Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
By the same argument the US would have a lot better if it had stayed as a British colony.Yes we can know. They'd still be living in mud huts without help from the outside world.
Look at New Guinea for a perfect example.
Take a look at china, it has never been a colony and it has had a remarkable development.
They were ahead of all of us,yet Europeans managed to progress.
Whats the hold up in africa?
By the same argument the US would have a lot better if it had stayed as a British colony.Yes we can know. They'd still be living in mud huts without help from the outside world.
Look at New Guinea for a perfect example.
Take a look at china, it has never been a colony and it has had a remarkable development.
They were ahead of all of us,yet Europeans managed to progress.
Whats the hold up in africa?
I would argue colonialism disrupted their development, they will probably achieve the current development of the US in the next 50 years.
Given the huge investments China is making it will be interesting to see if they follow a colonialist approach or if they treat african countries as their peers accelerating even more their development.
Social and economic advances are achieved with knowledge exchange and trade ( fair trade, I would like to add ) . It is somewhat clear that excepting the coastal areas and the Nile basin Africa is not particularly well fitted for trade.So it's your contention that africa would have suddenly become an economic power house even though they where around thousands of years and made no advancements in tech?
Sorry the evidence doesnt support that.
Social and economic advances are achieved with knowledge exchange and trade ( fair trade, I would like to add ) . It is somewhat clear that excepting the coastal areas and the Nile basin Africa is not particularly well fitted for trade.So it's your contention that africa would have suddenly become an economic power house even though they where around thousands of years and made no advancements in tech?
Sorry the evidence doesnt support that.
Indeed, Egypt was an economic powerhouse for thousands of years, but all civilizations decline.
What I argue is that if those countries had been treated as economic peers and not as colonies, they would have been better off, just as the US was better off when it was treated as an economic peer by England.
What I argue is that if those countries had been treated as economic peers and not as colonies, they would have been better off,d.
This is a mental game, it is related to poverty and how to combat it.
The scenario is the following . You have a substancial amount of money which can be used to buy bed nets to prevent communities in Africa from getting Malaria.
The cost of the nets is $10.
These are the choices
A) You distribute vouchers which allow buying the netbed for 100% discount
B) You distribute vouchers which allow buying the netbed for 65 cents
C) You distribute vouchers which allow buying the netbed for 1 dollar
D) You distribute vouchers which allow buying the netbed for 1.60 dollar
E) You distribute vouchers which allow buying the netbed for 2 dollars
F) You distribute vouchers which allow buying the netbed for 3 dollars
Relevant questions :
If people have to pay for bednets will they pay them ? (remember it's a poor country)
When people get free bednets will they use them ( or use them for other purposes like fishing) ?
Will free nets discourage future purchases ?
To test this last question , supose you give a second voucher which allow the persons to buy a second net for two dollars. Which group will buy the most nets?
The lesson is that policy can be experimented in small scale to see the results before applying it on a larger scale.
proof , links ?The lesson is that policy can be experimented in small scale to see the results before applying it on a larger scale.
too stupid the world was stagnant for 100,000 years and then instantly transformed by Republican capitalism.
the liberal wants proof that the world developed more during the last 200 years of capitalism than during the previous 2 million years? How stupid is that?proof , links ?The lesson is that policy can be experimented in small scale to see the results before applying it on a larger scale.
too stupid the world was stagnant for 100,000 years and then instantly transformed by Republican capitalism.
the liberal wants proof that the world developed more during the last 200 years of capitalism than during the previous 2 million years? How stupid is that?
There was an event which you probably missed , they call it industrial revolution.
Capitalism predates the industrial revolution and it really didn't alleviate poverty.
It was the massive increase in output derived from the industrial revolution which increased the standard of living.
As allways the conservative is too dimwit an naive to understand these basic historical events.
