Jun 20, 2007

Sobre Bill Gates y métodos efectivos para ayudar a los más carenciados:

Bill Gates is the richest man in the world, helped create a revolutionary computer software company, and earlier this month collected an honorary degree from Harvard University. But he may not understand the vital role wealth creation plays in society. In collecting his degree, Mr. Gates delivered a commencement address that focused not on the information age, the rise of personal computers or the relentless efficiency his software has brought to nearly every industry. Instead, he focused on his own personal philanthropy. His implicit theme was that so far what he has accomplished may have been good for him and Microsoft shareholders, but it has been no great contribution to society. He suggested that with a personal fortune of about $90 billion (including what he has transferred to his foundation) it is time for him to give something back.

A conservative estimate, in a model where software serves as a new variety of productive input, is that the social benefit of Microsoft's software is at least the $44 billion Microsoft pulls in each year. When capitalized with the same ratio (22) that the market applies to earnings, this flow corresponds to a valuation of $970 billion. Thus, through Microsoft's future operations, Mr. Gates is creating a benefit to the rest of society of about one trillion dollars -- or more than 10 times his planned donations. And this counts only the likely future benefits, giving no weight to the past.

To find policies that are likely to alleviate poverty, it is best to look at actual successes and failures. In recent decades, the biggest single accomplishment is the post-1979 (post-Mao) economic growth in China. Xavier Sala-i-Martin ("The World Distribution of Income," Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 2006) finds that the number of persons below a standard poverty line fell in China by about 250 million from 1970 to 2000. This massive poverty reduction occurred despite an increase in the Chinese population of more than 400 million and rising income inequality within China. The second-best story is the economic growth in India, where the poverty count fell by around 140 million people from 1970 to 2000.

These examples suggest that the key question for poverty alleviation is how to get Africa to grow like China and India. An important clue is that the triumphs in China and India derive mainly from improvements in governance, notably in the opening up to markets and capitalism. Similarly, the African tragedy derives primarily from government failure.

...foreign aid is typically run through governments and, thereby, tends to promote public sectors that are large, corrupt and unresponsive to market forces.

3 comments:

  1. Impresionante, más claro echale agua. Insisto, es una enorme tragedia para los más pobre del mundo que todavía sigamos perdiendo el tiempo discutiendo estas cosas.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Estoy de acuerdo, no entiendo como este tema se sigue planteando con el mismo enfoque de hace 40 años, como se sigue hablando de "las ayudas al tercer mundo" como si fuera la solución a todos los males.

    No sé si los defensores a ultranza de aumentar los subsidios a los países subdesarrollados escucharon alguna vez la parábola del río y los peces... esa que dice que es mucho mejor enseñar a pescar a tu vecino que darle un pescado todos los días...

    Y eso no es lo peor, sino lo que se menciona al final: las ayudas se conceden a gobiernos corruptos en su gran mayoría y acaban en cuentas corrientes privadas de gobernantes chanchulleros desaprensivos, con lo cual no importa cuánto se suelta, nunca tiene impacto donde se supone que debería.

    De este tema se puede hablar sin parar durante horas, pero me callo, que las muecas me provocan arrugas y no estoy para arrugas a mi edad!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hacia tanto que no escuchaba "chanchullo"!

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.