What do you do with all the farmers? [Spengler]

Asia Times Online ^ | 9/26/2006 | Spengler

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

Agriculture employs half the world's population outside the advanced countries, where only one person in 40 still farms. In the United States, the ratio is one in 50. By prevailing standards of technology, 1.25 billion workers are redundant, and nearly 3 billion people (including their dependants) stand to be displaced. [1] The good news is that Chinese and Indian farmers comprise three-fifths of the world's total, and have good prospects of eventual integration into the world economy. But that leaves more than a billion people at risk, mainly in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East.

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

Intesting thought piece by Spengler. He indicates that a Palestinian state is not economically viable - result: war. Obviously, there are other reasons, but this perspective is an interesting addition.

[dirtboy]

He indicates that a Palestinian state is not economically viable - result: war.

I guess that's why Hong Kong, with little arable land, is such a strife-ridden poverty-stricken hellhole.

Whoops, it isn't. Maybe something else is keeping the Palestinians down - such as corrupt government and their desire to obliterate what should be their key trading partner, Israel.

[dirtboy]

The good news is that Chinese and Indian farmers comprise three-fifths of the world's total, and have good prospects of eventual integration into the world economy. But that leaves more than a billion people at risk, mainly in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East.

Methinks he has it backwards here as well. Increasing agricultural productivity LEADS to freeing up workers to engage in industry. You can't work in a steel mill if someone isn't capable of growing enough food for both his family and yours.

What will keep poor countries poor are the corrupt kleptocracies running them.

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

He points out how China has handled its problems. Clearly, the cultural element is dominant in determining how different societies and groups respond to economic challenges. The culture of the Middle East, and the Palestinians in particular, guarantee that the economic issue will turn into a festering sore and just add to their already mountain-high list of resentments and grievances.

[dirtboy]

Hong Kong was a synthesis of a unique British Administrator and the Chinese work ethic. Which goes you show, you don't need resources and arable land to be a success, just a work ethic and a government that gets out of your way.

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

Again, culture is dominant. The culture of the West and to a significant degree, the culture of Asia, allow economic dislocations to be turned into economic opportunities. The culture of Latin American and Africa cause them to turn into rage and resentment.

[wideawake]

If Israel is economically viable, there is no reason - other than the culture of Palestinian Arabs and their personal behavior - for the PA not to be economically viable.

The thesis is fatally flawed.

[Mark was here]

Give the Palestinian Arabs a green house and they can succeed.

That is succeed in breaking all the windows out in less than an half an hour.

[wideawake]

Reminds me of when the dictator Mugabe stole those Rhodesian farmers' land and gave it to his mobs.

They took these fabulously modern and highly profitable farms and looted the machinery for parts, ripped up the irrigation equipment to build huts with, ate all the grain, slaughtered the dairy herds for food, and took up residence in the stables.

Million dollar businesses turned into slum villages in months.

[Popocatapetl]

The United States went through a similar transition away from single family farms. The answer to what you do with all of those people is simple: small business entrepreneurship--the biggest employer in any efficient, modern economy.

But here is where it gets interesting. In the US, our laws are based on the Common Law, laws that are very pro creativity, initiative and business. One of its guiding principals is "that which is not expressly illegal, is legal". This means that if you can think of something that sells, you can go ahead and sell it, with minimum interference.

In Europe however (with the exception of England and the Norse nations), the basis of their laws are Roman Law and Napoleonic Law. And one of their guiding principals is "that which is not expressly legal, is illegal". This makes starting a small business very hard. In essence, you have to have a law passed to allow you to be creative and sell, before you are allowed to do so.

And this is why Europe has such perpetually high unemployment--they stifle creativity and small business creation. New ideas must be approved before use.

So the bottom line for nations around the world is this: either you encourage people to be creative and support themselves and others through entrepreneurship, or the best thing you can hope for is that the avian flu wipes out all of your "excess people."

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

Hong Kong has a virtual laissez-faire economy. I really enjoyed James Clavell's books,
Tai-Pan and Noble House.
Also, I visited Hong Kong in 1981. It was fascinating.

[THEUPMAN]

I don't want to burst your bubble ... but I think you would be interested in checking out the modern zoning laws.

Your statement
"One of its guiding principals is "that which is not expressly illegal, is legal""

May have been true in the past but things are changing very fast.
One of the main tenants of "zoning" is " that which is not expressly permitted is prohibited".

Check out the language in the ordinance closest to you.

[Popocatapetl]

It is relative. In Europe, before you could start your business, you would first need the permission of the EU bureaucracy, and then your national bureaucracy, and then regional and local bureaucracies. This could more than double your start-up costs.

On top of that, in their efforts to regulate everything, the number of onerous regulations you would have to submit to are staggering.

And finally, on top of that, you have much higher tax rates, so that even if you make it through the gauntlet, you will have to be satisfied with modest profits, even for a really good idea or product.

To recap, small business employs most people in modern, efficient economies. Therefore, whatever stimulates the creation of new small business will significantly help employment.