Why are predominately black countries mostly poor? in your opinion

[A Real Human Bean]

because of capitalism and expanding literacy

This is totally unfounded. The same capitalist policies that existed during the 80's and 90's, that devastated African countries, are the same that exist today.

The reasons for the growth of African countries in the last decade or so has virtually nothing to do with capitalist policies and mainly to do with the effects of the primary commodity price boom (along with the ending of many civil conflicts within the continent).

And the growth of Korea, Japan and China all can be attributed to heavy industrial policy, which is in direct opposition to the capitalist policies offered by Washington to developing nations.

 

[theworldismine13]

This is totally unfounded. The same capitalist policies that existed during the 80s and 90s, that devastated African countries, are the same that exist today.

The reasons for the growth of African countries has virtually nothing to do with capitalist policies and mainly to do with the effects of primary commodity price boom (along with the ending of many civil conflicts within the continent).

And the growth of Korea, Japan and China all can be attributed to heavy industrial policy, which is in direct opposition to the capitalist policies offered by Washington.

during the 80's and 90's most of the countries in africa were flirting with marxism, socialism and communism, african countries did not have capitalistic policies, you are definitely making things up

commodities has definitely been most of the increase............and? the fact that african economies are making money through the free market is a good thing but the problem is what i said at the beginning of the thread, you cannot spread abstract wealth to an illiterate population, so the more literate africans become the more they will be able to access wealth

im not really understanding how you can separate industrial policy from capitalism, those countries have industrial policies that are perfectly aligned with the us, especially korea and japan who are occupied by the us, i think its more accurate to say that the us designed their industrial policies, it wasnt until the 80's when japan started making competitive cars that the us realized it had created an industrial monster

 

[A Real Human Bean]

during the 80's and 90's most of the countries in africa were flirting with marxism, socialism and communism, african countries did not have capitalistic policies, you are definitely making things up

commodities has definitely been most of the increase............and? the fact that african economies are making money through the free market is a good thing

im not really understanding how you can separate industrial policy from capitalism, those countries have industrial policies that are perfectly aligned with the us, korea and japan are occupied by the us, i think its more accurate to say that the us designed their industrial policies

Your claims are absurd. During the Third World debt crisis most African countries were forced to take loans from the IMF and World Bank, with an understanding that these countries would adopt more capitalist policies (free up trade, deregulate, privatize etc.). The effect as I said was devastating for reasons better explained by serious economists who have written extensively on the matter. You should read them.

As far as how industrial policy is separate from the capitalist policies (known as Washington consensus policies) offered by the IMF and World Bank - that's pretty obvious if you simply know what they are, which I suspect you don't.

Sure, the U.S. "designed" the industrial policy of Korea and Japan in the sense that Korea and Japan followed the footsteps of the U.S. with its heavy state intervention in markets. Again, these are policies that are directly opposite to the policies offered to developing countries today.

 

[theworldismine13]

Your claims are absurd. During the Third World debt crisis most African countries were forced to take loans from the IMF and World Bank, with an understanding that these countries would adopt more capitalist policies (free up trade, deregulate, privatize etc.). The effect as I said was devastating for reasons better explained by serious economists who have written extensively on the matter. You should read them.

As far as how industrial policy is separate from the capitalist policies (known as Washington consensus policies) offered by the IMF and World Bank - that's pretty obvious if you simply know what they are, which I suspect you don't.

Sure, the U.S. "designed" the industrial policy of Korea and Japan in the sense that Korea and Japan followed the footsteps of the U.S. with its heavy state intervention in markets. Again, these are policies that are directly opposite to the policies offered to developing countries today.

i dont consider the world bank and IMF to be capitalism, i think they should be avoided like the plague, its not clear to me why they even exist

african countries should borrow money through bonds in the capital markets like any other country does

as far as free trade and deregulation, they have helped speed up african economies, and the most devastating thing to happen to african economies is marxism

sometimes heavy state intervention is necessary as long as its temporary

 

[ejthompson23]

Nah I'd rather you go to hell, Africa was great and will be great again regardless of the hatred of crackers and toms like yourself.

I'm a Tom because I told the truth? I see your feelings hurt

 

[ejthompson23]

i dont cosign that at all, africa has a lot of potential, but like ive been saying, you need to develop the educational level and to create financial networks, and that financial network should include a pan african netwrk from the us, the caribbean to africa

Bruh its been well proven that Africans can't do shyt...we have nothing significant to show for ourselves in the past 600 years...the fact that we readily accept n excuse that is another problem

 

[Im Kemet Rocky & I like penis]

I'm a Tom because I told the truth? I see your feelings hurt

nikka take yo ugly ass on somewhere..

spreading that pseudo intellectual bullshyt..

smurf onion nose lookin ass nikka..

and @Poitier and @KOohbt is killing yall phaggys..

 

[mson]

I had a discussion with a poster in the locker room recently who said the only the solution for Haiti is to ask the US to become part of its territory like PR.

 

[Loose]

as far as africa goes i blame the arabs, robbed us of most of our historical land and riches

 

[Chris.B]

as far as africa goes i blame the arabs, robbed us of most of our historical land and riches

I blame Arabs the most. The introduction of Islam to African countries have destroyed African advancement.

Take a look at Nigeria for example....the prospering parts are the south (christian) and the trouble making parts is the north.
Islam has stagnated the advancement of Africans.

 

[theworldismine13]

Bruh its been well proven that Africans can't do shyt...we have nothing significant to show for ourselves in the past 600 years...the fact that we readily accept n excuse that is another problem

Yeah but I've been trying to explain the reasons for that, and it's the same reasons why black people are poor all over the world

Black people all over the world have the same basic problems so I don't think black people can seperate ourselves from africa

 

[theworldismine13]

as far as africa goes i blame the arabs, robbed us of most of our historical land and riches

I mentioned something about this too, but that still begs the question of why we allowed arabs to conquer or enslave us, and the answers are similar

The lack of indigenous writing systems, sparse population, seperate populations, no transregional empire, all these reasons made africa vulnerable

 

[Leasy]

I mentioned something about this too, but that still begs the question of why we allowed arabs to conquer or enslave us, and the answers are similar

The lack of indigenous writing systems, sparse population, seperate populations, no transregional empire, all these reasons made africa vulnerable

Dude the people you credit for having these achievements didn't have any to start with. The Arabs didn't have a culture they were nomads who got civilize once they destroyed and enslaved the people who were civilized and taken their lifestyle. The Europeans I don't even have to start with that breh. You really believing this nonsense is scaring me man.

Africa is a continent that is larger than all continents combine except certain parts of Russia and you mean to tell me that they should of had a combined Empire, that is not even possible breh.

 

[TTT]

Industrial policies definitely helped East Asian countries, they were even called crony capitalism in the Western countries and considered the reason the Korean economy along with other Asian economies collapsed in 97/98. Japan had the institutional memory and capability to develop after war because prior to the war they were in a better condition ,comparatively speaking, than African countries at Independence. Many African countries at Independence were only starting to develop a sense of nationhood because they had organized themselves as Kikuyu,Shona,Xhosa,Bakongo longer than they had been Kenyan,Zimbabwean, South African etc. In fact outside of settler colonies of Kenya,Zimbabwe,Algeria,SA, and Angola/Mozambique most African countries were bequeathed virtual shells of nations and had to start from scratch. The infrastructure in the settler colonies was well developed to serve European populations and the non-settler colonies were either sources of labor or had minimal infrastructure designed to ship commodities to the "mother nation". We cannot ignore the initial starting conditions because all prescriptions i am reading are based on countries that had different experiences. Countries like Malawi ,Burkina Faso were set up by the Europeans to provide labor to bigger countries like Ivory Coast, Zimbabwe/SA respectively. It is rather simplistic to just drop capitalism where the infrastructure is threadbare and the skills are relatively sparse and the governing institutions are only starting up without much support from outside after a major world war.

 

[theworldismine13]

Dude the people you credit for having these achievements didn't have any to start with. The Arabs didn't have a culture they were nomads who got civilize once they destroyed and enslaved the people who were civilized and taken their lifestyle. The Europeans I don't even have to start with that breh. You really believing this nonsense is scaring me man.

Africa is a continent that is larger than all continents combine except certain parts of Russia and you mean to tell me that they should of had a combined Empire, that is not even possible breh.

im not sure what is the significance of the fact that arabs or the europeans didnt have any culture, the only thing that matters is what was the situation when contact was made

what do you mean it scares you that i believe this, i believe in history and its a historical fact that arabs and muslims came out of arabia and conquered vast areas and including north africa and parts of europe, do you not believe that?

after that the europeans came and conquered and colonized the whole of africa, do you not believe that?

the question we need to ask why did we was african allow these 2 groups to come into africa? holding on to long dead empires and former glory is not going to answer the question in a way that will offer practical solutions