2006-06-27
Botswana - African Success, Lesson for Zimbabwe
Ghetto Economist Walter Williams says that Botswanans are succeeding where Zimbabweans have failed. The reasons: Botswanans have created a transparent democracy that embraces the resulting capitalism, whereas Zimbabweans have succumed to a marxist dictator.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree that foreign aid has been a disaster for Africa. Often it is the terms of the loans and grants that drive the nations deeper into debt. It's the same as running your credit cards up and refinancing your house, but then not having the income to cover the payments.
I am very disappointed in Mugabe. Paul will recall that I was (and principally still am) an advocate of land reform there, but Mugabe's plan failed and other actions he has taken over the past few years have been detrimental to the nation.
As for Botswana, the CIA's World Factbook says this:
"Botswana has maintained one of the world's highest economic growth rates since independence in 1966. Through fiscal discipline and sound management, Botswana has transformed itself from one of the poorest countries in the world to a middle-income country with a per capita GDP of $10,000 in 2005.
Two major investment services rank Botswana as the best credit risk in Africa. Diamond mining has fueled much of the expansion and currently accounts for more than one-third of GDP and for 70-80% of export earnings. Tourism, financial services, subsistence farming, and cattle raising are other key sectors.
On the downside, the government must deal with high rates of unemployment and poverty. Unemployment officially is 23.8%, but unofficial estimates place it closer to 40%. HIV/AIDS infection rates are the second highest in the world and threaten Botswana's impressive economic gains. An expected leveling off in diamond mining production overshadows long-term prospects."
So the government is rich and corporations who pillage the nation are rich, while the people remain some of the poorest and most unhealthy in all of Africa.
Conservative motherfuckers like Walt Williams and Paul Hue think that the fortune DeBoers extracts from a nation benefits the people of that country.
They are wrong. A 40% unemployment rate, a high infant mortality rate and a life expectancy of less than 34 years cannot be equated with a high quality of life.
Zimbabwe's people are suffering from poor leadership (which has little to do with aid programs, by the way) while Botswana's people are definitely suffering from the legacy of colonialism and the continued rape of their national resources by the government elites and outside interests.
Another difference is that much of Zimbabwe's income and employment was derived from agriculture. The land reform program, while not wrong in principle, was short-sighted and poorly managed. Other nations like neighboring Mozambique have better policies.
Post a Comment