6 ms·

There's really no reason to blame this on the foreigners installing corrupt politicians, corruption is far more frequently organic and homegrown. Corrupt people

There's really no reason to blame this on the foreigners installing corrupt politicians, corruption is far more frequently organic and homegrown. Corrupt people work to further their own goals, if that happens to be using their power to take on e.g. debt on unfavourable terms then so be it, but that's not because they're beholden to foreigners, it's because that is their best route to enriching themselves - they can just steal the borrowed funds! Keep in mind that corrupt societies are the most likely to have their debts forgiven, i.e. they are not likely to pay back the money borrowed. I really recommend reading The Dictator's Handbook to learn more about how corruption works.

mathverse 4y ago
It's not as simple as that. Building domestic industries takes time and you can never be sure about the outcome (especially if you believe everyone around you is corrupt as was believed in the countries behind the Iron Curtain). The easy money from foreign investors is hard to resist.
karpierz 4y ago
They have their debts forgiven on the basis of adopting certain policies (free market reform) that allows corporations from wealthy countries to set up shop and extract raw materials from the counter while avoiding giving back to the country via taxes. The profits get booked in Singapore or the Bahamas, and the stock price keeps going up.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  Free market reforms do not forbid taxes on natural resource extraction. The U.S. has plenty of such taxes, and they score very highly on measures of economic freedom.
  - karpierz 4y ago
    Of course. But we aren't talking about the States, we're talking about countries that are forced into return as a condition of loan forgiveness. Some of those conditions involves avoiding any sort of export tariffs and using the declared value of goods to calculate profits (ex: if I spent 20$ extracting copper, and sold it for 20$ to an overseas company which totally isn't related to me, then the taxable profit in your country is 0$).
FormerBandmate 4y ago
South Korea and Ghana were at the exact same place 50 years ago. South Korea’s leadership were largely competent, so they’ve industrialized and used trade to become one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Ghana has not had nearly as good leadership and institutions, so they haven’t. Everyone constantly blames the West for all the problems of the world. If trade was really that deleterious to developing countries, you wouldn’t see the rise of China happening at all
- karpierz 4y ago
  South Korea had a propped up dictatorship that the United States strengthened and funded because they were scared of commies. Meanwhile Ghana had a dictator which was saddled with US loans who was overthrown. But the country still had to pay the loans back, despite them being will outside of their means.
  - fsloth 4y ago
    This is extremely disrespectful of the economic savvy and work ethic of South Korean people. Korean state had an extremely focused industrial policy to improve the added value created by the country's economic output. The thing that needs critique here is that free trade would be somehow always beneficial. South Koreans state aggressively supported those industries it wanted to uplift. Countries do rise up from third world countries to advanced industries. It just does not happen very often - sadly. Another example of a country that rose from total poverty to industrialized advanced economy is my home country Finland which was in the 18th century dirt poor, started to industrialize, and only after second world war started to get some resemblance of wealth. However, the long history of poverty is still reflected to this day in lack of capital (are there other reasons for lack of capital I'm not sure).
    - karpierz 4y ago
      Your implication is that Ghana failed where South Korea succeeded because they didn't work hard enough. Of course people in South Korea worked hard to get where they are. So did people in Ghana. But in South Korea, the US protected them and funded them. Meanwhile in Ghana, the US stripped them of their wealth. How well off do you think South Korea would be if the US didn't intervene in the Korean War?

mathverse 4y ago

It's not as simple as that. Building domestic industries takes time and you can never be sure about the outcome (especially if you believe everyone around you is corrupt as was believed in the countries behind the Iron Curtain). The easy money from foreign investors is hard to resist.

karpierz 4y ago

They have their debts forgiven on the basis of adopting certain policies (free market reform) that allows corporations from wealthy countries to set up shop and extract raw materials from the counter while avoiding giving back to the country via taxes. The profits get booked in Singapore or the Bahamas, and the stock price keeps going up.

zozbot234 4y ago
Free market reforms do not forbid taxes on natural resource extraction. The U.S. has plenty of such taxes, and they score very highly on measures of economic freedom.
- karpierz 4y ago
  Of course. But we aren't talking about the States, we're talking about countries that are forced into return as a condition of loan forgiveness. Some of those conditions involves avoiding any sort of export tariffs and using the declared value of goods to calculate profits (ex: if I spent 20$ extracting copper, and sold it for 20$ to an overseas company which totally isn't related to me, then the taxable profit in your country is 0$).

FormerBandmate 4y ago

South Korea and Ghana were at the exact same place 50 years ago. South Korea’s leadership were largely competent, so they’ve industrialized and used trade to become one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Ghana has not had nearly as good leadership and institutions, so they haven’t. Everyone constantly blames the West for all the problems of the world. If trade was really that deleterious to developing countries, you wouldn’t see the rise of China happening at all

karpierz 4y ago
South Korea had a propped up dictatorship that the United States strengthened and funded because they were scared of commies. Meanwhile Ghana had a dictator which was saddled with US loans who was overthrown. But the country still had to pay the loans back, despite them being will outside of their means.
- fsloth 4y ago
  This is extremely disrespectful of the economic savvy and work ethic of South Korean people. Korean state had an extremely focused industrial policy to improve the added value created by the country's economic output. The thing that needs critique here is that free trade would be somehow always beneficial. South Koreans state aggressively supported those industries it wanted to uplift. Countries do rise up from third world countries to advanced industries. It just does not happen very often - sadly. Another example of a country that rose from total poverty to industrialized advanced economy is my home country Finland which was in the 18th century dirt poor, started to industrialize, and only after second world war started to get some resemblance of wealth. However, the long history of poverty is still reflected to this day in lack of capital (are there other reasons for lack of capital I'm not sure).
  - karpierz 4y ago
    Your implication is that Ghana failed where South Korea succeeded because they didn't work hard enough. Of course people in South Korea worked hard to get where they are. So did people in Ghana. But in South Korea, the US protected them and funded them. Meanwhile in Ghana, the US stripped them of their wealth. How well off do you think South Korea would be if the US didn't intervene in the Korean War?