South Africa, Nigeria, Angola, Kenya and such economies in trouble

[MOON Ki]

It cannot compete with say South Africa....even if our population is not far off..or Singapore or China

Singapore has a very small workforce (and population).   But a GDP near ten times that of Kenya.

So you may argue that Asian tigers had all these great policies; but reality from data shows this was case of more inputs (more working people) producing more outputs.

 

I think you are confusing cause and effect.   Even if indeed the Asians had more "inputs" at the time, it does not necessarily follow that that was the main factor in their growth.   A simple way to see that is to look at why some East Asian countries have, in the same period, been more successful while others have not been.   And if you want to talk about "reproductive factors" have you looked at Malaysia?   The notion that good policies, pushed properly are not the main factors is simply not supported by the evidence.

Interestingly, the Chinese government has now decided that it needs to quickly reform state-owned industries because simply having more people ("inputs" as you call them) beavering away is counter-productive---more inputs does not necessarily imply more outputs.   Instead, as they see it, the focus should be on efficiency.   

CHina started it one child policy in 50s when Asian tigers were already on high pedestal....

Really?   Which Asian tigers "tigers were already on high pedestal" in the 1950s?

so they had to wait till  70s and 80s...when the boom time comes.

I didn't know that ... all the population stuff.   Most Chinese people seem to mark the change from when Deng Xiaoping and did aggressively started  complete turn-around.

When you say Kenya doesn't utilize it's workforce..how do you propose it do it....

That's the sort of thing governments exist for and which is why I say the current GoK is failing miserably.   But here's a quick thought: Suppose those who run the government stopped seeing it as just a vehicle to use in robbing the country and, instead, money went into doing the right sorts of things.   I'm sure that would make a difference.

This is hard. Complex. I know. So stick with simplistic theories.

I appreciate the spirit of the advice, but I like to challenge myself.   Try to improve my lot.   See if I can handle some complex theories the way you can.   Shouldn't you therefore be encouraging me on the onward-and-upwards path?

[RV Pundit]

Those simplistic theories were famoulsy debunked by Nobel Paul Krugman.

http://econ.sciences-po.fr/sites/default/files/file/myth_of_asias-miracle.pdf

Asian miracle came down to two things more inputs (more labour) +investments (in roads, rails, etc) leading to growth. During the Asian miracle...Uganda productivity even beat those Asian tigers. Meaning it wasn't the case of working smarter or harder...but rather the case of a country having so many working population [thanks to previous policies that reduced their dependant population] and their gov throwing money to finance huge infrastructure (like Kenya is doing). Then later on you have FDI coming in from US & Europe.

You cannot expect Kenya which has working population of 15-20M (18-65 yrs] to compete say with South Korea of then that maybe had 30 or 40M working population.

So you may argue that Asian tigers had all these great policies; but reality from data shows this was case of more inputs (more working people) producing more outputs.

 

I think you are confusing cause and effect.   Even if indeed the Asians had more "inputs" at the time, it does not necessarily follow that that was the main factor in their growth.   A simple way to see that is to look at why some East Asian countries have, in the same period, been more successful while others have not been.   And if you want to talk about "reproductive factors" have you looked at Malaysia?   The notion that good policies, pushed properly are not the main factors is simply not supported by the evidence.

Interestingly, the Chinese government has now decided that it needs to quickly reform state-owned industries because simply having more people ("inputs" as you call them) is counter-productive because more inputs does not necessarily imply more outputs.   Instead, as they see it, the focus should be on efficiency.   

CHina started it one child policy in 50s when Asian tigers were already on high pedestal....

Really?   Which Asian tigers "tigers were already on high pedestal" in the 1950s?

so they had to wait till  70s and 80s...when the boom time comes.

I didn't know that ... all the population stuff.   Most Chinese people seem to mark the change from when Deng Xiaoping and did aggressively started  complete turn-around.

When you say Kenya doesn't utilize it's workforce..how do you propose it do it....

That's the sort of thing governments exist for and which is why I say the current GoK is failing miserably.   But here's a quick thought: Suppose those who run the government stopped seeing it as just a vehicle to use in robbing the country and, instead, money went into doing the right sorts of things.   I'm sure that would make a difference.

This is hard. Complex. I know. So stick with simplistic theories.

I appreciate the spirit of the advice, but I like to challenge myself.   Try to improve my lot.   See if I can handle some complex theories the way you can.   Shouldn't you therefore be encouraging me on the onward-and-upwards path?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Once all these "ingredients" are set....then we will start to quickly industralize and modernize...however we will have Moonki attribute all these ground work to guy in charge then...and some smart alec will probably write a book about this " Kenyan" miracle...unaware that there is no "Asian or whatever" miracle...but many years of painstaking progress that eventually all come together..and voila...everything start "happening".

Perhaps such views explain the hopelessly slow progress.   I'm afraid it's not a matter of people mindlessly slogging away and things suddenly coming together some day.   In all those East Asian countries, the governments, under the right sort of leadership, have devised policies for what they needed and then aggressively seen them through.

I have no doubt that there has been some progress of sorts made in Kenya.   My main points are largely around funny illusions, such as Vision 2030.   The simple fact is that Kenya, especially under its current government, simply doesn't have what it would take to industrialize at that rate.   

Leadership matters simply because they provide the overall direction.  I am not sure how anyone can argue against that.

Every five years, the economy in Kenya takes a dive to wait out the elections.  Elections are nothing short of a threat to national security.  The question should be why?  I believe the answer to that also says a lot about why the country is still turning a corner, to borrow pundit's phrase.

[MOON Ki]

Those simplistic theories were famoulsy debunked by Nobel Paul Krugman.
http://econ.sciences-po.fr/sites/default/files/file/myth_of_asias-miracle.pdf

Being somewhat slow, I was hoping for something along the lines of "Mr. Studwell  says this", "but right here, Mr. Krugman shows that to be wrong".  Can do?  (We can start at the "high level " of Mr. Studwell's "Big Three": do Africans, with Krugman's help, have an alternative path that they can argue is sufficiently promising?)

Otherwise:

I am aware of that paper.   I also know that it was written 20+ years ago---data up to 1990---and we now have much better analysis and insights into these things.   (Don't you have anything more recent?)  One of the ways in which it is easy to see how dated it: look at some of the "predictions".   For example, take a look at the prediction on Singapore's subsequent growth relative to the post-1990 reality. Or, if you prefer bigger things, take a look at what he says on China---how fast it will grow, when the size of its economy might overtake that of the USA, etc.----and then look at the figures that we now have.

Asian miracle came down to two things more inputs (more labour) +investments (in roads, rails, etc) leading to growth. During the Asian miracle...Uganda productivity even beat those Asian tigers. Meaning it wasn't the case of working smarter or harder...but rather the case of a country having so many working population [thanks to previous policies that reduced their dependant population] and their gov throwing money to finance huge infrastructure (like Kenya is doing).    Then later on you have FDI coming in from US & Europe.

Uganda, huh?   Is that so?   And today Uganda is where?   And why is that?   In the answer lies Africa in a nutshell.

But let's take a look at the red above.   Just taking Singapore, as an example, the paper you have submitted does in fact tell us that it was (at the time) at the time a matter or working harder!   The fellow refers to it as "perspiration rather than inspiration".   The second point he refers to is the mobilization of resources----getting people to stop idling and start working.  (Note that again: it's not just a matter of having the people; it's about getting them to do  real work.)  And the third is the major changes in their educational system.   Do you need an explanation of how the right government policies, pushed properly have a role to play in all that?  (By the time I moved to Singapore, sheer grunt-work was at its tail end, and the second phase hard started----smarter: ICT, financial services, etc.)

Beyond that, I can only look at what the evidence says.   More inputs is what  makes the difference?   Compare Singapore and Kenya.   Look at China's current view on "just have more inputs".   In general, on "inputs" (and your own theory), even your supporting paper tells us that it is all not just a matter of "inputs".

The FDI aspect is definitely interesting:   Did the Asian Tigers have governments that put in place policies that attracted all that FDI, or was it just a matter of luck?   Kenya attracts (by African standards)  fair amount of FDI, but a trivial amount by global standards.   How much better could it do if the government wasn't a den of thieves?

You cannot expect Kenya which has working population of 15-20M (18-65 yrs] to compete say with South Korea of then that maybe had 30 or 40M working population.

A working population of 30-40M at a time when the total population was in that range.   And the entire country was emerging from the total devastation of a long war?  Looks like Kenya has it quite good right now.   And its growth rates compared to the Asian Tigers when they got going?

[RV Pundit]

So many divergent threads on a simple easy to understand concept. General thesis of Asian myth is that Gov policies are small part of the theory.Nobody is disputing that Gov plays a role.

Now that I think you've understood that demographic transition in East Asia meant more workers coming out as opposed to situation we find ourselves in..with more kids in school than working population..which we can't blame anyone...then you need go back to my earlier responses...where I tell you that behind the scenes...there are stuff happening. We are getting more working population, we have 80% high school transition, we have more going to universities, we are investing in infra, more FDI is flowing in, et etc.

In short there are lots of "background" work that is been done and you with you bare naked eye cannot see. You only see this when it manifest itself. Unless you look deeper.

We are few years from that happening....first we need to move from 5-6%...to 10% growth..like Ethiopia has been doing. I belief this will be possibly once Oil & minning sector start kicking in...this will be second engine of growth...the rest of sector par a few....we are on marginal gains already....but stuff are happening underground...that will fire this growth for longhaul.

But knowing some of you..even 10% Ethiopia has been doing for 10yrs plus...won't be good enough

Those simplistic theories were famoulsy debunked by Nobel Paul Krugman.
http://econ.sciences-po.fr/sites/default/files/file/myth_of_asias-miracle.pdf

Being somewhat slow, I was hoping for something along the lines of "Mr. Studwell  says this", "but right here, Mr. Krugman shows that to be wrong".  Can do?  (We can start at the "high level " of Mr. Studwell's "Big Three": do Africans, with Krugman's help, have an alternative path that they can argue is sufficiently promising?)

Otherwise:

I am aware of that paper.   I also know that it was written 20+ years ago---data up to 1990---and we now have much better analysis and insights into these things.   (Don't you have anything more recent?)  One of the ways in which it is easy to see how dated it: look at some of the "predictions".   For example, take a look at the prediction on Singapore's subsequent growth relative to the post-1990 reality. Or, if you prefer bigger things, take a look at what he says on China---how fast it will grow, when the size of its economy might overtake that of the USA, etc.----and then look at the figures that we now have.

Asian miracle came down to two things more inputs (more labour) +investments (in roads, rails, etc) leading to growth. During the Asian miracle...Uganda productivity even beat those Asian tigers. Meaning it wasn't the case of working smarter or harder...but rather the case of a country having so many working population [thanks to previous policies that reduced their dependant population] and their gov throwing money to finance huge infrastructure (like Kenya is doing).    Then later on you have FDI coming in from US & Europe.

Uganda, huh?   Is that so?   And today Uganda is where?   And why is that?   In the answer lies Africa in a nutshell.

But let's take a look at the red above.   Just taking Singapore, as an example, the paper you have submitted does in fact tell us that it was (at the time) at the time a matter or working harder!   The fellow refers to it as "perspiration rather than inspiration".   The second point he refers to is the mobilization of resources----getting people to stop idling and start working.    And the third is the major changes in their educational system.   Do you need an explanation of how the right government policies, pushed properly have a role to play in all that?  (By the time I moved to Singapore, sheer grunt-work was at its tail end, and the second phase hard started----smarter: ICT, financial services, etc.)

Beyond that, I can only look at what the evidence says.   More inputs is what  makes the difference?   Compare Singapore and Kenya.   Look at China's current view on "just have more inputs".   In general, on "inputs" (and your own theory), even your supporting paper tells us that it is all not just a matter of "inputs".

The FDI aspect is definitely interesting:   Did the Asian Tigers have governments that put in place policies that attracted all that FDI, or was it just a matter of luck?   Kenya attracts (by African standards)  fair amount of FDI, but a trivial amount by global standards.   How much better could it do if the government wasn't a den of thieves?

You cannot expect Kenya which has working population of 15-20M (18-65 yrs] to compete say with South Korea of then that maybe had 30 or 40M working population.

A working population of 30-40M at a time when the total population was in that range.   And the entire country was emerging from the total devastation of a long war?  Looks like Kenya has it quite good right now.   And its growth rates compared to the Asian Tigers when they got going?

[MOON Ki]

Now that I think you've understood that demographic transition in East Asia meant more workers coming out as opposed to situation we find ourselves in..

Sorry, I have not "understood" any such thing.  Please explain it to me again.  What is the "coming out"?  Part of the transition in Asia  to get more of the available people working.   How is that "opposed to the situation we find ourselves in"?   We don't have people who should be working? Not enough of them?   What?

with more kids in school than working population..which we can't blame anyone...then you need go back to my earlier responses...where I tell you that behind the scenes...there are stuff happening. We are getting more working population, we have 80% high school transition, we have more going to universities, we are investing in infra, more FDI is flowing in, et etc.

I am aware of all that.  What are the plans for all those muscular men who are idling at roadsides every day?    They are hardly kids in school ... Great going with the universities.   But how will the country industrialize with B.A. (English Literature) from Nyalguna Above-Bar University?   (Take a look at the East Asian countries that have done really well.)

In short there are lots of "background" work that is been done and you with you bare naked eye cannot see. You only see this when it manifest itself. Unless you look deeper.

How about we just work on the basis that I cannot see deeper. So, just show it to me.

We are few years from that happening....first we need to move from 5-6%...to 10% growth..like Ethiopia has been doing.  .... But knowing some of you..even 10% Ethiopia has been doing for 10yrs plus...won't be good enough

Would that be the Ethiopia that is in Africa?   The one of wazungu rock musicians saying "let's take a break from getting high and save these starving f**kers"?    If so, then it would be the same one that is now desperately begging for food, to keep its people alive, just as it as been doing for much of the last 50 years.  So, what have they been doing 10% of?  Their appetites?    (Studwell's remark on agriculture is actually two-pronged, the first being in the most basic sense.)

[RV Pundit]

Pretty much summarize why it waste of time debating you. No set parameters. You'll just go off tangent forever.

Would that be the Ethiopia that is in Africa?   The one of wazungu rock musicians saying "let's take a break from getting high and save these starving f**kers"?    If so, then it would be the same one that is now desperately begging for food, to keep its people alive, just as it as been doing for much of the last 50 years.  So, what have they been doing 10% of?  Their appetites?    (Studwell's remark on agriculture is actually two-pronged, the first being in the most basic sense.)

[MOON Ki]

Pretty much summarize why it waste of time debating you. No set parameters. You'll just go off tangent forever.

How is that off-tangent?   You brought up Ethiopia as some sort of example of a good job, and I am simply pointing out that it is not----that the first thing they need to do is get their priorities right and learn to feed themselves.    Economic growth should not be seen as and end to itself, to be pursued for its own sake; it should be something that improves the well being of people.   

By the way, I should let you know that I agree with you on one thing: the idea of an Asian economic miracle is indeed a myth, which is why I never use such terminology.     There is no miracle---just the right policies, seen through, and plenty of hard focused work.   

[MOON Ki]

Semiconductors come much later after the core industry is established.  I believe Kenya should aim to establish itself on a world class level in one field, at least initially.  That way when someone in DC or Paris or wherever wants a service/product he should think Kenya.  That way Kenya and that particular niche become like Google and web search.   I see information technology as the low hanging fruit.  Because Kenya has no serious capital and an IT industry today is not as capital intensive as setting up factories and other brick and mortar ideas. 

About the doing, it seems to me that the government ,when it's not busy covering up for a thief or celebrating impunity, is just all over the place.  I am not saying they should ignore other things; food security is a must; but they should be laser focused on IT.  Kamwana should only make trips abroad related to selling Kenya as an IT hub; everyone already knows the country has lions, some even roaming in residential areas, and other endangered animals; enough of that.

One of the points that people like Studwell are trying to make is that that of agriculture as the source of initial capital: farmers deposit their money in the banks, the government borrows it very cheaply and uses it for infrastructure, low-cost lending to export-driven businesses, etc.

On IT in Kenya: Has there been much progress on Konza City (or the Silicon Savannah)?   The Legoland  images certainly look very nice.

[RV Pundit]

So you think the agrarian economy like Ethiopia can grow at 10% for more than decade without getting right it's prioriities including food production. This doesn't mean Ethiopia is immune from natural disaster like drought once in a while.Asian tigers similarly followed the path...but definitely growing at 10%...is impressive now, then and in the future.

Ethiopia has done very well. Kenya is doing good.

How is that off-tangent?   You brought up Ethiopia as some sort of example of a good job, and I am simply pointing out that it is not----that the first thing they need to do is get their priorities right and learn to feed themselves.    Economic growth should not be seen as and end to itself, to be pursued for its own sake; it should be something that improves the well being of people.   

By the way, I should let you know that I agree with you on one thing: the idea of an Asian economic miracle is indeed a myth, which is why I never use such terminology.     There is no miracle---just the right policies, seen through, and plenty of hard focused work.   

[MOON Ki]

So you think the agrarian economy like Ethiopia can grow at 10% for more than decade without getting right it's prioriities including food production. This doesn't mean Ethiopia is immune from natural disaster like drought once in a while.Asian tigers similarly followed the path...but definitely growing at 10%...is impressive now, then and in the future.

It has nothing to do with what I think.   It is the simple and unpleasant hard facts.

What once in a while?  This is a perpetually starving place!   It has got food production right?      When has it not required food aid?   And that includes years when it cannot claim "natural disaster".   How is it that other countries can grow food on Ethiopian land and then turn around and give Ethiopia food aid?!?

Ethiopia has done very well.

They are starving and begging for food.   As usual.   That's not my idea of "very well".  Apparently, one can't eat economic percentages ...

[RV Pundit]

Nonsense. Ethiopia have come a long way from famines to occasional droughts.It been a while since an Ethiopian starved to death. When was last famine we had in Ethiopia? This is a country that was rock-bottom in every indicator;and has done very well recently; although their GDP per capita is still not even half of kenya's.  Again for stupid people ..their incredible efforts the last two decade are not visible..until every Ethiopia is living the America style middle class life.

It has nothing to do with what I think.   It is the simple and unpleasant hard facts.

What once in a while?  This is a perpetually starving place!   It has got food production right?      When has it not required food aid?   And that includes years when it cannot claim "natural disaster".   How is it that other countries can grow food on Ethiopian land and then turn around and give Ethiopia food aid?!?

Ethiopia has done very well.

They are starving and begging for food.   As usual.   That's not my idea of "very well".  Apparently, one can't eat economic percentages.

[MOON Ki]

Nonsense. Ethiopia have come a long way from famines to occasional droughts.It been a while since an Ethiopian starved to death. When was last famine we had in Ethiopia?

Please note the question that I asked and try to answer it: In which years has Ethiopia not required food aid?   You could, for example, just list the years, and then we'd take a closer look.   Straightforward, simple facts like that would make for a better case than "nonsense" and "stupid people".

Once you have an answer to that, you will also see why they no longer starve to death.   But note that I did not state that they were starving to death; I merely stated that they are starving. (Massive food aid from the likes of Uncle Sam has prevented the worst.)

Again for stupid people ..their incredible efforts the last two decade are not visible..until every Ethiopia is living the America style middle class life.

The main concern is food.   They don't have to live the "America style middle class life", but I''m sure that even they think a bit of food would be nice.

[RV Pundit]

Food aid is a business that I know very much having worked for world biggest food aid distributor.China was receiving food aid 15-20yrs ago and quickly became food donor. And 15 yrs ago -China had been growing for decades at dizzy levels. Ethiopia, Kenya and many countries receive food aid but numbers of those receiving food aid & intensity of their needs are reducing year in & year out.

So once again focus on the trend....how many Ethiopia received food Aid 10yrs ago...maybe 50% or more...and now it down to maybe 2%. Meaning in those few years Ethiopia have lifted millions out of absolute poverty to say "normal" poverty.

Should a country like Kenya throws 20B every year to feed it's northern citizen....that doesn't make economic & political sense to collect taxes & borrow debt to feed a few citizens...so it appeals for food aid from richer nations. If US or Japan were to be hit by huge catastrophe...they will do the same.

Nonsense. Ethiopia have come a long way from famines to occasional droughts.It been a while since an Ethiopian starved to death. When was last famine we had in Ethiopia?

Please note the question that I asked and try to answer it: In which years has Ethiopia not required food aid?   You could, for example, just list the years, and then we'd take a closer look.   Straightforward, simple facts like that would make for a better case than "nonsense" and "stupid people".

Once you have an answer to that, you will also see why they no longer starve to death.   But note that I did not state that they were starving to death; I merely stated that they are starving. (Massive food aid from the likes of Uncle Sam has prevented the worst.)

Again for stupid people ..their incredible efforts the last two decade are not visible..until every Ethiopia is living the America style middle class life.

The main concern is food.   They don't have to live the "America style middle class life", but I''m sure that even they think a bit of food would be nice.

[Nefertiti]

MOON Ki,

Details matter and numbers have a real meaning.

Ethiopia's sustained GDP growth reduced poverty from 44% in 2000 to 30 percent in 2011, according to the World Bank. The emergent food processing industry has unfortunately pushed food prices out of reach for a marginal bottom-poor minority. Collateral effect. In Rwanda, 8% growth 2006-11 reduced poverty from 57% to 45%.

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/publication/ethiopia-poverty-assessment

The question of the "demographic dividend" -- whether it is orchestrated by state actors or is a natural phenomenon like the weather? Clearly the state has a significant role to play but is not fully in control. In the Chinese case, the Communist totalitarian state utilized the party apparatus to mandate a one-child policy, eminent domain, among other things. Whereas democratic India is shackled. In Singapore the state's education and immigration policies had a significant role in the subsequent impressive growth.

For Kenya the more educated and employed people are the less likely they are to get big families. The Health ministry, medics, counties, NGOs and CBOs are crucial players in dissemination of family planning services. Customs and traditions e.g. polygamy, early marriage, etc also play a part in people's behavior. See? -- state, non-state, culture -- many players.

So the answer is somewhere between Pundit's and your argument. Development is a complex process but has visible indicators like GDP, driven by less visible factors like demographics. How much part government vs extragenous factors play is debatable. As well, whether these invisible trends are positive enough for Kenya to attain Vision 2030 despite present reality of slow progress? I am pessimistic.

[RV Pundit]

I think we achieved vision 2030 in 2015 when the economy was re-based and we found ourselves a middle -income economy. Maybe I should re-read the vision again but that was the goal.

As well, whether these invisible trends are positive enough for Kenya to attain Vision 2030 despite present reality of slow progress? I am pessimistic.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

MOON Ki,

Details matter and numbers have a real meaning.

Ethiopia's sustained GDP growth reduced poverty from 44% in 2000 to 30 percent in 2011, according to the World Bank. The emergent food processing industry has unfortunately pushed food prices out of reach for a marginal bottom-poor minority. Collateral effect. In Rwanda, 8% growth 2006-11 reduced poverty from 57% to 45%.

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/publication/ethiopia-poverty-assessment

The question of the "demographic dividend" -- whether it is orchestrated by state actors or is a natural phenomenon like the weather? Clearly the state has a significant role to play but is not fully in control. In the Chinese case, the Communist totalitarian state utilized the party apparatus to mandate a one-child policy, eminent domain, among other things. Whereas democratic India is shackled. In Singapore the state's education and immigration policies had a significant role in the subsequent impressive growth.

For Kenya the more educated and employed people are the less likely they are to get big families. The Health ministry, medics, counties, NGOs and CBOs are crucial players in dissemination of family planning services. Customs and traditions e.g. polygamy, early marriage, etc also play a part in people's behavior. See? -- state, non-state, culture -- many players.

So the answer is somewhere between Pundit's and your argument. Development is a complex process but has visible indicators like GDP, driven by less visible factors like demographics. How much part government vs extragenous factors play is debatable. As well, whether these invisible trends are positive enough for Kenya to attain Vision 2030 despite present reality of slow progress? I am pessimistic.

I have always seen India as shackled, not because of democracy, but corruption.  Corruption not in the sense of looting 30% or more of revenue, but in terms of integrity in general. 

The institutions do not do what they promise to do.  It is a situation akin to legal lawlessness.  This also Philipines, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Pakistan.  Malaysia and Indonesia to some extent.  There is a limit to the kinds of risks external investors will make in that environment.

In China and Far East,  the instititutions do what they say they will do.  There is a ruthless application of the law across the board, good or bad.  If they have to cut your head off they will.  The environment is predictable.

[Nefertiti]

Yes we are officially middle income country -- biggest economic goal. We have met income and extreme poverty targets. Relative/normal poverty is still there due to economic inequality.

Middle income - Target $1,045; Actual $1,587

Normal poverty - Target 22%; Actual 42%

For the current 2016 fiscal year, low-income economies are defined as those with a GNI per capita, calculated using the World Bank Atlas method, of $1,045 or less in 2014; middle-income economies are those with a GNI per capita of more than $1,045 but less than $12,736; high-income economies are those with a GNI per capita of $12,736 or more. Lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income economies are separated at a GNI per capita of $4,125.

http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-and-lending-groups

I think we achieved vision 2030 in 2015 when the economy was re-based and we found ourselves a middle -income economy. Maybe I should re-read the vision again but that was the goal.

As well, whether these invisible trends are positive enough for Kenya to attain Vision 2030 despite present reality of slow progress? I am pessimistic.

[Nefertiti]

I have always seen India as shackled, not because of democracy, but corruption.  Corruption not in the sense of looting 30% or more of revenue, but in terms of integrity in general. 

The institutions do not do what they promise to do.  It is a situation akin to legal lawlessness.  This also Philipines, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Pakistan.  Malaysia and Indonesia to some extent.  There is a limit to the kinds of risks external investors will make in that environment.

In China and Far East,  the instititutions do what they say they will do.  There is a ruthless application of the law across the board, good or bad.  If they have to cut your head off they will.  The environment is predictable.

Corruption (budget theft) is less important to investors than integrity (e.g. judicial independence and efficiency). Both have a big impact on the economy in the longterm.

Demographics as a macroeconomic is way bigger. Political inability to control population in India's case has had a big negative impact compared to China.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I have always seen India as shackled, not because of democracy, but corruption.  Corruption not in the sense of looting 30% or more of revenue, but in terms of integrity in general. 

The institutions do not do what they promise to do.  It is a situation akin to legal lawlessness.  This also Philipines, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Pakistan.  Malaysia and Indonesia to some extent.  There is a limit to the kinds of risks external investors will make in that environment.

In China and Far East,  the instititutions do what they say they will do.  There is a ruthless application of the law across the board, good or bad.  If they have to cut your head off they will.  The environment is predictable.

Corruption (budget theft) is less important to investors than integrity (e.g. judicial independence and efficiency). Both have a big impact on the economy in the longterm.

Demographics as a macroeconomic is way bigger. Political inability to control population in India's case has had a big negative impact compared to China.

The way I understand what you mean by demographics.  A population with a large working age component.  Preferably healthy and skilled.  And a smaller dependent component.  It is one of many factors, if the most important if I understand you right.

If one can borrow Raila's lyrical flourish.  The country is like a soccer team.  A good demographic and other useful factors like minerals, location etc are like players on this team.  The demographic is like Leonel Messi. 

The question arises.  Is it enough to assemble a group of talented individuals and put them on the field and expect them to bring back the champions cup or whatever it is that good soccer teams normally bring back?  If not, what is the missing aspect of this team?

Have there been instances when such a talented group has lost to teams with less gifted players?  If yes, what did the less talented team have over the group of gifted individuals?