>From: "Ian Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [PEN-L:23494] Wade vs Wolf
>Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:21:17 -0800
>
>< http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk >
>Are global poverty and inequality getting worse?
[snip]
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>----------------
>
>
>You are convinced that the World Bank has cooked the data on
>poverty and inequality. You need to produce chapter and verse to
>substantiate such a serious charge, but have failed to do so.
>That is not good enough. All you assert is that we do not know
>what has happened to poverty and inequality, not that they have
>become worse. I note also that you have not taken up my offer to
>explain how we are to reduce absolute gaps in living standards
>in the near future.
We should remember that itīs crucial to take into account _how good progress
has been_ (rates of poverty reduction) rather than absolute poverty
reduction only. All of these data ignore other data that is virtually
unmeasurable, such as how happy people feel in general, how secure, at
peace, crime rates and individual atomisation, etc..
>I accept that infant-industry promotion, buttressed by trade
>restrictions, may occasionally accelerate economic growth.
>However, the record on the use of such policies in developing
>countries is, with few exceptions, dreadful.
This seems flat-out wrong to me. Isnīt "infant-industry promotion,
buttressed by trade restrictions" the only way any country has ever
industrialised ,including all of Southeast Asia and India, or am I way off
here?
Also it seems to me that in many ways the import substitution regime in
Latin America, however flawed, seemed to progress at a faster pace than the
current neoliberal model.
Yet even though
>liberalisation of protectionist trade policy regimes is good for
>developing countries, I don't claim it is a panacea.
>
>I also fail to see why WTO constraints on policy discretion
>should be good for rich countries, as we know they are, but not
>for poor ones. Governments of developing countries are, if
>anything, more vulnerable to capture by protectionist lobbies
>than those of advanced countries.
>
>I do accept, however, that developing countries have sometimes
>been forced to accept inappropriate policies: the trade-related
>intellectual property agreement is an example. I also agree that
>the north should liberalise in favour of the south and that more
>aid, targeted on countries with governments that know how to use
>it, is a moral and practical necessity.
>
[snip]
>
>Yours Martin
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
