The Global Poverty Trap

Posted By: kamalik @ 12/28/2007 2:30:31 AM

Comment: I tend to agree with the role of culture in economic growth. But then culture is not static; it keeps evolving under the influence of various factors, may it be political, religous or environmental. There was a marked difference in the pre and post industrial revolution culture of England. In addition to culture there are certain historical events which change the entire course of history. In our present day history, 9/11 is such an event afterwhich world was never the same. Similarly the process of colonization started by Britain seems to be the main factor for accumulation of wealth and giving a boost to the economy.

Posted By: russellcole38 @ 11/09/2007 3:56:31 AM

Comment: This is an interesting thesis. However, rather than simply cultural factors that are proliferated according to biological determinants, a much simpler explanation for England's industrialization consists, simply, of the presence of a wool trade, which effectively precipitated the closure of the commons, leading to displacement among agraians from their traditional manorial existences and communities. Further, wool was related to the textile trade that, in turn, attracted rural agraians from the countryside into the centers of this early industrail mode of production. this is not to say that culture had no role in the transformation into an industrial capital economy. However, the interplay of culture and the material conditions of the economy are more complex than explanations where one cites either culture or materialism as the antecedent to the other. This is to say that the economist who has proffered this thesis fails to understand the recursive relations between culture and economy: culture may produce an economic mode of production, but vice versa economics affects the condition of culture.
russ cole
http://www.midwest-populistamerica.com

Posted By: brogowski @ 11/01/2007 3:36:09 PM

Comment: Please...The reason we have such incredible economic growth is due to our hedonism. We look no farther than today so we are using up all of our resources very quickly. We are overfishing the oceans, and abusing the soil. This is all without mentioning the horrors of global warming. Let's stop using so much stuff!
Lee Anne Brogowski

Posted By: kg101 @ 11/01/2007 7:47:12 AM

Comment: The key phrase that hits me is the patience and drive of a middle class.

Posted By: cerebralmanas @ 11/01/2007 2:58:49 AM

Comment: Reminds one of Pierre Bordieu's concept of 'cultural capital' which capacitates upperclasss guys in contrast to their lower class counterparts ,to move on their growth trajectory.

Posted By: cerebralmanas @ 11/01/2007 2:38:13 AM

Comment: You r right Mr. Samuelson, Culture is perhaps one of the biggest factors influencing growth. Even Marx acknowledges indirectly while makes a criticism of the capitalistic society. Pierre Bordieu calls it cultural capital which allows upper class children to stay ahead in comparison to their lower class counterparts in terms of job prospects. The values of a particular class or community ,ultimately streamlines its growth trajectory. The fact that india is coming up as a n Asian giant testifiesthe fact that the values of the Great Indian Middle Class is growth oriented and the vice versa. Although, it can safely be attributed to a great degree to the change in government Policies.

Posted By: Azim @ 10/31/2007 1:12:33 PM

Comment: So, it is the culture that will be the determinent factor for reducing poverty in any society but not the factors that are occuring in the world statge. According to the Milinium goals of reducing the poverty by 50% from the face of the earth is than only a pipe dream if we happen to take the theory that Mr. Clark is weighing in. He does though agree that the transformation of economy which is based on technological advancement and the acceptance of it by societies is merely fruitless. Again, I for one will dispute this Economist's assertion that poverty cannot be tackled because sociatal and cultural barrier may prevent from meeting that goal.

I am disputing his assertion because as the technological and global economic strength are generating a momentum that if Governmennts around the wprld takes that foresight to defend that goal, I think it is do able. As Nobel Lorriate Mr. Mohammad Yunus claims that if our minds are really geared to eliminate poverty, we can achieve it and put poverty in the museum. Off course the task is very difficult but again in this era of Democracy, technological advancement coupled with political and openness among societies and countries, we could achieve it. For example, a country named Bangladesh is way within the march of reducing its poverty initiatives by the milinium goal reducing it to 50% that was taken in 1999.

So, you can tell me why can't it be done? We are no longer living in the dark age of the 1800's or for that matter in the 1700's. These are just history but nothing that Mr. Clark can defend. Let's give it a fair chance of reducing this poverty from the face of this earth. Theorizing is mostly a waste of time but if we can implement some sort of mechanism to tackle this issue will hopefully contribute to the world for both the North an d the Southern countries around the world. Let's hope for that.