO in the richest neighborhood of Port au Prince. The (terrifying) motor ride we took to get there drove us by thousands of tents, and once inside the gate EVERYONE was white (except for security) and all dressed up like they were in New York and EVERYONE worked for an NGO or media conglomerate. Then, last night, a few of us went to a“jazz festival”. I was told today that Duvalier was among the guests that included, again, all the NGO people (they all know each other), journalists and ambassadors of all the first-world countries – US, Canada, Spain, etc. It was a group of people that under any other circumstance I would be protesting their political and economic castrations, rather than mingling with them. It was disgusting. When I say NGO, I include not only people from all the different aide organizations (many of whom are paid outrageous salaries to be here) but the World Bank and Organization of American States. I met a guy last night that worked for the OAS in finance, and I said something like, “you all have got to change your economic approach -- capitalism has obviously not worked and its starving people and making everything worse”. And he said, “I totally agree. If you want to see capitalism at it’s best, come to Haiti”. I was quite amazed that he admitted that.
I have never been in a place of such economic disparity. (There are mansions here bigger than the ones on Long Island.)
One of the problems with Haiti is that organizations have either purposefully sidestepped the Haitian state with the good intentions (as obviously the state has not been trustworthy with its funds) or bypassed it out of their own interest. The results are completely disorganized and in-cohesive attempts to improve Haitian living conditions by organizations of every type working independently of each other (resembling hundreds of people trying to stop a gigantic surge of water with small and misshapen plugs) and with no coordination, and economic interests run wild (often
under the auspice of an NGO title). Some of the organizations have done a lot of good, and maybe the situation would be much worse without them, but the lack of coordination and community is a lot of wasted resources at best and contributing to the problems at worst.
The bottom line is that the underlying, root causes are not being addressed and a lack of political structure holds nothing together – I would label the biggest problems as neo-liberal capitalism/globalization, international political destabilization (to support capitalism run riot)and a lack of democracy. I’m pretty convinced that the best use of money/donations is investing in community, grassroots organizations working for political empowerment,education and economic justice, even though it’s tempting to just give money to anybody, anywhere, as that might buy them a meal. Until the political system changes, not much of anything else will change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)