created by D__Miller on 20/01/2025 at 13:14 UTC
359 upvotes, 9 top-level comments (showing 9)
Comment by AutoModerator at 20/01/2025 at 13:14 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Remember that TrueReddit is a place to engage in **high-quality and civil discussion**. Posts must meet certain content and title requirements. Additionally, **all posts must contain a submission statement.** See the rules here[1] or in the sidebar for details. **To the OP: your post has not been deleted, but is being held in the queue and will be approved once a submission statement is posted.**
1: https://old.reddit.com/r/truereddit/about/rules/
Comments or posts that don't follow the rules may be removed without warning. Reddit's content policy[2] will be strictly enforced, especially regarding hate speech and calls for / celebrations of violence, and may result in a restriction in your participation. In addition, due to rampant rulebreaking, we are currently under a moratorium regarding topics related to the 10/7 terrorist attack in Israel and in regards to the assassination of the UnitedHealthcare CEO.
2: https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy
If an article is paywalled, please ***do not*** request or post its contents. Use archive.ph[3] or similar and link to that in your submission statement.
4: /message/compose/?to=/r/TrueReddit
Comment by D__Miller at 20/01/2025 at 13:15 UTC
38 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Submission Statement:
The Guardian's editorial highlights the persistent economic disparity between wealthy and developing nations, emphasizing that colonial-era extraction patterns continue to this day. The World Bank reported that in 2023, affluent countries received over $1.4 trillion in loan repayments from developing nations, a figure projected to exceed $2 trillion annually by 2030. A 2022 study found that between 1990 and 2015, richer nations "drained" $242 trillion from poorer countries, amounting to approximately a quarter of the global north's income. This systemic imbalance hinders the global south's development and perpetuates inequality.
Comment by p-nji at 21/01/2025 at 00:00 UTC
14 upvotes, 1 direct replies
countries should pursue economic sovereignty
There is no way this paper was written by an economist. Or a historian.
Institute of Environmental Science, International Inequalities Institute, Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, etc
Okay, that makes sense.
Comment by p-nji at 20/01/2025 at 23:55 UTC
7 upvotes, 2 direct replies
If loans are so terrible for developing nations, then why do they keep borrowing money? Are they stupid?
Comment by aridcool at 20/01/2025 at 15:52 UTC
6 upvotes, 1 direct replies
More still means the poor are benefitted some though. Would the world and developing nations have been better off without a world bank and external investment? It is an interesting question. I imagine the answer will be fairly one sided here. And I can see the point that is being made. On the other hand, many academic economists likely disagree with you.
Comment by gauchnomics at 20/01/2025 at 17:37 UTC
6 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Unequal exchange theory posits that economic growth in the “advanced economies” of the global North relies on
I'm sympathetic to the claim that developing countries, especially former colonies, are systemically disadvantaged by highly developed countries. However this method to estimate expropriation is absurd. It essentially compares the price difference between a good in low income countries and high income. Why should we expect price equality on all traded goods either individually or on average? The underlying paper goes on to discuss primary goods being a large culprit of this trade imbalance. If one country (e.g. Indonesia) has a natural abundance of coconuts, why should we expect the price of a coconut in Indonesia to be the same as in Canada? I've purposely picked a tropical crop but this extends to all traded goods.
If we think through the fact that countries generally export goods where there is a comparative advantage then we should expect a persistent price difference (i.e. country A will trade goods it is better at making to country B and import goods country B is better at making). This is all to say the method the paper authors use makes no sense as a measure of effective exploitation.
Comment by peterpansdiary at 22/01/2025 at 02:00 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
What I simply can’t understand with these types of articles is assuming that free market takes in the best form across all countries.
Politics do matter. If only a subset of rich is supposed to gain from high exploitation industries one can’t expect a growth. Peripheries usually have much more rigid wealth + political structure.
There are valid points but crunching numbers won’t get anywhere. At this current state of “free market”, its 90% politics in my opinion.
There are things that may be advantageous in monetary scheme but still it isn’t validating the opposing opinion that these are necessarily drivers of economic growth *themselves*.
Comment by BigDong1001 at 21/01/2025 at 00:41 UTC*
-2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Yes, but how do you, in spite of all that, still feed the poor three full meals a day and keep them above the $5 per day malnutrition line for all countries of the world outside the First World.
Everybody knows you have to bell the cat but how do you bell the cat? And who’s gonna bell the cat? lol.
The malnutrition line in the First World is actually almost $50 per day ($49.48), by the way. So everything is almost ten times more expensive in the First World.
They are only/merely examining it now, belatedly, because their post-colonial era extraction of wealth/earnings from the global south is no longer providing them with the same kind of prosperity it previously did in Europe. Yeah, that’s all Europe and Europeans right there. lmao.
There’s no point in fishing for information anymore, Europe is already bankrupt, and they don’t have the mathematical ability to find any mathematical solutions whatsoever to it even to save their own skins. lmfao.
It’s like fat people finally realizing that overeating has clogged up their arteries and has to reduced their life expectancy. lmao. lmfao.
Comment by Outsider-Trading at 20/01/2025 at 15:27 UTC
-16 upvotes, 1 direct replies
What must be done, we could start with completely undoing the global incentive structure that the powerful use to extract surplus value from the less powerful
Yeah, great, let's get right on that. Ironically the one technology that actually has the capacity to increase fairness in global trade (by increasing participation, guaranteeing performance, and reducing intermediary friction) is smart contracts/blockchains, which the left despise for some reason.