Display:
Yes, regime changes would be good opportunities to repudiate odious debt. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen that way, for a variety of reasons (most of them not very good).

Another issue for Africa is that on most of the continent, the infrastructure really isn't anything to write home about, except in the sense that you'll have plenty of time to write home if you try to use it to get from A to B. And of course, there's the whole rainforest belt, where it's pretty limited how much European-style industrialisation you can do at all, due to the climate. Property protection really comes rather far down the list of Things To Do.

To illustrate, recall that Yeltsin's Russia had very good de jure property protection (considering the lack of popular legitimacy of the Yeltsin regime, de facto is another story...). This did not prevent a massive capital flight to flag-of-convenience countries.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Mar 8th, 2009 at 05:28:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
de jure is rather useless, if people don't trust, that the law will be followed.

It is very clear, that Russian oligarchs tried to get their money out of Russia to get it out of reach of politics.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers

by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Sun Mar 8th, 2009 at 05:31:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series