TED Conversations

daniel orupabo

MD, southernhouse ltd

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

In what practical ways can African states tackle the issue of poverty and unemployment amongst its young people?

Many African states list their young people as a vital resource base. But very disturbing is the fact that young people in Africa are left to rot due largely to almost zero opportunity and failing structures compounded by systemic corruption. Now, for African states a wasting generation of young people is a more threatening challenge than political instability.

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    Gail . 50+

    • 0
    Oct 2 2012: I am not in favor of capitalism. But you ask your question as if capitalism is the best thing for Africa. Actually, it's the worst. You cannot have capitalism without poverty. Capitalism creates poverty, and now Africa is a poverty pit.

    If all of those unemployed youth could learn how to build houses from indigenous materials, they could built houses. Not for $$$, but for houses. Look at the young man who took it upon himself to learn how to build a wind mill to pull water out of the ground, and to produce electricity for his village. When you take money out of the picture, all kinds of wonderful things can happen. Equality and cooperation can prosper.

    I think that if the Internet were available in every African village, and it were free, and Africa started a campaign for donors to send used computers to needy villages, that the people would begin educating themselves about many things, and education is inspirational.

    Hmmm. I am going to see if there is a foundation that collects used laptops. This sounds like a good idea. I could do that if it's not being done.
    • thumb

      Henry Woeltjen 10+

      • 0
      Oct 6 2012: TED Lover,

      What about capitalism do you think causes poverty?
      • thumb

        Gail . 50+

        • 0
        Oct 7 2012: John Locke's Treatises of Government: The canonical text for economic, political, & legal understanding of how an effective government works.

        1st he introduces the rights of private property ownership with these 3 rational provisos:

        There must be enough left over
        You must not let it spoil (let things not go to waste)
        You must mix your labor with it.

        Then he shows that with the introduction of $, along with men's tacit agreement to put value on it, the all the provisos are no longer applicable.

        1. Now you no longer have to mix your labor with your property. Now you can buy labor and profit from money itself.
        2. There is no longer a consideration of spoilage, because money cannot spoil.
        3. There is no longer a consideration for whether there is $ left over for others, because ownership of $, an intangible invention, is not a basic human right. And if money can buy land, without leaving enough for others, then access to land (for food/clothing/shelter) is no longer a basic human right.

        Then comes Adam Smith, (Wealth of Nations - another canonical text). He accepts the above, saying that the right to own the labor of others - without limits - is granted by a natural law. (the invisible hand).

        Within this natural law, he says, the scantiness of subsistence, that's caused by not enough money in the hands of the poor, puts natural limits on the "RACE of laborers" (his words). He states that the greater number of their children MUST die in the name of the economic system, and the free market, with money as its foundation, will take care of that using natural law.

        In other words, capitalism cannot work unless there are poor people, or if there are too many poor people, but don't worry about them. A majority will die from poverty related issues (hunger, disease, exposure, war, etc) so that the cost of providing for them will not dip too deeply into the private property of the wealthy.

        Capitalism requires inequality.

        PS: War is the most profitable.
        • thumb

          chen xin

          • 0
          Oct 7 2012: i agree most of what you said
          while at this point i dont agree
          you say Capitalism requires inequality .
          while some european countries like norway fenland ,they are all capitalism countres why they have a much better life compared to america . and they have a much common level in each person'salary so what i want to say is that your country's welfare
          is not being worked well .

          you know recently french bosses are escaping to england why because their government put a heavy tax to them.

          i think at root it is how we treat the wealth of different people .and i think we must have a
          much more nimble policy.

    • Rich Goulet

      • 0
      Oct 11 2012: If not capitalism what? Socialism, communism? Government owned bussinesses? Capitalism means that consumers make the choices. Are there problems? Yes. Have there been abuses? Yes. Socialism/government control has resulted in atrocities just as bad or worse than anything capitalism has done. Hitler, Stalin,Mao have killed and kept people in poverty far more than capitalists. The robber barons worldwide got their money because governments tried to control the economy and give them exclusive franchises. Thar's socialism.

      Besides do we really think that government bureaucrats can make better decisions than business people?

      I know my attitude flys in the face of many of the subscribers to Ted. But none of us is smart enough to run a huge economy. Although some won't admit it.
      • thumb

        Gail . 50+

        • 0
        Oct 12 2012: I favor the moneyless gift economy. Republicanism, Socialism, & Communism exist in order to give power to the few at the expense of the many

        • Rich Goulet

          • 0
          Oct 12 2012: Dear Ted Lover,

          I'm sure you are a kind, loving person who cares a great deal about humanity. However, what you describe is like chocolate that won't make you fat. It's a great dream but won't happen. In the real world money is the method of exchange that is most efficient. I just believe that capatilism is the system that offers the most benefits, efficiently.

          I do volunteer work for a group called ShelterBox. Without money and the effort of people worldwide we would not be able to fulfill our mission to deliver shelter to those who have been effected by war or other disasters. We couldn't do the good we do using a moneyless gift economy. How would we get a ShelterBox to Africa or Asia within a week after am earthquatke? Gifts wouldn't do it.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.