4 ms·

Why? Because of the Resource Curse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse

tptacek 16y ago
Most of the supposed reasons behind the "curse" assume that there's an already-functioning economy to wreck. Minerals in Afghanistan aren't going to wreck their nonexistent licit agriculture output. Further, Afghanistan is already in a state of chronic intense conflict, which neutralizes another arm of the "curse".
- MichaelSalib 16y ago
  The presence of vast mineral wealth will encourage the continuation of chronic intense conflict. And as long as said conflict continues, foreign investment will be very limited, which means it will be very difficult to begin large scale mining operations. If you were a mining engineer, would you want to travel to Afghanistan and spend a year or two setting up a new mine there?
  - tptacek 16y ago
    Conflict in Afghanistan was going to continue until the West left. Would I want to live in Afghanistan to set up a new mine? Depends on how much you paid me. There are already many tens of thousands of private contractors in war zones.
fgf 16y ago
the arabs do well, africans don't, who knows what will happen to the afghans?
- WorkerBee 16y ago
  the arabs do well Do they? The Saudi Arabian ruling classes do very well indeed, but how does the average Saudi do? Hint: google "Saudi Arabia inequality" and "Saudi Arabia oppression". It's the resource curse at work.
  - fgf 16y ago
    How is the lack of resource curse working out in Yemen and Egypt? (nations fortunate enough to be without oil) They are doing even worse. Arab nations with oil do better than arab nations without oil. I'm only arguing against the notion that large mineral resources will always be a catastrophe. Yemen and egypt has about a tenth of Saudi Arabias gdp pr. capita. Saudi arabia, the emirates and kuwait all have welfare states for their citizens who are better off (materially) than egyptians or yemenites. Those (really) poor and oppressed people are guest workers. They were desperately poor before they went to Saudia Arabia, the Saudis merely gave them a marginally better option.
    - MichaelSalib 16y ago
      Nobody is claiming that the Resource Curse explains all possible development outcomes.
    - WorkerBee 16y ago
      Those (really) poor and oppressed people are guest workers. That's the official line, anyway. The whole issue of who is a citizen, and who has merely been there for years is part of it. They were desperately poor before they went to Saudi Arabia, the Saudis merely gave them a marginally better option. the Saudis gave them what looked like a marginally better option.
      - fgf 16y ago
        "That's the official line, anyway. The whole issue of who is a citizen, and who has merely been there for years is part of it." It's not a difficult issue at all, you're a citizen if the law says so. No one promised guest workers citizenship and I doubt they expected it. Only westerners subscribe to the novel idea that anyone they let into their countries are also owed a part of it (citizenship, welfare etc.). "the Saudis gave them what looked like a marginally better option." There are five million guest workers, a lack of horror stories would be surprising. I'm not convinced coercion to stay is widespread before I see some statistics, if coercion to stay is not widespread then I trust that most of the five million guest workers know what is best for them.

tptacek 16y ago

Most of the supposed reasons behind the "curse" assume that there's an already-functioning economy to wreck. Minerals in Afghanistan aren't going to wreck their nonexistent licit agriculture output. Further, Afghanistan is already in a state of chronic intense conflict, which neutralizes another arm of the "curse".

MichaelSalib 16y ago
The presence of vast mineral wealth will encourage the continuation of chronic intense conflict. And as long as said conflict continues, foreign investment will be very limited, which means it will be very difficult to begin large scale mining operations. If you were a mining engineer, would you want to travel to Afghanistan and spend a year or two setting up a new mine there?
- tptacek 16y ago
  Conflict in Afghanistan was going to continue until the West left. Would I want to live in Afghanistan to set up a new mine? Depends on how much you paid me. There are already many tens of thousands of private contractors in war zones.

fgf 16y ago

the arabs do well, africans don't, who knows what will happen to the afghans?

WorkerBee 16y ago
the arabs do well Do they? The Saudi Arabian ruling classes do very well indeed, but how does the average Saudi do? Hint: google "Saudi Arabia inequality" and "Saudi Arabia oppression". It's the resource curse at work.
- fgf 16y ago
  How is the lack of resource curse working out in Yemen and Egypt? (nations fortunate enough to be without oil) They are doing even worse. Arab nations with oil do better than arab nations without oil. I'm only arguing against the notion that large mineral resources will always be a catastrophe. Yemen and egypt has about a tenth of Saudi Arabias gdp pr. capita. Saudi arabia, the emirates and kuwait all have welfare states for their citizens who are better off (materially) than egyptians or yemenites. Those (really) poor and oppressed people are guest workers. They were desperately poor before they went to Saudia Arabia, the Saudis merely gave them a marginally better option.
  - MichaelSalib 16y ago
    Nobody is claiming that the Resource Curse explains all possible development outcomes.
  - WorkerBee 16y ago
    Those (really) poor and oppressed people are guest workers. That's the official line, anyway. The whole issue of who is a citizen, and who has merely been there for years is part of it. They were desperately poor before they went to Saudi Arabia, the Saudis merely gave them a marginally better option. the Saudis gave them what looked like a marginally better option.
    - fgf 16y ago
      "That's the official line, anyway. The whole issue of who is a citizen, and who has merely been there for years is part of it." It's not a difficult issue at all, you're a citizen if the law says so. No one promised guest workers citizenship and I doubt they expected it. Only westerners subscribe to the novel idea that anyone they let into their countries are also owed a part of it (citizenship, welfare etc.). "the Saudis gave them what looked like a marginally better option." There are five million guest workers, a lack of horror stories would be surprising. I'm not convinced coercion to stay is widespread before I see some statistics, if coercion to stay is not widespread then I trust that most of the five million guest workers know what is best for them.