Ok guys i am going to post something i wrote a long time ago in response to another thread.

It is a suggestion as to how the Iraq situation may be handled in a more intelligent manner. Of course the post was written befoe conditions got this bad, but maybe it can spark other ideas


I would say that a force of economic stabilization units is what you need.

The US has the biggest consumer fueled economy on the planet. Fact of the matter is that when things are good for the rest of the world, things are good for the US. It is a fact that there is plenty in the world to go around. It only needs redistribution and effectivization.

Teams that work independent of politics to improve the economic situation of an area. Note that i do not say "control", i say "improve". That is why i say independent of politics.
SO that begs the question "how to remain independent of politics".

Well in denmark a social experiment was launched in 1974. The hippies got a certain area in copenhagen declared a "freezone". The actual experiment isn't as important as the fact that an experiment took place. It lasted 30 years. FOr 30 years no political party could interfere with the project. Therefore it functioned completely independently of politics. It got scrapped after 30 years in denmark, which was a political decision. BUt that was because the initial act of parliament gave the experiment a 30 year duration, and polticis could be made around its renewal.

Anyhow, what i mean to say is that the launching of economic stabilization units CAN work independently of vested interests for a sustained period of time if the act is passed with the right stipulations.

The reason it would be beneficial to the US are the following :

1) It is not an expensive plan to launch. THe units will be created from a pool of entrepreneurs and skilled workers. I would suggest IT, Primary goods, Cultural, Pharmaceutical, agricultural, Textile and Human Resource experts..
They should be trained in cultural understanding and communication. They should be trained in immersion into local culture and economics.. Not in subjugation of local economics ( i hope you can spot the difference in those two)

In any case they would be easy to form since america does not lack successful entrepreneurs. If Bush can manage to wrangle billions upon billions out of congress for massive military operations, i am sure he can rustle up a few billion for maintaining a programme like that for let's say 30 years. I'm talking expenses for maintaining an HQ and staff. THat plus a fund of a few million for initial capital investment.

These units will then be on their own. It will be their job to liaison with the US after improving the buying power of a locality.. Get it? WHat's the point of having something to sell if the market can't keep absorbing the product.

2) the fact that the US releases relatively small amounts of cash ( again the war is insanely expensive for EVERYBODY) and uses inserted teams to distribute that cash the most effectively it sets industry and market precedents and standards. Hopefully the unit will start maintaining itself and eventually churn out a profit. The local teams as entrepreneurs take a share of the profit and the US government share is reinvested in the same market. Suddenly the US owns a local asset in a local economy and is instrumental in setting standards and policies.

3) Most of these third world countries have massive corruption at the highest levels. This is where the official protection of the US comes in. If the unit itself works with complete transparency the common man in pakistan will not object to pressre being put on their corrupt leaders. THis is also something the US is supremely fit to do.. Proper use of the media will ensure that the common is kept truthfully advised around the economics of the unit.

This company/unit will essentailly have no company secrets. The reason for that is that the common man has to be educated BY EXAMPLE of how progress is made. Good economics is not about killing opposition, but by DOING EVERYTHING BETTER, QUICKER and CHEAPER.

4) doing something truly altruistic, without view towards immediate control of the world will go a LOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way in reducing anti-americanism. Whether the hordes of evil people out there deserve it or not, it can only work to the US' favor.

5) having fewer people pissed of at you might help reducing the amount of your citizens get killed by angry terrorists ( It might just also help reduce the number of inocent civilians that pay the ultimate price )

6) Less terrorism means less military expenditure, which frees up COLLOSSAL capital for the government to use to improve its infrastructure. Hey maybe the government would be able to afford free healthcare for all WITHOUT raising taxes if there was no reason to spend so much on weapons and war.




I realize i may be living in a dream world, but i don't see why the above experiment wouldn't work.