intro’d to Jason via twitter rec.. as similar to the rules..
taking him in here first..
may 2016 – To Eradicate Poverty We Have to Radically Reorganize the Global Economy
1\ define extent to which most min econ rights remain unfulfilled.. ie: say now fewer than 1 bill living on less than 1/25/day… far too low for even basic human survival.. ie: india..just above this line..60% underweight; niger.. just above line..infant mortality risk 20%.. 3x world avg… if 1.25 not enough..can’t claim that lifting people above this line means bringing out of poverty…
peter edward: in order to achieve 70 yrs… need 3.5 more.. about 5 dollars/day.. very min
unless we bag money.. no? ie: radical econ ness
2 min – what happens if measure according to ethical poverty line… now not just 1 bill via un.. but rather about 4.3 bill.. 60% of world pop.. and has been rising since 1980…. and this is highly conservative.. so 60% remain avoidably unfulfilled..
4 min – i argue that govt of rich countries that created/sustain this inbalance/order.. are violating rights of world’s poor.. have corres responsibility to seek to re org the order.. so that as many as possible have access toward well being.. .. 3.1 trill annually to bring 4.3 bill… up to $5/day line
5 min – ideas for re org of system
realizing human rights does appear to acquire of reduction in global quality.. once poor regain.. rich can gain more..
6 min – we can’t increase consumption indefinitely.. rich world consume 3x fair share..
if we want to ratchet up income of poor.. we have to ratchet down the rich..
7 min – challenge of 21st cent… how to max human development while bringing eco footprint back down in sustainable levels..
human devel.. not human monies..
conclusion: *in absence of some kind of miraculous decoupling of incomes from resource use/waste.. which has no sign of happening in any meaningful way..the human rights framework requires not just slight reduction of global ineq.. but actual material shrinkage of richest countries.. which amounts to total re org..
* whoa.. perhaps why we haven’t yet.. not imaginative enough.. not brave enough to call out how we’ve been doing things (ie: measuring transactions) as the ridiculous… thing.
july 2015 – Why microfinance fails:
no net pos impact from micro finance… in some instances does help certain individuals.. but across board doesn’t.. and some cases worse.. ie: spending money on consumption.. borrowers then unable to fund.. debt ensues.. if do succeed.. usually displacement.. most often businesses fail.. no customer base for them..
3 min – a lot of micro finance lenders are banks.. not so much a charitable endeavor that most of us are thinking..
5 min – no question that micro can work for some.. can lead to empowerment in some situations.. rather that it is a definitive empowering tool… jury is still out… worse when not about to repay..
6 min – one problem.. mico finance regards poverty as a problem that exists out there… on not needing micro loans.. but a fair system..
7 min – causes of poverty.. 1980s structural adjustment programs were pushed on global s countries.. to this day remains most single cause of poverty in developing world... lost 5 bill dollars/year… it was good for banks.. but awful for poor countries.
if we’re serious about solving problem of global poverty.. have to look at basic unfairness of global econ and how that’s producing poverty in first place..
The Rules (@TheRulesOrg) tweeted at 5:42 AM – 15 Feb 2017 :
Aid in reverse: how poor countries develop rich countries https://t.co/SPgiKOap8U #povertyiscreated #whosdevelopingwhom (http://twitter.com/TheRulesOrg/status/831846028915511296?s=17)
They tallied up all of the financial resources that get transferred between rich countries and poor countries each year: not just aid, foreign investment and trade flows (as previous studies have done) but also non-financial transfers such as debt cancellation, unrequited transfers like workers’ remittances, and unrecorded capital flight (more of this later).
What they discovered is that the flow of money from rich countries to poor countries pales in comparison to the flow that runs in the other direction.
In 2012, the last year of recorded data, developing countries received a total of $1.3tn, including all aid, investment, and income from abroad. But that same year some $3.3tn flowed out of them. In other words, developing countries sent $2tn more to the rest of the world than they received. If we look at all years since 1980, these net outflows add up to an eye-popping total of $16.3tn – that’s how much money has been drained out of the global south over the past few decades.
Basically, corporations – foreign and domestic alike – report false prices on their trade invoices in order to spirit money out of developing countries directly into tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions, a practice known as “trade misinvoicing”. Usually the goal is to evade taxes, but sometimes this practice is used to launder money or circumvent capital controls. In 2012, developing countries lost $700bn through trade misinvoicing, which outstripped aid receipts that year by a factor of five.
Multinational companies also steal money from developing countries through “same-invoice faking”shifting profits illegally between their own subsidiaries by mutually faking trade invoice prices on both sides.
In other words, for every $1 of aid that developing countries receive, they lose $24 in net outflows.
The aid narrative begins to seem a bit naïve when we take these reverse flows into account. It becomes clear that aid does little but mask the maldistribution of resources around the world. It makes the takers seem like givers, granting them a kind of moral high ground while preventing those of us who care about global poverty from understanding how the system really works.
Poor countries don’t need charity. They need justice. And justice is not difficult to deliver. We could write off the excess debts of poor countries, …
We know how to fix the problem. But doing so would run up against the interests of powerful banks and corporations that extract significant material benefit from the existing system.
Hi everyone. In case you’re interested, my new book is available for pre-order on Amazon. amazon.co.uk/Divide-Brief-G…
poverty doesn’t just exist, it has been created.
something much more radical is needed – a revolution in our way of thinking.
Anthropologist at the London School of Economics // Writing in The Guardian & Al Jazeera // Global political economy and development with a view from the South
Why is development failing? This brings us to what the Gates’ letter omits. The letter focuses so unwaveringly on foreign aid that you’d be forgiven for believing that charity is all that’s needed to address poverty. We hear nothing of the systemic forces that drive poverty and inequality in the first place, such as – to name just two relevant examples – tax evasion and avoidance, and intellectual property rights.
let’s go deeper
For all its candor and color, here, in black and white, is what the annual letter doesn’t tell you: that our global economic system is designed in such a way as to channel our planet’s wealth into the hands of a tiny elite. The proof? The eight richest men in the world – of whom Bill Gates is one, even after donating $30 billion to the foundation – have more personal wealth than the poorest half of the world’s population combined.
Changing that system at its root – by *stopping illicit financial flows, shutting down tax havens, creating a fairer trade system, battling climate change and helping to build resilient local economies and communities – would require those with power and wealth to dismantle the very machine that created their privilege. That sounds unattainable but if the Greek roots of the word philanthropy literally mean for “**the love of humanity” surely such drastic change that would benefit people and planet is the point
**let’s go more drastic..
Martin Kirk (@martinkirk_co) tweeted at 4:52 AM – 12 Jul 2017 :
Are You Ready To Consider That Capitalism Is The Real Problem? https://t.co/p3NTTOTIuL (http://twitter.com/martinkirk_co/status/885089421082734592?s=17)
..there’s something fundamentally flawed about a system that has a prime directive to churn nature and humans into capital
ours is a system that is programmed to subordinate life to the imperative of profit.
millennials aren’t bogged down by these dusty old binaries. For them the matter is simple: They can see that capitalism isn’t working for the majority of humanity, and they’re ready to invent something better.
Our leaders will tell us that these ideas are not feasible, but what is not feasible is the assumption that we can carry on with the status quo
Johann Hari (@johannhari101) tweeted at 4:47 PM on Thu, Aug 10, 2017:
The brilliant @jasonhickel explains how our addiction to economic growth is killing us https://t.co/aRIpKrPHIm
let’s try truly disengaging from gdp .. from any measuring of transactions..
Capitalism has become a dogma, and dogmas die very slowly and very reluctantly. ..to question it can trigger a visceral reaction; it can feel like an attack not just on common sense but on our personal identities.
It would be a sad and defeated world that simply accepted the prebaked assumption that capitalism (or socialism, or communism) represents the last stage of human thought; our ingenuity exhausted.
The path to a better future will be cut by regular people being curious and open enough to challenge the wisdom received from our schools, our parents, and our governments, and look at the world with fresh eyes.
We’ve been debating whether #hungerispolitical. @jasonhickel #GHI2017 https://t.co/mn8LZSp0h5
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/ConcernUK/status/919990585452199936
hunger is not a natural phenom.. it’s a political one
if not said otherwise.. these are quotes from Jason
Why is microfinance failing to reduce poverty? Check out our broadcast debate on Roundtable. youtube.com/watch?v=U_lgCL…
godfather of the micro loan – hammad yunis wanting to create a world w/o poverty
borrowing money doesn’t deal w root cause..
30 yrs on.. and yunis micro finance success.. reviews are split
(after saying.. true.. microfin has helped some.. but have to zoom out).. net impact against poverty of microfinance is zero – jason
scale of effectiveness.. but nothing counterfactual.. more than 80% of beneficiaries are women.. a gender dimension to who is succeeding.. my point is that the success of microfinance is due to the work of women.. – Dr Kate Maclean @dr_kate99
the way microfin works is a groups of women who trust each other.. Kate
for every story of success.. there’s a story of deep failure.. so impact is zero.. why.. because don’t have enough money.. using money for consumption.. how do we get money into pockets of poor people… debt not working.. so why not cash transfers.. – Jason
18 min – i think the principle of micro fin is fine.. it’s not a solution to poverty.. the structural drivers of impoverishment… yunis peace prize is important point..
they give nobel peace prizes to people who do not ultimately threaten the status quo of existing arrangements of economic and political power.
others get assassinated.. Yunis gets a peace prize because he validates our sense of being able to save the world as rich countries/individuals.. to save the world from poverty w/o any threat to our own privilege.. for keeping their own status in the liberal econ.. and that’s fundamentally a problem i think – Jason
not saying Yunis is a bad person at all
this is great.. just not sure how the principle of micro fin is fine.. and how money/cash is fine.. i mean if we’re trying to create a nother way that doesn’t perpetuate oppression
the same kind of exploitation.. that women have to do more work voluntarily .. hasn’t changed.. – Kate
poverty is political problem.. imbalances of power in global econ.. micro fin may help.. may not.. but ultimately it’s a distraction from the real causes of the problem we’re trying to address.. going to require sacrifice on part of rich countries who presently control global econ
or.. disengagement from money/measuring.. ie: a nother way