The subtitle of Siddhartha Deb’s article, Feast and Famine, in the Boston Review reads, “India Is Growing, But Indians Are Still Starving.” The subtitle is too short. It should have added, “If India had not been growing, a couple of hundred million additional Indians would be starving.” I make this point because the article gives the impression that somehow India’s growth has something to do with the 800 million Indians who have to survive on less than Rs 20 a day.
The article is a reporter’s piece laying out some of the facts; it is not an analytical piece attempting to make sense of the situation as it exists. While it is mildly informative and makes for strongly depressing reading, it does not help us understand the big picture. Take for instance, ” . . . part of the growing national trend of farmer suicides, with nearly 200,000 farmers killing themselves from 1997 to 2008, in the very years that the Indian economy was expanding.”
Did you catch that implied hint of causation in the reported correlation? Anyway, just how high is that raw 200,000 number? We just don’t know because the context is missing. India’s raw suicide rate in 1998 was 12.2 for males and 9.1 for females per 100,000 population, or approximately 10.6 people 100,000, per year. With a population of 1 billion, India can expect 106,000 suicides per year. Now we have to ask, “Is the number 18,000 farmer suicides a year unnaturally high if the total number of suicides a year is 106,000?”
The answer to that question depends on what the population of farmers in the Indian population is. If the population of farmers in the population is, say, 25 percent, then the number of suicides among farmers is actually below the population average.
The point is that for us to make sense of the suicide numbers, we need to know not the raw numbers but normalized numbers — “farmer suicide rate is 15 per 100,000, as compared to overall rate of 12.2 per 100,000,” for example. Not just that, we need to know the trend. “Farmer suicide has gone up to 15 per 100,000 in 2008, from 12 in 1997.” (These figures are made up and not to be taken literally.)
The piece by Deb is unfortunately typical of such reporting. Perhaps word limits don’t permit a fuller treatment of the subject by the reporter. But even then, surely one can glean from just looking around that India’s starving hundreds of millions is a symptom of a deeper malaise, and mention that however briefly in the article. Instead the overall impression one gets from the article is that somehow evil multinational corporations are behind all the unimaginable misery and it is a compassionate government which is trying its best to fix the problem.
It is not my case that MNCs are really benevolent charitable organizations. They are in the business for profit, and can be as ruthless as they are often reported to be. You cannot wish them away, although you could legislatively force them to keep off your property. But that comes at a cost — there are benefits to having MNCs around. The challenge is to control them such that the benefits exceed the costs. Which brings us to the one agency which lies at the crux of the matter — the government.
We all know those numbers: nearly half of India’s children below five are malnourished; x thousand farmer suicides; 40 percent illiteracy; lack of drinking water; lack of power; overcrowding and slums in cities; . . . the list is long and distressing. India is desperately poor — even compared to many sub-Saharan African states.
They have a saying in Texas which goes, “if you see a tortoise on top of a 10-foot pole, you sure as heck know that it did not get there by itself.” India’s poverty could not have happened without the active participation of some agency in engineering it. We have to understand that basic fact and internalize it before we can have a hope of fixing it.
India’s poverty did not happen overnight. It took decades to engineer. When the British left in 1947, India had around 200 million desperately poor people. Six decades later, that number is now 800 million. It could not be because of multinational corporations simply because MNCs and modern globalization are recent phenomena. No, India’s problems have a local genesis — and how can it not be local when India has been pretty much shut off from the rest of the world by its wonderful socialistic autarkic regime thanks to Mr Jawaharlal Nehru and his spawn.
The unarguable fact is that India cannot afford to have such a large population dependent on agriculture as their primary source of income. Just do the numbers. Basic arithmetic, really. We must do arithmetic. John McCarthy, the Stanford computer scientist guru says, “Those who refuse to do arithmetic are doomed to speak nonsense.” Let’s avoid nonsense.
India occupies two percent of the world’s land area and has 17 percent of the world’s population. Agriculture requires land. And huge amounts of water. India’s fresh water reserves are pitifully little. Water tables are dropping. India — and Indians — cannot afford to earn a living growing food. Indians have to bring something else to the global table. It cannot be food. It has to be manufactures or even services, but not food.
Sure India needs food, and food that is produced in India. But there is a limit to food productivity and food production. New Zealand with it single-digit million population can be single-crop economy and prosper. India cannot because India is no New Zealand. India has a population of 1,200 million people.
India’s agricultural productivity has to increase so that its production goes up and fewer people are in agriculture. Arithmetic again. If 100 percent of the population is engaged in producing food, surely no one can be “rich” because to be rich one has to have something other than food. Who is going to produce that something other if everyone is engaged in producing food? Answer me that!
The simple fact is that India is poor because too many people are in agriculture. What India has to do is to move out of agriculture and go into manufacturing and services. But then, you have to be educated to be in manufacturing and services. With absolutely low percentages of the population even literate, there is scant chance of being educated.
Why aren’t Indians educated — even literate? Because the government does not allow education and literacy. Really? Yes, really.
India has to move to manufacturing and into services. It can be done, and in a short time. it is a matter of policies. But it cannot happen under the current set of rules, which are such that it forces more and more people into desperate poverty. Why do they do that? Because it helps the policymakers — more specifically the Nehruvian socialist types. The policies they make help them personally and impoverish the nation. That’s what needs to change, not the MNCs.
Atanu Dey : Life is a Random Draw 
Not Nehruvian Socialist — Nehruvian Stalinist. In addition to being a socialist, he was also a totalitarian who did not tolerate dissent or listen to reason.
LikeLike
Right, we can debate ad f-ing nauseum about socialist vs. capitalist, left vs. right, internal or external imposition of poverty etc. etc., but curbing procreation will never be deemed worth discussing. Anyway, no sweat, nature will take care of all this in a couple decades.
LikeLike
Might be many of us want poor people around us so that we can get cheap maid, driver, gardener, dhobi, riksa, and sabji waala … Also it gives us a “feel good” factor (however sic it is).When we see people fighting for the thrown away food , we feel we are in a very good condition.
Nothing else explains the support of Congress(I) in educated and so called well informed ppl.
LikeLike
TiredProf,
Even the last census shows that the fertility rate in India is reducing. It is directly proportional to per capita GDP. As per capita GDP increases, people become richer, they have less kids. This has been established via data from many parts of the world. So population is not where most of the effort of the state should go.
LikeLike
I read this Boston Review piece. It read like a TYPICAL socialist/communist commentary. The guy even praised the NREGA, that was the cherry on this stink cake.
On the point of moving people out of agriculture, it is essential to do so if a nation wants to become prosperous. But this only works if the productivity of the farm sector goes up in proportion. Now, by using high yielding seeds, and scientific agri practices with irrigation, yields can be increased and productivity improved.
So this opposition to high yielding seeds boggles the mind. Who in their right mind would be opposed to farmers making more money and Indians having cheaper food? Only ideological fools !!!
The MNCs relationship with a country like India is a business relationship. Both parties must benefit in a good commercial relation that is sustainable. Since both parties are free (big assumption for India) this relationship can only work if it is mutually beneficial. Why such a simple thing is so hard for communists to understand?
LikeLike
Atanu,
Your take on Baba Ramdev’s movement please…
Regards,
Sandy
LikeLike
RC: Do you proofread what you write? Are you what Atanu calls “innumerate”?
LikeLike
TiredProf,
Please do point to which part/parts of my comment needed proofreading. Being snarky and throwing insults at others is not a sign of intelligence rather a sign of lack of maturity.
LikeLike
Atanu,
Have you read Deb’s article (an excerpt from his soon to be released book) in a magazine called Caravan ? He went on and on about hindu fundamentalism of Indian middle class and how this blinds them to the poverty of the poor and lower castes. Basically he equated hindutwa with casteism and Indian capitalism with hindutwa.
LikeLike
He also interpreted the Bhagwath Gita as a book that demonises the poor, weak and minorities- and both hinduism and the Gita as being inherently evil.
LikeLike
Ok RC, since you want to be babied like the typical IIX student:
“census shows that the fertility rate in India is reducing. It is directly proportional to per capita GDP.” The anaphora in it does not refer to the reduction, but to fertility itself, so that is absurd. Of course you will now blather on about how obvious the meaning is and how anal I am in pulling you up. But Indians really need to clean up the shit in everything they do. Throwing insults is actually a fine way to get this done.
Coming back to the topic, no one disagrees about the polarity of the influence of GDP per capita on fertility. That was not being debated and it does not matter. The crisis is that fertility in India did not come down fast enough between 1950 and 2010 to avoid a lot of misery already and going forward, as well as a lot of uneducated—hence, very dangerous—people.
High fertility has many unsavory effects, most of which have come to pass in India. As just one example, high fertility has outpaced the rate at which quality education can be given to school children. Poor quality of school education is a crisis not only in villages, but even for urbanites. Imagine, none of Koda, Modi, Raja, Kanimozi, Kalmadi, etc. got a school education decent enough to keep their grubby fingers off the loot. Even middle class urban children have lost their moral compass, and future Kodas, Modis, and Rajas will arise from their ranks.
I left out Atanu’s favorite characters Chacha, Shrew, Pilot, Tube Snipper, Eunuch and Puppet Mistress out of the above list.
LikeLike
Tired,
What a spectacularly stupid way of missing the point. You appear really “Thaka hua insaan” as your screen name suggests.
Japan’s population is higher per sq.mile than India, but Japan has one of highest per capita GDP in the world. Only looking at the aggregate number and completely missing the point is the hallmark of idiots.
You are conflating morality, education, corruption and population in one stinking pile of incoherent gibberish.
LikeLike
RC — keep going, the more you speak, the more you explain what’s wrong with India (and my screen name). And it is entertaining to boot! Morality, education, corruption and population are inextricably mixed up in, you got it, the stinking pile that is India.
And where from did population density per square mile come in here? What are you smoking?
LikeLike
>>> ” MNCs and modern globalization are recent phenomena”.
As recent as the time of Jahangir who traded with the MNC East India Co. and Hudson Bay Co started their loot of North Americas destroying native populace.
very recent phenomena.
>>> “India has been pretty much shut off from the rest of the world by its wonderful socialistic autarkic regime thanks to Mr Jawaharlal Nehru and his spawn”
Yup, all that trade with East India Co had enriched india for so many centuries before nehru shut them out. Of course there were other world players in india at that time, the French, Portugese and Dutch East India Cos who likewise enriched india and yet were shut out.
Opening up of the country to those MNC people would have done a whale of good to India. There wouldn’t have been the Singur and Nandigram incidents, for instance, ‘cos those areas would have already been industrial wasteland and not prime farm land as they are now. There wouldn’t have been farmers agitation in UP, all that area would have been made unfarmable long back through dumping industrial waste. Instead of one Bhopal, india would have had a hundred Bhopals as western MNCs would have set up all their noxious spewing industries in this land.
The entire agri sector would have been with Monsanto.
Not that Nehru’s policies were good. only that looking west is not the solution. Even Nehru was guilty of that same error. He looked west for inspiration. He was inspired by the western ideas of socialism and communism. Much like some indians are today enamured of western system of capitalism. Both these types of people are ignorant of or are too lazy to look up indigenous systems that made India the richest land in the world, rich enough to attract the greedy from as far back as Alexander the great robber.
>>> “The unarguable fact is that India cannot afford to have such a large population dependent on agriculture as their primary source of income”
Alexander or the Khiljis and Ghaznis or the East India Co did not come to loot watermelons produced by indian farmers. Indians were producing everything from textiles to steel to gunpowder to ships. Testimony of indian metallurgy is the iron stupa at Mehrauli, Delhi, unmatched by even the modern technology.
Don’t try to paint indians are nincompoops like some western mleccha with superiority complex may do.
>>> “McCarthy, the Stanford computer scientist guru says, “Those who refuse to do arithmetic are doomed to speak nonsense.” ”
And it was Indians that invented arithmetic and calculated the circumference of earth while Mcarty’s ancestors were swinging from trees.
>>> “India’s fresh water reserves are pitifully little. Water tables are dropping.”
Yet every year people die in floods. does that ring a bell somewhere ?
There are thousands of indigenous techniques for water harvesting and conservation. People schooled in western ways of exploitation never learn those.
It is the unmindful rampant exploitation instituted by western systems which have been ruling india for past few centuries that are causing fresh water depletion and dropping of water tables.
Just as slums are not characteristic of india, depletion of water and other resources are not characteristic of india. They are brought about by the western systems that are imposed on india.
>>> “and Indians — cannot afford to earn a living growing food.”
sure. let’s turn over this arable fertile land to industries and eat imported food. There are more fertile lands like persian gulf and china and siberia that can be used to produce food for the world while we produce LCD monitors and diapers and make a wasteland of this bharat.
Do you even care to consider what you are proposing or do you merely vomit what westerners fed you ?
You don’t have to look at New Zealand to chart out your course. India has an agricultural history of 10,000 years at least, going back to Mehrgarh. And it was multi crop farming even back then.
>>> “If 100 percent of the population is engaged in producing food, surely no one can be “rich””
yeah, you want to be richer than your neighbour. self-aggrandize. so go ahead, loot your neighbour, enslave him, and you are ‘rich’. That is how western countries became ‘rich’. And those schooled by westerners imbibe that same attitude.
‘rich’.
At what cost is this riches of yours ? polluting detsroying the Nature for short term luxury of yours.
FYI, there is more to life than becoming ‘rich’.
Preserving the balance of Nature is more important from bharatiya perspective.
That is never possible when unbridled aggrandizing instinct is allowed free rein. The drive to riches is always at the cost of someone else, someone else who is impoverished, enslaved, exploited and disregarded in the quest for riches of some others.
>>> “But then, you have to be educated to be in manufacturing and services”
Centuries before western education came to india, india was very well known for its manufacturing industries all over the world.
Western education has only managed to produce sepoys of empire out of indians, who always look upto their western tutors for everything, including the way to live life.
>>> “Because the government does not allow education and literacy. ”
On the contrary the govt is making western education compulsory, sort of, through RTE so that there will be more slaves available to do the bidding of the western lords on whose pay these sepoys in govt work.
>>> “India has to move to manufacturing and into services. It can be done, and in a short time. it is a matter of policies. But it cannot happen under the current set of rules, which are such that it forces more and more people into desperate poverty. Why do they do that? Because it helps the policymakers — more specifically the Nehruvian socialist types. The policies they make help them personally and impoverish the nation. That’s what needs to change, not the MNCs.”
Yeah, listen to my sermon from pulpit, Kingdom of God is just round the corner. All you have to do is go by the bible. Thee will be saved. The Nehruvian heathens will be slayed. Our congregation is doing good. nothing wrong with our missionaries(MNCs). they are doing God’s work. So what if some of the heathen culture is villified or if a few padre do some things to native boys, its all for the good. Listen to Farter. Thigh kingdom come. Amen.
who are we fooling, heh ?
One thousand years of foreign domination not enough ?
Did even one western economy make its riches through honest means ? without slave trade, piracy, colonial loot and usurping the Native’s land or collaborating with those who did these ? And these lootere are our teachers ?
Is there one ‘industry’ of these western horribles that does not pollute the world, literally and figuratively ?
So long as sepoys work for the empire, empire of lootere will flourish. but only so long.
LikeLike
I dont think you will get it, so I urge you to not try. Why dont you find another grammar error in my comment 🙂
LikeLike
The sepoys took Baba
LikeLike
Atanu easy to blame the government for the ills,but we indians are stupid per se we produced more people than what was absolutely necessary ,each person having more children that what could be afforded is certainly a recipe for disaster(india).did the govt tell the people to have children when it was beyond their means to support them, btw in the coming decades no country can afford to export food as their own populations are increasing(usa,australia,canada etc).
LikeLike
pankaj, fear not, our population density is still much less than that of Japan. Unfortunately, the density of our minds is much higher.
LikeLike
Your point about normalized data is well taken – liberals do this all the time because then they can word play. If you point out that discrepancy, they fall back on it’s-the-thought-that-counts backup to beat you up.
But the larger point that you make is flawed – that somehow education will solve the problem of too many folks in argi-business. It is the govt policies, especially labour and industrial policies, that are problem. Yes, literacy is helpful, which is in the 70-80% range, but non-farm jobs, unskilled and semi-skilled, are the basis for getting folks from fields into factories. Most policies involving labour intensive industry are meant to keep businesses small, meaning they hire lot fewer literate and non-literate people than they could otherwise. MNCs and local Indian businesses, including “Hindu” businesses, are the solution, not the problem as liberals, meaning quasi-socialists, shout from their roof tops.
And, of course, govt intervention in the argi-market place distorts when it tries to set price controls – but it really only impacts 1 or 2 crops, paddy for example. But there are so many incentives that govt provides to farmers, with ensuing corruption of course, that govt involvement in agri-field is not the problem. Govt involvement in non-farm industry is. It’s the demand-side, not the supply-side, that’s the issue.
LikeLike
Mr Jawaharlal’s policies were a distinct improvement over the proposed policies of a certain Mr Mohandas Gandhi;we can thank Providence that those did not see ruthless implementation in independant India.
Better miscegnation and heavy industries than self sufficient villages ,khadi ,celibacy and other fetishes.
Time now to jettison all of that and see what rapid industrialisation can do for us ;all power to your ideas , Atanu !!
LikeLike
eek !! miscegnation as in mixed economy !!
LikeLike
Better mixed economy and licence permit raj than self sufficient villages . khadi and all that .
Now we need what you are advocating.
Hope we can see those changes implemented
LikeLike
Congress won’t do it.They are too busy giving free TVs, d2h and homes.
Jai Ho – British Raj 2.0 ki jai ho ..
LikeLike
Atanu,
Did you see this McKinsey report on Indian urbanization? I think it might be interesting to review the report’s findings against your own thesis for India’s development. I’d love to hear what you have to say regarding how meaningful this report is…
Click to access MGI_india_urbanization_fullreport.pdf
LikeLike
Mr Dey,
I am reading this article 2 years after you posted it. But i hope you you can answer some of my questions?
“”If India had not been growing, another 200 million would be starving””. So, you say you have arithmetic to back this up? Lets see it. Also explain how socialist India managed to provide 510 grams of food grains per capita by 1991, which has dropped to 445 grams today.
I would also like to know, just how much do you know about the farmers in India. Do you even live in India?
You also say, India has to bring something other than food to the global table. But you forgot to mention what that something is. Or maybe, you don’t know yourself. You just believe some invisible hand will magically provide all the energy, mineral, water and electric resources necessary to run a western style service economy here in India. Let’s see the arithmetic that shows that such a goldilocks economy is possible in India, as you claim it is.
One last suggession. If you don’t have any solutions, please don’t create misinformation about the problems in India. People here are fighting hard for their basic entitlements. You enjoy your stay in america.
LikeLike
In 1990, food grains per capita was 435 gm and in 2000; 445 gm per capita. It is almost stagnant (reference Indian economy after 1991: Economic reforms and performance published by Alvin). I am not sure about where you got a number of 510 gm/capita. Also there are other food items like meat, dairy etc consumption of which have gone up e.g. chicken industry is growing up by 20% annually. There is no valid evidence to support that the food situation is worsen. The same book which I said about earlier have a detailed study of the food patterns with above conclusion. Major question is if pre 1991 things were okay, then why India broke financially. There was surely something wrong otherwise liberalization wouldn’t have taken place. The other things on table is manufacturing and services and he clearly mentioned it. It is not some invisible hand, it is the right policy which will bring all that energy, water, resources etc. Economic policy in Nehru’s time was the worst one which was reason of rampant poverty and it will take time to get rid of scars from Nehruvian socialism which still people believe will work. Historically socialism have failed almost everywhere.
LikeLike
Thank you for the reply. Thank you for teaching me the failures of socialism and the great achievements of capitalism. I sorely needed that education.
1) “I am not sure about where you got a number of 510 gm/capita. ”
Click to access estat1.pdf
Take a look at table A22- NET AVAILABILITY OF CEREALS AND PULSES
2) “Also there are other food items like meat, dairy etc consumption of which have gone up e.g”
Wow. Great news for the 800 million Indians who are living on less than 20 rupees a day, for they can easily afford meet and diary. By the way, I am sure than non of the cereals that used to be available for human consumption is being diverted for meat production.
3) “Major question is if pre 1991 things were okay, then why India broke financially. There was surely something wrong otherwise liberalization wouldn’t have taken place.”
Personally, I think liberalization was enforced by our benevolent humanitarians at World Bank and IMF and It was carried out by their faithful fans here in the Indian government, like Dr Manmohan Singh and Montek Ahluwahlia(both former World Bank employees). As far as India being broke is concerned, lets take a look at the our favourite capitalist champion USA. Total public debt- $17,548,000,000,000 and rising. I am sure this is what solvency looks like.
4) “The other things on table is manufacturing and services and he clearly mentioned it. It is not some invisible hand, it is the right policy which will bring all that energy, water, resources etc.”
Hmmm..When you wish upon a star….. When you want something dearly, the entire universe conspires to ensure that you get it. Right.
5) “Economic policy in Nehru’s time was the worst one which was reason of rampant poverty and it will take time to get rid of scars from Nehruvian socialism which still people believe will work. Historically socialism have failed almost everywhere.” Can you give me a date by when you will get rid of the scars? How many of these Nehruvian socialists are in the cabinet of ministers? Can you name 3 financially solvent capitalist countries?
LikeLike
1. Difference resources have different data so I don’t know which one to take. I just google it and found in a book. I was surprised so tried to google it. Thanks for right source of information.
2. I agree your point that people cannot afford, but why?, did socialism had any solutions to that?. The answer was about why grains per capita have reduced overall because of difference in food patterns and eating habits and that is legitimate answer to it. Also you have to take account for increase in population.
3. You have not answered why we were broke if policies were correct. They were not, IMF, world bank etc lets say forced India to adopt that. How could they force Russia, China, Chile, Brazil and many more countries who adopted market driven economies?. Are you suggesting everybody was forced to do that? USA is living beyond its means and that is true. In any system there are issues and debt is part of present democracies. There are many capitalist countries with lower ratio. Also debt is one part of equation, you have to also count how many asset generating investments are there.
4. You expect all details from writer, the question you posted was what and that can go from 2 words to 200 words. Only agriculture is not sufficient, that was the point. You were saying he didn’t say anything about the other.
5. It will take longer time, to get our country broke from 1947 to 1991 was 44 yrs. Economic policies results takes as far as 50 yrs to show results. So India establish more free market, the high growth will take its course with removal of poverty and increasing income levels. Statistician Hans Rosling suggested it will be 2048 to reach at level of per capita GDP like US/UK if liberalization is continued without any war. UPA have tried to have more welfare programs which caused more corruption and moving money from honest rich to dishonest rich instead of poor. To answer in one line 80% of poor in USA lives with Air conditioning. Poverty in USA is far better than poverty in India. There are many financially stable countries with AAA rating Canada, Singapore, Nordic European countries like Finland, Denmark, Sweden etc.
LikeLike
2. Difference in food patterns and eating habits are great for people like you and me. The markets have nothing to offer to the poor. Poor require more subsidies and welfare, which they had access to before 1991. I know you are going to show me some statistics that show that will show that agricultural and fertilizer subsidies are rising. Before you do that, spend some time doing research and find out how much of those subsidies are going to industrialists.
3. India was not broke. We just had to devalue our currency. Just like USA did during world war 2, and again in 1971 by abolishing gold standard when they couldn’t pay their bills. It’s OK when USA does it, but India has to mortgage their gold and liberalize it’s economy. Imperialism is alive and well. The big boys at IMF and world bank tried to force it in every single second and third world country. They succeeded to varying degrees. In India their victory was complete. By the way, no amount of asset generating investments can repay that debt of USA. First because they are not enough. Second, most people who own those investments don’t wanna pay any taxes, and often pay 0.
4. I was merely pointing out that the authors statistics and arguments were flawed and misinformed.
5. The air conditioning poor you are talking about were the beneficiaries of a one time fossil fuel lottery ticket. Not to mention slavery (Yes, they are still enjoying the benefits today). What’s the trend these days? Ask them whether they are getting richer or poorer. Lehman Brothers was AAA. Canada and Nordic countries are more socialist than Karl Marks.
LikeLike
Poor require money for sure, but are these welfare programs are correct way to do it is the question. only 27 rs out of 100 are reaching the poor. Putting money in these programs are not really reducing poverty. If poverty removal programs were working why poors (800 mils w/ less than 20 rs a day like you said) are still in higher % since 1970?. There are other ways to reduce poverty if not removal. It is being tried after 1991 and we are seeing the results now with reduction. Again, it is a process, results cannot be shown even in 2 decades. If subsidies are going to industrialist, government is to be blamed because government officials give that to industrialist, Industrialist don’t steal it. The system we have, dishonest rich will always find their way. Law and order system needs to be improved and you will see the results.
India devalued currency after getting broke not because of devaluing today and you get broke the next day, it was a long process. They had balance of payment problems in 1990, If you still want to believe that we did not broke. I cannot do anything as it is a historical fact otherwise why 1991 is called year of economic reforms. 2nd and 3rd world failed in their economic policies otherwise there was no external agency needed if they were doing good. First world did bad to us and I am of the opinion that they should be paying back for it, for slavery or whatever. But question is how that will be done?. Intentions are not solutions to problems. One thing we can do is rise economically first. Nordics are mostly capitalist. 90%+ of industries are privately owned. It is a illusion as they have free health and free education. They are social democracies but not control the economy, rest of the things are privately owned and they have money to do that with very high taxes, so eventually somebody pay for it. You first see definition of marxism, it is not reflected in Nordic nations. They mostly are free market economics with highest level of economic freedom index.
LikeLike