Ehis Odijie

London Uk, United Kingdom

About Ehis

An idea worth spreading

true freedom is the freedom from fear

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

172706
Ehis Odijie
Posted about 1 year ago
Economy indicators
You are right - A single rule for calculating indicators will reduce the misuse of numbers by politicians. But on the actual point, I think there is a profound problem with what is not knowable about the economy due to changes that are not measurable in mathematical or number terms. Perhaps let me provide a little example with inflation. We use Consumer Price Index (CPI) to measures the rate of inflation by looking at change in the price of a fixed market basket of goods and services. The problem is that price changes can be confusing- either an increase in real price or a decrease in quality can be scientifically regarded as price increase. Consider this; I own a bakery and the cost price of a bread loaf is about three dollars and selling price is somewhere around five dollars. When inflation hit (i.e cost of producing my bread goes up) i have the choice of increasing the price or slightly reducing the quality (i.e. the quantity of flour, sugar or other ingredient that goes into the bread, Or perhaps sack the security, decrease salaries or slightly increase working hours). The price of my bread may stay the same with a slight reduction of quantity – there is no way to represent that in the official inflation number. Qualitative difference cannot be measured or represented in numbers – this, in my opinion, is the biggest problem in the science of economies as far as indicators are concern.
172706
Ehis Odijie
Posted about 1 year ago
What is treasonable?
Naturally I think nothing should be considered treasonable - a crime should be just that. The term treason implies a crime that undermines the offender's government. Here people mistake government for the people - if the Snowden exposure achieved anything is dispelling that myth. He did what he did for the people and yet the government want him for exposing their operations to the people. If we can separate the state from the people then sedition would be an offence against the people and not the state; in which case NSA should answer for treason – not Snowden.
172706
Ehis Odijie
Posted over 1 year ago
If there is so much aid in developing countries, why poverty is increasing in these regions and the industrialized world?
Mali lost 1.7 per cent of GDP and 8 per cent of export earnings yearly, which amounts to an annual $43m loss to local cotton farmers as a result of U.S. cotton subsidies (Oxfam, 2002: 3-10). Similarly, due to US subsidies, Burkina Faso sustains a yearly loss of $28m; Benin $33m; Cameroon $21m; the Central African Republic $2m; Chad $16m; Côte d’Ivoire $32m; and Togo $16m (Oxfam, 2002:18). The list goes on to include all of the 32 cotton-producing countries in Africa, comprising roughly 30 million cotton farmer in Africa sacrificed for 25 thousand in USA .. . In light of this you have people talking about aid not working . . . What a load do rubbish
172706
Ehis Odijie
Posted over 1 year ago
If there is so much aid in developing countries, why poverty is increasing in these regions and the industrialized world?
There seem to be a pretend ignorance in this discussion, which i don't think most of us can afford, that aid is a development tool that has failed. That the United States and all the aid donors provide aid for development and now they are confused because they want development for the poor so badly. Aid, by its very definition, is a way of getting leaders of poorer countries to do what you want more like a refined gunboat diplomacy. There is no better way to bring this out than constant treat to withdraw support when the recipient goes out of order. Aid and development doesn't mix because the problem of the poor or underdeveloped in not shortage of funds but lack of what I call productive value. Americans are actually creating more poor people with its trade policy. The example I like to give is the case of cotton. In. In Mali, more than three million people – a third of the population – depend on cotton to survive, while the United States has 25,000 cotton farmers. The U.S. cotton farmers are paid approximately as much from government subsidies as they earn from the total value of their harvest. In the 2001/2002 period, the value of U.S. cotton production amounted to $3 billion at world market prices with subsidies of $3.9bn in the same year. What makes the level of U.S. farm subsidies so significant for the world market is that the United States exports half of the cotton it produces, so that America’s export prices have a great influence on the world price of cotton. Several studies have attempted to describe the effect of US cotton subsidies on African cotton producers. A study by the Fair-trade Foundation suggests that cotton subsidies from the U.S. are costing West African cotton producers (Mali, Benin, Burkina Faso and Chad) £155m a year (Jowit, 2010). Another study by Oxfam estimates the lost income for West Africa cotton producers as $191m (£118m) each year, while sub-Saharan cotton exporters lost $302m as a direct consequence of US cotton subsidies.