The gap between the rich and the poor widens daily. John Mutter states that natural disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and climate change cause this increasing gap. Mutter also states that through economic development one can best improve this gap. Yes, clearly the disparity continues to grow between the rich and poor, but do these really cause disparity and does improving economic development the best way to improve this gap? I believe other, more important factors exist that have caused this gap between the rich and poor and better ways exist to improve this problem.
John Mutter, author of “Disasters widen the rich—poor gap”, stated in Nature’s opinion section of an August issue that“In the face of a growing population of poor people, the environmental stresses of climate change and its potential impacts on future natural disasters, the rich–poor divide is set to increase. Of all the consequences of our warming world, this could be the most predictable and the most unjust.” He uses resources such as the effects of Hurricane Katrina, as well as mentioning Hurricane Andrew of 1992 and the Chicago heat wave of 1995 to support his idea that climate change increases the disparity between rich and poor countries. Mutter relates New Orleans to the disproportion of wealth in the rest of the world and how it is minute in comparison to the gap in other countries. Using examples such as the 30 year set back of Samoa’s economy due to numerous hurricanes that devastated the entire island; and of course, Haiti, who suffered one of the most demoralizing earthquakes ever, killing more than 220,000 people and injuring more than 300,000 (Watson). Mutter continues to present factual information leading to the idea that the future will bring a larger and larger gap between the rich and poor, such as: the expected world population growth to 9 billion or more by 2050, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claim that meteorological hazards are likely to increase, causing more frequent intense storms and rains, and more areas affected by drought (article 6 of Mutters bibliography).
After stating his claim and supplying his research, Mutter makes an argument to his claim that in some cases, natural disasters can be good for a nation. For example, some say that Alaska was better off after the damage from the 1964 earthquake due to the proposition of recovery programs. Finally, Mutter finishes with his solutions to the changing climate, “The underlying problems of poverty, poor construction and lack of economic security need to be addressed more comprehensively.”
Mutter starts off his article with aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, but there is no evidence that Katrina was the result of a human-caused climate change, and we don’t know that climate change will increase the disparity between the rich and the poor. This is a confused blend of ideological issues that Mutter bases on no clear evidence. If the policy makers had wanted to make New Orleans an opportunity, they shouldn’t have continued to weed out the population.
Mutter’s article is called “Disasters widen the rich—poor gap,” however, Mutter never really talks about the gap. Yes, he explains how the Central Business District of New Orleans, the richer side, had a high repopulation number and the Lower Ninth Ward, the poor side, had a sharp decrease in population after Katrina. All of this is true and I agree with Mutter that the gap is widening, yet is the disparity between the rich and the poor even relevant to his article? His article talks mainly about natural disasters and their impacts, but the gap between the rich and the poor has nothing to do with when and where natural disasters will occur, and how these disasters widen the gap. This disparity only seems to be relevant if you are under the impression that economic development is at zero-sum, meaning that in a certain situation, one participant’s gains result only from another’s equivalent losses (Investorwords.com), and that rich countries wealth somehow comes at the expense of poorer countries. Mutters lack of ability to connect his main claim with the topic of his article throws off his organization, therefore hurting his argument.
Rich country development has benefited poorer countries through trade, local aid, and technology transfer. By comparing costs and benefits of international commercial agreements, we can see that developing countries to benefit from trade with rich countries. Cline (2004), a leading reference of the subject of the World Trade Organization, WTO, projects that trade liberalization with rich countries would lift 540 million people out of poverty. At the UM Millennium Summit meeting of heads of state in 2005, leaders of wealthy nations committed to deeper debt relief and increased aid programs for developing countries (Birdsall). Also, there was a European Union pledge to spend 0.56% of Gross National Income on poverty reduction by 2010, and 0.7% by 2015 (Shah). Technology has benefited developing countries, for example UN information technology has benefited developing countries opening new business opportunities (Schlein).
All of Mutters ideas suggest that an excellent way to reduce the destruction of natural disasters is to maximize the economic development. However, maximizing the economic development means no more government aid, which can be harmful; it means promoting pro-growth policies, not the Western European regulation and redistribution; and it means no more attempts to reduce carbon emissions, which effects climate change—what Mutter believes causes the rich and the poor gap to expand.
Finally, Mutter ends with his solutions to the widening gap between the rich and the poor. “There are lessons to be learned from how wealthier nations respond to crises following man-made disasters, such as the financial slump.” However, poor regulation of the financial region was not the leading cause of the financial slump. The slump was caused by the lacking monetary policy of the Federal Reserve and the “guaranteed” mortgage lending of the federal government.
Mutter reveals a current issue in that the gap between the rich and the poor is drastically changing. However, his stand on the cause and effect of this gap is misleading and not thought out. Mutter brings to attention the harmfulness of natural disasters and the potential ways to reduce these harms. The effects of natural disasters and the rich and poor gap are two different topics that Mutter tries to cram into one paper. If each topic were to be centralized and focused on individually, this would be a much better argument and Mutter would be able to clearly support his main claim. I agree with Mutter, however, that something must be done before this monetary gap is too large.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7310/full/4661042a.html
Birdsall, Nancy. "How To Help Poor Countries." Foreign Affairs. N.p., July 2005. Web. 13 Oct 2010.
Schlein, Lisa. "UN: Information Technology Can Benefit Developing Countries." IWS- The Information Warfare Site 21 November 2003: n. pag. Web. 13 Oct 2010.
Shah, Anup. "Foreign Aid for Developement Assistance." Global Issues. N.p., April 25 2010. Web. 13 Oct 2010.
Watson, Ivan. "Six months after quake, Haiti still suffers." CNN July 12 2010: n. pag. Web. 13 Oct 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment