September 28th, 2016 by nathan Leave a reply »

with active citizens and societies and efficient States to ensure safety and compliance with the law, and capable of promoting economic growth that benefits all.For too long, experts have crossed fingers hoping that economic growth by itself alone were enough to end poverty. But it has been consciously ignored that inequalities prevent that growth translates into lower poverty. Now it is increasingly clear that the only way to put an end to the flagrant inequalities that have condemned to the misery to more than 1 billion people is through a redistribution never deep power, assets and opportunities, according to Gonzalo Fanjul, director of research at Intermon Oxfam.Indicates that two examples: the world never lived a phase of technological, scientific and economic development as the end of the 20th century; However, despite some progress, it was not capable of ending poverty. While the exports from Latin America increased of $ 96,000 million in 1981 to 752.000 million in 2007, the number of poor (understood as those living on less than two dollars a day) increased from 136 million to 209 million between 1980 and 2005. Interesting as drafted it to communicate, the book is full of examples of what has worked and what has failed in relation to the fight against poverty and CITES multiple examples of how the mobilization of society, together with democratic and developmental States, they have achieved significant levels of development. Fifty years ago, South Korea was poorer that Sudan today is industry leader. Other successful examples are Taiwan, Botswana or Mauritius. Sri Lanka, a country of medium low income, has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. No doubt, says Green in his book, that poor communities on the planet will pay the price of climate change, caused mainly by the proliferating carbon emissions of the rich. Such extremes are both morally repugnant and a waste of talent and potential.


Comments are closed.