1/Today's Substack post is about why Jason Hickel is wrong about global poverty.
And why he's also wrong about the nature of the global economic system.
noahpinion.substack.com/p/against-hick…
And why he's also wrong about the nature of the global economic system.
noahpinion.substack.com/p/against-hick…
2/Hickel gets things so wrong because he believes that except for China, developing countries have been following free-market capitalist dogma.
As someone committed to opposing free-market capitalist dogma, he must therefore claim poverty hasn't fallen.
theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
As someone committed to opposing free-market capitalist dogma, he must therefore claim poverty hasn't fallen.
theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
3/For example, Hickel completely put words in @NickKristof's mouth.
Hickel claimed Kristof was a cheerleader for capitalism, when in fact Kristof was simply celebrating the drop in global poverty without making any claim as to the cause.
Hickel claimed Kristof was a cheerleader for capitalism, when in fact Kristof was simply celebrating the drop in global poverty without making any claim as to the cause.
4/Here is Hickel's central claim.
He has committed himself to the position that global poverty hasn't fallen, because he feels this position is necessary in order to oppose free-market capitalism.
He has committed himself to the position that global poverty hasn't fallen, because he feels this position is necessary in order to oppose free-market capitalism.
5/But Hickel is TOTALLY WRONG about global poverty reduction. Let's talk about why.
First of all, why the hell would you exclude China? It's a fifth of humanity. That should be the first tell that Hickel is playing fast and loose with the narrative here.
First of all, why the hell would you exclude China? It's a fifth of humanity. That should be the first tell that Hickel is playing fast and loose with the narrative here.
6/Second, even if you do exclude China for bizarre ideological reasons, you see that global poverty has indeed fallen.
7/How does Hickel get around these facts?
A simple trick: After excluding China, he picks one preferred poverty threshold, and refuses to consider any progress below that threshold.
A simple trick: After excluding China, he picks one preferred poverty threshold, and refuses to consider any progress below that threshold.
8/In a 2019 Bloomberg column I took Hickel to task for this, explaining that poverty reduction isn't about crossing a single finish line.
In fact, the poorer the people, the more their income gains matter for human welfare.
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
In fact, the poorer the people, the more their income gains matter for human welfare.
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
9/In fact, you should look at the WHOLE DISTRIBUTION of income to get a clear picture of poverty reduction.
Check out this chart, courtesy of @MaxCRoser. Look at how the distribution changes between 1975 and 2015.
Check out this chart, courtesy of @MaxCRoser. Look at how the distribution changes between 1975 and 2015.
10/Or look at this animation of how various regions changed between 1988 and 2011.
If you look at this and tell me global poverty hasn't gone down, you're not being intellectually honest!
If you look at this and tell me global poverty hasn't gone down, you're not being intellectually honest!
https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1378044875069853698
11/But Hickel feels he has to deny the reduction in global poverty, because he believes that to do otherwise would be to admit that the dreaded CAPITALISM is effective at reducing poverty.
The thing is: Hickel is WRONG ABOUT THIS TOO!!
The thing is: Hickel is WRONG ABOUT THIS TOO!!
12/Hickel thinks that except for China, developing countries have been adhering to free-market dogma.
Wrong.
For example, consider this paper by @rodrikdani and @arvindsubraman, who show that pro-business policies were very important in India's growth.
imf.org/external/pubs/…
Wrong.
For example, consider this paper by @rodrikdani and @arvindsubraman, who show that pro-business policies were very important in India's growth.
imf.org/external/pubs/…
13/Or consider the success of development states in Southeast Asia (a developing region of over 500 million people almost everyone ignores in these discussions):
core.ac.uk/download/pdf/3…
core.ac.uk/download/pdf/3…
14/Or consider the recent drop in inequality in Latin America (which is responsible for the fall in poverty there).
This was due in large part to government: To more redistribution and better education.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
This was due in large part to government: To more redistribution and better education.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
15/In fact, if there WAS one place where capitalism was the biggest driver of poverty reduction, it was...
...drumroll...
CHINA.
...drumroll...
CHINA.
16/And China's capitalistic poverty reduction has come with a cost -- skyrocketing inequality.
Exactly the downside you'd predict from a free-market approach.
When Thomas Piketty pointed this out, China BANNED HIS BOOK!
scmp.com/economy/china-…
Exactly the downside you'd predict from a free-market approach.
When Thomas Piketty pointed this out, China BANNED HIS BOOK!
scmp.com/economy/china-…
17/So Hickel is completely wrong about the drivers of global development.
Developing countries are using mixed economy strategies -- markets, yes, but also powerful "development states" and redistribution -- to achieve poverty reduction.
Developing countries are using mixed economy strategies -- markets, yes, but also powerful "development states" and redistribution -- to achieve poverty reduction.
18/Cheerleaders for poverty reduction, like @MaxCRoser, @DinaPomeranz, @BillGates, and @NickKristof, are totally right to cheer.
Developing countries are finding their own paths to poverty reduction. They are "crossing the river by feeling the stones".
Developing countries are finding their own paths to poverty reduction. They are "crossing the river by feeling the stones".
19/By denying this success, Hickel isn't just denying the data. He's denying developing countries AGENCY.
Developing countries do not need wise British lefty writers to save them from the dogma of capitalism or the scourge of poverty.
They are saving themselves just fine.
Developing countries do not need wise British lefty writers to save them from the dogma of capitalism or the scourge of poverty.
They are saving themselves just fine.
20/We need to stop seeing global development and poverty reduction as a function of the ideological debates that we Westerners have with each other.
Developing countries are over our bullshit -- both the rightist and the leftist varieties.
(end)
noahpinion.substack.com/p/against-hick…
Developing countries are over our bullshit -- both the rightist and the leftist varieties.
(end)
noahpinion.substack.com/p/against-hick…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
