Recalling the comments of BA (2005).
When you mention about the issue of external debt, it is important to note its historical significance as the story marks a formative character of this fenómeno.
La deuda como tal, surge desde la antigua historia. Algunos historiadores marcan que desde la prehistoria ciertos grupos nómadas rentaban herramientas a otros grupos pagando una renta con algunos cultivos devolviéndolas posteriormente.
Un ejemplo de una civilización desarrollada que se encargaba de rentar bienes y servicios a otras civilizaciones fue el imperio romano, aclaro que las naciones sometidas al imperio eran completamente títeres del dominio económico.
En la edad media los galos, sajones, teutones y árabes participaron directamente en la acumulación del capital por medio de los feudos, esto hizo que junto con los comerciantes el flujo de las mercancías fuese punteando. Al parecer is at this time, specifically in the transition from VI and XIII century, where economic and political factor mingled with the religious factor, we know that this factor was the cause of many wars and feuds specifically civilizations with the Arab civilization, in the average age relations of countries categorized as barbarous or "obscurantism." Once having
imperialism where theocracy, military and feudal economic system, attached to a new era called the Renaissance, civilization building wealth accumulation took on the task together with the merchants who were already playing an important role and had some purchasing power to establish a commercial monopoly, for this expedition voyages promoted, market strategies. Some poor countries that lacked the entire organization and ideology of the powerful countries were suffering transactions
powers La deuda como tal, surge desde la antigua historia. Algunos historiadores marcan que desde la prehistoria ciertos grupos nómadas rentaban herramientas a otros grupos pagando una renta con algunos cultivos devolviéndolas posteriormente.
Un ejemplo de una civilización desarrollada que se encargaba de rentar bienes y servicios a otras civilizaciones fue el imperio romano, aclaro que las naciones sometidas al imperio eran completamente títeres del dominio económico.
En la edad media los galos, sajones, teutones y árabes participaron directamente en la acumulación del capital por medio de los feudos, esto hizo que junto con los comerciantes el flujo de las mercancías fuese punteando. Al parecer is at this time, specifically in the transition from VI and XIII century, where economic and political factor mingled with the religious factor, we know that this factor was the cause of many wars and feuds specifically civilizations with the Arab civilization, in the average age relations of countries categorized as barbarous or "obscurantism." Once having
imperialism where theocracy, military and feudal economic system, attached to a new era called the Renaissance, civilization building wealth accumulation took on the task together with the merchants who were already playing an important role and had some purchasing power to establish a commercial monopoly, for this expedition voyages promoted, market strategies. Some poor countries that lacked the entire organization and ideology of the powerful countries were suffering transactions
Later in the colonization of America, Southeast Asia and other African countries sur suffered total dependence of the powers such as Spain, Portugal, England, France, etc. and why that was the problem?, pro conquered civilizations that could not survive and in a complex primitive globalization, the markets began to be comprehensive and powers began to be interdependent with each other off over the transition from feudalism to capitalism, market protectionism and excessive abuse of power over the conquered civilizations were some factors for the explosion of the movement for independence of the countries, especially the Americans, and the late nineteenth and early twentieth century some countries, mostly in Southeast Asia as it was, today Siam Taiwan, Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, etc. After independence and be given the chance to compete, we tried to establish economic with the other powers but not yet achieved its economic independence as it was growing complexity of globalization, external debt was forming an economic culture of the countries "have-nots."
Following the two world wars, the Cold War and certain social and political revolutions, the world was plunged into financial chaos, that hurt poor countries as are some of the center of America and other African countries. For 80's' capitalism suffers an exaggerated crisis and the U.S. economy had a deficit and devaluation, because wing manipulation of the "black gold" of the Arabs and their strategy market supply control, this is where trade agreements and policy interventions of the UN, begin to pattern certain guidelines focused on international aid for poor countries, the product of inequality and social vulnerability in exaggerated terms. Banga Dlesh versus U.S. are an example of all trigger effects previously mentioned, while the former deals with their poverty into something more alarming that end, the second boasts the macroeconomic wealth, coinciding only in his capacity as foreign debt , only with income levels totally opposite, and interestingly, consumption of a year of U.S. GDP is 15 years of that country.
From the early 90's, shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall which marked the disintegration of the Soviet Union, scored two roads in the productive processes of the world: the new political project of nations and new global division of labor, which required greater specialization in the productive forces, this would mean more innovation and implementation of technologies and the prioritization of science studies and better academic preparation workers. The question is: What will those countries that their education is just about exist, their power consumption is virtually zero, its economic and social policy are both subordinate and dependent entirely on rich countries and their economic structures are highly vulnerable to changes in technology for the sake of globalization and its social formations left behind in the paradigm of modernity?
Following the two world wars, the Cold War and certain social and political revolutions, the world was plunged into financial chaos, that hurt poor countries as are some of the center of America and other African countries. For 80's' capitalism suffers an exaggerated crisis and the U.S. economy had a deficit and devaluation, because wing manipulation of the "black gold" of the Arabs and their strategy market supply control, this is where trade agreements and policy interventions of the UN, begin to pattern certain guidelines focused on international aid for poor countries, the product of inequality and social vulnerability in exaggerated terms. Banga Dlesh versus U.S. are an example of all trigger effects previously mentioned, while the former deals with their poverty into something more alarming that end, the second boasts the macroeconomic wealth, coinciding only in his capacity as foreign debt , only with income levels totally opposite, and interestingly, consumption of a year of U.S. GDP is 15 years of that country.
From the early 90's, shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall which marked the disintegration of the Soviet Union, scored two roads in the productive processes of the world: the new political project of nations and new global division of labor, which required greater specialization in the productive forces, this would mean more innovation and implementation of technologies and the prioritization of science studies and better academic preparation workers. The question is: What will those countries that their education is just about exist, their power consumption is virtually zero, its economic and social policy are both subordinate and dependent entirely on rich countries and their economic structures are highly vulnerable to changes in technology for the sake of globalization and its social formations left behind in the paradigm of modernity?
This is certainly a question that the UN should take into account, as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, institutions that are theoretically required to truly implement policies focused on developing these countries and not just intervene where powers like the U.S. need for their services.
The reality today mark the debt service exceeds 250% compared to the GDP of third world countries, no doubt the effect is the recession of the economy and the cultural and social backwardness of these nations. An important point is that in these countries are often crisis or social unrest, economic and political and that the debt is a compulsory topic in different development agendas.
conclude that debt is a historical complex that according to the time set the national character of the subject peoples, the interesting thing is that the world has experienced for more than 10 000 years some form of debt and still does not rescue key points to avoid falling into the same mistakes and not being able to plan solutions, and the reality of the current external debt, the poor suffer the most, although that has been used as diuscurso of "leverage development" and efficient "currency manipulation" of public finances, so that by the expenditure, it can provide an arena for economic and political development.
Bibliography:
1. "State and Globalisation", Mark Kapplan
2. "The debt trap. Unit Third World. " George, Susan. IEPALA
3. "History of the External Debt Latin America. " Marichal, Carlos
4. "Experience for an economy to serve the people," Carlos Bologna
0 comments:
Post a Comment