This is nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense.
Its so bad, its difficult to know where to start. The subtext is the first hint: saying this needs to be explained to 3rd world countries implies there is some secret to it.
Second, what it describes just plain isn't how economics works. The condo I live in (owned by my best friend) is worth a specific amount of money for a specific reason: people are willing to pay that amout to buy it. It doesn't get any simpler than that.
Basically, it starts with the assumption that to become a successful capitalist country you have to oppress others and tries to fit the data to the conclusion. Its not even wrong.
Hey look, me and Russ agree. What a great way to bring in the new year, Peace on Earth may have hope after all.
LOL! I knew Russ would love it. If I can get Russ and Smurf to agree then the post was worth it!
Of course the source is the quarterly magazine of the International Monetary Fund.
Huh? http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/03/desoto.htm ? Can't say I see such an assumption --- can't say the IMF 1/4ly is the original source.
de Soto's got a different slant on what I call "cultural inertia," but, beyond that the guy's pretty well nailed things --- his 200 year development period is more in the neighborhood of one-two ka if you happen to buy historical and archeological perspectives.
What were the circumstances/conditions in Europe and western hemisphere that favored development of capitalism? Nobody knows. The West went the property system direction, and the East got locked up in monarchial tax farming systems. Hong Kong thrived for all China to see for damned near two centuries before China chartered a bank and joined the mainstream global economy.
I admit I havn't read the whole article but the first part really does seem full of assumptions that I don't agree with.
You really need to read the whole article in the IMF quarterly. The quotes Ivan pulled out really misrepresents the intent of the article IMO, but would you expect anything less considering the source ? Har har, good one Ivan.
China has joined your mainstream global economy under the barrel of a gun, and on the dead bodies of countless Chinese, same for Japan and other Asian nations(actually all).
Happy new year to you too.
I guess I'm expected to be a fan of the IMF...?
I'm much more partial to the IGMTSF
From what I have read cursorily, the article makes a lot of sense. If there is not a comprehensive legal system to recognise and delineate any property right I have in my mud hut, how am I ever going to realise its financial potential by securing my financial arrangement with it and to engage in other economic activity as soon and as frequently as I want to? The English legal system transplanted to Hong Kong has always been touted as the best legacy a colonial government can be bestowed and I think for good reasons.
No, I was assuming just the opposite.
??? Opponents of the IMF tend to be partisans of the third world, hence leftist if intellectual, green if street demonstrators. Do you think russ belongs in either category?
The IMF and the World Bank are corrupt, financed by governments, controlled by goverments and use government (=taxpayers) money in order to do large scale interventions in third world countries. Usually resulting in catastrophic investments, corruption of the third world government and gigantic debts to be payed by the common people. This is socialism on a high level.
Why should any proponent of capitalism support them?
No, however, since I strongly support the IMF [or at least I did] I assumed that Russ doesn't. It was a guess based on experience.
Those are the most vocal, but there is another catgory, illustrated by Aquamarine, and I fall into that category.
Separate names with a comma.