Zimbabwe vs. Botswana: The Difference is Economic Freedom

[ShootSpeeders]

[. Plus, what you're saying sounds awfully prejudiced and it's an insult to the many black scientists/doctors/engineers - don't judge people as groups, judge them as individuals.

Oh dear - did i offend your little PC ears? HAHAHA. Actually there are very few black scientists. I mean legitimate. Nearly all of them got accepted at a college and graduated thru affirmative action and were hired on the same basis.

 

[TemplarKormac]

[. Plus, what you're saying sounds awfully prejudiced and it's an insult to the many black scientists/doctors/engineers - don't judge people as groups, judge them as individuals.

Oh dear - did i offend your little PC ears? HAHAHA. Actually there are very few black scientists. I mean legitimate. Nearly all of them got accepted at a college and graduated thru affirmative action and were hired on the same basis.

I'm going to have to disagree with that statement. Given the likes of Andrew Jackson, Thomas Sowell, Colin Powell, Martin Luther King, George Washington Carver, George Carruthers, Erich Jarvis and others.

 

[Hoosier4Liberty]

[. Plus, what you're saying sounds awfully prejudiced and it's an insult to the many black scientists/doctors/engineers - don't judge people as groups, judge them as individuals.

Oh dear - did i offend your little PC ears? HAHAHA. Actually there are very few black scientists. I mean legitimate. Nearly all of them got accepted at a college and graduated thru affirmative action and were hired on the same basis.

Look, I hate affirmative action just as much as you do, but wouldn't you agree that there are plenty of dumb white people and smart black people? Trends/averages don't apply to every person. What I'm saying is, people should be judged as individuals, not as members of a group, whether it be for describing their intelligence or for deciding college admissions.

 

[bendog]

One thing I've never understood about liberals is why they fail to understand how imperative economic freedom is for a country to prosper. Having economic freedom means that a country is free to trade with others for what one needs and wants, the national currency is stable and not subject to massive inflation (your wealth is protected), the rule of law and private property is protected, and government stays small relative to the size of the economy. Countries that are ranked highly in economic freedom in indices like Frasier and Heritage do much better than those ranked near the bottom.

Botswana and Zimbabwe provide a perfect case study into this.
Botswana and Zimbabwe: A Tale of Two Countries ? The American Magazine

Zimbabwe used to be the "crown jewel" of Africa. It had thriving agricultural, industrial, and financial industries. Then, socialist Robert Mugabe took power. He forced white people out of the country and redistributed land to people who didn't know how to farm. He raised taxes massively and increased government spending as much as 500% of GDP during the 2000's. The results of his policies? Zimbabwe went from the richest country in Africa to arguably the poorest country in the world. Inflation was so rampant that the $100 trillion bill became worthless.

Meanwhile, in Botswana, which was the 3rd poorest country in the 1960's, the leaders took a different approach. They let people keep more of what they earned, and they decided to give capitalism and free enterprise a chance? The result, income per capita in Botswana grew faster since 1966 than any other country in the world (even China and India!) This economic success story is a testament to the virtues of free enterprise; it should be taught in every classroom in America instead of the socialist garbage that spews forth from Paul Krugman.

Empirically, economic freedom is the only way a country can attain prosperity, and it is the only way a country can keep prosperity.

Liberals, as much as you may think economic freedom isn't "fair", can't you at least see that it works in bettering the lives of the vast majority of people?

If you don't believe me, ask yourself this: Would you rather live in a country at the top of this list or at the bottom?
Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

why would you hypothesize that liberals have something in common with mubabe? Seriously. WTF are you thinking? And, I'm no Obama fan, but JFC!

 

[Hoosier4Liberty]

One thing I've never understood about liberals is why they fail to understand how imperative economic freedom is for a country to prosper. Having economic freedom means that a country is free to trade with others for what one needs and wants, the national currency is stable and not subject to massive inflation (your wealth is protected), the rule of law and private property is protected, and government stays small relative to the size of the economy. Countries that are ranked highly in economic freedom in indices like Frasier and Heritage do much better than those ranked near the bottom.

Botswana and Zimbabwe provide a perfect case study into this.
Botswana and Zimbabwe: A Tale of Two Countries ? The American Magazine

Zimbabwe used to be the "crown jewel" of Africa. It had thriving agricultural, industrial, and financial industries. Then, socialist Robert Mugabe took power. He forced white people out of the country and redistributed land to people who didn't know how to farm. He raised taxes massively and increased government spending as much as 500% of GDP during the 2000's. The results of his policies? Zimbabwe went from the richest country in Africa to arguably the poorest country in the world. Inflation was so rampant that the $100 trillion bill became worthless.

Meanwhile, in Botswana, which was the 3rd poorest country in the 1960's, the leaders took a different approach. They let people keep more of what they earned, and they decided to give capitalism and free enterprise a chance? The result, income per capita in Botswana grew faster since 1966 than any other country in the world (even China and India!) This economic success story is a testament to the virtues of free enterprise; it should be taught in every classroom in America instead of the socialist garbage that spews forth from Paul Krugman.

Empirically, economic freedom is the only way a country can attain prosperity, and it is the only way a country can keep prosperity.

Liberals, as much as you may think economic freedom isn't "fair", can't you at least see that it works in bettering the lives of the vast majority of people?

If you don't believe me, ask yourself this: Would you rather live in a country at the top of this list or at the bottom?
Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

why would you hypothesize that liberals have something in common with mubabe? Seriously. WTF are you thinking? And, I'm no Obama fan, but JFC!

Liberals certainly aren't 100% like Mugabe, but both believe more government is the solution. Mugabe redistributed the wealth(Zimbabwe land reform), and it resulted in a massive loss of wealth for his country.

All I'm saying to liberals is this: the more economic freedom a country has, the better it will do. So, stop promoting policies that kill economic freedom!

 

[bendog]

If you were anymore black and white you'd be a chik file commercial.

 

[Hoosier4Liberty]

If you were anymore black and white you'd be a chik file commercial.

All I'm saying are these 3 facts:
1. Liberals support policies that reduce economic freedom.
2. Countries that abandon the ideals of economic freedom do poorly.
3. Countries that embrace the ideals of economic freedom do very well.

 

[flacaltenn]

One thing I've never understood about liberals is why they fail to understand how imperative economic freedom is for a country to prosper. Having economic freedom means that a country is free to trade with others for what one needs and wants, the national currency is stable and not subject to massive inflation (your wealth is protected), the rule of law and private property is protected, and government stays small relative to the size of the economy. Countries that are ranked highly in economic freedom in indices like Frasier and Heritage do much better than those ranked near the bottom.

Botswana and Zimbabwe provide a perfect case study into this.
Botswana and Zimbabwe: A Tale of Two Countries ? The American Magazine

Zimbabwe used to be the "crown jewel" of Africa. It had thriving agricultural, industrial, and financial industries. Then, socialist Robert Mugabe took power. He forced white people out of the country and redistributed land to people who didn't know how to farm. He raised taxes massively and increased government spending as much as 500% of GDP during the 2000's. The results of his policies? Zimbabwe went from the richest country in Africa to arguably the poorest country in the world. Inflation was so rampant that the $100 trillion bill became worthless.

Meanwhile, in Botswana, which was the 3rd poorest country in the 1960's, the leaders took a different approach. They let people keep more of what they earned, and they decided to give capitalism and free enterprise a chance? The result, income per capita in Botswana grew faster since 1966 than any other country in the world (even China and India!) This economic success story is a testament to the virtues of free enterprise; it should be taught in every classroom in America instead of the socialist garbage that spews forth from Paul Krugman.

Empirically, economic freedom is the only way a country can attain prosperity, and it is the only way a country can keep prosperity.

Liberals, as much as you may think economic freedom isn't "fair", can't you at least see that it works in bettering the lives of the vast majority of people?

If you don't believe me, ask yourself this: Would you rather live in a country at the top of this list or at the bottom?
Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

why would you hypothesize that liberals have something in common with mubabe? Seriously. WTF are you thinking? And, I'm no Obama fan, but JFC!

You would not believe the number and commitment of Leftists I debated in the 90s DEFENDING Mugabe.. On the basis that he rescued his country from the tyrannies of Colonialism and Economic Imperialism.. This guy was (is) the poster child for blaming Britain,Spain and the US for all of the world's hellholes..

Plenty of support for THAT THEORY from the Obama himself --- if you read his book.. He's probably a top 10 admirer of Mugabe ejecting white biz from his country and giving it all to his cronies...

 

[Hoosier4Liberty]

^Exactly.

Liberals have their idols and they won't look at hard data that disproves their fantasies.

In the 1980's, many liberals overestimated the Soviet Union's GDP by a factor of 2 and thought it would take much longer for the empire to collapse. Their ideology gets in the way of the facts.

 

[flacaltenn]

^Exactly.

Liberals have their idols and they won't look at hard data that disproves their fantasies.

In the 1980's, many liberals overestimated the Soviet Union's GDP by a factor of 2 and thought it would take much longer for the empire to collapse. Their ideology gets in the way of the facts.

Great thread. The disparity between Socialist tyranny and the wiser countries of Africa just keeps getting more stark.. The BIGGEST pain to the PEOPLE of Zimbabwe is not the internal political strife, but their resulting ISOLATION from the rest of the world.

It may take a wheelbarrow of Zimbab money to go the store --- but once you're there, the choices really suck. Because no other country wants to trade or invest in your little hellhole because of your "dictator for life".. Same for job prospects and education..

These folks might as well be on another planet.. After modern day slavery, this has to be the next worse thing.. BUT --- at least they don't have any Imperialists telling em what to do.

 

[JoeB131]

First, there was massive wealth redistribution under Mugabe with his land reforms. The economy in zimbabwe was already losing ground to Botswana in the eighties as the American article shows. Also, how can you deny botswana's success in comparison to the rest of Africa as something other than sound economic policies? The country isn't that special otherwise.

But the point the man was making was that Zimbabwe didn't redistrubute the land when it stopped being Rhodesia. In fact, for a long time, Mugabe let the white farmers continue to own and run the farms, until people demanded otherwise.

but here's the important difference.

The population of Botswana is only 2 million.

The Population of Zimbabwe is 13 million.

So, yeah, Botswana works really well as a free market, given - ALMOST NO ONE ACTUALLY HAS TO LIVE THERE!!!!!

 

[flacaltenn]

It onlyy took mugabe 2 years to fire the opposition leader in his cabinet. Plunging the country into a 6 yr resumption of their perrenial civil war. Nothing much got done for that period other than massive slaughter and decay.