The Third World is impoverished. This poverty is not because of one country taking from another, taking too much of the “fixed pie,” as Left “Progressive” thinking asserts, but is a result of a hostile environment for the planting, germination and nurturing of new businesses and for the expansion and healthy maintenance of existing businesses. With lack of businesses, comes a lack of employment as the business sector offers a nearly unlimited flexibility and potential for more opportunities for employment and self-employment by the hour, by the day, by the week, by the month, by the year, providing individuals far more access to earning income starting with little or no experience and working one’s way up to higher levels of responsibility and productivity than any rigid governmental employment structure can ever provide.
Businesses are the manifestation of productivity in a society. Business is one outlet through which people express natural human creativity in creating and producing goods and services for the community. Businesses are the fruit of human imagination and problem-solving, and are borne of an awareness of the needs of the local society and how these needs can be met.
Businesses can be as small as a carpenter fashioning one table at a time, a gardener employing two people to care for fifty clients’ yards, a babysitter who provides services to two families. Many businesses are as simple as a chauffeur saving up his money to buy a two room lodging, one half to live in, the other half to rent out. He raises his family’s standard of living modestly, but measurably and enhances his children’s chances to higher achievement in the future. Instead of a renter himself, he is now an owner of a small, income-producing asset which he can sell later if he chooses. Another fellow makes his start by hawking drinks on the street. He saves enough money to pay for a kiosk so he doesn’t have to stand in the sun, wind and rain anymore, and sell more drinks, and he’s noticed people like a certain type of biscuit so he adds that to his inventory. In year of this, he has saved up enough money to build a small room, where he can stock fifty items, matches, tea, tomato paste, the staples he’s discovered the local community will buy. To make a sale, he’ll break sets, sell half-packages, whatever he perceives his clients can and will buy.
This natural identification of a need and a solution to addressing that need happens every day. It’s impossible to suppress and shouldn’t be suppressed. In the midst of a refugee camp of displaced people, 10,000 of them, chased and beaten out of their homes with hardly more than the clothes on their backs, within two days, while government and humanitarian aid agencies sat in meetings to discuss the emergency, hawkers had already figured out how to get small goods into the guarded camp and were wandering through selling items which people needed. People require goods and services to live and to function, and other people are willing to do the hustle to make those necessities or luxuries available. The two, consumer and provider, are brought together, they exchange payment for goods and they both depart satisfied.
In America, this free market tradition has brought the nation and the individual great comfort and wealth, yet many people in America do not perceive themselves as wealthy. But a comparison of the standard of living of an American carpenter versus an African, or South-Asian (Indian) carpenter dramatically displays the difference between an American carpenter’s comfort and a Third World carpenter’s comfort. An American carpenter, one of the trades, owns a car, owns a truck, owns a house. There is nothing noteworthy in America to see a Middle Class carpenter in a three bedroom house, with two full baths, a half bath and a garage, in fact it is expected and the norm, usually with much more. In the Third World, a carpenter is of the Middle Class, with a trade by which he can produce a regular income. His transportation is a bicycle. His family lives in a nine by twelve foot rented room, and shares a toilet with up to ten other families also renting rooms alongside his. A single room is his home – kitchen, salon, bedroom for the whole family in one. The major feature is a sturdy locked door to keep the thieves out at night. He’s admired. He has a nice little sofa, his wife has a decent set of cooking pots, a nice tea server for guests, and underneath the embroidered dust cloth is a second-hand TV, which can be used when the electricity is on. His wife fills their family jerry cans with water from the communal tap at the end of the building. She knows when to fill as the water is rationed through the city, on in her neighborhood for certain hours of the day only.
Both men have the same trade. They both are solidly representative of their respective nations’ Middle Classes, but the American carpenter has benefited from a business environment that his Third World counterpart does not have.
The Third World has several critical flaws that make it Third World, a World without Business.
The chauffeur mentioned earlier is real. He lives in the country of Guinea in West Africa. He is a professional driver who works for one of the international organizations, so he’s had a steady, decent-paying job, so with part of his earnings he built a small building. His family lived in one 9 by 12 foot rooms and he rented out the other 9 by 12 to a tenant. It took him years to be able to save up enough to shift out of renter to min-home-owner and mini-landlord. He began to enjoy a bit more income to send his kids to a better school. His home/rental was situated in a busy, growing neighborhood about three miles out of downtown Conakry and he was poised to expand to rent out a second room to add a little more again to his monthly income. But today, his income is only his salary and he must rent a place for his family. Why?
The chauffeur pointed out to us what happened, indicating a restricted construction area we were passing by one day. The government decided that the square mile community was in the exact location they absolutely needed to put up new governmental and international agency buildings. The entire neighborhood was razed to the ground, not a person of the thousands in it had any say in the matter and not a soul was compensated. After years of saving, plus the hard work of construction, the chauffeur was wrecked, his home and rental, destroyed. He’s older, and has fewer years of income ahead before mandatory retirement; his investment for his family and his old age is gone. Instead of having some buffer and cushion, he is back to the scramble of his early days, but with more mouths to feed. Every business and residence in that area, including scores and scores of small kiosks and shops and services, was literally wiped off the map. The investment of the wealthy, government-connected were enhanced by the government taking that land and handing it to contractors and politically-connected landowners who then had the guarantee of years of lucrative leasing to international organizations, but the investments of thousands of little guys was destroyed. A fraction of those micro-investors had the resources and drive left to start over, wary to invest in anything that could be taken away again.It wasn’t Big Corporation that hurt the little guy, it was Big Government, and what was destroyed was Business. The people moved on to more squalid living, and just make do, because they had no choice. But many of them have lost heart to start another business, to invest again because of the disappointment and discouragement of their loss of years of sacrifice. They are unable to raise their standard of living. They remain at hardly more than a subsistence level of economic activity. Every time they try to improve, their efforts are knocked down. First World “experts” tsk and shake their heads, decrying the local people’s woeful lack of initiative as the barrier to development, without a glimmer of understanding as to why a universal, natural in-born human trait was missing. Yet, immigrant Africans are amongst the fastest-rising immigrant achievers in America. If these people had no initiative because of their culture, how come they flourish in America? Initiative hadn’t been missing, it had been punished. Likewise, international corporations learn the same brutal lessons about the wisdom or futility of investment efforts when their companies are overrun, their employees threatened, and their assets are seized by national governments made up of political officials scheming to enrich themselves on other people’s work.
A survey of Third World businesses will reveal a pattern of cynical adaptability. With confiscation a real threat, businesses large and small are stripped to the bare bones. Warehouses and factories appear dilapidated, lest – by being neat and well-kept, and noticeably prosperous -they catch the eye of a covetous government official. Not a penny of investment which can be gone without goes into maintaining the infrastructure – just enough to keep it from falling on everyone’s heads, no more. No paint, no improvements, just mildewing plaster. Private businesspeople in the Third World have an emergency plan, which includes their passports in one hand at all times, so they can abandon the country within hours if they have to, to literally walk away from everything they own there, and everything they own was deliberately chosen to be expendable. One Third World writer complained a few years ago, “At least with the old days, the “corruptocrats” would invest their money locally. But with the Socialists, Communists and Dictators seizing property and banks, the rich folks don’t dare keep their money in country. They move it out immediately to foreign shelters, so local investment is practically dead.”
At the micro-level, it is the same. Third World streets are lined with rough, scrap-board tables so unattractive, they appear ready for the junk pile, but they are in service during the day holding the stock for sale of the small vender. When the police are sent out by the government-connected shop owners to remove the low-overhead competition, there’s not much to smash, and if it does get smashed, a few nails and another cross-support usually does the trick , and the goods are on display again after a discreet waiting period.
Business as a natural human endeavor needs certain basic conditions to survive and flourish. The lack of these five conditions produces the reality of the decrepit Third World economy:
1) Security. No one can run a business of any sort when rebels or armies or bandits rule the streets. Bullets, bombs and robberies are the results of two different failures of security: First, national security against all manifestations of foreign or domestic aggression which undermines and endangers normal societal functions; second, local security of a professional and competent police force. Effective local policing for a time in Lagos, Nigeria, abruptly and effectively brought a halt to massive robberies, where bandit gangs would start at one end of a street and rob every single house to the other end of it – dozens and dozens of frantic calls to the police unanswered, plus the alarming highway bridge robberies where in broad daylight, thieves would set up a roadblock at the two-mile long stretch of lagoon bridge, trapping hundreds of vehicles over the ocean waters so the thieves could rob each car, and everyone in them, one after the other. No police.
2) Property Rights. People of high and low classes will invest generously if they are guaranteed to be able to keep their investment. If their investment is not protected by law, subject to confiscation by government or by covetous competitors, people become discouraged and defeated in hopes of moving up the economic ladder. If ownership cannot be proven or protected, people are unable to buy or sell any asset with confidence.
3) Infrastructure. Expansion of business and increasing sophistication of business activity requires good roads and other transportation modes, plus reliable utilities like electricity and water, and communications. Commerce, and all business suffer greatly in Kenya due to the horrible state of the nation’s roads. Potholes, the infamous “Kenyan Massage” known here in Arizona as “washboard,” crumbling tarmac, and narrow routes cause accidents, loss of life, loss of property, vehicle damage, and delay, delay delay, with high transportation losses that hamper trade and reduce profits. Nigeria, an OPEC country, has fuel shortages as endemic as malaria thanks to government artificially setting low prices. Government officials commandeer cheap gasoline and diesel from the refineries and sell them in the neighboring countries for many times the Nigerian official price. Not much is left over for Nigerians. Cars queue for a week at the filling stations. The employee or boss cannot sit a week in a line at the gas station, so a driver must hold the place, sleeping in the vehicle, ready to move ahead the moment the tanker rumbles in to refill the station’s empty tanks. Nigerians, in order to maintain some semblance of continuity of working must horde gasoline and diesel. Explosions are common, thanks to poorly stored fuel. As the days without gas increase, so the number of cars on the roads decreases. People with enough money buy generators to provide electricity when the city power goes out, hours of a day, or two-three-four days in a row. This is a constant drain on productivity, and increases all costs on everything in the country.
4) Reasonable Taxation. Overtaxed people have no money to invest. Overtaxed businesses are a double tax ; first on the individual, then on the business. Businesses have to pass expenses on to the consumers in the calculations of the pricing for goods and services. There is point where more and more consumers cannot pay the increases, and the buy and sell activity slows or halts. Businesses cannot employ people if they can’t sell anything, and bribes to government officials to stay in business without harassment are simply another form of taxation.
5) Human Resource Development: Business can only expand as far as the ability to recruit competent people. Effective schooling to improve the productivity of people is key to an upwardly mobile population. Uneducated or poorly educated people are not effective in their ability to take on work or take on higher responsibility once employed.
Government doesn’t have to be the enemy of Business, but through human history the trend is that governments set themselves at every opportunity to shackle or destroy natural human business interaction and activity, through heavy taxation, confiscation, dereliction of security and disrespect for Rule of Law. America’s innovation was to clear the playing field, to recognize the importance of the merchant and the producer, to allow Human Business to flourish.
The Third World is right across the horizon. It can be reached in a day from any place on the planet. What excuse then is there to ignore or dismiss the reality of how these nations remain in poverty and human stagnation? What excuse is there is to claim that American Business has not served Americans well when the standard of living for the American Middle Class has exceeded the Middle Class of every other nation in every measure since American Independence, and the evidence is openly verifiable? Government is best when it provides a few key neutral functions which enable human beings to express their aspirations through their own hard work and initiative. It is at its worse when it covets all human productivity while being crushingly jealous of the human natural cooperative, social drive for business. Actions have consequences. America, indeed no country, is immune from becoming part of the “Third World,” a moribund and aspiration-crushing nation-state of being – The World without Business.


The key is small business being successful — so how is your local business doing – a business who uses and supports other local business? or are you doing all your shopping at the big box store who sends all of its profits to the headquarters in another state? Is it WIST or Office Max?
check it out here – http://www.localfirstaz.com/index.php
Quaint idea, eschewing the Big Box for the local boutique shop … but totally economically unsound.
Retail (which is what is inferred in the first comment), only churns money within a given economy. Money churns a few times before it completely leaks out of the local system.
Manufacturing or, basic industry creates a product for export and thereby imports new money into the local economy.
The object is to create something of value (software to steel) and export the good or service (financial services to China for example) and import new dollars into the local economic pool.
Resource based economies are the pits. What’s the point of exporting raw copper or huge bales of cotton at commodity prices only to have value added in some other community who in turn imports new dollars into their system?
One manufacturing or basic job creating something for export, usually generates 3 to 7 service sector and local government jobs downstream.
New retailing jobs or new hair salons do nearly nothing for the growth of a community’s economy.
Great Post,
Thanks
Vista Hair Salons
Best regards!
We were just in a hair salon today. Two years ago, we found out in the barber shop the real depth of the construction/housing layoffs, and today, we got the local scuttlebutt on the deepening job losses as the ripple effect moves thru the economy, all just by casual eavesdropping on conversations.
Got superior news and inside intelligence on the state of the economy from real folks with independent small businesses than can be found in any US daily newspaper or MSM network.
No doubt there are many domestic policies being pursued in third world countries that hurt economic development in some way, however, wanuba brushes aside the rather large and looming fact of the impact of the first world on the third with a curt dismissal of the notion that the problem is in no way related to “one country taking from another.”
In fact, trillions of dollars of wealth has been extracted from the third world by the first, often through the barrel of a gun, without any compensation. Add to this the incredible social and economic costs of throwing off colonial, master, being proxy battlegrounds by both sides of the ‘Cold War,’ and suffering from completely irrational IMF policies, and the claim that third world poverty has nothing to do with what other countries is simply absurd.
I am really curious wanuba – how about you give us a real example of a third world country that has not faced massive exploitation and financial loss at the hands of the first world? Even better, give us an example of a prosperous first world country that did not rely on exploitation of the third world to build up its economic might.
how about you give us a real example of a third world country that has not faced massive exploitation and financial loss at the hands of the first world?
………………
The United States.
It’s been forty years for many African nations, that long to discover the hard way that the trendy chic of the 1960s was European-elitist university political thought that Socialism and Communism, cutely repackaged as “African Socialism” was NOT the “Way.”
The Soviet Union heavily invested in Africa, Latin America and the East to push Soviet Communism, sending connected political people to Soviet universities, funding communist/socialist leaning politicians, or when that failed, funding insurgencies to try to force their way on a nation.
It’s very curious that all the “exploitation” and “colonialist” arguments NEVER mention this historically, politically and economically significant meddling to push emerging new nations away from free markets and commerce-friendly governance to heavily centrally-controlled statist economies.
AFrica, indeed the Third World as a whole, is characterized by of government-controlled pricing, production, nationalisation and confiscation – all justified under Socialist and Communist-contributed concepts of State ownership over private ownership. Instead of restructing the colonial-based economy for more freedom and profits for African entrepreneurs, modifying a base that worked, and would work better opened to more innovation, the market structure was evicerated. Encouraged by Socialists and Communists, they threw the baby out with the bathwater. Today, more and more African governments are rejecting Socialism and Communism and are looking to the free market for creation of wealth. Affinity for Socialism and Communism lasts longer amongst those who never had to actually LIVE in a fully State-controlled environment.
The Left has had a decades long pattern of omitting the OTHER side of the story, pretending that “capitalism” is the same as “colonialism” when it is not, and that the communists and socialists somehow had nothing whatsoever to do with anything – the emerging Third World governance after independences was Socialism. And when Socialism and Communism didn’t deliver, they scapegoated the old colonial system to deflect the blame away from failed State-dominated economies.
Have the Communists of Kenya, personified today by Obama’s stated cousin, Odinga, learned ANYTHING from neighbor Tanzania’s ordeal under the communist Nyerere? Tanzania was run into the ground while the more free market Kenya moved ahead – same kind of cultures, same sorts of people, same types of natural resources, same industries – practically twin nations, yet communism wrecked Tanzania.
We crossed from Kenya into Tanzania in 1982, no mean feat with a closed border between the two nations. Soviet CCCP freighters filled the Tanzanian ports. Tanzanians had been forcibly torn off their private land and moved to collectives to farm. Once productive industries, now state-run was collapsing under incompetent, bureaucrat-management. There was no toothpaste to be had, no soap, no sodas – they had the bottles, the metal caps, the soda itself, but no little bottletop liners to seal the bottles. No bottling could be done.
Compared to Kenya, Tanzania seemed like Sunday afternoon every day of the week, silent, slow, businesses closed, boarded up, inactive.
AFricans themselves are already quite fed up with blaming the old colonialism, they know it was Socialism and COmmunism which destroyed the privately-owned industries that were producing and employing for their nations at Independence.
“The United States.”
How about you explain that.
Oh, did I not mention both sides of the Cold War? Yes, I believe I did. Not sure what your tangent has anything to do with what I said.
VV-
WIST is hardly a boutique — it pays good salaries with good benes to its over 100 employees. As opposed to big boxes like Staples and Office Max who make sure they don’t give people more than 30 hours a week so they don’t qualify for benes. Guess whose healthcare you are subsidizing throught AHCCS?
VV -
Blame those big corporate buddies of yours for taking those production jobs off shore. Michelin used to make tires here – now they do it in Ireland and other places. We can’t even fight a war because we don’t have enough steel production in this country to build a complete airplane or truck. (You know Boeing shipped its engine plant to China, right?)
todd Says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
“The United States.”
How about you explain that.
Oh, did I not mention both sides of the Cold War? Yes, I believe I did. Not sure what your tangent has anything to do with what I said.
………………
The economic powerhouse known as the United States didn’t get really rolling until it threw off the British colonial shackles of high taxes, monopolistic trade restrictions and so forth. But it didn’t turn its back on proven market functions which worked.
But if you’d rather have some other examples:
Norway. South Korea. Taiwan.
wanumba,
The early US economic power was built on cotton and textiles. Before the Civil War cotton was almost 60% of US exports. Northern textile mills got almost all their cotton from domestic sources which were profitable and low-cost because of slave labor. While there were other industries, the domination of the US in this area was not due to capitalism, but due to slavery (andIt later the exploitation of share-cropping).
Contrary to your claim about high taxes and restrictions, the US economy developed in the 1800′s under extremely high tariffs that were completely anti-competitive and highly protectionist.
Your understanding of history leaves quite a lot to be desired.
todd Says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:26 pm
wanumba,
The early US economic power was built on cotton and textiles. Before the Civil War cotton was almost 60% of US exports. Northern textile mills got almost all their cotton from domestic sources which were profitable and low-cost because of slave labor. While there were other industries, the domination of the US in this area was not due to capitalism, but due to slavery (andIt later the exploitation of share-cropping).
Contrary to your claim about high taxes and restrictions, the US economy developed in the 1800’s under extremely high tariffs that were completely anti-competitive and highly protectionist.
Your understanding of history leaves quite a lot to be desired.
……………….
The Early US economy in the years of 1775-1800 was based on international merchant sea trade. Free markets were the policy of the emerging United STates. Our first wars, the Quasi War and the Barbary Wars were to ensure free trade safety for American merchants.
The SOuthern US economy was based on cotton, to the detriment of all other sectors in the South, actually a drag on developing a more balanced market.
US education prefers to focus on US history 1830 to the Civil War to enhance the 1800s at the expense of an understanding of the explosion of enterprise and commerce after the American colonies threw off the colonial yoke.
“The Early US economy in the years of 1775-1800 was based on international merchant sea trade.”
Yes, before cotton became KIng there was the later named triangular trade route. Sugar came from the Caribbean (produced by slaves) to the US. From the US went tobacco (farmed by slaves) and hemp (farmed by slaves) to Europe and rum and simple goods to Africa. From Africa to the Caribbean and US came slaves and gold. You will note the common theme here. The economy was largely based on the profits made from uncompensated workers (slaves)
As to your claim of 1775-1800, the facts don’t support your claim. Per Capita income peaked in 1770 and did not regain the same level until 1800. After that it remained static until the war of 1812 which saw another plunge until it shot up around 1820 after a heavy regime of protective tariffs were introduced which finally made manufacturing profitable and able to compete with England.
The record is very clear. If you want to hold the early post-colonial US as an example of growth it is obvious that the model to follow is to enslave a large number of people to supply an uncompensated workforce and impose extremely high tariffs so that domestic industry can be established.
Are there some other examples you want to bring up? Maybe something more contemporary?
Are there some other examples you want to bring up? Maybe something more contemporary?
…………
Back to the point. Nearly a half century of Independence of many Third World nations and the reason they have failed economies is because of a hostile environment for all business, micro to macro. A new generation has been born and grown into societies that were PURPOSELY structured by Socialism and Communism after Independence, NOT free markets.
Making excuses for any of these people that “colonialism” is responsible is not valid. Actions have consequences. The colonial system was dismantled, understandably not in favor with the new nations. But “colonialism” is not the same word in ANY sense as “capitalism” or “free markets.” All these nations COULD have structured for free market principles, but CHOSE not to. Many are now CHOSING to try capitalism-friendly governance for the first time.
Many nations were wooed by Socialists and Communists and they fell for the rhetoric, but found reality was a different matter. Many Third World governments now are looking to the free market for solutions to their economic problems.