₦airaland Forum

@fstranger3: The problem is you think that this is American style. When it is in fact the style Nigeria had in the 50s and 60s, before everything became centralized. Nigeria didn't say, "Build a stadium in each of the three regions." One region decided it wanted one, so went for it.

Federalism is not a uniquely American invention. It is the most natural form of government for humans. People are better able to make decisions for themselves at a local level than someone very far away. I cannot tell you how to decorate your house; you'd better to know how to do it than me, since you are closer to the situation.

My own ancestors were essentially federalists. . . each village/town would manage its own affairs, and cooperate with its neighbors as needed to accomplish tasks too big for them to accomplish themselves. If Town A decides they want to build a new palace for their king, it doesn't mean that ALL the towns in the area must do the same thing.

The problem seems to be that you strongly dislike anything American. If I call pounded yam American you'll probably stop eating it

[quote author=Ileke-IdI link=topic=639565.msg8061673#msg8061673 date=1302066407]@ekiti bear
If you derail this thread, omo ale ni e.[/quote]Noted. Carry on. I'll stalk Kobojunkie elsewhere

You guys had progressed well beyond a 1st name basis already, I thought?

Why is she still blindly guessing? 

For shame, Ileke-Idi 

Basically, I think the FG should take care of the following tasks:

1) National defense
2) Currency, monetary policy
3) Interstate roads
4) Things like NAFDAC, other agencies that make sense to have uniform standards for
5) A few other things I'm forgetting right now. . .

And leave pretty much everything else to the states or private industry.

Kobojunkie, you should perhaps set the record straight about your origin and history so that people like me who are slightly obsessed are not mislead and confused by OnlyTruth  


Anyway, let me not derail any further :]

fstranger3:
For a plethora of reasons:
Cheaper housing courtesy of government subsidy
Access to better food from fresh harvests right in your neighborhood, not to talk of spending less on food.
More secure neighborhood; a luxury WRT to the high crime rate in most cities. This you'd accept is a biggie. At-least anyone who has lived in Lagos would understand
Better air Vs. the Polluted air,  from second hand 'molues' and '18 seaters,' that has now become the bane of most cities in Nigeria, especially Lagos, Ibadan  and other big cities.
Better environment to raise kids; you have more control over who influences your kid. Adequate shelter from the influences of Area boys and girls (Another biggie if you know how the environment influence the proper upbringing of a child)

Amongst other things. Simply stated, the standard of life would be better in this new towns.

How do I get from this new town to the job I have in the old town? And if you say, "gov't should do public transport too". . . well, why the heck doesn't the government focus on transport alone, then let people live in the equivalent of the suburbs? That is how things happen here. You might work in Houston, but live out in Stafford, Texas and commute. But it isn't like the FG is the one developing residential property in Stafford; private industry is.

I agree with you. By this initiative, the governmental is fast tracking the process. This initiative reminds me of Ikorodu. Ikorodu used to be a ghost town in Lagos. No one wanted to go live there, but once government started selling plots land to people at very cheap price, people moved. First to move where the middle class people, your lawyer, doctor, engineer, banker etc,. And, in order to cash in on the promise of the new town your regular 'iya eleran' 'vulganizer, iya n worobo' and the rest started moving in. What you have today is a vibrant city, safe and booming with all the amenities necessary for daily living within reach

So in a way, the government started the process, which inevitable provided opportunity for small business people, which then would attract more people, creating more opportunities, which would then attract more people and the cycle goes on.

That was done by the state government though? Not the federal? That is my major point. . . this isn't a bad idea. . . but NOT what the FG should be doing!

Really?  Any link?

Just stuff I learned from econ and history class high school. . . just Google "planned economy failure" and you'll come up with plenty of links.

best thing to do is to find a woman who makes as much money as you do. Or one who isn't very materialistic.

Poor + materialistic chick = recipe for disaster

Onlytruth:
So, in essence, we may have to fight another war again, while kobojunkie runs away with another Aboki.

Hold on a second. Kobojunkie, are you married to an aboki?  Somehow I imagined you to be a tall, single woman in her late 30s, early 40s. . .

@fstranger: But why would one choose to live in these cities? For you to move somewhere, there has to be job, no?

It is actually business and economic opportunity which drive the movement of people, not vice versa. If you construct a new city in the middle of nowhere in Adamawa (an already not-very-populated-state), why on earth would people move there?

Anyway, as we've learned from the Soviet Union and other examples, ideas like this never work out

Floating city = GEJ smoking some bad ganja

Hrm, I for some reason thought the writing appeared before the Sokoto Caliphate. . . was giving them credit for that.

I think they get some credit for trade though:
https://i52.tinypic.com/9ih4es.png

PhysicsMHD:
Well, I thought you would have specifics, since you believe they were more advanced and sophisticated. Perhaps I'm missing something, but in 1700, what was so advanced about the Hausas? All their cities would be conquered a hundred years later rather quickly by an alien group (Fulani) that was not significantly more technologically advanced than them, so how advanced and sophisticated were they really?

Long distance trade? Writing? Kano being a major cosmopolitan trade center even at that time seems like a big deal to me. I dunno, perhaps I overstated my case.

OAM4J:
^^hahahahahaha. . . am not buying it dude, thats too cheap to be real 

Run, the boogeyman cabal is chasing after you!

Until 1970, Ibadan was the largest city in sub-Saharan Africa (Lloyd et al. 1967). In 1952, it as estimated that the total area of the city was approximately 103.8 km2 (O. Areola, 1994: 99).   However, only 36.2 km2 was built up (see Map 1). This meant that the remaining 67 km2 were devoted to non-urban uses, such as farmlands, river floodplains, forest reserves and water bodies. These “non-urban land uses” disappeared in the 1960s: an aerial photograph in 1973 revealed that the urban landscape had completely spread over about 100 km2. The land area increased from 136 km2 in 1981 to 210-240 km2 in 1988-89 (Areola, 1994: 101). By the year 2000, it is estimated that Ibadan covered 400 km2 (Onibokun 1995: 7).

The growth of the built-up area during the second half of the 20 the century (from 40 km2 in the 1950s to 250 km2 in the 1990s) shows clearly that there has been an underestimation of the total growth of the city. In the 1980s, the Ibadan-Lagos expressway generated the greatest urban sprawl (east and north of the city), followed by the Eleiyele expressway (west of the city). Since then, Ibadan city has spread further into the neighbouring local government areas of Akinyele and Egbeda in particular.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_Report/pdfs/Ibadan.pdf
Section 3.2

I'm no more sold on Kano City being more populated than Ibadan. If someone who has lived extensively in both and knows both like the back of his hand is willing to tell me this and support it with evidence, I'll believe it. But for now, I don't see any reason to believe it.

PhysicsMHD:
Proof?

What sort of proof are you looking for? Make it specific, and I'll try to support this position.

Also, I'm not at all convinced any more that Ibadan is less populated than Kano is:
https://i51.tinypic.com/24exto4.png

See this report: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_Report/pdfs/Ibadan.pdf

Especially Section 3.2.

Ibadan was the largest city in sub-Saharan Africa up until 1970. The rise of Lagos would have slowed down its growth, but probably not killed it. Map #1 (on page 4) of the above report offers some evidence for that.

@Nchara: These things happened for concrete reasons. The Hausa man is not inherently evil. He was certainly more advanced and sophisticated than you or I 300 years ago. Just things changed, the importance of those desert trade routes decreased, they had some bad leaders who didn't allow them to Westernize.

Try to be a bit more humane.

emmatok:
Man Kano, Sokoto ,Maiduguri, Kaduna and other northern cities are not rural areas.

Never claimed claimed that the cities are rural. . . that, by definition makes no sense.

It is also wrong to compare Kano to OYO state.

You do realize that Oyo has a GDP nearly $4 billion bigger (PPP) as of 2007 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nigerian_states_by_GDP) than Kano? So you are right, Oyo and Kano are not comparable. . . Oyo is in fact far greater. At least as far as economic productivity goes (unless this Canback research company was completely off.)

Kano is more cosmopolitan then OYO state.

Not sure what you mean by "cosmopolitan."

Well, good for me to know that if I'm representing Nigeria and come up short, Nigerians will be the first to abandon and rubbish me 

Fairweather friends!

@kalokalo: I think military rule might have ruined the minds of our politicians. Militaries by their nature must be centralized, socialistic, etc. Nigeria by its multi-ethnic nature needs to be run in a decentralized manner, if we want it to succeed.

A wiser, more visionary leader would be thinking about how he could empower the states and LGs, and use them as engines for growth. GEJ instead seems to prefer this top-down approach.

PhysicsMHD: First, it is probably a bad idea for the reasons you stated (and other reasons).

But even if it were a good one, it shouldn't be the purview of the FG   It should be done by the states in collaboration with private investors.

The more disturbing thing to me about all this is that it seems GEJ is a centralist, top-down sort of guy. I don't like that at all. I want Nigeria to become more federalized, not more centralized. States less dependent on the FG, not more.

He should be talking about shrinking the FG, not making its influence bigger.

I'm a bit annoyed.

NewsApr 5, 2011
   
By Samuel Oyadongha
Yenagoa – The Federal Government, yesterday, said it would build new towns in the 36 states of the federation.
The move, the Federal Government, said, was aimed at depopulating  over populated cities and create room for the construction of new houses in a well planned and serviced environment.
Speaking at the ground breaking ceremony of the N2.46bn Okaka Phase II Housing Estate funded by the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria, FMBN, in Yenagoa, the Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Nduese Essien, assured the people of Bayelsa State of the preparedness of President Goodluck Jonathan to right the wrongs of the past.
The Minister who said the Federal Government was aware of the huge housing problems facing the people of the state, assured that  government was committed to addressing it headlong.
“We are aware of the housing problem facing the people of the state and we are committed to addressing them headlong,” he said.
In the course of the year, we will build a new city near Yenagoa.
“This effort is intended to depopulate the already over populated city and create room for the construction of new houses in a well planned and serviced environment. This same arrangement will be replicated in the 36 states of the federation.”

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/04/fg-to-build-new-towns-in-36-states/

This to me seems a bad policy. I hope it is challenged in court by states and LGs.

Why is the FG setting how much money the states/LGs have to pay their workers? I thought we practiced federalism? Let every state/LG set its own minimum wage freely rather than forcing a one-size-fits all solution on the country.

How can Ekiti State and Lagos have the same minimum wage, when the former is much cheaper to live in than the latter?

Dumb policy, GEJ

@naijaking1: That is useful for places which are undercounted. But what of places which are overcounted? Why won't they just claim 5K tax base, but claim that only 2k are paying?

States and local government councils must pay their workers the N18, 000 minimum wage signed by President Goodluck Jonathan, the Federal Government said yesterday.


Minister of Labour and Productivity Chief Emeka Wogu who made this known in an interactive session with journalists in Abuja declared that the new wage has become law, adding that refusal to pay would be unconstitutional.


While pointing out that state governments were fully involved in the process that led to the emergence of the new minimum wage which was hitherto N7,500, government declared private sector employers with more than 50 employees must pay the minimum of N18, 000 as monthly salary for their workers, as contained in the constitution.

“I think every state will look at the law, the first thing is to get a copy of the law, study it and then note what they have against the law. For now, there is a law on national minimum wage that would apply among the states of the federation; and remember that the Nigerian federation comprises of the Federal, State and Local Governments so the law applies to all these tiers of government.”

He added that “the minimum wage is now a law and there are no sentiments about it. Although, for every law people are allowed to air their sentiments and the only legal way to challenge any law is through the law courts. And this is a law that most people even the state governors will not want to test its legality.

“Most governors have agreed to pay,” the minister added even as he denied knowledge of some state governors saying they would not pay as reported in the media.

the new wage has become law, adding that refusal to pay would be unconstitutional.
He however said that “if there are such isolated cases (of governors not willing to pay) then it becomes issue of either not believing in the law or having other reasons about the law.”

“At the appropriate time these issue would be addressed. The issue now is availability of funds, affordability and management of resources.”

According to him, the ministry will soon come out with a broad guideline on its implementation as provided for in the minimum wage report, saying that the bureaucracy in the ministry was already working on it to have a smooth implementation.

“The reason for this is to forestall any industrial action that might come due to wrong implementation of the minimum wage because what is important is the implementation, we must come out with a clear, and applicable guidelines,” he said.

The minister urged workers to “reciprocate the good intention of President Jonathan and his love for Nigerian workers by voting for him during the presidential election so that he can continue his good work.”

http://www.dailytrust.dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16075:fg-says-18000-minimum-wage-binding-on-states-lgs-others&catid=2:lead-stories&Itemid=8

why?

She isn't in Nigeria any more. http://nigeria.usembassy.gov/biography.html

New guy is Terence P. McCulley.

naijaking1:
We will never have true and correct census until the government agrees to link it with some sort of taxation as in other countries. Right now, census is linked to sharing of the national cake, creating every incentive for regions to falsify their numbers.

Would that be enough? Say a $10/year tax per capita of some sort collected by the FG that is deduced from each local government?

I don't think it would entirely do the trick. Raises the costs of inflating population figures, but probably not enough. Main thing is we'd need to entirely reduce the incentive to inflate.

Which means a federal government with limited power, money, and influence, no?

Sai Fashola

Fashola for Governor of Yoruba State

kandiikane:
hahaha so you telling me your sons are allowed to do whatever at that age yeah?
Do i sense sexism here?

I don't want my sons doing whatever at that age. But if they disobey, the consequences are much less worse. If you are a guy and you spent a lot of time in your teens smoking, drinking, f***ing, not really going to ruin your life. You'll mostly turn out OK. But if you are a girl and do those same things. . . from what I've seen, it doesn't really work out 

Do you see sort of see what I'm saying? I hope it doesn't sound sexist. I'm not sexist. . . I just don't want to have a very stressful time when I one day become a parent  I want it to be as smooth as possible.

For me, having a disobedient daughter would cause a lot more anguish than a disobedient son. . . just because I know that the risks are higher.