Bono Still Hasn't Found What He's Looking For

Bono has an open question on Yahoo! Answers this week: "What can we do to make poverty history?"  (Full disclosure: I'm a huge U2 fan).  Here's my pro-competitive answer, which is number 29,276:

"Pleas for more aid, whether financial or food, are a failure of colossal proportions. For decades countries in the West have been shamed to donate, yet the results themselves are shameful. As U2 sings in the song "40": "How long...to sing this song..."

A functioning free market system will make poverty history without wasted billions in aid. The only way to reach "developed" nation status is for the people to build themselves up. But we can help them put these systems in place. Mainly, a change in government is needed in most poor countries.

Corruption must be eliminated so that workers and businesses are free to rise and fall on their own merit, versus by payoffs to bureaucrats or mobsters. Similarly, import taxes and other laws that protect local companies from global competition must also be removed. Only by full, free competition will these countries build working economies that can succeed on their own. Western nations in turn must eliminate subsidies and import protections for poor nations to compete.

Bono, I urge you to move away from pleas for aid and debt forgiveness, and toward encouraging a path of self sufficiency through fair government and free markets. You have a powerful voice, but now it must be aimed at shaming corrupt regimes into setting their people and markets free. Free market systems worked in the West, they worked in Asia, and now it's time for reform in Africa as well.

Let's build a system of fair competition that will help poor nations pull themselves up to the rest of the world. Bono, as U2 finishes "40", will you "sing, sing a new song"?"

To date, I have mixed feelings on Bono's politics.  I love that he is moving beyond music toward a greater goal of improving the world.  But I am not a fan of his calls for more aid and reduction of debts.  These solutions only provide temporary relief at best; at worst they instill a culture of handouts.  Only by reaching self-sufficiency can a nation rise to developed status.

Maybe Bono is tacitly acknowledging that more aid is not the answer, hence his question on Yahoo! Answers.  If only he can keep reading all the way to my post #29,276...

Thanks to Micro Persuasion for the link

Comments

[Jay]

I love the idealism here. However, the big question, how can the free market help governments become free of corruption, isn't answered. Witholding aid is like sending your kid to bed without any supper...it doesn't work...so please continue this stream as I think it's the crux.

Interesting counter argument - the benevolent dictator. I have traveled across across 5 continents and over 2 dozen countries, both developed and developing. One interesting comparison that I have seen is between developing countries that started free/capitalist/democratic and ones that have started communist/controlled. While I don't have the data to confirm or contradict my hypothesis (I'm sure you will find it given your rigorous writing!), it appears to me that countries that have had strong central control (government, financial systems, economies) in their early periods are better positioned for rapid growth and development than countries that have had longer traditions of democracy. Compare India and China in the last years of the last century (circa 1997). India - one of the oldest democracies in the region, had poor infrastructure (roads, water, etc.), tons of corruption and a very weak economy. China, to contrast, while not breaking through, felt more set up for future success - strong road and rail systems, urban planning in many cities, and an overall structure that felt ready to move ahead and sustain it. While China was not without corruption, the country felt better ready to take on the challenge (given its generations of dictatorship - some more benevolent than others) instead of being thrust into a competitive world where they cannot compete let alone survive.

Can a benevolent dictator/ruler actually circumvent the dividend challenge, if only for a short period of time until the invisible hand can reach down and grab a country by the bootstraps?

[Bob]

Great questions and answers, Jay.

One thing of note is that I'm not advocating democracy, but rather free markets. As you say, India is one of the oldest democracies, but also one of the most corrupt.

I believe a key role of any government is to promote free market competition. This can be done by a democracy or dictatorship. In some cases, you don't even need a "free" market in the home country to be competitive globally. China, for example, has leaders that focus on investments to make the country a better performer on the world economic stage. They invest in better roads and rail lines, which in turn allows the country to become the center of manufacturing.

As for how to improve Africa, I do believe we need to pull the needle of aid out of the continent so that real markets can develop. Prominent Africa economist, James Shikwati, even says "stop sending the aid". At minimum, we should not give aid to governments that are not embracing pro-market reforms. Without the reforms the money is a temporary relief that lines the pockets of corrupt officials, in turn killing long-term prospects.

Here's the article mentioned above: http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00.html

[Rose]

I saw a bumper sticker on an old car the other day. It stated. I live simply so that others may simply live.

The very wealthy in this world have become greedy and gluttonous. Until we take up costumes of modest covering and live in dwelling of less palace like abodes, but 'reasonable',we will not change the world. We have 'gotten out of hand' and need the best of species set an example and shame on those that live so frivalously when there are those that have 'nothing.'