How Africa is STILL Getting ? Today
Options
Stiff
Members Posts: 7,723 ✭✭✭✭✭
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNYemuiAOfU^^
Watched that documentary a few days ago about how in Zambia, billions of dollars in copper comes out of the minefields annually. The vast majority of the proceeds however go to the corporations who drill the mines who pay little to no taxes through various loopholes and accounting tricks. Of course, these corporations are largely European. In Zambia in particular, a Swiss company called Glencore owns the rights to the lions share of the mines. Meanwhile,the people of Zambia starve with over 60% of the nation living in poverty and 80% unemployed. And as you probably already know this is exact same system is repeated throughout the nations of Sub-saharan Africa, just with different resources.
Africa is by far the most resource rich continent in the planet. Trillions of dollars come out of Africa in the form of various raw materials, resources a year but the African people don't reap the benefits. The West loves to tote its humanitarianism through foreign aid that goes to Africa, but the reality is for every $1 that comes in to the continent in the form of foreign aid $10 goes out in the form of one of the many resources that Africa is home to.
What can be done by the governments of Africa to reverse this?
Zambia in particular attempted to nationalize their mines in the late 60's but were forced to reverse this decision due to what was said to be mismanagement and pressure from the IMF and World Bank in exchange for financial aid.
I believe a nationalization of all resources is the only option and a dividend paid to the citizens would be the most effective action to combat the course that Africa is currently on. They could claim ownership of all minerals and resources within their borders and relegate outside corporations to just extraction contracts (if that) with strict oversight, taking full ownership of the mineral rents.
If they reinvest enough profits back into their respective industries, in the long run they can put more money into the hands of their people and also have a larger effect on employment by owning the largest industries in their lands. What would be some potential ramifications of this?
I'm sure there are people on here that have more knowledge of the situation over there than me so any enlightenment is appreciated.
Comments
-
Nationalization will only work if those in power have the capacity, knowledge, and will to reinvest the profits back into the community properly. There are so many examples of nationalization of a key resource going wrong (Venezuela, Jamaica, etc.) so i'm hesitant to advocate for full nationalization. The government should have a stake and ensure that native companies and its citizens benefit from them tho
-
Nationalization will only work if those in power have the capacity, knowledge, and will to reinvest the profits back into the community properly. There are so many examples of nationalization of a key resource going wrong (Venezuela, Jamaica, etc.) so i'm hesitant to advocate for full nationalization. The government should have a stake and ensure that native companies and its citizens benefit from them tho
This is true but the bolded is going to be needed no matter what they decide to do if the governments want to turn their countries around.
Maybe partial nationalization? Claim an ownership stake of a to be determined size in any company that mines within its borders, while tightening tax laws?
I think there would be some blow back from the Western financial systems( namely IMF) tho.. It would also most likely negatively effect foreign investment due to the initial shock but I think it would be a necessary sacrifice in the long term. -
Nationalization will only work if those in power have the capacity, knowledge, and will to reinvest the profits back into the community properly. There are so many examples of nationalization of a key resource going wrong (Venezuela, Jamaica, etc.) so i'm hesitant to advocate for full nationalization. The government should have a stake and ensure that native companies and its citizens benefit from them tho
This is true but the bolded is going to be needed no matter what they decide to do if the governments want to turn their countries around.
Maybe partial nationalization? Claim an ownership stake of a to be determined size in any company that mines within its borders, while tightening tax laws?
I think there would be some blow back from the Western financial systems( namely IMF) tho.. It would also most likely negatively effect foreign investment due to the initial shock but I think it would be a necessary sacrifice in the long term.
Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen. Iran would be an even bigger power in the world today if it wasn't for western nations assassinating leaders who wanted to partiallyor fully nationalize oil. Latin American leaders have similar stories, have you read Confessions of an Economic Hitman? Gaddafi was trying to get his own currency and oil sales away from the dollar and even Euro and we all know what happened. Saddam tried to do similar, you already know.....
Leaders in Haiti, Cuba, and other places have similar stories so it's gonna be tough to just partially nationalize resources without some western nations and sadly some ? African leaders who will try to be slick and cause some mayhem. With that being said, more personal responsibility has to come from African nations too, end some of the corruption, and do what they can to take care of housing and other needs for their people. Small steps can turn to bigger ones. -
Double
-
Video is pretty long, I'll check it out tonight
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »Nationalization will only work if those in power have the capacity, knowledge, and will to reinvest the profits back into the community properly. There are so many examples of nationalization of a key resource going wrong (Venezuela, Jamaica, etc.) so i'm hesitant to advocate for full nationalization. The government should have a stake and ensure that native companies and its citizens benefit from them tho
This is true but the bolded is going to be needed no matter what they decide to do if the governments want to turn their countries around.
Maybe partial nationalization? Claim an ownership stake of a to be determined size in any company that mines within its borders, while tightening tax laws?
I think there would be some blow back from the Western financial systems( namely IMF) tho.. It would also most likely negatively effect foreign investment due to the initial shock but I think it would be a necessary sacrifice in the long term.
Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen. Iran would be an even bigger power in the world today if it wasn't for western nations assassinating leaders who wanted to partially or fully nationalize oil. Latin American leaders have similar stories, have you read Confessions of an Economic Hitman? Gaddafi was trying to get his own currency and oil sales away from the dollar and even Euro and we all know what happened. Saddam tried to do similar, you already know.....it's not easy dealing with crooked corporations who have govt guns worldwide to back them up.
Leaders in Haiti, Cuba, and other places have similar stories so it's gonna be tough to just partially nationalize resources without some western nations and sadly some ? African leaders who will try to be slick and cause some mayhem. With that being said, more personal responsibility has to come from African nations too, end some of the corruption, and do what they can to take care of housing and other needs for their people. Small steps can turn to bigger ones.
That's big. But how much of that corruption do you think comes from outside influence (ie. bribery) and how corrupt do you think the average african nation is compared to your average western "democracy"?
Yeah I get you though, the world has a vested interest in keeping its foot on Africa's neck. How functional is the African Union? What are their long term goals and some of their courses of action? If the members were to decide in unison that nationalization is their next step, the imperialists would have their work cut out for them sending the entire unified continent into chaos at once. -
i'm gonna watch the video tonight
and unfortunately this ? of resources occurs throughout the "Global South". like king said, any time these countries try to own their stuff, they are pressured directly or indirectly from the West to stop trying to be sovereign
its very frustrating and sickening, i remember going to the south of Haiti where they had bauxite deposits. the Canadians were in charge of the mines and totally exhausting the earth and cut down all the trees (and took most of the profits). when they left, the Haitians protested that they got nothing out of the deal and at the very least, the Canadians should replant the trees in the countryside; so they did. Except the trees they planted were coniferous and now that area of Haiti (and many other parts) are extremely prone to mudslides and landslides because the pine trees (unlike the previous forest cover) don't provide cover -
? the Swiss
-
...or they just plain ? things up themselves. we HAVE already mentioned Venezuela in this thread.kingblaze84 wrote: »Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen.
it's kind of convenient when outright incompetent leadership can say "but but but THE WEST" and get an immediate pass. -
...or they just plain ? things up themselves. we HAVE already mentioned Venezuela in this thread.kingblaze84 wrote: »Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen.
it's kind of convenient when outright incompetent leadership can say "but but but THE WEST" and get an immediate pass.
Did you watch the video? I admit there is some corruption involved but let's not act like western nations haven't used force or crooked business deals to screw over the people in other nations who are digging the mines and extracting the resources needed to make some companies filthy rich, so rich that some companies are richer then whole nations. You're good at history so you should at least be fair and say MANY of the problems afflicting Africa and other poorer areas of the world come directly from the west ? people over. I'm not giving anyone a pass but there's a reason things are the way they are...check these links out, it's not so simple to just blame corruption for Africa's ills
http://mic.com/articles/92581/how-the-u-s-screwed-up-latin-america-in-7-classic-historical-cartoons
http://listverse.com/2013/03/12/10-ways-britain-has-ruined-the-world/
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »Nationalization will only work if those in power have the capacity, knowledge, and will to reinvest the profits back into the community properly. There are so many examples of nationalization of a key resource going wrong (Venezuela, Jamaica, etc.) so i'm hesitant to advocate for full nationalization. The government should have a stake and ensure that native companies and its citizens benefit from them tho
This is true but the bolded is going to be needed no matter what they decide to do if the governments want to turn their countries around.
Maybe partial nationalization? Claim an ownership stake of a to be determined size in any company that mines within its borders, while tightening tax laws?
I think there would be some blow back from the Western financial systems( namely IMF) tho.. It would also most likely negatively effect foreign investment due to the initial shock but I think it would be a necessary sacrifice in the long term.
Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen. Iran would be an even bigger power in the world today if it wasn't for western nations assassinating leaders who wanted to partially or fully nationalize oil. Latin American leaders have similar stories, have you read Confessions of an Economic Hitman? Gaddafi was trying to get his own currency and oil sales away from the dollar and even Euro and we all know what happened. Saddam tried to do similar, you already know.....it's not easy dealing with crooked corporations who have govt guns worldwide to back them up.
Leaders in Haiti, Cuba, and other places have similar stories so it's gonna be tough to just partially nationalize resources without some western nations and sadly some ? African leaders who will try to be slick and cause some mayhem. With that being said, more personal responsibility has to come from African nations too, end some of the corruption, and do what they can to take care of housing and other needs for their people. Small steps can turn to bigger ones.
That's big. But how much of that corruption do you think comes from outside influence (ie. bribery) and how corrupt do you think the average african nation is compared to your average western "democracy"?
Yeah I get you though, the world has a vested interest in keeping its foot on Africa's neck. How functional is the African Union? What are their long term goals and some of their courses of action? If the members were to decide in unison that nationalization is their next step, the imperialists would have their work cut out for them sending the entire unified continent into chaos at once.
Good question on how much of that corruption comes from outside influence, definitely a lot. A few million dollars and promises of a good future for a corrupt official's kids and family would corrupt a lot of people and it happens a lot based on documentaries I've watched. I would have no way to say for sure how corrupt African nations are compared to western democracies because their histories are so different. Western nations got most of their wealth and power through force and past colonialism, and African nations are still pretty young considering how recently many got independence (60s and 70s mostly). But based on research I've done, there is a lot of corruption in many African nations and if that can be fixed up, many issues would be helped.
African Union has made some huge steps for a better future, the fastest growing economies in the world are mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa now. The middle class there is growing by a lot and even Russia is taking notice, they called Africa one of the last few hopes for the world's economy a few months ago. A lot of their long term goals definitely include more nationalization of their resources and less exploitation from wicked western govts. Only time will tell how serious Africa is in this though, and how much resistance comes from the ? and crooks in western nations. Some of my African friends have told me several times based on their travels if Nigeria and other nations get their act together, it may become a superpower in its own right some day. That's gonna take time though. -
actually, i thought this was common knowledge, but i never watch videos people post.kingblaze84 wrote: »Did you watch the video?
but this, however, is not really my point.kingblaze84 wrote: »I admit there is some corruption involved but let's not act like western nations haven't used force or crooked business deals to screw over the people in other nations who are digging the mines and extracting the resources needed to make some companies filthy rich, so rich that some companies are richer then whole nations. You're good at history so you should at least be fair and say MANY of the problems afflicting Africa and other poorer areas of the world come directly from the west ? people over.
let us agree that the Western nations in question did a bunch of nonsense in South America and ? things up. fair enough. but right now, we have some specific examples where you can point to the leadership of the nation (say, Venezuela), see clearly how that leadership is ? up and watch as their response is "but but but Yankees!"
obviously it works (or maybe "works") because the Yankees DID do ? back in the day. but we shouldn't immediately grant a guy like Maduro credit because of that. hell, Chavez and Maduro have essentially wasted a windfall of oil in the process, which you'd pretty much think would be THE thing to get a nation back on stable ground after whatever past events.
perhaps the way to look at it is this: if the leadership blames nonspecific, nebulous Western plots instead of being able to describe some specific ills, that might be the hint. -
actually, i thought this was common knowledge, but i never watch videos people post.kingblaze84 wrote: »Did you watch the video?
but this, however, is not really my point.kingblaze84 wrote: »I admit there is some corruption involved but let's not act like western nations haven't used force or crooked business deals to screw over the people in other nations who are digging the mines and extracting the resources needed to make some companies filthy rich, so rich that some companies are richer then whole nations. You're good at history so you should at least be fair and say MANY of the problems afflicting Africa and other poorer areas of the world come directly from the west ? people over.
let us agree that the Western nations in question did a bunch of nonsense in South America and ? things up. fair enough. but right now, we have some specific examples where you can point to the leadership of the nation (say, Venezuela), see clearly how that leadership is ? up and watch as their response is "but but but Yankees!"
obviously it works (or maybe "works") because the Yankees DID do ? back in the day. but we shouldn't immediately grant a guy like Maduro credit because of that. hell, Chavez and Maduro have essentially wasted a windfall of oil in the process, which you'd pretty much think would be THE thing to get a nation back on stable ground after whatever past events.
perhaps the way to look at it is this: if the leadership blames nonspecific, nebulous Western plots instead of being able to describe some specific ills, that might be the hint.
Well I don't know all the facts on Venezuela's poverty situation, I do know it's surprising a nation with oil like that would run out of basic supplies and goods. They almost ran out of paper or something like that a few months ago, not sure if they fixed that problem yet. I think even people there would admit they have a corruption problem or two but as long as some western nations with corporate help continue actions like the wars in Libya and others that have destabilized whole regions and created hundreds of thousands of refugees (millions if you include the war in Iraq), govts like Zimbabwe and Venezuela will say what they say. I think you can admit that. And I'm not even saying either nation has a good govt.... -
...or they just plain ? things up themselves. we HAVE already mentioned Venezuela in this thread.kingblaze84 wrote: »Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen.
it's kind of convenient when outright incompetent leadership can say "but but but THE WEST" and get an immediate pass.
the video shows how foreign corporations like Glencore exploit Zambia's extensive copper reserves through fraud and giving money to Zambia;s leaders so Western nations/corporations ? over the Third World isn't something that only exists in our imaginations -
...or they just plain ? things up themselves. we HAVE already mentioned Venezuela in this thread.kingblaze84 wrote: »Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen.
it's kind of convenient when outright incompetent leadership can say "but but but THE WEST" and get an immediate pass.
the video shows how foreign corporations like Glencore exploit Zambia's extensive copper reserves through fraud and giving money to Zambia;s leaders so Western nations/corporations ? over the Third World isn't something that only exists in our imaginations
Fact. There are wolves in the world. When a wolf takes a sheep, do you blame the wolf or the shepherd who fell asleep ( or took a bribe ) and let the wolf pass?
The responsibility of Govt is to protect it's people. If a govt. is not up to the task or is so corrupt it aids in the exploitation of it's resources and people, they should be held accountable.
A lot of people cite Africa's great wealth of natural resources. Almost without exception for many countries in the world, this is a curse and not a boon. Economists have studied this extensively and it has been dubbed 'The Curse of Plenty' and it applies to both oil and mineral wealth. In short, Govt become so complacent and reliant on the stuff, they ignore other aspects of the economy. Russia\Venezula are prime examples of this currently making the news. Everything was great until disruptive technology made drilling for oil in other parts of the world easier and then came the price war and now they are hurting. The Curse of Plenty also breeds corruption and the oil and mineral wealth are rarely seen by the ordinary citizen.
The paradox of plenty
http://www.economist.com/node/5323394
The Elusive Curse of Oil
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/rest.91.3.586?journalCode=rest#.VMJGAUfF-So
-
Darth Sidious wrote: »
...or they just plain ? things up themselves. we HAVE already mentioned Venezuela in this thread.kingblaze84 wrote: »Partial nationalization I think should be done but as many leaders worldwide have said, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein, when a nation tries to take paths away from western interests that often do more exploiting then being true partners, convenient assassinations, bombings, coups and ? knows what else starts to happen.
it's kind of convenient when outright incompetent leadership can say "but but but THE WEST" and get an immediate pass.
the video shows how foreign corporations like Glencore exploit Zambia's extensive copper reserves through fraud and giving money to Zambia;s leaders so Western nations/corporations ? over the Third World isn't something that only exists in our imaginations
Fact. There are wolves in the world. When a wolf takes a sheep, do you blame the wolf or the shepherd who fell asleep ( or took a bribe ) and let the wolf pass?
The responsibility of Govt is to protect it's people. If a govt. is not up to the task or is so corrupt it aids in the exploitation of it's resources and people, they should be held accountable.
A lot of people cite Africa's great wealth of natural resources. Almost without exception for many countries in the world, this is a curse and not a boon. Economists have studied this extensively and it has been dubbed 'The Curse of Plenty' and it applies to both oil and mineral wealth. In short, Govt become so complacent and reliant on the stuff, they ignore other aspects of the economy. Russia\Venezula are prime examples of this currently making the news. Everything was great until disruptive technology made drilling for oil in other parts of the world easier and then came the price war and now they are hurting. The Curse of Plenty also breeds corruption and the oil and mineral wealth are rarely seen by the ordinary citizen.
The paradox of plenty
http://www.economist.com/node/5323394
The Elusive Curse of Oil
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/rest.91.3.586?journalCode=rest#.VMJGAUfF-So
Very interesting, makes sense but as you said, there are wolves in the world who know how to take advantage of a people and a nation. Almost all groups have done this to an extent but western nations and corporations took it to whole other levels, it's not easy to reverse the consequences of all that. -
Weak Leadership
Weak Financial Structure
Poor and Undisciplined Military
Corporate Land Ownership
Disunity
War
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »
Very interesting, makes sense but as you said, there are wolves in the world who know how to take advantage of a people and a nation. Almost all groups have done this to an extent but western nations and corporations took it to whole other levels, it's not easy to reverse the consequences of all that.
The wolf analogy may be crude but it's hard to say it doesn't fit. We have to remember the idea of a business acting ethically and morally is a modern concept mostly done out of necessity to comply with laws meant to stop abuse and corruption and more recently prevent bad PR.
However there are still plenty of players out there who subscribe to the 'by any means necessary' to make a buck and maximize profit philosophy.
Even big smiley companies like Apple ? around and only tone down their shenanigans when raised to scrutiny, imagine what other less known companies will do when perceived to be out of sight in a land lacking laws and protection.
You can't just ? a wolf and expect the problem to go away because a new wolf will take his place. The only way you stop them is by building walls. Walls in the form of laws, regulations and oversight to prevent abuse.
For that you need strong govt as Focal Point mentioned and that is sorely lacking.
That's not easy because abuse goes on even in the most industrialized countries with great legal systems and watchdog groups. -
The president of South Africa said a few days ago his government will begin steps to take the fertile farmland German, British, and Dutch Whites stole from native Black Africans sometime this year by force.....this might help things if the Africans cultivate the land properly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R00bECzJXf4&x-yt-ts=1421914688&x-yt-cl=84503534&feature=player_detailpage -
Darth Sidious wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »
Very interesting, makes sense but as you said, there are wolves in the world who know how to take advantage of a people and a nation. Almost all groups have done this to an extent but western nations and corporations took it to whole other levels, it's not easy to reverse the consequences of all that.
The wolf analogy may be crude but it's hard to say it doesn't fit. We have to remember the idea of a business acting ethically and morally is a modern concept mostly done out of necessity to comply with laws meant to stop abuse and corruption and more recently prevent bad PR.
However there are still plenty of players out there who subscribe to the 'by any means necessary' to make a buck and maximize profit philosophy.
Even big smiley companies like Apple ? around and only tone down their shenanigans when raised to scrutiny, imagine what other less known companies will do when perceived to be out of sight in a land lacking laws and protection.
You can't just ? a wolf and expect the problem to go away because a new wolf will take his place. The only way you stop them is by building walls. Walls in the form of laws, regulations and oversight to prevent abuse.
For that you need strong govt as Focal Point mentioned and that is sorely lacking.
That's not easy because abuse goes on even in the most industrialized countries with great legal systems and watchdog groups.
The wolf analogy could work but these aren't wild wolves. These are dogs that have owners...their own respective governments. So if your dogs are attacking my sheep then yes the sleeping shepherd should be held accountable but the dog's owner should be held accountable as well if he continues to sit by idle and allow it to happen. The governments and people of these European nations benefit from the exploitative actions of these companies. -
there are protest against glencore and them in switzerland i guess
but what you gonna do, its the same thing as coca cola buying wells all over the world.
-
right, but here's the thing: if the West is ? around in Libya, that has NOTHING to do with good governance in Venezuela or Zimbabwe. it's not a legit argument for Maduro to say "things are ? here because the US is to blame, look at Libya!"kingblaze84 wrote: »Well I don't know all the facts on Venezuela's poverty situation, I do know it's surprising a nation with oil like that would run out of basic supplies and goods. They almost ran out of paper or something like that a few months ago, not sure if they fixed that problem yet. I think even people there would admit they have a corruption problem or two but as long as some western nations with corporate help continue actions like the wars in Libya and others that have destabilized whole regions and created hundreds of thousands of refugees (millions if you include the war in Iraq), govts like Zimbabwe and Venezuela will say what they say. I think you can admit that. And I'm not even saying either nation has a good govt.... -
was this the thread where i declared i don't watch internet videos?the video shows how foreign corporations like Glencore exploit Zambia's extensive copper reserves through fraud and giving money to Zambia;s leaders so Western nations/corporations ? over the Third World isn't something that only exists in our imaginations
but here's the thing: there's a difference between saying "here's legit issues with, let's say, Glencore/Zambia" and a blanket statement of "i'm not to blame because the West is shady." the former is something we can address; the latter should never be an excuse for bad governance, corruption, etc. -
so i bolded the part that never seems to happen when governments do thiskingblaze84 wrote: »The president of South Africa said a few days ago his government will begin steps to take the fertile farmland German, British, and Dutch Whites stole from native Black Africans sometime this year by force.....this might help things if the Africans cultivate the land properly
plus, let's be frank: this is not a wrong-righting action or one that will address societal ills, it's a "forget about the ? i do that makes people mad" move. please don't sell it as sincere. we saw where the land went in Zimbabwe when the concept was sold the same way.
-
so i bolded the part that never seems to happen when governments do thiskingblaze84 wrote: »The president of South Africa said a few days ago his government will begin steps to take the fertile farmland German, British, and Dutch Whites stole from native Black Africans sometime this year by force.....this might help things if the Africans cultivate the land properly
plus, let's be frank: this is not a wrong-righting action or one that will address societal ills, it's a "forget about the ? i do that makes people mad" move. please don't sell it as sincere. we saw where the land went in Zimbabwe when the concept was sold the same way.
Well time will tell, if the land is taken from the White farmers whose ancestors did take the land through blood and violence, and if the land is used properly, maybe wider justice can be served. It sucks for the little White kids who live on the farmland but the Blacks there went through worse. On that note, we really don't know if South Africa will end up like Zimbabwe if the SA president is serious, Zimbabwe went through very serious sanctions for a long time (and still is going through) so it's not just corruption that can be blamed for Zimbabwe's high poverty
