Jan Björklund (FP) om ledarskap vid Folkpartiets riksmötet i Västerås.

#svpol

#svpol #miljöpartiet #pldebatt #Romson #Auschwitz

Löfven är sig lik. "Aldrig svara på frågor"-taktiken används hela tiden. #pldebatt #svtagenda

— Torbjörn S Brandhill (@Farbrorblas) May 10, 2015

Lågt av Romson att jämföra båttragedierna i Medelhavet med Auschwitz! #svtagenda #pldebatt #svpol

— Martin Brandhill (@synthfilosofen) May 10, 2015

Åsa Romsons liknelse mellan Auschwitz och det som händer i Medelhavet var verkligen häpnadsväckande. Historielös liknelse. #pldebatt

— Torbjörn S Brandhill (@Farbrorblas) May 10, 2015

"Krona för krona" Löfven citerar Anders Borg. #pldebatt

— Torbjörn S Brandhill (@Farbrorblas) May 10, 2015

Trams? Menar du inte "käbbel" Löfven? 😉 #pldebatt #Agenda

— Torbjörn S Brandhill (@Farbrorblas) May 10, 2015

Regeringen är verkligen fattig när det kommer till politiska förslag och politiska visioner. #pldebatt

— Torbjörn S Brandhill (@Farbrorblas) May 10, 2015

Subventioner är inte lösningen på bostadsproblemen. Tänk om det vore så enkelt. #pldebatt Jobben nu.

— Torbjörn S Brandhill (@Farbrorblas) May 10, 2015

Be om ursäkt, vice statsministern Åsa Romsom om att båttragedierna i Medelhavet liknas vid Auschwitz! Om inte, avgå! #svtagenda #pldebatt

— Martin Brandhill (@synthfilosofen) May 10, 2015

Det är tydligen helt omöjligt för @socialdemokrat partiledare och Sveriges statsminister att ge konkreta svar. Skrämmande! #pldebatt #agenda

— Carl-Johan Linde (@cjlinde) May 10, 2015

Döden på Medelhavet är en skam för Europa. Men jämförelsen med Auschwitz fullständigt fel. Så tondövt. #pldebatt

— Peter Wolodarski (@pwolodarski) May 10, 2015

Grattis Ebba och din man! Ett jättestort grattis och lycka till säger jag även till din ersättare i kvällens debatt.  #pldebatt  

- Hälsningar Torbjörn S. Brandhill "Farbror Blå" 

Skulle ha umgåtts med partiledare ikväll men vi har fått finbesök som vi kommer umgås med istället! #babybuschthor pic.twitter.com/XVu1lD0Sc4

— Ebba Busch Thor (@BuschEbba) May 10, 2015

Ben Ross Schneider’s Conclusion

The conclusion is that escaping middle income trap is not just a question of incremental adjustments. The middle income trap countries need big leap in institutional capacity. It requires convergence in interests and broad collations according to Ben Ross Schneider.

The theory is for instance path dependent and prior trajectories of growth shape and constrain contemporary potions. FDI, informality are two examples of this.

There are also contra institutional hegemony in development studies. Countries need to look at trajectories and social coalitions to understand possibilities for institution building.

The tasks for development in a middle income country has been numerous. Two examples are the Cold war, and globalization.

Possible solutions for the middle income trap:

Top-down – A theory which is sometimes described as a synonym for decomposition. Someone are breaking down the system to gain insight into its compositional sub-systems. A top down approach begin with the large picture and breaks down the large picture into smaller segments or components. The term top-down do not mean the same thing when we speak about decision-making in management and organizational arenas. In management and organizational arenas top-down means the decisions are formal decisions and they are made by a management team in a company or they are formed from the government to the people.

Bottom-up – is more of a social democratic idea of decision-making in a management or organizational arena. A bottom-up system is based on the grassroots and a larger number of people work together in a particular situation. Modernizing a society which urbanizing follows and the agriculture becomes less essential because the agriculture needs fewer people thanks to machines.

Discussion:

Critic: GDP - One problem with the study of the middle income trap is the GDP. It is not very accurate to use GDP to compare the economic situation for citizens in different countries. Why are the group not using HDI (human development index) instead? There are countries which have high GDP but very low HDI because the spend not enough money on welfare, education etcetera.

 GDP do not answer how it is with: Corruption in a country, crime situation in a country, the security spending and the military spending,

Equality: The statements in the equality section are interesting and correct. The lecturer did not specify what variables was used to compare equality in the countries. They have so specify if it is about gender equality, economic equality and a diversity issue. I know that the lecture was not very interested in this issue.

Higher education: It is difficult to guarantee that higher education will generate higher income in a country. It is difficult to draw conclusions about that when there are individuals who need to go through the system.

There are however evidence which proves the correlation between higher income and higher education. A high quality Education system is an important investment for a middle income country if the system supports breakthroughs in technology and science by encouraging creativity.

However there are other variables who affect a countries possibility to gain economic growth. I think it can be problematic to compare all the middle income countries with the US. It creates an illusion that the united states are the leading role when it comes to economic growth. The Unites states has a positive progress according to GDP but the figures are not as convincing/impressive in human development index. The study would have been more accurate and less hypothetical if the scientist used human development index instead of GDP.

“There is as well an absence of threat and incentives for complacency.” Why is absence of threat and incentives of complacency a problem? Absence of threat and incentives of complacency is supposed to make a country less vulnerable to threats and unpredictable aspects. This should lead to the fact that a country has more time to solve new problems and this can make people lazy or at least less active to fight for change because of the complexity of the middle income trap. There is no evidence for this in my perspective.

Comparison with the US

The countries which was included when Ben Ross Schneider spoke about the middle income trap was/are compared to the US. The majority of the scientist in the project are from the US and the Emory University is in the US and that might be the reason why the united states are the main country in the comparisons. There is a problem with comparisons with the United States because it is difficult to draw conclusions about general factors when United States has a complex then again a specific economy.

Conclusion:

The study is very specific and interesting because there is clear evidence for a stagnation in countries which has growth into middle income countries. There are variables that need to take in the consideration such as HDI and another measurement of equality. The study would have been more accurate and less hypothetical if the scientist used human development index instead of GDP. However there was interesting arguments concerning equality and economic growth but then again more are variables need to be specified. I want know what state of equality is admirable, because the question is not answered. Equality is an essential part for economic growth in a country and therefor the issue about ultimate objective needs an explanation and an answer.

The comparison with the United States leaves very much to offer and it is difficult to make a general conclusion regarding the middle income trap because of that decision.

Maria Larssons "standardargument" när det kommer till drogdebatter. "En bred konsensus om att..."

- Hälsningar Torbjörn S. Brandhill "Farbror Blå"

What countries are we talking about?

Upper middle class income countries are the main countries in this futuristic study. This report/study focuses on 9 out of these countries. The study leaves out small countries, petrol countries, China and Cuba. The focus are on Argentina Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey and South Africa. Especially Brazil and South Africa is apparently interesting in the study of the middle income trap.

Middle income countries and politics: The political capacity is weak in the middle income countries. In the sense of fractures society, a low bureaucratic and fiscal capacity, which means the countries may have great difficulties to take care of a rising economic growth and a large increase of multinational companies and so on. There is as well an absence of threat and incentives for complacency.

Growth into middle income leaves a weak state: It was described that growth into a middle income country leaves weak state. Weak state in the sense of low fiscal capacity, which concerns informality, direct and tax morale. Multinational Corporation’s ability to control the market and to transfer pricing is a sign of a weak state. In the middle income countries is there also a low income tax and a low income tax can leave a weak state.

Bureaucratic capacity in the middle income state: Prior development tasks were easier than the futuristic task named middle income trap. The expanding primary education has for example had effect on the state because of the low bureaucratic capacity in the middle income state. A larger primary education needs a greater bureaucratic capacity.

Democracies shorten time horizons: Few incentives for politicians to initiate conflictual policies that will not show immediate results. Heightens importance of long term social coalitions. Divergent interests and the missing education coalition can be solved in a shorten time according to Ben Ross Schneider.

MNC and domestic firms

Multinational corporations (MNC) competing with domestic firms. Multinational corporations are 1/3 to ½ of the largest firms in the countries. Multinational corporations are mostly in higher manufacturing and services. Domestic firms are though dominating in commodity.

Formal versus informal workers in the different market areas. Informal sector is 40-50 % of economy.

Equality

The middle income countries has high inequality. Large middle income countries have low equality compared to High income OECD countries.

There are debilitating effects of inequality in politics means Ben Ross Schneider.

Ben Ross Schneider stated that inequality reduces cooperation, governance and coalition building:

In equality increases a countries vulnerability to volatile populism and clientelism. Entrenched elites shape extractive institutions to their favor. Mexican telecoms is an invention because of increased vulnerability to clientelism and volatile populism. Ben Ross Schneider mentioned that scientist named North, Robinson and acemoglu has written about this particular subject.

MNC are not interested in equality. MNC can move, find lope holes or train in-house. Big domestic business are non-tradable and commodities. (The business are renting for private training solutions) Workers are not interested according to two different principles: 1. Formal sector has in-house training. 2. Informal sector does not require skills.

Curiosities: 2/3 of respondents in Latin America are satisfied with local schools for their children.

There was no description of what kind of equality they were comparing or what state are admirable to escape the middle income trap.

Ett kort svar till en homofob helt enkelt. Ett väldigt bra svar skulle jag säga. Det är så tröttsamt när man hör "övertygelsen" om att homosexuella kan välja att inte vara homosexuella. (Ja, jag känner personen i videon och då menar jag inte homofoben) 

- Hälsningar Torbjörn S. Brandhill "Farbror Blå" 

The middle income trap

The middle income trap: More politics than economics – Richard F. Doner, Emory University, Ben Ross Schneider MIT Lecture by Ben Ross Schneider 19. December 2014.

Richard F. Doner is a professor of political science at the Emory University and Ben Ross Schneider is a professor of political science and director of MI.

“The middle income trap” is an academic term. The term is in process and the lecture described this process and how far the scientist has progressed in the search after a solution to the middle income trap.

What is the middle income trap? There are many different variables scientist use when they are defining a countries wealth. Different variables like welfare, taxes combined with a country’s GDP, scientist are able to classify it as middle income-low income country etcetera. The theory is that if a country attain a particular income because of given advantages it will get stuck at that level. This phenomena is called the middle income trap.

Few people are graduating to high income in the middle income trap. Many theories lead to expectations of convergence to high income, however the result has shown that is partly not true.

Wordlist: *R & D is an acronym for research and development. The process of researching and developing new methods or technics is named R & D. First people synthesize and theories, and then explore and state hypothesis based on the research material. Scale up and study effectiveness is important when it comes to the research and development process. In Europe the term research and technical is more often used.

*MI = middle income, MNC = multinational corporations * clientelism = the exchange of services and goods for political support.

*MNC = multinational corporations

Why is it a trap?

Economist have many lists of “policy remedies” but the main points are:

• A lack of many different investments, infrastructure, R & D, property rights, flexible labor markets and human capital.
• If we know how to get out of the MI trap. Why are not countries avoiding the trap in the first place?
• Political capacity is lower in the countries who growth into middle income countries,- States are weak, coalitions are difficult to form, constitutional problems. There are upgrading policies and those are institutional intensive. Institutions as schools, universities, labs, courts and public verses private market.

There are upgrading policies and those are institutional intensive. Institutions as schools, universities, labs, courts and public verses private market.