Why African Resource Exporting Nations Need Tariffs

by John Brian Shannon

Many nations in Africa are presently experiencing a boom in resource exports. And that is truly wonderful news as exports of any kind contribute handsomely to national GDP and balance-of-trade figures. Not only that, millions of dollars of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) often accompany resource exports.

For workers involved in the resource sector of a nation, it is unquestionably a positive development. Many other businesses and citizens at the periphery of the resource sector benefit too.

But does resource extraction benefit the rest of the society? It is heartening when one sector experiences strong growth – but when that rapid economic growth is limited to a small proportion of the population, tensions can become inflamed.

Joseph E. Stiglitz, Nobel laureate in economics and Professor at Columbia University has noted the problems inherent to resource-based economies in his recent and excellent article; “From Resource Curse to Blessing” which I urge you to read. Early into his piece, he says;

“On average, resource-rich countries have done even more poorly than countries without resources. They have grown more slowly, and with greater inequality – just the opposite of what one would expect.” — Stiglitz

Rather than develop the resource sector to the exclusion of all else and hope the rest of the society holds itself together — it would be prudent to tax all raw resources which are leaving the country.

In that case, comparatively few people will still make a good living directly from the oil (or other resource) company, while the rest of the country benefits in other ways from additional government spending on programs like improvements to national infrastructure, such as airports, highway systems, rail transportation and hospitals and schools on account of the tariff revenue.

When governments take in additional multi-millions of dollars from raw resource tariffs they will have additional money to improve services across the country.

The one thing governments shouldn’t do is add a tariff when resource prices are high! The major powers in the world will not let that happen as prices begin to skyrocket because that will add to uncertainty in the stock market and huge pressure will be brought to bear against any government attempting such a thing.

The time to add a small tariff is now, when prices are comparatively low and therefore, complaints will be few. Prices won’t drop much anytime soon. Due to the supply and demand equation they will be more often rising in the coming decades.

As we know, many African nations export significant amounts of unrefined oil, raw metals (ore and ingots), minerals or uncut and un-mounted gemstones. When African nations implement a 5% tariff on every exported tonne of resource — or barrel of oil — their economies will fire on all cylinders and with little complaint from rapidly growing and resource-hungry nations.

John Brian Shannon

ABOUT JOHN BRIAN SHANNON

I write about green energy, sustainable development and economics. My blogs appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint, EnergyBoom, Huffington Post, United Nations Development Programme, WACSI — and other quality publications.

“It is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.”

Green Energy blog: http://johnbrianshannon.com
Economics blog: https://jbsnews.wordpress.com
Twitter: @JBSCanada

Why Resource-based Economies Need Tariffs

by John Brian Shannon

Joseph E. Stiglitz, Nobel laureate in economics and Professor at Columbia University has noted the problems inherent to resource-based economies in his recent and excellent article; “From Resource Curse to Blessing” which I urge you to read. Early into his piece, he says;

“On average, resource-rich countries have done even more poorly than countries without resources. They have grown more slowly, and with greater inequality – just the opposite of what one would expect.” — Stiglitz

The usual solution to the inevitable slowing of a resource-based economy is to facilitate ever more extraction — in the hopes that more resource dollars will stimulate growth and compensate for the lack of progress in other sectors.

Time and time again this fails to work and to make matters worse, other sectors of the economy grow weaker in almost direct correlation with mounting resource exports. Manufacturing often takes the greatest hit.

Moreover, resource-rich countries often do not pursue sustainable growth strategies. They fail to recognize that if they do not reinvest their resource wealth into productive investments above ground, they are actually becoming poorer. Political dysfunction exacerbates the problem, as conflict over access to resource rents gives rise to corrupt and undemocratic governments. — Stiglitz

The government line on this is usually; “We should concentrate on what we do best.” Which is fine except that in so doing, the rest of the economy slowly slips toward the day when the government must then announce; ‘The majority of the resources are gone, we now must rebuild our economy from scratch.” This is when economists are finally consulted and listened to — but are then expected to solve the entire problem by the weekend, with nothing more than a magic wand and an algebraic/transcendental incantation.

Resource-based economies should commit to robust and long-term economic development throughout the economy well before such cantrip is required.

Real development requires exploring all possible linkages: training local workers, developing small and medium-size enterprises to provide inputs for mining operations and oil and gas companies, domestic processing, and integrating the natural resources into the country’s economic structure. Of course, today, these countries may not have a comparative advantage in many of these activities, and some will argue that countries should stick to their strengths. From this perspective, these countries’ comparative advantage is having other countries exploit their resources.

That is wrong. What matters is dynamic comparative advantage, or comparative advantage in the long run, which can be shaped. Forty years ago, South Korea had a comparative advantage in growing rice. Had it stuck to that strength, it would not be the industrial giant that it is today. It might be the world’s most efficient rice grower, but it would still be poor. — Stiglitz

The problem of course, is how to fund the necessary investment in the non-resource economy. And what level of funding do non-resource sectors enjoy at the present? Less than you might imagine.

Of all solutions, the simplest usually work best. Which is why a nominal export tax is a necessary ingredient to any resource-based economy to assist the national economy maintain a quantitative balance.

After all, taxing natural resources at high rates will not cause them to disappear, which means that countries whose major source of revenue is natural resources can use them to finance education, health care, development, and redistribution. — Stiglitz

There is little need for domestic resource taxes in nations where the majority of resources are exported. Such ‘recycling’ of citizen’s money adds little ‘new money’ to the economy and irritates voters, while the most efficient economic performance enhancement available comes from export tariffs and FDI.

Both export tariffs and FDI revenue streams represent new money entering the system which means unlike domestic taxation, citizens are not paying for other citizens employment programs — foreign interests will be paying that bill.

When resource-based economies implement a 5% to 8% export tariff on every exported tonne of coal/metals/minerals, or barrel of oil, their economies will fire on all cylinders — and with little complaint from the rapidly growing and resource-hungry nations.

John Brian Shannon

Will Global Sustainability Ever Be Possible?

by John Brian Shannon

If you haven’t seen these two short videos on demographics and sustainability from Professor Hans Rosling take the time to do it now. Hans at his best!

If you prefer to watch video 1 at www.ted.com click here>> “Hans Rosling Shows the Best Stats You’ve Ever Seen”

If you prefer to watch video 2 at http://www.ted.com here>> “Hans Rosling on Global Population Growth”

Bonus video from The Economist: “VideoGraphic: Global Fertility”

Bonus article from The Economist: “Go Forth and Multiply a Lot Less”

John Brian Shannon

John Brian Shannon

ABOUT JOHN BRIAN SHANNON

I write about green energy, sustainable development and economics. My blogs appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint, EnergyBoom, Huffington Post, United Nations Development Programme, WACSI — and other quality publications.

“It is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.”

Green Energy blog: http://johnbrianshannon.com
Economics blog: https://jbsnews.wordpress.com
Twitter: @JBSCanada

 

The Donald. Unloved?

by John Brian Shannon

I happen to like Donald Trump. There is no doubt about his business acumen, his commitment to his family and his showmanship — and he articulates his thoughts very well.

As I was visiting the Twitterverse today looking for non-Olympics-related tweets or other newsworthy articles that I might like to read, I came across this tweet, apparently from ‘The Donald’ himself:

“I have founded and run one of the largest real estate empires in the world. I employ thousands of people. Why am I the enemy?” @realDonaldTrump 11:42 AM – 7 Aug 12 via web

Right off the bat, let’s agree that Donald Trump has founded and run one of the largest real estate empires in the world and employs thousands of people. I could now quote many articles and offer you a magnificent list of his worldwide properties and portray his wealth in many other ways. Which would take days to read. Zzzz.

Just for fun — after reading my short post, please take a look at the Donald J. Trump Wikipedia site. Many serious journalists do not like Wikipedia because they feel it is not an authoritative source for information (and good heavens — commoners can edit the articles there!) But if you look carefully at the bottom of the Wikipedia page, you can click on the links to the same Bibliography and Reference sources that real journalists use. Check out Donald J. Trump at Wikipedia here…

So the problem is not proving that Donald Trump is a billionaire, nor that he has sound business management and media qualities – all of it is easily proved by looking at his outstanding record of success. Oh yes, many people got exposed to a rapidly-changing real estate market years ago and Mr. Trump was one of those people. Notice that he came back stronger than ever?

“Why am I the enemy?” – Donald J. Trump

Human psychology is a funny thing. It makes us act in irrational ways and say odd things. It is not necessarily logical.

A good example of human psychology occurs when one person in a typical suburban neighbourhood purchases a brand-new Ferrari and drives it every day. Past all of those people who don’t have one.

About one-third of them will congratulate the happy owner on his new purchase, another one-third won’t care either way and the last third will begin hating that owner more powerfully each and every day they can see or hear that new Ferrari.

Why? Because it makes some people ultra-sensitive to the fact they haven’t got a new Ferrari and they start to realize that they are ‘missing out’. Which brings to the forefront of their consciousness that they may (or may not) have made some mistakes along the road of life and though at one time they were on-track to buy one, they cannot now buy one. Or, through no fault of their own, they just don’t make enough money to afford one and never will. Maybe they paid for their nephew’s cancer treatments with their life-savings, or something.

The point is, Mr. Trump can afford to drive a different Ferrari every day of the week – and you can’t. Which causes some people to become angry and to feel hostility towards anyone who is so obviously enjoying their success.

It is simply and profoundly, human nature at work. Is it irrational? Yes. Is it illogical? You bet. But it is human.

What would be better? Ferrari’s for everyone! Woo-Hoo! Yes, that would work… wouldn’t it? Unaffordable, but such great fun.

Much better, would be an education system which gives all students the tools to succeed at life, to weather storms and to overcome any obstacles on their way to becoming wealthy citizens themselves — contributing to our society. Let me put it plainly. Rather than continue to produce high school grads programmed to not succeed in some areas of their life, why not incorporate a sound business/financial education into the primary and high school curriculum geared towards personal financial success?

Instead of getting angry at the very wealthy, why don’t we begin educating 100% of our youth for an entire lifetime of financial success.

At this point, anything would be better than the large numbers of professional haters, people who hate successful individuals and their corporations. You know, those individuals who create jobs, add to the GDP of the nation and which help the government to counteract wealthy individuals and corporations from other parts of the world – ones definitely not benign to our Western way of life.

A nation of envious haters will not succeed. A nation of citizens properly educated and motivated for personal financial success, will!

John Brian Shannon

ABOUT JOHN BRIAN SHANNON

I write about green energy, sustainable development and economics. My blogs appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint, EnergyBoom, Huffington Post, United Nations Development Programme, WACSI — and other quality publications.

“It is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.”

Green Energy blog: http://johnbrianshannon.com
Economics blog: https://jbsnews.wordpress.com
Twitter: @JBSCanada

Will the Collapse of the Western Manufacturing Base Create a Worldwide Depression?

by John Brian Shannon

The Eastern economies have traditionally been the manufacturers and purchasers of downmarket goods in their own region, while Western economies have traditionally been the manufacturers and purchasers of upmarket goods in their particular region.

Over the past 40 years Asia has taken much of the West’s upmarket manufacturing base, so much so, that the West has lost fully 50% of the manufacturing jobs it once enjoyed previous to 1980. That is the single most important reason why there is significant unemployment, under-employment and worryingly, under-reported unemployment (people who no longer look for work) stats in the Western economies.

Which obviously leaves a big hole in the economy of the West, translating into lower Western economic performance and recessions in North America, Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand since the 1970’s.

The fact that many Western corporations are making huge amounts of money at this (outsourcing their manufacturing to Asia – resulting in better corporate profits due to the much lower labour rates there) is now a complete side-issue.

It has now come down to this; The once broad base of Western consumers with generous amounts of disposable income is changing to an ever-broadening base of Western consumers without much disposable income.

If things continue, soon it will impact the Eastern economies — as there won’t be enough people in the West with enough disposable income to afford much of those upmarket goods and services! Translating into reduced economic performance there.

For now, China and India are the only significant economies in the entire world which maintain a healthy growth rate. They have been the economic engines of the world since 1998. Here in the West, we have suffered two recessions since then — and that, with China and India firing on all cylinders and their admirable growth rates of at least 8% per year and sometimes much higher than that.

The U.S. growth rate was an anemic 2% last year and is expected to come in at 1.5% to 1.6% next year. The U.S has not seen any growth rate over 4% since the 1980’s. Europe and Canada have posted similar percentages over that same time-frame.

If demand for Eastern-produced goods slackens any further in the West, the Eastern economies will see recession too. At that point, with the West still mired in the fog of recession — the entire world economy will tailspin resulting in a worldwide depression. This is the fear of many economists — including economists in Asia.

Which is why I favour keeping some significant amount of manufacturing here in the West, as manufacturing produces (relatively speaking) a lot of jobs — while removing resources from the ground and shipping them to Asia produces relatively few jobs.

Oil refineries here cost 12 – 13 billion dollars, while in China they cost 1 billion dollars. No new refineries are planned for the West for obvious reasons. As much as I’d like to say otherwise, there is precious little chance of adding value to our petroleum exports when new refineries are so expensive here.

Which is why we need to find ways to add value to our other resources.There are many North American resources that are being exported away and some would say, squandered away. We need much more focus on a value-added economy. We need to add value to our diminishing resources before they leave our Western economy.

One way, is to manufacture products out of our resources — and then sell them abroad, to enhance our balance of payments, which would contribute to enhancing our GDP, thereby lowering our overall debt-to-GDP ratio. Those ratios are killing us right now in the West.

Another good way to improve our Western economic picture is to tariff all resource exports and use that money to fund infrastructure projects, which would contribute much to the economy, but only temporarily. After all those projects reach completion in about ten years, workers (consumers with disposable income) will again be unemployed or under-employed, just as they are now. What then?

Some economists have suggested a Goods and Services Tax for the U.S. economy and to use those windfall tax funds for national infrastructure programs, as was done in Canada so successfully from 1990 – 2004. I am one of those people. However, with the latest projected U.S. growth rates set to be 1.5% to 1.6% for next year, that means there is a lot of fragility in the economy and some economists say a large, useful Goods and Services Tax might stall the recovery process. A smaller tax would be much less useful, but the taxation rate could be increased as the economy builds positive momentum. Even with those limitations, it is still a good option for the U.S.

It keeps coming back to the fact that we need to add more value to our economy, especially to our export economy on a long-term sustainable basis. We need to create MORE jobs from the resources we extract and from our agriculture and forestry industries — or eventually there won’t be enough demand for Asian-produced products and when those Asian sales sag due to lack of demand in the West, it will hit the fan everywhere.

.

John Brian Shannon writes about green energy, sustainable development and economics from British Columbia, Canada. His articles appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint Asia, EnergyBoom, the Huffington Post, the United Nations Development Programme – and other quality publications.

John believes it is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.

Check out his personal blog at: http://johnbrianshannon.com
Check out his economics blog at:
https://jbsnews.wordpress.com
Follow John on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/#!/JBSCanada