U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-27-2018, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Maryland
18,624 posts, read 16,426,727 times
Reputation: 6348

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by caribny View Post
Enlightened capitalists sometimes do think that way. There is no charity here. Who do you think that small and mid sized farmers in much of the world sell to.

But I guess you think that they should toss people off lands and then be forced to abandon their investments when some of these people become terrorists and attack them. Boko Haram emerged from issues which Nigerian elites chose to ignore and now we see the results. Niger is a very vulnerable place and Islamists are already active there, so why assist in their attempts to recruit?
I don't think people should be tossed off their land. I do think developing countries need to focus on food production. About 10 years ago when the global price of rice shot up many Haitians were reduced to eating mud. There were social disturbances in Sierra Leone as well at the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-27-2018, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Maryland
18,624 posts, read 16,426,727 times
Reputation: 6348
[quote=silverkris;51729366]
Quote:
Originally Posted by caribny View Post

Before the oil boom of the 1970s, Nigeria was a big cash crop exporter and was able to feed itself.

Problem was that the "Dutch disease" economic effect of the petroleum boom sector led the country to underinvest or disinvest in their agricultural sector (through land, labor and capital inputs). So when the oil busts came, it left Nigeria in dire straits - they had a big foreign exchange debt to pay AND they had to import their food.
To that end Nigeria's economy today lacks diversity and is wholly dependent of oil and its derivatives
https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/nga/


Quote:
The top exports of Nigeria are Crude Petroleum ($36.9B), Petroleum Gas ($7.39B), Refined Petroleum ($603M), Cocoa Beans ($504M) and Rough Wood ($333M), using the 1992 revision of the HS (Harmonized System) classification.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2018, 11:06 AM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
21,382 posts, read 19,304,861 times
Reputation: 8493
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
Being that much of Europe and Japan have little to no gas or oil resources, Ghana is safe. Oh, oil prices will rise and fall, but meanwhile OIL and GAS use aren't going anywhere at all.

I live in Barcelona, and if you say there's no ethnic conflict in Spain (Catalonia) or in Europe (Scotland, among other places) then you are painting a false picture of Europe. Yet you don't use ethnic conflict to disparage European development.

Ethiopia is the second growing economy in the world, period and to dig up reasons to take away from that shows racism. For that matter what you said about Ghana is also racist. What, Black countries can't show economic development and have to go to the stone age to please you?
There is no future in oil and gas.
Who cares about Spain?! Your little independent movement there is a joke compared to the violent ethnic clashes in many African countries.
There is nothing racist about what I said. It is not about black or not, but about very specific countries in Africa, who happen to be the way they are for various reasons.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
It doesn't matter what you agree or don't agree with. Factually, small scale farming has no future. Spain, though of course it has better agriculture than cold Northern Europe, still has a lot of tropical fruits it imports like bananas. I don't think these are grown on small farms. In fact the banana industry has always grown on large, corporate plantations. Ditto other tropical foods.
Of course it has a future. Why bananas? That is among the last things I think of when speaking about feeding hungry mouths. Bananas lack most nutrients. Most people in the world don't even eat bananas. They are more like desert, while we are talking about the main dish.
I think they actually grow bananas here in Portugal, on Madeira, but not in an industrial way. Banana plantations are very unhealthy places for those poor people who have to work there (usually for very little money, I might add).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2018, 04:33 PM
 
7,437 posts, read 5,928,652 times
Reputation: 3799
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
I don't think people should be tossed off their land. I do think developing countries need to focus on food production. About 10 years ago when the global price of rice shot up many Haitians were reduced to eating mud. There were social disturbances in Sierra Leone as well at the time.
Corporate farming in the USA, which depends on massive subsidies, drove the Haitian rice farmers out of business. How can a Haitian farmer, of any scale, compete with the US Federal gov't? Much of US agriculture is massively subsidized and sold at below production costs. To further injure the USA then exports surpluses to nearby poor nations at even lower prices, counting the discounts as "aid".


The USA was dumping cheap rice, which was sold below production costs, in Haiti, so Haitians bought this rice and left the local rice on the shelf. Of course when prices rose the Haitian industry was already destroyed and so semi famine conditions prevailed.


This has also happened to chicken where heavily subsidized chicken was dumped in Jamaica, the skin and bones variety that few Americans would buy. Again their chicken industry under went severe damage. Jamaica is now reduced to growing crops that the US doesn't massively subsidize and then dump into poor nations as "aid".


Corporate farming means that people will be tossed off the land. This is already happening in Niger and other places. This type of farming places emphasis and heavy investment in machinery and is not labor intensive. This cannot happen unless the people are removed.


We also see Brazil where corporate farming is creating a desertification of the Amazon basin, this being a huge issue given that this basin is the lungs of the world, and in fact is responsible for a fair % of the rainfall on this planet. Ditto the Congo basin. Similar areas in southeast Asia no longer exist due to massive corporate farms dedicated to palm oil and other cash crops.


This is why a creative strategy of upgrading the skills of the local farmers and marrying them to corporations which have an interest in marketing their products. Yes not all will be able to remain and there will have to be consolidation of the micro farms into something more sustainable. But farms as big as a small Caribbean island, which is what corporate farming entails, is not suitable. These farmers need to become owners of viable farms and not refugees struggling to cross the Mediterranean.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2018, 04:35 PM
 
7,437 posts, read 5,928,652 times
Reputation: 3799
[quote=EdwardA;51733531]
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverkris View Post

To that end Nigeria's economy today lacks diversity and is wholly dependent of oil and its derivatives
https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/nga/


Much of Nigeria's indigenous farming was destroyed by corporate farms selling products to Europe. Then oil came, this type of farming became less lucrative and Lagos became a far bigger city than it can sustain.


Until attention is made to upgrade small farmers and to enable them to become more efficient and competitive, this problem remains.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2018, 04:45 PM
 
7,437 posts, read 5,928,652 times
Reputation: 3799
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
In Paraguay I have.

.


You know what socialism is? Huge state owned "corporate farms" Cubans have seen the folly of this and are now switching to small farmers, who are considerably more efficient than are the big farms.


In fact communists hate small land owning farmers as these people tend to be very conservative and aggressively defensive of their rights to control their lives.


It is the LANDLESS rural proletariat who tend to be more interest in communism as they blame concentrated land ownership for their plight.


I am from the Caribbean and arrived in NYC as an adult. I used to do farming and so am well aware of what farming entails. I also saw how more efficient the small farmers in Guyana were when it came to producing fruits and vegetables, than were the large scale operations. Attempts to grow products other than sugar and grains failed on these mega farms.






And corporate farming in Paraguay is the last thing that you should boast about. Paraguay has massive amounts of poverty, much of it in the rural areas. It has a huge issue with unequal land distribution, this underlying much of this poverty. So thanks for showing a classic example of a nation where corporate farming has had hugely negative effects.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...E1C3C07BA0D17C
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 06:15 AM
 
24,199 posts, read 17,590,002 times
Reputation: 9149
Quote:
Originally Posted by caribny View Post
You know what socialism is? Huge state owned "corporate farms" Cubans have seen the folly of this and are now switching to small farmers, who are considerably more efficient than are the big farms.


In fact communists hate small land owning farmers as these people tend to be very conservative and aggressively defensive of their rights to control their lives.


It is the LANDLESS rural proletariat who tend to be more interest in communism as they blame concentrated land ownership for their plight.


I am from the Caribbean and arrived in NYC as an adult. I used to do farming and so am well aware of what farming entails. I also saw how more efficient the small farmers in Guyana were when it came to producing fruits and vegetables, than were the large scale operations. Attempts to grow products other than sugar and grains failed on these mega farms.






And corporate farming in Paraguay is the last thing that you should boast about. Paraguay has massive amounts of poverty, much of it in the rural areas. It has a huge issue with unequal land distribution, this underlying much of this poverty. So thanks for showing a classic example of a nation where corporate farming has had hugely negative effects.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...E1C3C07BA0D17C
Why aren't you living in Guyana as a small scale farmer right now, if it was so wonderful?

The reality is most people worldwide don't want to live as a small scale farmer, and it simply isn't economically viable. Small scale farmers did not enable or create the internet we're using, the airplane you took to fly to NYC, or anything worthwhile. The corporate sector did, and that includes innovation in agriculture itself.

The corporate sector, along with governments, universities, and hospitals and government made the increase in living standards AND the increase in life expectancies around the world. Small scale farmers typically died young and medical care for them traditionally was substandard, if non existence.

Re: I didn't spend time in rural Colombia but I've flown over it. You can see the large scale farms from the airplanes as you fly into Bogota.

Urbanization in South America increased substantially over the 20th century.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 08:34 PM
 
Location: Katy,Texas
3,499 posts, read 1,698,631 times
Reputation: 2212
I personally think slums in Lagos is better than village life. The only villages that can ever truly develop are the ones in Oil Rich regions of Nigeria, and the ones on the edge of cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2018, 02:03 AM
 
24,199 posts, read 17,590,002 times
Reputation: 9149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
There is no future in oil and gas.
Who cares about Spain?! Your little independent movement there is a joke compared to the violent ethnic clashes in many African countries.
There is nothing racist about what I said. It is not about black or not, but about very specific countries in Africa, who happen to be the way they are for various reasons.




Of course it has a future. Why bananas? That is among the last things I think of when speaking about feeding hungry mouths. Bananas lack most nutrients. Most people in the world don't even eat bananas. They are more like desert, while we are talking about the main dish.
I think they actually grow bananas here in Portugal, on Madeira, but not in an industrial way. Banana plantations are very unhealthy places for those poor people who have to work there (usually for very little money, I might add).
Who cares about Spain? All the African immigrants moving into cities here for starters? . It's a part of the European Union, and lots of people anywhere from around the world would want to live ANYWHERE in the EU.

Bananas are found in pretty much ANY store in the Western world, so lots of people do indeed in bananas and other tropical fruits IMPORTED from tropical countries. How tropical countries make money is EXPORTING agricultural and natural resources to developed nations. And yes, the corporate sector controls this. SUGAR, since people like sweet stuff, is another major export from tropical nations. And yes, the corporate sector controls banana plantations and sugar farms.

Modern life in EUROPE, AMERICA, CANADA, JAPAN, and KOREA is made possible in huge part by corporate farming, not just from the West but from TROPICAL countries themselves.

People drink COFFEE to stay away. Exported by large corporate farms from Colombia, Ethiopia, and similar countries.

Who really cares about violent ethnic clashes in the countries that have them? The countries not having violent ethnic clashes in Africa are doing much better economically, such as GHANA AND ETHIOPIA, both ranked by the IMF and the World Bank as having the fastest and the second fastest growing economies in the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2018, 02:04 AM
 
24,199 posts, read 17,590,002 times
Reputation: 9149
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare View Post
I personally think slums in Lagos is better than village life. The only villages that can ever truly develop are the ones in Oil Rich regions of Nigeria, and the ones on the edge of cities.
I'm sure it is. Nigerians admire education and development. A lot of Nigerians move to Western countries to work and study.

Obviously there's no rush for people to want to live in villages!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top