Comments on: Commonwealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet, by Jeffrey Sachs

By: From Poverty to Power, by Duncan Green « Make Wealth History

From Poverty to Power, by Duncan Green « Make Wealth History — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:13:16 +0000

[...] Commonwealth, by Jeffrey Sachs [...]

By: State of the Planet - the Earth Institute blog « MAKE WEALTH HISTORY

State of the Planet - the Earth Institute blog « MAKE WEALTH HISTORY — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 15:31:55 +0000

[...] John McArthur, head of Millennium Promise, and Jeffrey Sachs, author of The End of Poverty and Commonwealth. Should be a blog worth keeping an eye [...]

By: Why economic growth alone cannot solve poverty « MAKE WEALTH HISTORY

Why economic growth alone cannot solve poverty « MAKE WEALTH HISTORY — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:35:00 +0000

[...] “Rapid economic growth and the spread of prosperity are on the way” he promises in CommonWealth, fearlessly equating economic growth with the spread of prosperity. “This spread of [...]

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:35:58 +0000

Yes, there is a huge amount of coal left and a number of countries, including China and the US, are investing in coal-to-oil plants. Unfortunately this is a hugely polluting fuel, as there are considerable emissions in producing it as well as burning it at the point of use.
As for CCS, it’s interesting that of the 30 coal-to-oil plants being hastily built at the moment, only one (in Australia) is bothering to trial CCS. Using coal is a solution that’s a snap reaction to rising oil prices, with little regard for the environmental consequences.

By: David Nissen

David Nissen — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:33:27 +0000

RE: “pinning hope on a currently non-existent technology and a rapidly declining natural resource.”

The problem is that fossil resources in total are not rapidly declining. There are about 18,000 gigatons of CO2 equivalent of conventional oil, natural gas, and coal (not counting methane hydrates) in the surface of the earth, of which we have burnt about 1,100 gigatons since the beginning of the industrial revolution, raising atmospheric CO2 from 280 ppm to 384 ppm.

Of course, most of it is coal, but above $50/b oil, we can make any liquid fuel out of coal.

So there is 70% fossil fuels in the primary energy balance now, and the about the same in 2030 in most projection. There will be significant fossil primary energy in the balance for centuries. CCS is not just one alternative, it is a necessity. But its costs and difficulties require bringing in conservation behavior, efficiency in the production of energy services, and alternative primary energies as well.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 11:37:40 +0000

Thanks for your detailed and insightful comments Bill. I’m actually reading a book by Erik Reinert (the man responsible for the Attila the Hun quote at the top of this post) at the moment, called ‘How Rich Countries got Rich, and why Poor Countries stay Poor’ which reaches similar conclusions. There’s a chapter called ‘why the millennium goals are a bad idea’ which is an interesting counter-point to Sach’s flag waving for them.
The case, as you say, is that they fail yet again to recognise the key problems. All the goals address symptoms, rather than the underlying inequalities and insufficient institutional foundations for real development.
De Soto’s Peruvian example rings true too. I’ve seen that kind of inefficient bureaucracy first-hand in Madagascar in the 90s, with the corruption that often accompanies it.

By: bill greene

bill greene — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 01:55:24 +0000

The problem preventing an end to poverty is, as you say, not the absence of solutions, but the inability to agree on what the best solution is. For sixty years the “rich” countries and the large international organizations have poured trillions of dollars of aid into Africa alone with no discernible benefit. The elites who adminster aid have been of one mind–to adminster their centralized and theoretical programs from the top down. This is because as professional government “planners” they do not recognize that all economic progress comes from the bottom up. Jeffrey Sachs has muddied the waters , being half right and half wrong: He has wisely called for empowering the masses at the bottom of these Third World countries to allow them to participate in their economies, own and transfer property, save and invest, without the oppressive bureacratic controls and restrictions that presently hamper their actions. Sachs wrote, “When the end of poverty arrives, as it can and should in our own generation, it will be citizens in a million communities in rich and poor countries alike, rather than a handful of political leaders who will have turned the tide.” This is right from Hernando deSoto’s prescription: No amount of central planning, government investment, or financial aid can ever match the unfettered energy and activity that can come from the efforts of the multitudes at the bottom. But they must be granted full and easy access to commercial activity and must be assured the safe and ready transferability of their assets. Those necessary legal and financial systems that allow Americans to freely participate in our economy are what is lacking in the LDC’s, and their absence is what holds the masses in those nations in poverty. It is not the lack of “money” or assets that retards these people– De Soto writes, “If the United States were to hike its foreign-aid budget to the level recommended by the United Nations–0.7% of national income–it would take the richest country on earth more than 150 years to transfer to the world’s poor resources equal to those they already possess.” Obviously, if they can’t work and multiply what they already have, how will giving them more money for 150 years help? The only help these gifts can accomplish is o sustain the marginal existence of whoever receives a bag of foodstuffs. Pulitzer Prizes have gone to the photos of pot-bellied children in Africa for decades–but my grandmother saw them and cried 60 years ago. The children that survived begot the starving pot-bellied kids we saw pictures of in the 1970′s, and those who survived then are now producing the suffering children who are depicted today. One of the typical characteristics of the over-educated elites who run the government programs is that they are so sure the programs they devise are correct, that they do not recognize failure, alter course, or admit defeat–instead they double the size of their ineffective programs. Theirs is a perversion of Churchill’s admonition to “never, ever, ever, ever, give up.” Aside from the burden imposed on logic by their inflated egos, the foreign aid elites are hindered by their dislike of free economic activity, capitalism, private property, and limited government. Of course, many of them would be without jobs if we reduced the size of government and central administrative and regulatory agencies. But it those government “hurdles” to business that are the problem! De Soto determined that for a Peruvian resident to start a small business, a hair dresser, say or a shoe repair shop, he or she would have to spend two years, making over a hundred trips into the capitol city, filling in hundreds of forms, and meeting dozens of licensing requirements just to open shop. And even then, he would have limited protection of his property, and could not readily transfer the business to others. Until these nations develop the mechanics to allow their people to engage in business any money spent will provide no lasting help. The Millennium Goal should never be enacted because it will throw good money after bad, postpone the institutional reforms needed to attack the underlying problem, end up largely in the bank accounts of corrupt political leaders, strengthen the power of established autocrats so that it is more difficult to depose them, and constitute a wasted drain on our taxpayers.