₦airaland Forum

Bottled water? Something is deeply wrong with Nigeria if it is more profitable to import bottled water than produce it locally.

I'm in my village in Ekiti right now. On the long drive from Lagos to Ekiti, I noticed so much verdant, green bush. I think if we focused on farming seriously in the SW, we could feed all of Africa. The land is too rich and fertile.

But right now it is poorly managed. Not enough modern agricultural  techniques being used to boost productivity (industrial fertilizer, mechanization, etc). Not enough capital for farmers to buy farming inputs. Small family farms when it would be more efficient to merge them into a large farm.

Also, I've noticed that the roads from Lagos to the hinterland like Ekiti are very poor, thus increasing the cost of getting goods to market (and thus decreasing profitability) 
And of course, the utter lack of electricity in Nigeria

Still, there is overall a lot of potential here.  They are doing some good things. . .the local "ofada" rice for example, the local chicken and beef, all very delicious.

Overall, a nice interview. I especially like how he is trying to neutralize the threat of the unions by separating the union leadership from the union workers.

However, I took issue with this:
[quote]One of the fears of Nigerians is that as soon as you place power in the hands of private sector, the tariff would just shoot up, thereby making it expensive for an average Nigerian to have power. What is your view on that?

That is totally unfounded and I can confirm that to you. You see there are two classes of people who would not suffer a rude shock in the case of tariff increase. That is the urban poor and rural dwellers. Those are the people we want to protect because these are the people who find it difficult to pay high tariff. But people who can afford should pay. They should be able to pay because that is how it is done anywhere in the world.

Nigeria should not be in the business of producing electricity or having people to invest in the business of production of electricity and loose money. People won’t come here to invest and we won’t have electricity. Therefore, we should make and create an effective system whereby if you invest in the power production, you should be able to get back your money over time.

That is the system. But those who cannot afford will not suffer any kind of tariff increase. We must understand that those who use generator, kerosene, pay far more today, even those who use candle also pay more. But people don’t know all that.
[/Quote]
I do not believe in subsidies, even for the poor in something like this. I understand that they are necessary in the short term, but why in the long term should people not pay a fair price for electricity? Why should some get it subsidized and others not? If the state governments of a state want to subsidize electricity for their citizens, then that is their own business. But why should all states have to follow this policy?

This is not the sort of policy that should be legislated by the federal government, it should instead be decided on a state-by-state basis, imo.

Isn't illegal, but seems slightly unethical. Rather than presenting this as a motion of the Imo Assembly, they should have instead presented it as the position of the "PDP caucus of the Imo Assembly." Of course, since the Assembly is entirely PDP, there is very little practical difference between the two bodies.

The Assembly could then pass some more generic resolution that is not PDP specific but will be widely interpreted as commenting on the PDP primaries.

Long story short, this is mostly fine, modulo some uncrossed tees and undotted eyes. Minor mistakes happen even in advanced democracies, not to talk of young ones like Nigeria.

EDIT: minor typos

Excellent move on her part. ACN is on the rise in the SW, and it might make some sense to abandon the PDP if you want to be relevant in our land.

With that said, I see no real reason for the ACN to accept her. What is she bringing to the table? I don't mind convincing the best talents of the PDP to change parties, but I don't see the point of letting political mediocrities into the fold.

Furthermore, we should be wary of helping to build the Obasanjo family political dynasty in Yorubaland. This is how trouble starts, when people begin to think that political power/relevance is their birthright. . .

Ibime:
OBJ taking Lagos power supply and feeding into the National grid.

This pains me more than anything else. If Lagos had been able to use the power generated offshore by AES for its own grid, then no doubt the entire state would have 24/7 power supply by now And SW Nigeria could piggyback on the Lagos electricity grid, paying Lagos fair value for the electricity it generates.

This is why I am a federalist. I don't see how the Nigerian federal government is going to be able to better manage the affairs of the states than the states themselves.

Chief Obasanjo, who spoke at the just concluded ‘5th International Conference on Federalism’ in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, said, “It is my belief that in a diverse and developing society like Nigeria, you need a strong, though not intrusive or oppressive central government that is democratic, transparent, accountable, effective, efficient, and adequately funded to manage the rough edges of federal politics and protect weaker or less_resource endowed constituent units. Nigerians appreciate this fact.”

I actually disgree strongly with him on this. I think Nigeria would benefit more from a very weak central government than a strong one. How are "weaker" or "less resource endowed" states vulnerable if the federal government is weak? If anything, a bigger danger to the states is the federal government, which prevents them from managing their own affairs in the best way possible. The regionalism that Nigeria had at independence is roughly what we should seek to return to, in my opinion. A confederation of 15 or 20 strong states is a better fit for Nigeria than the current centralist government we have (I can defend this position later, if necessary.)

“Ultimately, it is democratic practice, political will, good governance, leadership commitment, and a dedication to the cause of the people that determine the functioning of any federal arrangement. In essence, there must be popular participation at all tiers of government and facets of life with adequate accommodation for all for federalism to function appropriately.”

With all due respect to OBJ, he is widely believed to have been involved in large-scale rigging of elections in the SW. How is this consistent with "popular participation"? By rigging votes and thus denying popular participation, he himself contributed to the frailness of both democracy and federalism in this country.

“There was a declared need to rise beyond the various inter and intra ethnic and communal wars to build a nation_state that all would contribute to, be part of, but not lose their respective identities, cultures, values and traditional institutions. This, in some way, has been the underlying strength of Nigeria’s federalism,” he added.

Not sure what he means by this statement. Seems as if he is attacking federalism ("rise beyond various inter. . . ". The point of federalism is that I don't have to do any of this. I can be a Yoruba-centric tribalist and the nation will not suffer, simply because rather than needing to capture power at the federal government level to achieve my goals (and thus negatively affecting other ethnic groups) I can instead capture power locally and affect change there.

Anyway, long story short, I don't believe that Obasanjo is really a federalist. He seems to favor extremely strong central governments, but is wrapping his beliefs in federalist language.

Hard for me to fully grasp the situation here. Not sure if this is some sort of ethnic cleansing, or in fact simple armed-robber types targetting what they think is easy prey.

Regardless, needs to be investigated further.

^-- You misread me. I'm saying the Delta militants should fight for full control over the natural gas in their region. Then bring in investors with capital to develop it and sell it. Regarding derivation. . . 50%, 100%, I don't care so long as it is available in large amounts for purchase (that can be used to electrify the entire SW and fill it with factories.)

Cheaper to purchase pipelined NG from the Delta than LNG from abroad (roughly 1/2 the cost, if I remember correctly.)

And cheap power will give whoever has it a tremendous advantage when it comes to manufacturing things like electronics, cars, etc.

The whole situation in Nigeria right now is a bit weird. Massive amounts of natural gas just off and flared. If I were the Nigerian federal government, I'd develop natural gas properly and ensure that 50% of the money for it goes to the Delta. There is enough gas in Nigeria to power all of Africa, if only it was being developed 

I wish these Delta militants were fighting instead for the pie to be made larger instead of just to grab a larger piece of the small one Nigeria has. So much unrealized potential in this silly country. . .

I think this is a good development. Strong regional opposition parties will either cause the PDP to dramatically improve/reform, or wither away.

@Dede1: All that might be well and fine, but I suspect that when negotiating a new nation, they'll seek certain constitutional rights. That at the end of the day is more important than the things you mention. Anyway, it doesn't appear that any of these Akwa Ibom/Cross River folks have posted here yet. So mostly we are speculating until we get a sense of what they think.

Mariory:
Compare the population of the Czech republic with that of Saudi Arabia.

I thought I've normalized that out by looking at per capita figures. Or is your point something different?

Norway is a major oil and gas supplier.

Indeed. It produces roughly 2 million bpd, and Saudi produces 4X as much (this is off the top of my head, correct me if I'm wrong.) Yet only has what, 6X the population? My overall point is that Norway seems to be getting more out of its resources than Saudi Arabia is (at least, if per capita GDP is a rough indication if this.)

Onlytruth:
The Igbo are more interested in other things than politics. It is not always that majority tribes insist on leading in a DEVELOPED country. Obama is a proof to that.

Eh, Obama is one out of 40+ presidents and has a somewhat tenuous hold on power. I'm a fan of the guy and voted for him, but am not sure he is the best example to use. Obamas do not grow on trees, and even Obama's success is not nearly a given.

My point is that the lies about Igbo marginalizing the minority will not materialize. It will be a country designed to be deliberately and diametrically opposed to the Nigerian model of "majority vs minority", "winner takes all", "born to rule" and all the nonsense jargon that renders a potential giant impotent. None of it will happen in Biafra because Nigeria has been all the lessons we needed.

This is a good goal. I think if you enshrine political strength for minorities in your constitution (the US Senate is basically an example of this), then things will work out well. It would be pretty easy to sell Biafra to Eastern minorities if say the presidency were relatively weak, the Senate quite strong, and some overwhelming supermajority is required in the Senate to get things done.

That way minorities have constitution rights and mechanisms to prevent themselves from being numerically overwhelmed.

Good stuff. I'm glad they are resolving it peacefully. This Lekki Road will benefit everyone, including the indigenes there. Let us not stand in the way of progress.

Onlytruth:
A lot of it won't make sense to you because you have been conditioned to Nigerian way of thinking. 

I left Nigeria when I was 4, and am 25 now. Like, in thought and mentality I'm mostly American. Some aspects of Nigeria are unique to it, but others are universal. Again, there is no democracy on the face of the earth where a majority (in this case, an overwhelming majority, 80%+ of the population) is somehow "uninterested" in politics. Are the Igbo not human beings?

Overwhelming majority of Igbo people would rather do other things than be civil servants or politicians (in a country where GRAFT will be IMPOSSIBLE).
You keep thinking there will still be oil money to steal. No, there won't be.

So in your mind, the only way someone is interested in politics is to steal? Obama, Bill Clinton, Bloomberg (already a billionaire!), they all went there to steal money? There are just some fundamental laws of human nature that for some reason you keep ignoring.

All the money will come from business and personal income taxes. You steal, get convicted and face death by hanging.  Then politics loses much of its lure. You can't make money from it. Most Igbo men hate where they can't make money. Did you think about that?

OK. I was under the assumption that your goal would be to build a Western-style democracy. In such democracies, people are attracted to politics even though it is relatively difficult to get rich from. Yet somehow, in this new country, a supermajorty (the Igbos) would have zero interest in politics? When did Igbo become robots, rather than human beings, lol

Me personally though, 2 or 3 years into my program, I realized that I'm only slightly above average relative to my peers. Since I'm not going to be able to get a job at an elite school (unless I postdoc for several years and come up with something amazing, in which case I might be able to snag a school ranked 10-15 or something. And 10-15 schools are certainly not elite), I figure I may as well just leave academia and try to maximize my salary instead.

I guess for me, I don't like research enough to be able to sacrifice in other respects for it.

[quote="PhysicsMHD"]Everything you are saying makes sense from a practical point of view but the real problem is this:

Past a certain level of intelligence, or a certain level of intelligence & creativity, no intellectually minded person can give up something like scientific research for finance. To do so would mean the complete surrender of one's own inclinations, desires, dreams, aspirations, etc. to unrewarding conformity. Thus even if one were to do so- and I doubt that this often happens- one would enter one's new, more practical field with no passion or seriousness about the field.

Consequently people beyond a certain level of intelligence pursue their theoretical interests and end up, ironically, being less "useful" to Nigeria than most others that are less intelligent despite the fact that the research these people (physicists, mathematicians, research engineers, etc.) pursue might be more significant and useful to posterity and to the world than practical pursuits.[/quote]Not sure I completely agree. Certainly there are people who are only interested in scientific research. But most people like many things. Or stated more precisely, I gain X units of utility from doing research, Y from doing finance. If I also gain A dollars in salary from science and B from research, then depending on how I translate dollars into utility, I might decide to do finance, no matter how scientifically inclined I am.
You might be right that for certain types of people, dollars have very little value beyond some point, or that research gives them incomparable amounts of utility relative to something like finance. But for most human beings, this isn't true (even academics.)
I mean, DE Shaw is a pretty good counterexample. The Renaissance Technologies guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Harris_Simons) is another good counterexample.

Only thing I know about Bayelsa is that one of my favorite artists (Timaya) is from there

Yeah, I never hear anything about development there.

I just think human beings are human beings. Nobody is going to turn down political power if they can have it. Are Igbo not human, that they won't be interested in politics in a country in which they are 80%+ of the population?

Does such exist anywhere else in the world? I don't understand how "We do the economy, minorities do politics" is going to be sustainable longterm. Not to mention, what of minorities who are interested in business and industry?

Too much of this doesn't make sense, just sounds very implausible to me.

Also, Christianity alone is not going to erase ethnicity. Like, there are plenty of examples of countries where the internal beef was between two different Christian sides. . .

EDIT: ethnicity misspelled

Maybe my understanding of the situation is completely wrong. Would be nice if some of the Eastern minorities on this forum could chime in.

Hrm. So I mean failure in a relative sense. The amount of oil some of these countries pump from the ground doesn't actually seem to positively impact the lot of your average man as much as it "seems" it should.

Here is a list of countries by GDP per capita: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

Saudi Arabia is #39, at 16.6k.

You'd think that having the largest oil reserves in the world would lead to more wealth than say a country like the frikkin Czech Republic (18.7k).

Otoh, look at Norway. #2 on that ranking, GDP/capita of $84K.

So I feel that they are underacheiving, somehow.

Onlytruth:
Look dude, my problem with you is that you are in western Nigeria and dissecting eastern Nigeria according to your devious yardsticks. That is wicked.

What is wicked about political analysis? What am I gaining from my "wickedness"? If I say, "Taiwan doesn't really want to join China, but because of XYZ are being drawn closer and closer", am I also being wicked to the Chinese or something?

You are NOT interested in your survival (unless you've been lying  ).

Not sure what you mean by this.

You've concentrated more on my survival even when your concerns are UNSOLICITED and UNINVITED.

What does solicited or invited have to do with anything here? Must I ask permission to discuss certain issues? If it were entirely Igbo internal affairs, I could agree. But it is not, is it? Many other groups/ethncities are in SE Nigeria, are they not?

Ujujoan:
They had better beware . . . here comes the oil doom!

It doesn't have to doom a country, but it seems to be quite hard to avoid wahala. Norway is one of the few countries I know of that has been successful with large amounts of oil. Most of the other countries are failures, imo. There is an interesting article in Wikipedia on the "Dutch Disease" that is relevant. Maybe some of the economists here can chime in and offer more insight (Katsumoto, I'm looking at you.)

PhysicsQED:
You do realize that if any of the three major groups leaves, Nigeria will immediately split? Saying that if the Igbo leave then Nigeria will cease to be is accurate but maybe you're attributing to Onlytruth the idea that all the other groups in Nigeria will fail without the Igbo. I'm not certain that that's his position.

By "Nigeria", I'm using this as shorthand for the collection of states that remain.

I have no clue what his position is, and am trying to understand what he is seeing through his "eyes", so to speak. My hunch is that he thinks is that the remaining states in Nigeria (e.g., a hypothetical Odua Republic, Arewa, etc) will be much less successful if Nigeria breaks apart than if the status quo is maintained. So maybe he feels that Yoruba are pro-Nigeria because in his mind, their lot would be worse off if Nigeria falls apart.

Again, I don't quite understand his perspective, but this is my guess. Like, his perspective is clearly wrong for the Ijaw, right? If the Ijaw got a republic of their own, they would be wayyyy better off. I feel that my own ethnicity would be better off, too. But perhaps he implicitly disagrees. . .

Seems solid. Hopefully they manage it well.

So long story short, it is his position that Nigeria will die if Igbos leave? Is this why he constantly says things like, "coward", "lazy", etc?

Under his hypothesis, I can sort of his see his perspective. But at the same time, imo another plausible hypothesis is that Igbo leaving/staying will not have a significant impact one way or another on the remaining groups of Nigeria. This latter hypothesis is my own personal belief.

It is fine to have a hypothesis, but imo wrong to assume that everyone else is working under the same assumption. Especially in a discourse like this. Makes no sense to assume everyone believes the same things you do.

Onlytruth:
You are really getting lower and lower in your rush to adopt gutter strategies in order to score cheap points even if BY SHEER FALSEHOOD.

You have just lost the last respect I had for you for this latest falsehood from you.

I have posted the page you referred to, and I couldn't find anywhere it says anything about Cameroonians not liking Igbo. These things are in your sick mind and have NOTHING to do with facts.

You have to pay money to download the full PDF. It is like 5 or 6 pages. I have it on my computer, but unfortunately my battery is low and this airport doesn't seem to have a charger  

Anyway, I can assure you that it isn't a lie. I'll upload the full pdf when I get online next, you can decide for yourself if I'm lying or telling the truth in my assessment.

I asked you earlier why you are obsessed with trying to prove that Igbo cannot survive outside Nigeria in any form or shape,

I don't care, dude, one way or another. I don't see how what the Igbo do affects me and mine in any way. There is nothing in your lands I want or desire. So why should I care what you do? However, in a discussion like this, it certainly makes sense to separate fact from fiction. If you want, I can refrain from pointing out certain facts, since they seem to make you feel uncomfortable.

and I was wondering why you think that Igbos are like Yorubas (your OPEN FEAR about staying in Nigeria without the Igbos proves it abundantly here!). I told you to concentrate on western Nigeria and leave eastern Nigeria and Igboland alone but you won't because you are a coward who cannot mind his own business.

What sort of arroagance is this? Anyone pointing out certain facts is then acting from fear? Pray tell, what (or who) do I fear?

What will you do to your areas boys?
That is the question I asked. No answer from you.

Here is the page again!

Are you really comparing a social problem like area boys to severe issues like being landlocked? These two are not comparable problems when it comes to nationbuilding.

[/quote][quote]