5 ms·
Not the OP, but those kids need parents that have a steady pay-check (we can't all be entrepreneurs). Nowadays a steady pay-check is mostly associated with maki
by paganel 4y ago
Not the OP, but those kids need parents that have a steady pay-check (we can't all be entrepreneurs). Nowadays a steady pay-check is mostly associated with making things, especially in non-Western countries, things which are later sold (on the same internal market or to export markets).
Once a much bigger player from the outside comes in and gives stuff for "free", like it has happened with some of the Western aid, then that kid's parents I mentioned at the start of the comment risk losing their jobs. After all, it's not worth it anymore for their employer to keep them, well, employed, cause the market that he's targeting is getting dumped by all the free stuff coming in via Western "aid".
These are, in retrospect, basic economics-related things, but which nevertheless took a while to sink in into some people's minds in the West (some are still oblivious to it all). I remember a book written by an African lady (I think she was from Botswana or from that general area), former worker at a big financial institution in the West, and imploring the West to stop "aiding" the African countries if they want to see them actually develop.
- unmole 4y agoI'm sorry, what exactly does your comment have to do with effective altruism? The free stuff that EA advocates want to distribute are deworming pills and mosquito nets. That in no way precludes development of local manufacturing. Moreover, cash infusions like with GiveDirectly help kickstart a virtuous cycle of local production and consumption.
- elil17 4y agoExcept the "stuff" isn't everything, it's a few specific things (medicine and bednets). No one being given this stuff was about to go synthesize malaria drugs and make a fortune. Nothing is getting in the way of Africa's biggest economic activities such as mining, agriculture, and financial services.
- imtringued 4y agoJust manufacture the nets and drugs in the destination country, two birds one stone.
- elil17 4y agoYou face a very real short term trade off between manufacturing at a higher cost in the destination country (thereby saving fewer lives) and manufacturing at a lower cost elsewhere (thereby saving more lives but contributing less to the local economy). I would argue you want to do the latter because both net and medicine manufacturing are capital intensive - a small number of people are employed despite the large cost of setting up a factory. Most of the local economic contribution is going to come from hiring people to handle distribution.