7 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: The Guardian View on Development’s Paradox: The Rich Benefit More Than The Poor
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 Fenixius at 20/01/2025 at 17:47 UTC
7 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Would the citizens of developing nations be better off? Likely not, especially in the short term, as who else would be providing funding, infrastructure and services?
Would developing nations be better off? Likely so, especially in the longer term, as they'd be reducing the difference in bargaining and political power between themselves and the advanced nations.
If the authors are correct, logically, the latter effect would *eventually* outstrip the former, but who knows how long that would take and what it would cost the people who are currently dependent on industries financed by the global North?
It would be risky and difficult to manage an experiment, so I doubt we'll ever find out.