Razi hussain
Bs Economics
7th Semester
Subject: International Political Economy(Repeat)
The hidden force of economics: sending money home
https://www.ted.com/talks/dilip_ratha_the_hidden_force_in_global_economics_sending_money_ho
me?referrer=playlist-understanding_world_economics
This video is about Dilip Ratha, he was the first who analyze the global significance of
remittances. he is from India.His father was government servant. He went to United state In
2013, he worked a lot there in In the U.S., in a research center, for part-time, while taking
graduate classes in economics.
REVIEW:
Dilip Ratha talked about a very important issue of the economy that is of Remittances, which is a
crucial part of the developing economies, as per Dilip ratha, there is 413 billion dollars are sent
annually as remittance by 180 million migrants.
Dilip ratha compared 413 billion-dollar remittances with 135-billion-dollar aid, he cleverly
briefed about the thing which we see as a saver that is Aid is actually harming the poor and the
thing we ignore that is remittances is actually saving many of the developing countries, some
statistics Dilip ratha presented are a clear example of the remittances as a saver, which is as
follow:
1). 72 billion-dollar remittances are sent to India annually
2).18 billion-dollar remittances are sent to Egypt annually
3).42% of Tajikistan GDP is due to Remittances
4).35% of Somalia GDP is due to Remittances
5)Nepal poverty rate decline to 31% in 2005 from 42% in 1995
6)children of those family were healthy who were taking remittances as compared to
those who didn’t
7). Children school enrollment of those families were high who are receiving remittances
than those who didn’t… and so on and so forth. . .
Dilip Ratha put a spot light on the channel of sending and receiving those remittances and their
evil intension of bloodsucking of poor, he said that the sending channel is charging too high
because of the fear of money laundering which he considers has no link with remittances, how
much an individual will send money to their family? 500, 700 or 1000, no one can afford to send
more than 1000 dollar a month to their family.
Migrant send money not for the reason of money laundering but to help their family, to give fee
for their children school, for health purpose, for marriage, funeral, and even small investments.
Because of the high charges of money transfer company, the migrants are sending money
through illegal channels for only 60 cents per transaction, these high cost money transferring
company and illegal channels have to go, how? And who can do that?
International organization can do that by:
1)Relax regulation for small remittances
2)Abolish exclusive partnership with post office
3)Create a non-profit remittances platform
As per Dilip Ratha if we reduce remittance cost to 1% that will lead to 30 billion dollars saving
by the family who receive remittance and that 30 billion dollar is larger than the entire bilateral
aid budget going to Africa per annum.
Dilip ratha explained few points regarding those migrants that they send money to the
recruitment agent who helped him find this job which means not much money left for the family
and no money saved, this has to stop.
As per My understanding he picked a very interesting topic which is relevant to todays world,
hard life of migrant, the evil hands of money transfer company, the evilness of the recruitment
agents and so on and so forth, according to me this topic need consideration of the community
and the world, and it should be a prior concern of those who are indulge with remittances.
Video 2
https://www.ted.com/talks/dambisa_moyo_is_china_the_new_idol_for_emerging_economies?
referrer=playlist-understanding_world_economics
The Ted video was about the criticism of Democracy, the speaker Dambisa Moyo herself was a
supporter of democracy but she criticized democracy in a very productive way, People usually
see democracy as pre-requiste for economic growth but according to a study , it showed other
way around, in study it shows that ,less per capita income mean less surviving of democracy and
more capita per income is more chances of surviving of democracy.
Mrs Moyo mentioned that west is fighting for the democracy for the people in emerging
countries but they ignored that the poor will first want to fulfill their basic requirement then will
care about democracy. She also criticized that capitalism has increased the gap between
developed and developing countries and between rich and poor.
The poor people don’t care about democracy, monarchy or any other but what they care that who
is providing them more which is nowadays china, emerging countries dweller is now eyeing on
China and see it as a role model.
China earned many achievements in last 40 years, from a fast and astonishing growth rate to
pulling 300 million people out of severe poverty, from enormous infrastructure in her own
country to enormous infrastructure and investment in other countries. In 1970 total secondary
school enrollment was 28% now it rises to 82% in 2012. China providing innovative solution to
the age-old problems such as mobile health care to the far remote area and villages.
China economic system is criticized for state-own capitalism instead of private-own capitalism,
from prioritized economic system instead that of capitalism society, prioritized political system,
but they have ignored that china achieved high growth under this existing system, income
equality raised compared to USA which is on decreasing. the theory of capitalism is getting real
that wealth is going to few hands.
She said that now west can compete or cooperate with china for a better off but what I suggest
that west should co-operate to compete. By co-operate she meant that west should trade with
china and also encourage their own domestic businesses.
To some extent I appreciate the system and support the system of China, she is going very well
but Ma’am Dambisa Moyo ignoring that the Chinese citizen are going through a harsh situation,
China forcing their citizen to must save more than 50% of your income with china, China
making their own people views to make it compatible with the state ideology.so there is less
freedom of expression in china which more important after basic necessity.
