5 ms·
I cannot speak to this directly, not being African myself, but from my few visits there, I'm inclined to completely agree with this. From my limited impressions
by tbalsam 5y ago
I cannot speak to this directly, not being African myself, but from my few visits there, I'm inclined to completely agree with this. From my limited impressions, this seems to be the power hierarchy, but people outside of it (of which they are many) are excessively disgruntled about it.
Being there and seeing the kinds of corruption there helped me see better the kinds of corruption we have here now that I am back in the states. Healthcare+Insurance is probably the most similar kind of scheme, especially in the powerlessness it evokes. Not imagine that level of extortion for housing, groceries, social circles, cars, etc. Everything business-wise has a significant "tax" on it at every step of the way (let's say, for example, if it's a 15% skim then you get .85^(number of tiers of leadership) of the initial money through. And even then after it exits that chain, there's a good chance the next chain of command will skim it out too. So it's basically guaranteeing that that money goes near to 0 very quickly.
I'm way beyond my experience at this point but I'd venture this heavily discourages investment, innovation, and hard work because the guaranteed money needed to live comes from securing a place in the hierarchy. And if you do not do that out of principle, someone else starving is willing to do that as well. I'd consider it a disease and everyone talks about "corruption bad" but I got this sneaking feeling that when corruption "happened to" play in people's favor, more blind eyes were turned. Everyone has stories they tell themselves, I suppose, and I can't say whether or not I would do the same in that situation. I don't like starving or living in slums where the mud smells like a diahrrea and urine latrine when it rains because there's now sewer system or really much running water to boot. I empathize with it, it's I think a very bad locally nash-optimal solution* (*I think I'm understanding this right, not sure) that only can be escaped if everyone basically (up to a small percentage tolerance) refutes it, pushes against it, and revolts against it.
I think this next part is up to personal interpretation, but after seeing the layers of corruption and how most well-intentioned NGOs can cause a lot of communal harm, my political views swung through conservative to small government liberal. UBI in particular as a form of support. It has some obvious weird corner cases (why pay taxes on something you get right back or vice versa?), but I think I realize now why something like that has appeal -- in its strictest form (i.e. "everyone gets $2k a month"), admin overhead is excessively low due to scale and more importantly there is almost 0 overhead for corruption due to admin/population decisions. It's one valid opinion of many, I know, but coming back from the coastal villages and hearing how sustenance farmers (no money to buy food at market obvs) are starving because global warming disturbed the near-perfectly-constant rain cycles, and that they can starve there or maybe miraculously make it to the slums of the city and be effectively in slavery for a while, that plus a lot of other things changed my perspective on my contribution to society and my responsibility for a social safety net. I guess to many it may seem weird but we all have our reasons, and for me, it's a combination of guilt and shame about myself over what I've seen, and a love for these people that I hope to one day proximally help even if it's through higher tax levels or a kind word to a stranger.
Much longer than I planned, but hope that helps explain more of the situation at depth.
Best of love,
T&co.
- cplusplusfellow 5y agoIn what ways do you think UBI (in any country, not just Africa) would be insulated from the kinds of corruption you just described that occurs with groceries?
- tbalsam 5y agoI'm not sure exactly what you're meaning here, but basically no corruption surface (basically) in terms of surface area for decision-making that could create perverse incentives based upon the actions of people choosing where money could go.If everyone receives a (very basic) UBI payout relatively frequently that's direct deposit, there could be fraud but not the weird large scale territorial abuse seen in many bloated welfare systems today. It's not a perfect answer by any stretch, but like a good lambda function, despite the occasional inefficiencies it is much more understandable, simple, and side-effect free. It sort of is a tool that can shift the degree of power law around the economics of a population without entirely obliterating motivation to compete in the marketplace, build things, and generally innovate/conduct business. I'd consider it a good regularizer, and it also puts sideways pressure on jobs to compete for people to fill them due to QoL being more commoditized since one is choosing between "work or live extremely frugally" vs "work or starve and maybe die". Bit of a drastic comparison but you get my drift.
- imtringued 5y agoGreece was growing 5% per year in the 00s. It was doing quite well despite the supposed corruption. The truth is that corruption doesn't go away. Your economy just gets big enough to support the parasites. This is probably the biggest reason why we must have economic growth every year. If the economy grows then nobody will notice that funds are being redirected to special interests. UBI is only good for revenue neutral taxes. For example a UBI funded by land value taxes effectively grants every citizen an equal portion of the country. If such a system were to be adopted globally then there would be no need to conquer land forcibly. War happens exactly when we fail to reach an agreement through peaceful means. Revenue neutral CO2 taxes grant every citizen equal rights to pollute their country, effectively democratizing pollution. Negative interest rates paid to the central banks should also be redistributed through an UBI. However, using a UBI as guaranteed minimum wage is a huge error. You're living off other people's efforts. That's exactly what a land reform and negative interest rate is supposed to avoid. Lowering the interest rate floor to 0% means goodbye to vast forms of exploitation. Work for yourself, if you have too much money then donate it today, not 50 years later in some grand self congratulatory farce right before you are about to die. Don't insist on jamming the economic machine to gain power exclusively for yourself.