Poverty, ignorance and science-based decisions

How many times have we heard that “in Bolivia we are poor because we want to”? It is often said in this way because our country, despite having incredibly unbeatable production potential, has not exploited it throughout its history, but also, when it happened, how many times it went wrong. Therefore, short boom cycles and long poverty period. Hence also being a country “a beggar sitting in a rich man’s chair”, by wasting the resources that God gave us, while others advance without having what we have left.

According to the Royal Spanish Academy (RAE), a “poor” is a person who suffers from need, and does not have what is necessary to live; An ignorant person is someone who knows nothing and lacks knowledge. Do you know why it is necessary to clarify this?
For many, poverty is synonymous with underdevelopment, although Peter Drucker believes that there are no underdeveloped countries, but only poorly managed ones. Is it the result of state officials’ precarious knowledge – when not – of corruption in the conduct of public affairs?

A friend sent me this idea from an anonymous author: “The first act of corruption committed by a public servant is to accept a position he does not have the skills to fill.” Because, let’s be serious, it’s not about “managing for the sake” of a country, but about managing it well so as not to disappoint the citizens of a better life.

Or would you like to be murderously poor?
Statistics show that progress has been made in the fight against poverty in Bolivia, but there are still millions of Bolivians who do not eat three times a day because they do not get decent work to buy more food, and therefore do not get enough to eat; Not to mention going to a private doctor instead of facing the sad reality of the public health system; Or send their children to a private school, when public education is deficient.

Someone will say that “when there is money, poverty can be tolerated”, however, it will be good to understand that the state does not have to do everything; In fact, when this is thought to be the case, society tends toward more suffering.

Consider the following: would you like to have a decent and stable job in the private sector that allows you to plan your life, while also subject to public labor law? Do you agree that the discount they give you for your retirement can be managed on your own, for example, with a long-term deposit in a private bank? What if, what the company pays each month “to the fund”, could it arrange for direct contracting of private life and health insurance, with interest both nationally and internationally?

If the state provides the right conditions, the producer, merchant, and service provider in the private sector – of all sizes, in the countryside and in the city – will generate hundreds of thousands of new formal and legal jobs, ensuring a good income for families. Imposing taxes on the national treasury and foreign currencies to support the country’s economic stability. This should be the tone for economic policy, there are examples of this working.

I contribute to this reflection in light of the urgent approval that small agricultural producers are awaiting from their government, to use genetically modified seeds in order to improve their productivity and contribute to the development of the country.

I say it in all its letters and with the greatest possible intellectual honesty: just as things are portrayed at the global level, and the economic situation of a country, the only possibility in the short and medium term is not to retreat in the struggle against poverty, is to support two strategic sectors that provide high employment opportunities: the agricultural sector / Agribusiness and the forestry sector / The timber sector, both of which are related to exports.

The planet needs food that is accessible and we can provide; Not “organic” production, which is expensive and causes water in underdeveloped countries, while many farmers are getting out of poverty thanks to agricultural technology, given that science has shown that genetically modified crops produce food that is safer or more secure than conventional crops (they use pesticides less) ; They are more environmentally friendly (less burning diesel); It is of great benefit to producers, especially to the young ones.

When right decisions are made based on science, and actions taken accordingly, poverty, a product of ignorance, can be overcome…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.