First time I’m reading comments on Mr T’s Substack and I’m shocked by the disrespectful and ignorant tone of so many of them considering the author’s academic, ambitious and serious attempt to tackle big and complex issues facing humanity right now. Guys - if you’ve got nothing constructive to say, say nothing!!
The structural problems of Central and Latin America are created or kept in place by the US. The siege socialism of Cuba or the comprador capitalism propped by the US everywhere else.
So, it seems somewhat clear you support Kamala, Adam. Why? You are aware she supports the genocide in Gaza, right? And her administration spearheaded the current conflict in Ukraine...the one that could go nuclear WW3...the one they are committed to for "as long as it takes".
The Marshall Plan. More recently, the eradication of the Guinea worm and river blindness, accomplished through foreign aid. But I don't have exact figures for how saving millions from blindness increases the GDP, so you may decide not to count that example.
Most foreign aid comes in response to emergencies. Foreign aid going to the horn of Africa today is meant to keep large numbers of people from starving to death in the middle of a massive drought. I suppose that will have some positive effect on the GDP down the road, as not-dead people tend to contribute more to the GDP than dead people, but that's not really the main object, is it?
Approved US foreign aid this year (2024): To Israel 18 billion $; to Latin America 3 billion $ (c. 670 million people, many living in dire poverty). Could this be a hint at what foreign aid is really for? Is it the result of hard thinking about how and where you can do the most good in this world? Is it really in that sense ‹uplifting› that we aspire to …
[Foreign aid to Israel (a first world country) was for decades «only» about 4 billion $ each year. The current major and crucial supplier of weapon/munition to Israel is the US. Don't we make sure our weapon producer get paid well and in time ...]
As long as the polycrisis does not start to directly and personally affect the lives of the connected and powerful, the status quo suits them just fine.
Therefore, both Team R and Team D will posture and try to score points at the other's expense, and nothing will be done.
No, I am simply being a realist who recognizes that we are ruled by sociopaths.
And you are wrong about my voting. Although I admit that voting is largely futile, my vote still counts the same as a Kool Aid chugging true believer's.
When you turn on the light switch, do the lights come on? When you go to the grocery store, is there food, and is it generally safe to eat? When you are sick, can you get to see a doctor, and do they have available a wide assortment of medical treatments, some of which would have seemed miraculous to previous generations?
I wonder how all these things happened in a world ruled by sociopaths.
To the extent that it benefits them. They don't actively wish us harm, any more than the farmer wants to hurt his cattle, at least until it is in his interest to do so.
Power (in and out of government) is to sociopaths what catnip is to cats. Power inevitably ends up in the hands of sociopaths, because they are precisely the people who will do whatever it takes to gain power. Learn well The Iron Law Of Oligarchy.
At the same time, oligarch-led systems have an instability problem, because, whatever sociopaths may be good at, building lasting coalitions is not one of them.
I’m still astounded that immigration system reform is such a dead topic in US politics. As long as the US labor market is so strong, immigrants are going to keep coming. The only way to meaningfully reduce illegal immigration is legalization. Even if there’s a waiting list or a price tag, feasible legal entry for Central Americans would make a massive impact. But all of the debate is border security versus protections for those already in the country.
Not even cute. US “NIMBYism would be using for or the threat of force to prevent “Latin America” from building wealth-generating economies.
Sure we could do positive things: unilateral free trade would be a good start (allowing Medicare/Medicaid/ACA to be used for medical services abroad ought to be part of this). Fiscal reform that turns the US from as capital-importing country to into a capital-exporting country would help.
I don't have any problem with this analysis as far as it goes, but Tooze is pulling punches here, presumably knowingly. The US has been destabilizing South and Central American governments for DECADES, and often in league with extractive US corporations active in the region (I'm looking at you Chiquita-Fyffes, aka United Fruit). What don't they understand about the connection between this serial diplomatic malpractice and the migrant pressure on their own borders? It's of a piece with apparent European studied "bewilderment" that wrecking Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria has led to wave upon wave of migrants across and around the Mediterranean. Well, duh.
Can they really be this stupid, or are they lying to themselves and the electorate?
I assume you must know this, but as an economist your actual job is to create overwrought and intellectual-sounding arguments for why we shouldn't behead the rich right this moment. And these "think pieces" seem to be losing the plot. So as a friendly reminder, everyone who is not a member of the state like you wants to kill every single rich person, for ruining the world, as in firing squads and mass graves right now. And as a lapdog of the billionaires, you should be writing slackjawed bitch articles about why we need casino mogles and arms dealers. Dumbass.
First time I’m reading comments on Mr T’s Substack and I’m shocked by the disrespectful and ignorant tone of so many of them considering the author’s academic, ambitious and serious attempt to tackle big and complex issues facing humanity right now. Guys - if you’ve got nothing constructive to say, say nothing!!
The structural problems of Central and Latin America are created or kept in place by the US. The siege socialism of Cuba or the comprador capitalism propped by the US everywhere else.
So, it seems somewhat clear you support Kamala, Adam. Why? You are aware she supports the genocide in Gaza, right? And her administration spearheaded the current conflict in Ukraine...the one that could go nuclear WW3...the one they are committed to for "as long as it takes".
Do you ever rely on actual facts?
How can you forget when Kamala led that column of Russian tanks in their attack on Kiev?
Unfortunately, foreign aid has a very poor record of triggering economic growth:
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/why-foreign-aid-does-not-lead-to
The Marshall Plan. More recently, the eradication of the Guinea worm and river blindness, accomplished through foreign aid. But I don't have exact figures for how saving millions from blindness increases the GDP, so you may decide not to count that example.
Most foreign aid comes in response to emergencies. Foreign aid going to the horn of Africa today is meant to keep large numbers of people from starving to death in the middle of a massive drought. I suppose that will have some positive effect on the GDP down the road, as not-dead people tend to contribute more to the GDP than dead people, but that's not really the main object, is it?
Approved US foreign aid this year (2024): To Israel 18 billion $; to Latin America 3 billion $ (c. 670 million people, many living in dire poverty). Could this be a hint at what foreign aid is really for? Is it the result of hard thinking about how and where you can do the most good in this world? Is it really in that sense ‹uplifting› that we aspire to …
[Foreign aid to Israel (a first world country) was for decades «only» about 4 billion $ each year. The current major and crucial supplier of weapon/munition to Israel is the US. Don't we make sure our weapon producer get paid well and in time ...]
As long as the polycrisis does not start to directly and personally affect the lives of the connected and powerful, the status quo suits them just fine.
Therefore, both Team R and Team D will posture and try to score points at the other's expense, and nothing will be done.
So above-it-all you are, I suppose you're even too cool to vote.
No, I am simply being a realist who recognizes that we are ruled by sociopaths.
And you are wrong about my voting. Although I admit that voting is largely futile, my vote still counts the same as a Kool Aid chugging true believer's.
When you turn on the light switch, do the lights come on? When you go to the grocery store, is there food, and is it generally safe to eat? When you are sick, can you get to see a doctor, and do they have available a wide assortment of medical treatments, some of which would have seemed miraculous to previous generations?
I wonder how all these things happened in a world ruled by sociopaths.
To the extent that it benefits them. They don't actively wish us harm, any more than the farmer wants to hurt his cattle, at least until it is in his interest to do so.
Nobody goes into government with the idea of helping to make peoples lives better?
Power (in and out of government) is to sociopaths what catnip is to cats. Power inevitably ends up in the hands of sociopaths, because they are precisely the people who will do whatever it takes to gain power. Learn well The Iron Law Of Oligarchy.
At the same time, oligarch-led systems have an instability problem, because, whatever sociopaths may be good at, building lasting coalitions is not one of them.
Well, thanks for voting, anyway.
I’m still astounded that immigration system reform is such a dead topic in US politics. As long as the US labor market is so strong, immigrants are going to keep coming. The only way to meaningfully reduce illegal immigration is legalization. Even if there’s a waiting list or a price tag, feasible legal entry for Central Americans would make a massive impact. But all of the debate is border security versus protections for those already in the country.
Not even cute. US “NIMBYism would be using for or the threat of force to prevent “Latin America” from building wealth-generating economies.
Sure we could do positive things: unilateral free trade would be a good start (allowing Medicare/Medicaid/ACA to be used for medical services abroad ought to be part of this). Fiscal reform that turns the US from as capital-importing country to into a capital-exporting country would help.
I don't have any problem with this analysis as far as it goes, but Tooze is pulling punches here, presumably knowingly. The US has been destabilizing South and Central American governments for DECADES, and often in league with extractive US corporations active in the region (I'm looking at you Chiquita-Fyffes, aka United Fruit). What don't they understand about the connection between this serial diplomatic malpractice and the migrant pressure on their own borders? It's of a piece with apparent European studied "bewilderment" that wrecking Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria has led to wave upon wave of migrants across and around the Mediterranean. Well, duh.
Can they really be this stupid, or are they lying to themselves and the electorate?
🤣
I assume you must know this, but as an economist your actual job is to create overwrought and intellectual-sounding arguments for why we shouldn't behead the rich right this moment. And these "think pieces" seem to be losing the plot. So as a friendly reminder, everyone who is not a member of the state like you wants to kill every single rich person, for ruining the world, as in firing squads and mass graves right now. And as a lapdog of the billionaires, you should be writing slackjawed bitch articles about why we need casino mogles and arms dealers. Dumbass.
I doubt that your post, being very vulgar and insulting, will convert many people to your views.