Nationalism in developing nations

3036

nationalism-in-developing-nations

Developing countries should not grow weary of the global economy. Globalization has been the force pulling developing countries upward for the past two decades, and eventually it will accomplish the feat in full as long as their governments leave well alone.

Jeffrey E. Garten published an essay in the Wall Street Journal this week called The Dangers of Turning Inward, in which he argues that although most countries claim that their current protectionist policies are temporary, many of these policies will be difficult to reverse after the recession.

It is not only the actual tariffs in India, Argentina, and Brazil that are hurting their development into economic powerhouses, but the illusionary mindset which can turn a temporary policy into a long-term failure to re-cooperate with the world market. “It is a frame of mind that casts doubt on the very assumption that we live in a single international market, and that relatively open borders are a virtue."

Millions of people in developing countries will be moving from the countryside to cities such as Sao Paulo, Johannesburg, and Shanghai in search of careers, housing, and education. Globalization was the major force behind this movement, and only through increased trade and cooperation can these people find their means to live. “It will be globalization that opens the world to them, allowing international agencies to pump in capital, multinational companies to help supply technology and management, and Western universities to transfer knowledge."

Hopefully governments will not lose faith in the world market economy, for every country’s cooperation will eventually save us from the current mess. From the EU to the US to Argentina, every country should value the free-market, and not expect to rely on nationalism for long term growth.

Blog Review 887

3033

blog-review-887

We all agree that monopolies are a bad thing which is why tax competition is such a good thing.

One part of Obama's proposals seems to be to entirely gut the American approach to charitable giving. And replace it with government money.

Yet another proposal that government should simply steal private property.

That's still better than this proposal to abolish the rule of law though.

Is the book industry about to go the way of the music industry?

"There is no threat of deflation in Europe". Netsmith thought that central bankers had actually learned something from the 1930s?

And finally, ever had a day like this?

Optimists and pessimists

3032

optimists-and-pessimists

I have long thought that mainstream environmentalism is essentially a belief system for pessimists. In their eyes, we are on a downward path from some idealised golden age, and things can only get worse. This seems to be an inbuilt human trait, as each generation seems to find reasons why things were better when they were young and why the next generation (perhaps with their own children as exceptions) are taking society to hell in a handbasket. The green movement gives a pseudo-scientific gloss to this.

Of course, it is arguable that the discontent we all feel at times is what drives the human race to innovate and change things. Nothing is ever perfect and, as we make an improvement in one area, we often create other problems or have the leisure to find something else which needs fixing. The fact that greater prosperity doesn't necessarily make us any happier is sometimes used as an argument against continued economic growth; putting environmental goals before economic ones.

Now the Social Issues Research Council has published a report which suggests that, as a nation, Brits are more optimistic than we might believe. But, being Brits, we are very self-effacing about this and don't really want to admit it. Nevertheless, in my (optimistic) view, this seems to confirm my feeling that the majority of people worry less about the big environmental issues than does a vocal and influential cadre of pessimists.

Guest author Martin Livermore is the Director of The Scientific Alliance

The first minister moan

3031

the-first-minister-moan

Last week Gordon Brown met with the first ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. According to the BBC: “Alex Salmond was accused of turning the meeting into a squabble", as he and the PM disagreed over a government efficiency drive, which is set to cut the Scottish Government’s budget by £500m.

Apparently Alex Salmond doesn’t believe that his government can achieve a measly 1.5 percent efficiency saving, despite the fact that the Scottish Government’s budget has more than doubled since devolution. If that were true, it would be a pretty shocking indictment of their competence. In reality of course, such a saving should be easy.

Actually, that’s the real problem: the government’s efficiency target just isn’t stretching enough. Bearing in mind that fact that public spending has sky-rocketed since 1997 (from £300bn to £600bn), I’d say they could cut 15-20 percent (around £100bn per year) of public spending without reducing capacity. After all, if private sector businesses (which are far more efficient in the first place) can achieve such savings, doing it in the bloated public sector should be child’s play.

When it comes to Scotland, there’s another issue: as long as the Scottish Government is not responsible for raising the money it spends itself, Alex Salmond (or whoever) is going to keep coming to Westminster and moaning that he should have a bigger slice of the pie. If you separate the responsibility for raising revenue from the responsibility for spending it, you encourage profligacy. End of story.

The obvious answer is fiscal autonomy for Scotland: have the Scottish Government set and collect their own taxes. People say it would weaken the Union, but I don’t buy it. On the contrary, fiscal autonomy would probably blunt the most powerful instrument Salmond has in his quest for independence – the financial resentment that’s bubbling up on both sides the border.*

* Not that I'd actually mourn the end of the Union...

Young writer on liberty 2009

3018

young-writer-on-liberty-2009

This year we're running a competition to find the best Young Writer on Liberty. It is open to all under 19 year olds and requires the submission of three short articles on the subject of: The Three Greatest Threats to Liberty in 21st Century Britain.

1st prize includes a £500 cash prize, so click here to find out more.

Blog Review 886

3026

blog-review-886

It may well not be socialism we're heading for but is corporatism any better?

One more reason why it's really not going to be like the Great Depression: we're all so far above the (real) poverty line.

Yes, it's true, Adolf Hitler really was a Keynesian.

Worth pondering: why has so much time been spent passing new laws when we already have such that address the very same problems?

Also worth pondering. Would the financial markets have been very different if the banks had only lived up to their legal responsibilities rather than their perceived moral ones?

On demonising the rich yet delighting in what they have offered us to generate such riches.

And finally, welcome to the future.

We’ve all been made criminals

3028

weve-all-been-made-criminals

Click here to read the ASI's Director, Dr Eamonn Butler, in the Sunday Times today, on how the long arm of the law stretches deep into all our lives.

Fake Charities

3027

fake-charities

I think we all know about one type of fake charity? The ones where almost every penny raised goes on either paying for those who run the charity or into more fundraising to, err, pay those who run the charity? Allow me to introduce you to a new form of fake charity, one that has risen rather large in our political discourse in recent years.

My own eye opener came when I was pointed to the accounts of Friends of the Earth Europe. Some 50% of their money comes from the European Union. That in itself isn't too appalling, but FoE Europe's work is to lobby the European Union.  You can imagine how this might go then...the taxpayer gets gouged so that a lobby group can be seen to be urging a course of action upon those who have gouged the taxpayer in order to be lobbied. Lobbied to do something that they already wanted to do but need some public lobbying to provide the fig leaf perhaps.

This is not though an isolated incident. Via the excellent and very new fakecharities.org we find that many of those "charities" which appear in our national media are in fact little better than such State funded lobbying organisations. Taxes are taken from us so that the government can pay for the government to be lobbied, providing that fig leaf of a vocal campaign telling them (and us, more importantly) that what they've already decided to do is obviously a jolly good idea indeed.

You can see how the whole idea works here (although those of nervous dispositions might want to install that special anti-swearing filtering software). Perhaps the most egregious example uncovered as yet is Alcohol Concern. Out of an income in one year of just shy of £1 million, 57% came from the Department of Health...and yes, Alcohol Concern has been and is quite vociferous in its lobbying of the Department of Health on how access to alcohol can and should be restricted. Private donations were a tad shy of £5,000 (yes, that's five thousand, not five hundred thousand nor even fifty thousand) so their income from real people actually supporting their efforts was less than 0.5% of their total income. It's extremely difficult to see that this is a charity and even more difficult to see why theiy should been given any credence whatsoever in the media.

Might I suggest that in the spirit of this new citizen journalism, this new idea that we ourselves can and should investigate those who rule us, you pop over to fakecharities.org and give them a helping hand? Crack open a set of charitable accounts and see who is the sockpuppet and who is genuinely working independently? I seem to recall that someone proved that the Work Foundation was eating its capital, a thought which would make an interesting addition, anyone got other interesting such tidbits to add to the database?

The liberal future

3021

the-liberal-future

A serious policy package from the Liberal Democrats has been announced that tries to counteract the erosion of our basic civil rights and freedoms. They have announced a proposal for a ‘Freedom Bill’, designed to reverse years of damage that New Labour has inflicted on our social freedoms.
 
Their draft plan contains around 20 measures with the aim to:

• Cut the maximum pre-charge detention period from 28 to 14 days.

• Abolish the veto in the Freedom of Information Act that allows ministers to keep information secret.

• Scrap the ID card scheme.

• Remove all innocent people from the DNA database, except for those tried for a violent or sexual offence.

• Stop councils and others snooping by restricting the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) to serious and terrorist offences.

• Regulate CCTV to protect privacy following a Royal Commission on the use of cameras.

There is a realistic possibility that the Liberal Democrats could gain power at the next election as part of a coalition government, or with Labour's declining fortunes, they might even fine themselves in true opposition. Perhaps then, this proposal is the first step in turning the tide of authoritarianism.

Politics and the Blog

3019

politics-and-the-blog

On the 1st April we will host our Annual Bloggers Bash. This has proven in the past to be a great occasion and is shaping up to be so once again. Three speakers will talk for ten minutes on specific subjects linked to the broad theme of: Politics and the Blog

Two of our speakers are already confirmed as the politician John Redwood MP and top blogger Guido Fawkes. In attendance will be other top bloggers from politics, the media and beyond. As usual, beer will be served.

If you are blogger or are interested in attending, click here to find out more.