OK. We have covered major three perspectives so far. Among those assigned readings or theoretical perspective, which one do you like most? Can you say briefly why you like him (or his theory) most?
Financial Crises and Government's Policy Responses
financial crisis, policy
i liked most Friedrich list theory of production. His theory that having wealth is less important than finding a way to keep on adding to that wealth. The reason that i like his theory is because, i believe that one of the major problems that undeveloped countries are facing is that they want to attain wealth same as Western and eastern nations but seem unable to attain it. An example is my country where the government only value attaining individual wealth and not the wealth of the nation. I can’t say what our country is great at or what resources we have to increase productivity that will be valuable to other countries.
Great, Martha! You’re the first one who posted on this blog.
BTW, which country are you from?
Am from Kenya
Great! Whenever it’s possible, please tell us more on Kenya. Good to know that.
1. Smith’s view is way too easy to corrupt in this day and age. no one likes to play by the rules if they could get away with it while making tons of money doing it.
2. Marx’s view is too naive and boring. It lacks and discourages innovation and the will to better yourself, which in turn defeats the purpose for a growing economy in my opinion.
3. Wallerstein – how can non core states move up? No one likes being on the bottom and making it official
4. List has the most complete and modern view. his view on the need for regulation, relative gains and power of production strikes a cord with today economy.
I really like what marta said. The people from senegal are doing the same
thing as kenyan trying to develop individual wealth rather than the wealth of a nation as a whole. That is the reason why when aid is given to these countries the people who have to benefit from it dont get the aid because the leaders of these countries are corrupted.
In my case i dont like any of those great philosopher theory because i believe that moderate dictatorship is the only way for the africans nation to move forward.
So, do you like the East Asian style “soft authoritarian” government in setting up long-term economic plans and implement them in an authoritarian way? One of key facts for economic development is to maintain a long-term political and social stability, regardless of the political regime type. Hope you can develop some more concrete ideas for economic development in Senegal during the semester.
Exactly i think the African nations should follow the East Asian Style. because most of these East Asian country were poor but because of their political system they are able to set up a long term economic plan. And with an authoritarian government the work is alway done and there is less corruption than a democratic government. We also have to look at the history of the african countries democratie existed only when the colonist came to the continent.
Perhaps Marx did write Das Kapital to show the evils of capitalism but unfortunately he showed how it works and from there we see that it is the only form of economic policy that should be undertaken. I fully support his explanation of capitalism and encourage its spread.
I would prefer both List and Smith’s theory. Smith’s theory that nations attain wealth and function best where individuals are completely free to use their skills and capital (money, land, etc.) in their own self-interest. I totally agree with this theory of Smith. People who work hard to get somewhere in life should have much more wealth compared to any loser of a street. And I also agree with what List said that having wealth is less important than finding a way to keep on adding to that wealth. List theory most supports the nation as a whole but that doesn’t mean we should stop caring about those who actually work hard in their life rather than those are lazy and don’t like to do anything. I say nation is important as a whole as the people who are in it but individually not as a whole. This is why I prefer both Smith and List.