Doran Acemoglu and James Robinson's view on the prosperity of nations, illustrated in their book Why Nations Fail | centuries on how to make nations succeed and why these theories fail. These theories, namely the geographical hypothesis, the cultural hypothesis and the ignorance hypothesis, are theories devoid of any relativity with the economic institutions of a nation. The authors, by giving an in-depth analysis of inclusive and extractive institutions, were able to show how other theories failed while their theory would succeed. Assumptions of geography, culture, and ignorance are all assumptions that have been proven false in this book as well as in many cases throughout history and should therefore be abandoned. Nations around the world must adhere to the theory of economic development discussed in Acemoglu and Robinson's book and instill it in their societies in order to have a prosperous nation. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The authors argue that there are three widely accepted theories for why nations fail. However, each of these theories themselves fail to focus on the true nature of the problem. The first example can be seen in the geographic hypothesis. According to Acemoglu and Robinson, “the geography hypothesis claims that the great divide between rich and poor countries is created by geographic differences” (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). However, at this point the reader already knows that this theory is wrong since the authors opened the book with an example to argue against this theory. In the introduction to the book, the reader is described the circumstances on both the American side of the city of Nogales and the Mexican side of the city of Nogales. The Arizona (United States) side of the wall has a high standard of living with a low crime rate, a high average income, a majority of society with at least a high school diploma, a low life expectancy high, as well as the assistance they receive from the government. such as medical insurance and benefits for the elderly. On the other side of the wall is Nogales, which is now within Mexico's borders. Although the authors claim that this part of Mexico is an affluent region, their average income nevertheless remains a third of that of their neighbors on the other side of the wall. Furthermore, unlike their neighbors, they face daily theft and crime in their homes and businesses, their life expectancy is low, and education is not emphasized. Medical and seniority benefits are non-existent. On top of all this, citizens sometimes have to worry about their electricity and water source, something all Americans take for granted. Thus, Acemoglu and Robinson's initial example continues to prove that geographic location has absolutely nothing to do with the success or failure of an economy. In addition to this geographic factor, the geographic hypothesis also makes a nation's climate a factor in why that nation succeeds or fails. The climate hypothesis claims that tropical and warmer climate countries have a lower quality of life than countries with four seasons. This is apparently due to heat and humidity which leads to laziness and ultimately unproductivity. However, whoever formulated the geographical hypothesis completely dismissed the commercial factor. Trade is primarily the engine of the global economy. The reason countries like Australia and Qatar, which have warm climates, thrive is because they participate in international trade. Trade allows nations to produce everything inwhat they specialize in and export it, while importing what they lack. By trading, everyone involved generally does better, that is, if they trade in what they specialize in. Thus, the climatic hypothesisThe second theory, which is the cultural hypothesis, is based on information from the German sociologist Max Weber and states that "the Protestant Reformation and the Protestant ethic that it gave rise to played an important role in the geographical hypothesis. key role in facilitating the rise of a modern industrial society in Western Europe. The cultural hypothesis no longer relies solely on religion, but also emphasizes other types of beliefs, values and ethics” (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). What the sociologist Weber meant here was that industrial society succeeded largely due to the existence of Protestant believers compared to those of the Catholic faith, which essentially translates into Weber's assertion that some nations are more successful than others due to their unique cultural characteristics. However, any American citizen may disagree with this. The United States, a prosperous nation with one of the highest GDP per capita, is a nation mixed with many different cultures and nationalities. However, America's success is not because it has so many different cultures, just as Somalia's poverty is not because it is Somali. On the contrary, the United States is successful because it has many inclusive institutions within its country that care about people and businesses earning income easily. They succeed because their government does not infringe on their people's right to trade and free markets. Ultimately, there is no cultural contribution to America's success. Additionally, the majority of countries, except those that are communist or under extremist Islamic law, have a mix of cultures within their country anyway. All cultures are mixing more than ever. With improved technology and transportation, people can travel more around the world and choose where they want to live, which ultimately leads to a mixture of cultures. The flaw in the cultural hypothesis can also be seen in North and South Korea. Although the two nations are now separate, they were not once and so the cultural context between the two countries is virtually the same. The fact that the cultures are almost the same does not stop North Korea from being one of the poorest countries, while South Korea sets the bar high by being on the upper end of the spectrum of countries high income. The difference in standard of living between these two nations is that in North Korea, the government is in the hands of the leader, the richest are placed first instead of having equality for everyone, and above all, there is no equality for all. inclusive economic institutions to help people in their daily lives and economic comfort. Instead, North Korea is made up of extractive institutions that prevent creative destruction and/or technological improvement. Last but not least, there is the ignorance hypothesis. The ignorance hypothesis states that “global inequality exists because we or our leaders do not know how to make poor countries richer” (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). This theory continues to represent the idea that poor countries actually have good leaders who want to make improvements to the country, but don't know how to do it. This is by far a theory with no evidence to support it. At least, during.

Essay / Doran Acemoglu and James Robinson's view on the prosperity of nations, illustrated in their book Why Nations Fail | centuries on how to make nations succeed and why these theories fail. These theories, namely the geographical hypothesis, the cultural hypothesis and the ignorance hypothesis, are theories devoid of any relativity with the economic institutions of a nation. The authors, by giving an in-depth analysis of inclusive and extractive institutions, were able to show how other theories failed while their theory would succeed. Assumptions of geography, culture, and ignorance are all assumptions that have been proven false in this book as well as in many cases throughout history and should therefore be abandoned. Nations around the world must adhere to the theory of economic development discussed in Acemoglu and Robinson's book and instill it in their societies in order to have a prosperous nation. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The authors argue that there are three widely accepted theories for why nations fail. However, each of these theories themselves fail to focus on the true nature of the problem. The first example can be seen in the geographic hypothesis. According to Acemoglu and Robinson, “the geography hypothesis claims that the great divide between rich and poor countries is created by geographic differences” (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). However, at this point the reader already knows that this theory is wrong since the authors opened the book with an example to argue against this theory. In the introduction to the book, the reader is described the circumstances on both the American side of the city of Nogales and the Mexican side of the city of Nogales. The Arizona (United States) side of the wall has a high standard of living with a low crime rate, a high average income, a majority of society with at least a high school diploma, a low life expectancy high, as well as the assistance they receive from the government. such as medical insurance and benefits for the elderly. On the other side of the wall is Nogales, which is now within Mexico's borders. Although the authors claim that this part of Mexico is an affluent region, their average income nevertheless remains a third of that of their neighbors on the other side of the wall. Furthermore, unlike their neighbors, they face daily theft and crime in their homes and businesses, their life expectancy is low, and education is not emphasized. Medical and seniority benefits are non-existent. On top of all this, citizens sometimes have to worry about their electricity and water source, something all Americans take for granted. Thus, Acemoglu and Robinson's initial example continues to prove that geographic location has absolutely nothing to do with the success or failure of an economy. In addition to this geographic factor, the geographic hypothesis also makes a nation's climate a factor in why that nation succeeds or fails. The climate hypothesis claims that tropical and warmer climate countries have a lower quality of life than countries with four seasons. This is apparently due to heat and humidity which leads to laziness and ultimately unproductivity. However, whoever formulated the geographical hypothesis completely dismissed the commercial factor. Trade is primarily the engine of the global economy. The reason countries like Australia and Qatar, which have warm climates, thrive is because they participate in international trade. Trade allows nations to produce everything inwhat they specialize in and export it, while importing what they lack. By trading, everyone involved generally does better, that is, if they trade in what they specialize in. Thus, the climatic hypothesisThe second theory, which is the cultural hypothesis, is based on information from the German sociologist Max Weber and states that "the Protestant Reformation and the Protestant ethic that it gave rise to played an important role in the geographical hypothesis. key role in facilitating the rise of a modern industrial society in Western Europe. The cultural hypothesis no longer relies solely on religion, but also emphasizes other types of beliefs, values and ethics” (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). What the sociologist Weber meant here was that industrial society succeeded largely due to the existence of Protestant believers compared to those of the Catholic faith, which essentially translates into Weber's assertion that some nations are more successful than others due to their unique cultural characteristics. However, any American citizen may disagree with this. The United States, a prosperous nation with one of the highest GDP per capita, is a nation mixed with many different cultures and nationalities. However, America's success is not because it has so many different cultures, just as Somalia's poverty is not because it is Somali. On the contrary, the United States is successful because it has many inclusive institutions within its country that care about people and businesses earning income easily. They succeed because their government does not infringe on their people's right to trade and free markets. Ultimately, there is no cultural contribution to America's success. Additionally, the majority of countries, except those that are communist or under extremist Islamic law, have a mix of cultures within their country anyway. All cultures are mixing more than ever. With improved technology and transportation, people can travel more around the world and choose where they want to live, which ultimately leads to a mixture of cultures. The flaw in the cultural hypothesis can also be seen in North and South Korea. Although the two nations are now separate, they were not once and so the cultural context between the two countries is virtually the same. The fact that the cultures are almost the same does not stop North Korea from being one of the poorest countries, while South Korea sets the bar high by being on the upper end of the spectrum of countries high income. The difference in standard of living between these two nations is that in North Korea, the government is in the hands of the leader, the richest are placed first instead of having equality for everyone, and above all, there is no equality for all. inclusive economic institutions to help people in their daily lives and economic comfort. Instead, North Korea is made up of extractive institutions that prevent creative destruction and/or technological improvement. Last but not least, there is the ignorance hypothesis. The ignorance hypothesis states that “global inequality exists because we or our leaders do not know how to make poor countries richer” (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012). This theory continues to represent the idea that poor countries actually have good leaders who want to make improvements to the country, but don't know how to do it. This is by far a theory with no evidence to support it. At least, during.

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch