Good analysis. I think poorer countries could get richer faster if they abandon monopoly systems. It's not a question of richer countries being obligated to poorer countries, in my opinion. Poorer countries have an obligation to THEMSELVES to improve their economy by unleashing the full potential of their population's economic creativity. Cases on point--Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Hong Kong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkReality
Well, the size of the pie grows overall, but if poorer contries would get a bigger slice (higher prices for resources and work power) it would influence the size of our slice (profit made by companies using these resources).
It doesn't mean the poorer countries slice gets smaller and smaller, it's gets bigger as well, but much slower.
So, it helps poorer countries as well, but I wouldn't call it philanthropy. Philanthropy would mean sharing wealth in a fair way, but with equal wealth worldwide, economy would be fucked, because profit means paying less for something than you get for it.
Communism/socialism doesn't work long term, there are some nice ideas in these concepts, but without greed, there is no economic growth and no wealth...but I don't see a reason why capitalism shouldn't have some social components.
At the moment, it's pretty much darwinism and asking for respect or not caring at all just because we had the luck to be born in the "right" country is pretty sad and narrow minded.
|