see also:
are authoritarian governments better at fast-economic development
a philisophical discussion (about economic development): This is one argument that China has made for why it has been able to make drastic economic changes, but India has not. (China can push through changes that are unpopular, while the democratically elected government in India can not). This argument fits into a popular notion among developmental economists that countries such as Chile needed to be a military dictatorship in order to progress quickly (this argument is sometimes used in other countries such as Peru, for example). But, is this argument valid?
but, be aware:
"if a country has pro-business policies, should we care that they are a military dictator?" : YES! Because a lack of transparency = unpredictability = risk. You never know when / if the government will change its policies because it is not accountable to the people. #2, you never know when / if the people will rise up and demand a change in government (see Needler's rule). As happened in Cuba, you never really know if that government that follows will be socialist, communist (as Cuba was) or if it will be business friendly (which Cuba obviously was not).
What is worse for business? dictators or populists?
economic populism : governments that dont look after the best long-term interests of the economy, but instead play to short term benefits...oftne benefiting politicians during election years.
Examples:
In 2008, the President of Venezuela (Hugo Chavez) could be described as a populist, doing what is "right for the poor"....but, the question is: are the Chavez policies really in the best long-term interests of the Venezuelan people? Short term vs. long term. This issue of longterm vs. shortterm is the key to looking at populist policies. Often times (most times), the best long-term policies are difficult in the short term, and might even make most people worse off in the short term. This is one reason that politicians in democracies often struggle to impliment liberal economic policies (such as privatizations, free trade, etc).
add your comments here....
Human rights and the impact of freedom on creativity and innovation:
Its just my theory, but I believe that in order for innovation to foster, you need to have personal freedom and creativity. Human rights, personal freedom, and liberty are the building blocks for Innovation and entrepreneurship. The basis of this form of "creative distruction" that is needed for the creative entrepreneur, is the idea that you will challenge the powers that be, and that you will change the world with your ideas. Only in free societies will you find this creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship.
Remember...our theory is that innovation and entrepreneurship are the basis for economic development....
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.