By Invitation | By invitation

What’s good for the poor is good for America

Jeffrey Sachs on where Uncle Sam should be more generous, and why

|

ALTHOUGH its prosperity depends on a worldwide network of trade, finance and technology, the United States currently treats the rest of the world, and especially the developing world, as if it barely exists. Much of the poorer world is in turmoil, caught in a vicious circle of disease, poverty and political instability. Large-scale financial and scientific help from the rich nations is an investment worth making, not only for humanitarian reasons, but also because even remote countries in turmoil become outposts of disorder for the rest of the world. The biggest priority of next week's Genoa Summit should be for the rich countries, above all the United States, to get serious about contributing to global economic development.

This article appeared in the By Invitation section of the print edition under the headline “What’s good for the poor is good for America”

Keeping the customer satisfied

From the July 14th 2001 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

More from By Invitation

Bangladesh has achieved its second liberation, says Muhammad Yunus

The interim government’s new leader argues for releasing political prisoners and holding a free election

Margaret Hodge’s lessons from east London on countering the far right

Mainstream parties must win back white working-class voters by focusing on local issues, says the former Labour MP


The real winner of Venezuela’s election urges the regime to face facts

A peaceful transfer of power is still possible, says Edmundo González


Thailand’s thwarted election winner on the move to ban his party

Weaponising the courts to muzzle dissent will fail in the long run, says Pita Limjaroenrat

Keep the code behind AI open, say two entrepreneurs

Martin Casado and Ion Stoica argue that open-source models will power innovation without compromising security

Not all AI models should be freely available, argues a legal scholar

The more capable they are, the greater the risk of catastrophe, reckons Lawrence Lessig