Said1
Gold Member
If you have a background in economics I will go into more detail. That you don't know which "classical" theory I am talking about makes me a bit skeptical. Also, I am not going to do your homework for you (indeed I have plenty of my own) Prebisch has been around a while, if you want to know what he has to say then go to the library and look him up. In a few sentances I argue that the unsustainable nature of oil as the base of the global economic system offers a window of opprotunity to LA. In learning from the lessons of the first and second industrial revolutions these nations can focus on what is next rather than what is. As the world moves off oil and onto somthing else these nations will enjoy comparitive advantage and economies of scale.On top of that idea I layer the importance of social orginization and exogenous shocks to compute a coherent and comprehensive policy recomendation that has its foundings in a new, obvious, but until now, unrecognized theory of how development actually works.
Why would that make you skeptical? Based on what you've written, I have no clue as to what you are talking about - still. I can not for the life of me think of ANY theories that would coincide with anything you've written, simply because you haven't really written one thing making any solid connections to ANY theories. Being specific would give me some clues. How are you personally planning to avoid fossil fuel dependancy in SA by being in favor of supply side policies, I'm clueless. Also, if you look back, I didn't ask you who Prebisch is, I asked you how you drew different conclusions, I'm aware of his work.
Tell me honestly, did you really bring your paper to a conference unfinished, and so grossly incoherent? Oh well, post when done, I hope you at least get a C.