We know this is picky but could George Monbiot try reading his own sources?

Apparently the rich world should simply abolish all poor country debt to make up for the climate costs imposed by the rich world on the poor countries. That’s the latest Monbiot suggestion. Quite why someone who has lent to a successful and profitable business - for yes, of course, this is intended to cover all commercial debt as well - should have to give up getting it back is left unsaid.

However, the demand depends upon two different papers. Firstly, an evaluation of previous debt relief and how that might be extended. This insists that such debt relief only works when subsequent policy is sensible. Economic policy in the relieved country is sensible that is. Limit future debt to some reasonable multiple of export earnings for example. In fact, the outcome is pretty much that those who follow the precepts of the Washington Consensus - that list of stupid things not to do to an economy - do well, those that don’t, don’t.

The second underlying insistence seems to be that trade is bad. Poor people selling things to richer is exploitation. We can see this just because the wages poor people earn are lower than those richer do. QED.

Threading a policy between these two positions doesn’t seem possible. Which is why we’d rather urge Monbiot to check his sources rather more carefully. Because without understanding proposals it’s not really possible to start recommending them, is it? Or at least, not sensible to do so.

Previous
Previous

Advice for the Observer: don't believe your own casuistry

Next
Next

Food goes into people, not cars