Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Biggest leak in history of data journalism just went live, about corruption. Edward Snowden Twitter
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2870562" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>Direct from the Oxfam home page:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They never explain how offshoring costs the poorest countries $100B. For example, the 25 smallest economies in the world have a combined annual GDP of less than $20B. It takes the bottom 42 to equal $100B, and that includes countries like Leichtenstein and Monaco.</p><p></p><p>If you take the poorest countries based on purchasing power parity (ppp), the bottom 11 countries have a combined GDP of $101B. Take out the anomaly (#2 Democratic Republic of Congo at $39B) and exclude #15 Ethiopia ($61.5B) and you cover the entire GDP of 17 (out of 19) of the poorest countries with $98B.</p><p></p><p>Is Oxfam saying big business is stealing the entire GDP of the poorest countries listed? Pointedly, who's business? Apple? General Electric? Walmart? Microsoft? How have they shorted these countries?</p><p></p><p>Let's examine one of the most plundered countries in the world, the aforementioned Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It's the 2nd largest country in Africa, home to 79 million people and rich in natural resources. Yet they make the 2nd lowest per capita income in the world at $729 per year. Why?</p><p></p><p>Originally colonized by King Leopold of Belgium, indigenous slavers sold people to developing nations while Leopold plundered the resources for himself. Belgium itself ran the DRC from 1908-1960, when the locals established independence. That only lasted 5 years before Belgium and the US ran a coup, because communism. Of course the titular figurehead (Mobutu) was as corrupt as the day is long. He was kept in play until the Cold War petered out and he'd outlived his usefulness. As usual, nature abhors a vacuum and they've been in civil war mode ever since. China is currently the majority recipient of the DRC plunder.</p><p></p><p>So who should pay? And in a nation of strongmen and institutionalized corruption, who should they pay? Once paid, will it do anything beyond padding the coffers of the local warlords? That's the problem with pie in the sky humanitarian organizations like Oxfam. They only see the poverty and assume we're to blame because we're not poor.</p><p></p><p>The success of a country relies on several things. Natural resources (luck) play a significant role, but far more important is culture. Culture is driven by need and desire. You need to survive but you want to thrive. Some cultures manage this better than others. Nowhere is this on display more than the difference between Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Outside investment requires stability and drive. If you don't have it, they won't come. You can't just sit on your ass with your hand out and ever expect to thrive. Not only that, you can't even hold your head up with the knowledge you can even survive without a handout. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2870562, member: 1132"] Direct from the Oxfam home page: They never explain how offshoring costs the poorest countries $100B. For example, the 25 smallest economies in the world have a combined annual GDP of less than $20B. It takes the bottom 42 to equal $100B, and that includes countries like Leichtenstein and Monaco. If you take the poorest countries based on purchasing power parity (ppp), the bottom 11 countries have a combined GDP of $101B. Take out the anomaly (#2 Democratic Republic of Congo at $39B) and exclude #15 Ethiopia ($61.5B) and you cover the entire GDP of 17 (out of 19) of the poorest countries with $98B. Is Oxfam saying big business is stealing the entire GDP of the poorest countries listed? Pointedly, who's business? Apple? General Electric? Walmart? Microsoft? How have they shorted these countries? Let's examine one of the most plundered countries in the world, the aforementioned Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It's the 2nd largest country in Africa, home to 79 million people and rich in natural resources. Yet they make the 2nd lowest per capita income in the world at $729 per year. Why? Originally colonized by King Leopold of Belgium, indigenous slavers sold people to developing nations while Leopold plundered the resources for himself. Belgium itself ran the DRC from 1908-1960, when the locals established independence. That only lasted 5 years before Belgium and the US ran a coup, because communism. Of course the titular figurehead (Mobutu) was as corrupt as the day is long. He was kept in play until the Cold War petered out and he'd outlived his usefulness. As usual, nature abhors a vacuum and they've been in civil war mode ever since. China is currently the majority recipient of the DRC plunder. So who should pay? And in a nation of strongmen and institutionalized corruption, who should they pay? Once paid, will it do anything beyond padding the coffers of the local warlords? That's the problem with pie in the sky humanitarian organizations like Oxfam. They only see the poverty and assume we're to blame because we're not poor. The success of a country relies on several things. Natural resources (luck) play a significant role, but far more important is culture. Culture is driven by need and desire. You need to survive but you want to thrive. Some cultures manage this better than others. Nowhere is this on display more than the difference between Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Outside investment requires stability and drive. If you don't have it, they won't come. You can't just sit on your ass with your hand out and ever expect to thrive. Not only that, you can't even hold your head up with the knowledge you can even survive without a handout. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Biggest leak in history of data journalism just went live, about corruption. Edward Snowden Twitter
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom