₦airaland Forum

I commend Dora for the fact that she had a vision to change the image of Nigeria by her rebranding project. I do not agree with her but I think she tried to do something within her understanding - if all ministers bring such visible vision to our ministeries I am sure we will be at least one step ahead by now..

On the actual question : I think it is too soon to tell if the rebranding project was a success or not.

I don't think it matters so much who the president of World bank is, my concern is the failing ideology, the one-size-fit-all neoliberal policy which steams out from The bank and her sister, The IMF. Ngozi-Okonjo is at the center of this trade (as opposed to production) based, ahistorical, poverty breeding Policy that has prevented development in our country and Africa in extension.

So I honestly hope she doesn't get the job because if she do it means more world bank for us..

CAN should not get involve in politics.

make una no dey cus people mamma again.... E no make sence.






But e dey sweet sha..

Your mama mense akpu fly gate.
Your mama mouth dey smell like igbo man sheet.
Oh, your mamma resemble Jay Z......... No Busta Rhymes

Watin concern goat for inside aquarium !

Good one!

Good one !

Nice one. Check this out! An old lady boarded a bus from Lagos to Abuja.. She told the driver " Oga tell me when we reach Benin" and the driver agreed. Upon departure she shouted from the back again " I beg tell me when we reach Benin" the driver and the passengers said " we go tell you Mama".

Everone slept and the driver drove pass Benin. At lokoja- One hour after Benin a male passenger remembered and told the driver " Mama say make we tell am if we reach Benin" and the driver replied " I beg no wake am o" the Driver made u-turn back to Benin. At Benin he woke Mama " we don reach Benin". Mama brought out her Phone, dailled someone and said " we dey Benin now" and went back to sleep. The driver woke her up again, " Mama I say we dey Benin" and Mama answered " I tell you say I go come down from Benin? Na Abuja I dey go my daughter say if I reach Benin make I call am"

shymmex: I've read this post about three times, and I still don't see the correlation between it and extreme capitalism

shymmex:
How can we create "wealth" in Nigeria, if you think we're that "poor?"

.

There is no correlation because my post addressed the second question of - how do we create wealth. I feel the question of capitalism or no capitalism is a wrong one. My post was directed to wealth creation and nothing else.

shymmex: I'm trying to get something to eat quickly, I'll dissect your comments - and post a reply in a bit.

.....patiently waiting

. . . . Let me give you a practical example of what i mean by Infant industry - i use this example all the time.

Japan, economically weak after the Second World War, imposed high tariffs on foreign products and huge government intervention in order to build the country’s domestic firms. Its automobile industry furnishes a useful example.

Japanese auto industry had been built up behind a thick, impenetrable wall of tariff and non-tariff barriers. The Japanese government ousted General Motors and Ford and consistently shielded Toyota by means of protectionism and government bailout before the infant company could stand. As Chang (2009) puts it, "[i]t took Toyota more than 30 years of protection and subsidies to become competitive in the international car market". Before 1970, Japanese automobiles were unsatisfactory, and trade restrictions were necessary to ensure the survival of Japan’s fledgling auto industry Free market advocates doubted the strategy of protectionism, and made constant calls for a more orthodox economic strategy. For instance, the then Governor of the Bank of Japan, who strongly opposed the protection of the auto industry, wrote: "Efforts to foster an automobile industry are meaningless. This is a period of international specialization. Since America can produce cheap, high-quality cars, should we not depend on America for automobiles?" Now take a look at japan auto industry.

In this sense free trade is not only a rip-off but it is unnecessary for poor countries. We do not have a production base we are talking of trade – you have to produce before you trade. One serious problem is that economies is centered on trade (free-trade argument) rather than production (technical know-how).

The infant industry protection will enable us to focus on a particular production sector until it is strong enough to compete with world class . . then move to another, and then another, and then another. This is the only way you attain development - historically speaking . . I can provide you with more example if you need me to . .

shymmex: We can agree to disagree on your last comment.

How can we create "wealth" in Nigeria, if you think we're that "poor?"

Now you are asking a real question. But let us take a step back and ask what the difference between rich and poor countries is. The more you think of it the more you realize that the main difference is activity-based. Poor countries focus on diminishing returns while rich countries increasing returns. If you are an economist you may be familiar with diminishing returns but not increasing returns - the latter law was removed by David Richardo, the architect of mainstream economies, in order to accent his theory. Let me take the liberty to expand a little.

Diminishing Returns occur when one factor of production is held constant, while the other factors of production are expanded. As a consequence of the one factor being held constant, the increased input of the other factors yields less and less benefit. In general terms, any company or nation could be subject to Diminishing Returns in any economic activity.

Increasing return is the opposite of diminishing retune – In some economic activities the more you increase production the better produce there is and the cheaper the cost of production. So increasing returns is the reduction in cost per unit resulting from increased production. Examples of increasing returns are manufacturing industries. It might take Microsoft 10 million dollars to produce software but the more they produce the lesser the cost of production.
Diminishing returns goes with perfect competition – indistinguishable products (farm products) An idealized market environment in which every market participant is too small to affect the market price by acting on its own. Increasing return goes with imperfect competition - The situation prevailing in a market in which elements of monopoly allow individual producers or consumers to exercise some control over market prices. E.g Auto Company – the prices can be fixed.

Here lies the basic difference between resource-based economic activities and all other economic activities: When output is increased in any resource-based activity - agriculture, fishing, and mining - there is always one point, after which the crucial resource is no longer available at the same quality or in the same quantity as the previous ‘unit’ of the same resource. If specialised in agriculture, a nation will sooner or later have to resort to inferior land. If specialised in mining, the nation would have to mine deposits with decreasing quality of ore. As a result, the resource-based nation is locked into an economic activity which yields less and less as its specialisation in the resource-based activity deepens. The more such a nation produces of the specific resource-based product, the poorer it gets, and the more the environment suffers. This is what I call the double trap of resource based nations: poverty and economic degradation increase hand in hand as the nation continues to specialise according to its comparative advantage in international trade.

The real question is how we erect a manufacturing sector. The only way in through infant industry protection – this is how all nations developed – from Britain, USA, Japan, South Korea, Germany – just name it.

shymmex: I disagree that there is no wealth to be distributed in Nigeria. The same argument was made in the 50s and 60s - and Awolowo proved them wrong; he created a social welfare state in Western Nigeria; and there was also a lot of surplus. If we can cut corruption in Nigeria by at least 50%, become prudent and cut the wastages in all government parastatals - I think Nigeria has more than enough.

Awolowo proved what wrong? You are a bullionist to think that Nigeria, or by extension Africa, is wealthy. We have never EVER experienced development. How do you define wealth? This is funny. I take your point on government wastage of resources not wealth. Nigeria is a poor country by any standard- and has always been, maybe poorer then which is relative but says nothing about wealth. You are talking about re-distribution - distribution of what? Awolowo has surplus of what? You see wealth as paper money.

Corruption is not the problem with development with Nigeria - take it or leave it. The notion that if we cut corruption then everything will fall into its proper place is laughable.

@ poster

Control? Are you being serious? You are trying to turn him into your version of cool, and you may end up destroying his life because guess what, he is fine just the way he is. Love him and do not make any attempt to change him to what you want him to be, later in life you will recall this moment and understand why.

Marriage is what you want it to be. Life is so simple and sweet - always.

@Shymmex

You are involved in the wrong debate just like most "African scholars". We take countries like the UK and try to create a debate on the basis of their experience - instead of ours. You talked about your pan-africanist background hence once advocated distribution of wealth - but have we created any wealth in the first place? So how can we move to the stage of distributing what we do not have?- development is a curve, a learning curve so your question is the wrong one...

I agree with a strand of the argument but however think a paliamentary system will work best for us. I don't particularly like the idea of a regional system for obvious reasons. It will, for one, serve to accent our differences by grouping us into brackets drawn from ethnicity. I concede that it is far better than the present system but a paliamentary system seem more like it.

This will be the biggest error we ever made. It is bad for economies and politics.  This bill will change the incentive structure of Nigerians - we do not need this at all. Once you start a welfare state there is no going back. Apart from the obvious fact that it will be an avenue for FRAUD – there are serious questions we have to ask before going this road.  Who will fund this?  (Because it’s going to be a permanent project).

From a purely practical front we do not have the institutional framework to do this. Even if we do, you are subsidizing people to stay idle. It can demean a child's inspirations to achieve to earn money as they know they will end up with money. The reason you have so much teenage pregnancy in the UK falls down to government welfare policy which created an incentive structure for young girls to get pregnant. It is simple and basic ' If you pay more for anything you tend to get more of that thing ' . We should stop looking at the western world - they are not having it well- we can do better. This is a country (Nigeria) with huge deal of government failures and we are talking on how to introducing a system that has never worked in the most competent of governments. There is no successful welfare system on planet earth – people like to cite NHS as a successful system but I tell you it is not successful.

The best security for unemployed graduates is getting a job and the government can play a better role in that.

It is hard to accept any 'branded estimated' data that comes out Nigeria. " Mr. Lamido Sanusi, had said last week that the country was losing N100bn daily to the strike " and now Okonjo-Iweala with a different figure. I think they are both wrong.

canuck:

You are either not paying attention or just mischevious! FG and its mouth-pieces have been saying the subsidy removal will "cure" all the ills of our society by providing (quoting Diezani Allison-Madueke now) "worldclass healthcare, worldclass education, worldclass roads and other infrastructure".

"muami" = mumu

Enuf said!

I noticed the accented part of your comment as a thread that runs through the debate.  Our government officials seem to be wearing a thesis that the reason for bad healthcare, poor education and infrastructural problems come boils to fuel subsidy HENCE the removal of subsidy will provide allowance for development.

I thought Nigeria had oil ? how can we subsidies what we presumably have in abundance. There is a lot of miss-information in this debate. It is better to fix this problem once and for all, we need local refineries not IMF policy prescriptions.

Nice thread. My personal view on the gay question is that government should not partake in the debate at all. It is not the government's place to define marriage regardless of the fact that i see it repulsive i think gays do not affect any one. Is gay right the issue with Nigeria at the moment? I do not think so. the senate is indeed out of touch.

The system . . not the person.

The optimism of a faith based person is intertwined with the Will of God Almighty concerning the ordainment of fate. They pray for daily bread and then thank God for the half bread. . Fatalism at its worst.

femmy2010:
Heard in the news yesterday that Ugandan college student were protesting cos Government has refused to pay their "meal allowance" for the past 3 months.
we certainly shouldn't expect less from student with filled stomach.

Are you suggesting we should also allocate resources for 'meal allowance'. Government is not Santa Claus my friends and in the important sense it has no MONEY.

^^^^^^^

Learn about Buhari indeed ! !

Fine . . but why shame on Nigeria? there is no competition between Nigeria and Ugandan perhaps you exhibit the biggest problem with us; 'insecurity and pointless competition'. You should be happy for Ugandan not angry with Nigeria.

F.Y.I there are Nigeria inventions that Uganda haven't got. . . GROW UP.

~Bluetooth:
How buhari better than Ibb and Abacha ? Simple !

Ibb/Abacha are far better than Buhari, the latter is the worst since the inception of this union. Apart from the coup January 15 1966 , Buhari is the only Military guy that took power from a democratically elected administration. Military coup is bad enough but coup conducted against a democracy is on a different level on its own, there is no English word to describe that. Consider what Nigeria would be today if democracy endured from that moment. I am not surprised you have people holding the guy to a high esteem - Hitler is regarded as a hero by Neo-Nazi.

ginru:
I agree with those that say the key is in achieving the right Balance, thus getting the benefits of both while limiting the drawbacks. Capitalism is good for growing business, technology, infrastructure,etc,  and likewise Socialism should be embraced for underclass welfare and basic socioeconomic solidarity.

I see Socialism as ideally being suited to establishing cooperative societies, fostering a strong unity amongst the working-class people (preferably at local levels) and then having that be the foundation from which the larger market economy can prosper with minimal corruption. Capitalism and Socialism should be together like a good marriage.

There is no such thing as a pure capitalism or pure socialism. They only exist on paper not reality. Socialism is slavery . . Competitive capitalism is the answer especially in NIGERIA . The business of the government is to create a framework for individuals to flourish

Builder:
Around the world , we have different races, different religions, cultures and values. countires should be free to have different econmical and governmental systems as well

Go slowly! No one is disputing that fact. Sure countries should be free to have any economical and governmental systems THE question and issue is simple: which system is better? You speak of Europe, YES; Socialism works perfectly until you run out of other people's money. Greece, Spain, Germany, UK, Italy and many other European countries have run out of other people's money. Now they are more broke more than you can imagine. . .  They are living off debt bankrupting the future to maintain the present “standard” of living.

You said "under capitalism the profit motive is supreme" but in life the profit motive is supreme. The world cannot function without profit. I take your “socially destructive” point but that’s part of its excesses and can be managed. The excess of socialism is part of what we experienced in Second World War. Socialism progressed to communism and then fascism. . Ask the Russians.

The occupy Wall Street movement and, or the G20 protest has nothing to do with capitalism BUT the protesters think otherwise. They are there because of the financial crises supposedly caused by Wall Street and the bailouts. . The financial crisis was caused by government deliberate housing policy NOT WALL STREET. The bailout on the other hand was done by the government.  I have to mention here that Capitalism, as a system, is against bailouts of any sort, it is often regarded as a profit system but that’s a misleading label, it’s a profit and loss system and the loss part is just as important as the profit part because it is what keeps out badly operated and poorly managed businesses. It is the government that bailed out badly operated companies to stay in the system . . . the problem is the government.

This question is most properly put as 'freedom and incarceration' which one is better? There is no such thing as 'state capitalism' @Mr--Why . . the paradox is too glaring to go unnoticed. State equals collectivism while capitalism is based on private owners for profit. China is predominantly a capitalist nation . . .  Socialism is hell.  And i hear people talk of greed - what is greed? EVERYONE IS GREEDY. We do not have a problem of capitalism at the moment it is a problem of government meddling . . .

experience:
All originated by Africans . . .

Nothing was originated in Europe they just mastered the art of owning it.