Latin America is defeating poverty

[Perspicuo]

DW (español): América Latina: éxitos en la lucha contra la pobreza
http://www.dw.de/américa-latina-éxitos-en-la-lucha-contra-la-pobreza/a-17948939

“Ni los mayores optimistas contaron con que América Latina iba a ser una de las regiones con los mejores resultados”, se lee en un informe del Banco Mundial. Según este, la pobreza extrema se ha reducido un 50 por ciento en la región entre 1990 y 2010.

Más de 70 millones de personas en América Latina han superado la pobreza entre 2003 y 2011. Y unos 50 millones pasaron a integrar la capa media. Por primera vez, la capa media es en la región mayor que el estrato de pobres, dice el Banco Mundial.

Translation:

"Not even the most optimitic counted on Latin America would be one of the regions with the best results," reads a report by the World Bank. According to the report, extreme poverty has been reduced by 50 percent in the region between 1990 and 2010 .

More than 70 million people in Latin America have overcome poverty between 2003 and 2011, and about 50 million became part of the middle stratum. For the first time, the middle stratum is greater than the poor, says the World Bank.

Reducing poverty is one of the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) agreed by the international community in 2000 and must be achieved by 2015. Right now it is already negotiating new targets, the "post-MDGs."

The pioneers : Bolivia, Brazil and Peru

Particularly Brazil, Bolivia and Peru are the outstanding winners in poverty reduction. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC), poverty in Brazil between 1990 and 2012 declined from 47.5 percent to 18.8 percent. In Bolivia it decreased between 2000 and 2011 from 63.7 to 36.3 percent. Extreme poverty fell even in the same period from 38.8 percent to 18.7 percent.

The World Bank notes in the case of Peru sustained growth, increased life expectancy and a doubling of per capita income from $5500 to $10,000 between 2003 and 2012. Poverty in the country declined from 54.7 percent in 2001 to 23.7 percent in 2012.

From Latin America to Laos

According to experts, the success is based on three factors: sustained growth, social redistribution and sound economic policy. Very important are the social programs tied to certain conditions. Many other countries have been inspired by these transfer programs to develop themselves, for example, Cambodia, Laos, Rwanda, Indonesia, Kenya and South Africa.

By the way, once I read the news this morning (via Deutschwelle español on FB), I tried to find this in English speaking outlets. Nothing at all. I haven't the ghost of an idea why.

In any case, one would think Mexico would be the star of this show, since it borders with the most powerful developed country on Earth. In Europe, the most successful countries for centruries were the ones closest to Paris. (Coincidentally, Spain, south of that border was an exception to this, after the Peace of Westphalia.)

 

[Underseer]

It's not just that Mexico borders the US.

Mexicans are hard workers with loads of entrepreneurial spirit. Mexico is a large nation with lots of people and natural resources. Theoretically, they have all of the necessary ingredients for a successful capitalist economy, and I've always wondered why they don't have one.

 

[skepticalbip]

That is great news.

But I think it will give many people an incorrect idea. The word "poverty" is a relative term, not an absolute. These nations are doing a good job of eliminating desperate poverty and should be commended but it doesn't mean that those who were elevated in living standard now have a better standard of living than those who are considered to be living in poverty in Switzerland.

It would be nice if there was an objective definition of poverty established that only dealt with absolute living standard and applied internationally rather than living standard with respect to the living standard of others in the society. If there were such an objective definition then hearing that a certain percentage of people living in some country are in poverty would have a real and significant meaning. Depending on this definition, a country like Haiti could be found to have well over 90% of its population living in poverty (poverty in Haiti is now considered to be less than $2 US per day income). By the definition of poverty as applied in Haiti, I think it would be damned hard to find anyone in Switzerland living in poverty.

 

[dystopian]

In any case, one would think Mexico would be the star of this show, since it borders with the most powerful developed country on Earth. In Europe, the most successful countries for centruries were the ones closest to Paris. (Coincidentally, Spain, south of that border was an exception to this, after the Peace of Westphalia.)

Uhm, I'm not sure that's true. Actually, I'm sure it isn't. The most successful countries were successful for many reasons, but being close to Paris had nothing to do with it (if anything, those countries would've been even more successful if they didn't constantly have to deal with the threat of French invasion).

 

[skepticalbip]

It's not just that Mexico borders the US.

Mexicans are hard workers with loads of entrepreneurial spirit. Mexico is a large nation with lots of people and natural resources. Theoretically, they have all of the necessary ingredients for a successful capitalist economy, and I've always wondered why they don't have one.

An overly controlling government. I have a friend in Mexico who has to struggle constantly with government regulators to get permission to do anything. He has a couple businesses. One he wanted to expand to produce cheese rather than just milk and has been blocked by regulators for more than eight years now even though he has already bought the equipment.

 

[Perspicuo]

skepticalbip: It would be extreme poverty. Halved.

dystopian: I didn't mean because of Paris. I was using that as a general point of orientation. It could be a certain civlization/cultural powerhouse approximately the area about the Seine, the Rhine, and later the Thames. The level of civilization decreased in general (not absoutely) in concentric circles farther and farther away that area in Europe.

 

[doubtingt]

It's not just that Mexico borders the US.

Mexicans are hard workers with loads of entrepreneurial spirit. Mexico is a large nation with lots of people and natural resources. Theoretically, they have all of the necessary ingredients for a successful capitalist economy, and I've always wondered why they don't have one.

An overly controlling government.

And a government itself that is controlled by drug cartels that murders dissenters and journalist who try to expose that corruption.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

An overly controlling government.

And a government itself that is controlled by drug cartels that murders dissenters and journalist who try to expose that corruption.

Or so people claim. If all the people who try to verify and expose that end up dead, then there's really no way to tell for sure.

 

[fromderinside]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, and at what cost? Want a rain forest? Better go see it before it disappears. Seems that if big wants it and little can be used to supply it it doesn't matter whether it's good for us overall it can be used to promote successful capitalism.

Really guys. Think things through. When the laws begin to reflect actual social demands, then ,and only then, will any progress be made. So much clamor about the effects of harvesting and exploiting resources for the little guy.

Come on. Look at the toast. The jam is made of resources.

 

[Perspicuo]

Extreme poverty is never good. That has nothing to do with rain forest destruction. The profits are not given to the extreme poor, but to the already rich. Those felling the trees are few and (as everywhere) not as many as to make a dent in the statistics. The economy has to be better overall, meaning better laws regulating and taxing businesses, education, interest rate regulation, and other conditions for creating jobs and enabling workers.

Diminishing poverty requires resources, but forests are just wood. Any other resource (save for mining, but valuable minerals in extractable quantities are not inside every ground) is destroyed with the razing of the jungle.

BTW, Fromderinside, what you said almost sounds like a plead for Brazilians to stay poor so that your lifestyle in not endangered. I hope that's not what you implied, but in any case: a backwards country is not a good preserver of resources. Or good at anything else.

 

[Duke Leto]

Get rid of Leaded Gas and and the USA's retarded drug laws and you guys down South will be living la vida rica in a generation.

(Latin America's terrible crime rate is clearly linked to leaded gas use and narcotics trafficking.)

 

[skepticalbip]

Get rid of Leaded Gas and and the USA's retarded drug laws and you guys down South will be living la vida rica in a generation.

(Latin America's terrible crime rate is clearly linked to leaded gas use and narcotics trafficking.)

That seems rather simplistic. Or was it intended as satirical?

Although US drug laws contribute, it is far from the only cause or even a significant cause of poverty in the Americas or anywhere else in the world.

 

[Duke Leto]

Get rid of Leaded Gas and and the USA's retarded drug laws and you guys down South will be living la vida rica in a generation.

(Latin America's terrible crime rate is clearly linked to leaded gas use and narcotics trafficking.)

That seems rather simplistic. Or was it intended as satirical?

Although US drug laws contribute, it is far from the only cause or even a significant cause of poverty in the Americas or anywhere else in the world.

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

 

[skepticalbip]

That seems rather simplistic. Or was it intended as satirical?

Although US drug laws contribute, it is far from the only cause or even a significant cause of poverty in the Americas or anywhere else in the world.

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

There are only a hand full of countries in the world where leaded gas is still available... none of them in the Americas. There are three in Asia, one in Africa, and two in the middle east.

http://www.lead.org.au/fs/fst27.html

 

[Duke Leto]

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

There are only a hand full of countries in the world where leaded gas is still available... none of them in the Americas. There are three in Asia, one in Africa, and two in the middle east.

http://www.lead.org.au/fs/fst27.html

It takes ~15 years to get the stuff out of the "Likely Criminals" population, and it resides in the soil for decades more. Seriously, read the Mother Jones article.

 

[Perspicuo]

That seems rather simplistic. Or was it intended as satirical?

Although US drug laws contribute, it is far from the only cause or even a significant cause of poverty in the Americas or anywhere else in the world.

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

Most Latin American countries banned leaded gasoline in the 1990s.

http://www.bvsde.ops-oms.org/bvsacd/eco/030724.pdf

There are only a hand full of countries in the world where leaded gas is still available... none of them in the Americas. There are three in Asia, one in Africa, and two in the middle east.

http://www.lead.org.au/fs/fst27.html

It takes ~15 years to get the stuff out of the "Likely Criminals" population, and it resides in the soil for decades more. Seriously, read the Mother Jones article.

The US was ahead of L.Am. a decade before.

I am supporting the idea of leaded gasoline and crime. The only detail is that Lat.Am. already phased it out 15 to 20 y.ago.

 

[Duke Leto]

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

Most Latin American countries banned leaded gasoline in the 1990s.

http://www.bvsde.ops-oms.org/bvsacd/eco/030724.pdf

There are only a hand full of countries in the world where leaded gas is still available... none of them in the Americas. There are three in Asia, one in Africa, and two in the middle east.

http://www.lead.org.au/fs/fst27.html

It takes ~15 years to get the stuff out of the "Likely Criminals" population, and it resides in the soil for decades more. Seriously, read the Mother Jones article.

The US was ahead of L.Am. a decade before.

I am supporting the idea of leaded gasoline and crime. The only detail is that Lat.Am. already phased it out 15 to 20 y.ago.

Well, it depends on the jurisdiction obviously, but Venezuela was apparently late to the party in 2005. I imagine Costa Rica was much earlier. It'd be interesting to see a detailed breakdown. Anyway, Mexico should be seeing a peak of per capita violent crime around about now since it phased out around 1998.

Also, keep in mind there's the soil contamination issue.

 

[mopc]

That seems rather simplistic. Or was it intended as satirical?

Although US drug laws contribute, it is far from the only cause or even a significant cause of poverty in the Americas or anywhere else in the world.

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

Brazil fully abolished leaded gasoline in the late 1970s with the advent of the ethanol industry, when ethanol was added to gasoline instead of lead. Yet criminality started rising precisely after that point. So no, your theory fails.

 

[Kharakov]

Brazil fully abolished leaded gasoline in the late 1970s with the advent of the ethanol industry, when ethanol was added to gasoline instead of lead. Yet criminality started rising precisely after that point. So no, your theory fails.

I've read something that indicated that violent crime rates are tied to childhood exposure to lead, so that a toddler exposed to lead in 1979 would be slightly more likely to commit aggressive acts during their teenage and later years.

I think the article mentioned Venezuela, or maybe Chile, having phased out lead more recently is expected to have a peak crime rate ~11 years after leaded gas phase out.

Keep in mind that there is still craploads of free lead in cities, due to years of lead pollution, so the effects are going to take a loooonnnggg time to taper off completely.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Nope, dead serious. Latin America's crime problem is correlated to their ongoing use of Leaded Gas. Getting rid of it will reduce crime and therefore help positive economic growth.

See this study on the stuff in the USA.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

See also the lack of regulations against Leaded Gas until recently in most of the 3rd World.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead

Notice also the murder rate on a continent by continent basis. Latin America is way worse than more impoverished and just as densely populated parts of the developing world with fewer internal combustion engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Just because a fix is really easy doesn't mean it won't work.

Brazil fully abolished leaded gasoline in the late 1970s with the advent of the ethanol industry, when ethanol was added to gasoline instead of lead. Yet criminality started rising precisely after that point. So no, your theory fails.

There's a long lag from the removal of leaded gasoline and the end of the effects of lead on the population.