Some states are absolutely unequally prepared for global economic competition. There are some that are able to survive in global competition by mixing aspects such an externally focused trade system and the encouragement of a growing economy domestically. However, fairness within the system is relative. Also, the amount of wealth in our world is fixed, and thus a hierarchy forms. The combination of a hierarchy and farness provides an interesting arument about the success or failure of these states.
A country’s preparedness can be measured fairly well by examining the health of its economy. While any country and it’s expansion is subject to the natural business cycle, developed countries have been able to balance the improvement of technology, the flow of labor, human capital, natural resources and physical capital to boost their productivity. This delicate balance is defined in economics as the production function. In countries that are undeveloped or steadily developing, this production function grows at a different rate because of the natural inequality that exists around the world. Different regions have different levels of natural resources, different approaches to education, and different forms of physical capital. The improvements in any of the factors of the production are relative to the abilities of a country’s preparedness. For instance, any country is limited in its ability to produce by the amount of natural resources it possesses. While some anomalies exist (Japan), the majority of countries are limited in their ability to be economic competitors today because the natural resources they may possess are not significant aspects of the economic market in which we live. In addition, countries that are unable to provide sufficient human capital cannot continue their growth. Human capital, or the knowledge and skills that workers acquire through education, training, and experience, is one of the most important aspects of being prepared for global economic competition because the skills acquired are necessary to contribute to society. Naturally though, countries are all unequally prepared because of their global location, but the fairness of this inequality is relative.
What is fair? We are taught that life just isn’t fair when we are children because we can’t get what we want. Do countries feel the same way when they are unable to achieve the goals they have set for themselves economically? Frankly, I think that fairness has no place in the economic realm. A large reason for this is that the amount of wealth in the global economy is fixed. While it may not seem fair to many countries, a hierarchy forms around the amount of wealth. Countries with large pools of natural resources are able to maintain their economic position by securing a large portion of this wealth in their gross domestic products and thus are front-runners in the global economy. More on this later though. Countries didn’t get to look on a map and choose their location based on where the most resources were. However, everyone is stuck with what they have. Unfortunately, many developing countries, such as many African nations, with vast diamond and mineral deposits are squandering their potential to utilize these resources to their advantage and simply throw it away. So is it fair that they have these resources but waste them? Who is to say? The United States has plenty of resources that it wastes, and plenty of people complain that it is unfair that we are so wealthy. So why aren’t we complaining about the fact these underdeveloped countries are squandering what they have been given? It wouldn’t be fair of us because we have so much.
Back to the natural resources argument for a second. As we know, change is one of the only constants in the world that we live in, so consider this situation for a second. What would happen if we priced out drinking water on the commodity market the same as we do crude oil? If climate change in fact is going to change our world into a place with chronic drought and failing crops, clean water will be come the most precious commodity in the world and prices will soar. Thus, nations who have relied on their crude oil deposits to compete in the global economy will no longer be needed in the economy because people are too worried about acquiring the basic fluid for their daily lives. The hierarchy would switch dramatically and countries such as Canada, with vast amounts of fresh drinking water, have the potential to be front-runners in a global economy.
So because of the constant change the world experiences, it is nearly impossible to judge the success or failure of a state based on a scale of fairness. We may be able to say one day that having lots of oil and being very wealthy off of that oil is fair and thus the nation is successful. However, the next day when oil is obsolete and people are driving around in lithium powered cars, the country that has the largest deposits of lithium (which today is Bolivia, which olds 50%-70% of the world’s reserves of lithium) will become of the largest successes on the economic stage. So preparedness will always be unequal, because the needs of the future are constantly changing.
No comments:
Post a Comment