3 ms·

If Alaska would be a separate state maybe there would be a reason for concern /s I think 'resource curse' got it a bit backward although effect is straightforw

If Alaska would be a separate state maybe there would be a reason for concern /s I think 'resource curse' got it a bit backward although effect is straightforward and obvious - it allows a-holes aka bottom of society to rise, gives them extra booster rockets to rise fast (ie capture diamond mine, or oil fields like ISIL and sell via Turkey which was their primary income). Norway got it right because well its Norway, similar would happen if it was found ie in Switzerland. Some basic human decency ingrained deep in population and thus also in politics and those who set things up for future. If that's not present and society is more everybody-for-themselves, then yes it becomes the curse and more burden than benefit.

karmakurtisaani 4y ago
This is not the resource curse. It's basic economics actually: when there is a natural resource to be exploited, most investment, human capital and attention goes to that resource. This is because that's where the biggest returns are. Furthermore, the country's currency will get very strong, so it will make exporting anything else very difficult. Combine these factors and you end up with a country trapped in producing mainly only that one natural resource. This is also why Saudi Arabia is building seemingly insane megaprojects: to lure in enough production and construction to kick start a on industry unrelated to oil.