In my recent article called “President Weah’s Pro-Poor policy versus World Bank’s”, I listed several policies that the Liberian economic adviser (World Bank) might view differently than the Pro-Poor policy of President Weah’s government.

For this article, I have focused on the Zorzor District’s public high school (i.e., an example of anti-poor policy) that the World Bank, facilitators and supporters usually institute and implement. 

Yes, I visited my hometown, Fessibu, Zorzor District, Lofa County, after spending many years away from Liberia. Coincidentally, the visit was after Liberians had elected President George Weah and rejected former Vice-President Joseph Boakai, a son of Foya District, Lofa County. Before I departed from Monrovia to Lofa, many of my relatives and friends had jokingly stated that I was going to have fun and see many changes as war-weary residents strive to rebuild. 

Lofa County, was the county hardest hit the during the fourteen-year civil war because four warring factions (NPFL, ULIMO-K, RUF, and LURD) operated within the County, and therefore needed assistance from just about anyone and from anywhere but with no strings attached of course. Okay, I had a few emotions here and there. 

But, whatever feelings of nostalgia that had overcome me, during the initial course of the visit, abruptly vanished to give way to feelings of melancholy that sort of suffused my entire being. I guess this was so because of the advancements I saw within neighboring towns such as Fassavolu town in Guinea. 

Those advancements stood in stark contrast to the slow and rather sleepy developments within towns of Liberia such as Bokessa, Konia, Ziggida, Fessibu, Zorzor, Salayea, etc. Interestingly, advancement in Guinea does not paint the kind of picture many Liberians have on mind about Guinea.

Failing to analyze true reasons underlying economic developments in both Liberia and Guinea, they often wrongly assume that Liberia is far more advanced than Guinea and, they also mistakenly hold Guineans who migrate to Liberia as part of the reasons why Liberians are encountering harsh economic conditions.

Well, yes, foreigners/aliens in America, Europe, etc. are always perceived as the problem. 

Putting aside the impact of colonial rule in Guinea, Guinea’s 12 million people versus Liberia’s 4.5 million population or Liberia’s rich endowment with lucrative natural resources, is it realistic for Liberia to advance if the government does not invest in education? For instance, Zorzor District has a population of 90,080 residing within 42 towns. It also has eighty-five (85) elementary schools and only one (1) Public High School, according to the 2008-2011 Lofa County Development Agenda. 

The same Report also shows that two other Districts (Foya, the District of the former Vice-President Boakai and Kolahun) have one Public High School each, while another District, Vahun has no public high school.

This highly skewed distribution of schools was instituted in the 60s, many years ago before Liberia’s fourteen-year civil war. This kind of educational policy does not create an environment conducive for many eight-grade graduates to prepare themselves for good-paying jobs.

My siblings, for example, left Fessibu and joined me in Monrovia in order to enroll in high school. Zorzor District eight-graders, who are residents of towns faraway from the City of Zorzor and wish to enroll in high school are forced to move into the City of Zorzor, migrate to Monrovia, Sierra Leone, Ghana or elsewhere. 

Why provide so little funding for education, if it is the great equalizer? The late former President of South Africa, Mr. Nelson Mandela stated that education “…is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Does Liberia not need an educated workforce to lure good-paying investors to locate within the country?

Would an educated population not have the means to earn adequate money to purchase goods and services produced by businesses located in Liberia? Unfortunately, big business, especially the slave-wage plantation-type, does not want to give education to the masses. 

This is because an educated population might reduce its profits, deter the company’s exploitation of workers, minimize the offering of bribes in exchange of fraudulent concessionary agreements, etc.

For instance, the Liberian Firestone Rubber Plantation might face the shortage of unskilled labor if the Liberian government finances an effective educational policy that will have the effect of introducing skilled and better educated workers into the labor market.

Also, the oil-palm company in Bomi, Gbarpolu and Cape Mount,Counties might have to recruit unskilled employees from elsewhere if the Liberian government invests in education. 

Always in search of and anticipating higher profits, big business will always support candidates who will support its anti-poor policy. History shows that other nations, including our darling and oldest partner and ally, the United States of America, had a similarly skewed public school distribution pattern prior to the 1900s.

For instance, “…public schooling in rural areas did not extend beyond the elementary grades for either whites or blacks. And, after 1900, some cities began to establish high schools primarily for middle-income class people. Blacks living in Southern states generally did not attend school beyond the eighth grade. 

This is because big business made profits from slave-plantation-type jobs, similar to rubber tapping, log felling, gold and diamond mining or oil palm planting in today’s Liberia. I did not zero in on the issue of education until a colleague and longtime friend and I found out that the towns had efficient electricity supply systems.

For instance, the commissioner of the Fasavolu Region in Guinea was watching a television in his office, had a fax machine, and desktop computer, a copying machine, all because the Guinean government had invested in government office equipment and a Solar Panel System. The Solar Panel System supplied electricity to the towns’ streetlights, clinics, and schools. 

Back to Liberia, there was no electricity supply for the streets, Custom, Immigration and Revenue Offices, or within the rural towns of Zorzor District, least to mention the availability of fax machines, computers, televisions, etc. My colleague was surprised to hear from the Liberian officers that they did not even have hand-held Walkie-talkies to easily communicate with each other. My observation that our Liberian educational system is a “mess” is a re-statement of former President Sirleaf.

She stated a few years ago that the Liberian educational system is a “mess.” But I differ with her proposed solution that government’s involvement is the problem, and not limited government funding. 

Wait a minute, aren’t private investors (religious or not) dominating the educational sector in Liberia? Even during my high school days, there was one public high school in the capital City of Liberia, (Lab-High, which later morphed into the William V.S. Tubman High School), while there were countless private-high schools. More so, students from both private and public high schools have and continue to fail University of Liberia entrance exams.

The Africanews reported that in 2013, all 25,000 students who wrote the UL exam failed; in 2015, 15 passed out of 17,000, and in 2016 only one student of the 42,000 who wrote the West African regional examinations made an excellent grade. Zorzor District needs money to build additional high schools and hire additional qualified teachers.

Companies, operating in Lofa pay taxes to the government. For instance, a Logging Company, which ships logs from Zorzor District, drives through the streets of the City of Zorzor (I took pictures of the trucks carrying the logs). Certainly, I did not expect that a President Sirleaf, who implemented the dictates of big business, to institute any program that might reduce profits of big business such as the Liberian Firestone Rubber Plantation. 

The million-dollar question is will our Pro-Poor Policy President, Mr. Gorge Weah institute an educational policy to address our Liberian educational “mess” and thus lift people out of poverty as part of his Pro Poor policy? 

Yanqui Zaza, Contributing Writer
jyanqui@aol.com

Hopefully, the Liberian Presidency will be transferred on October 10, 2017 to a Native person or a Congo person.

Appropriately, he or she will receive all of the emoluments of the presidency; twenty-one gun salute, speaking and negotiating on behalf of the Nation-State, attending and visiting official nations and conferences, etc.

The question is will the new President have the will power to get a reasonable share of the revenue from “Papa’s Land” in the form of government revenue to finance infrastructure, education, social programs, etc. similar to the kinds of benefits Botswana government gives to its citizens.

Alternatively, will the new president allow a few elites to accumulate more wealth at the expense of society, an economic arrangement that pits the haves against the have-nots, according to Eduardo Porter? (NY Times, 7/11/17).

President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and leaders of other countries argued that the implied interpretation in the lyrics of the song called “Who Owns “Papa’s Land” was not about the physical possession or real ownership, rather the idea of a prudent management of lucrative assets.

This means that society should find the best managers that would generate higher profits, rather than worry over ownership, even if those owner-managers produce lower profits.

Therefore, Liberia awarded lucrative assets to investors, Japan increased de facto owners’ cash (lucrative assets) by reducing its business tax rate from 75% to 35%, and the state of Israel increased de facto owners’ assets by privatizing its state-owned entities because non-government managers do produce higher profits for both society and de facto owners, a win-win economic arrangement, they asserted.

Well, the late legendary singer Mr. Sonny Okuson did not question the managerial talents of mankind rather his or her greed, egotism, racism, selfishness, etc.

History lessons teach us that the characteristics of mankind have and will never allow those who own and, or manage lucrative assets to voluntarily give back to society a reasonable share of the profits of God’s gifts to humanity.

Rightly so, because elites have not trickle down a fairer share of the benefits of “Papa’s Land,” marginalized citizens have and continue to ask for a re-arrangement of the economic system.

In 1917, Russians demanded for more economic benefits.

In America, Franklin D. Roosevelt instituted welfare programs, retirement benefits, created jobs, etc. President Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana built schools, clinics, Akosombo Dam to create energy and electricity, etc. after taking power from the colonialists, according to Mr. Benedict Wisseh, Persepctive.org.

The late Fidel Castro changed Cubans from being slave-workers to doctors, engineers, etc. after ousting the Fulgencio Batista regime.

The Chinese leader, Chairman Mao Zedong changed China from a feudal society to become the third world economic powerhouse.

Another son of Africa, Muammar Gaddafi overthrew King Idris in 1969 and carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, and left Libya with $150 billion foreign reserves, etc.

Unlike Libya, etc. the transfer of political power has not benefited a majority of citizens of many countries.

For example, the third son of Africa, President Nelson Mandela and the African National Council took political power from the racist apartheid government, but a few elites continue to accumulate more benefits of gold, diamonds, uranium, bauxite, silver, copper, petroleum, tin, limestone, etc.

The government failed to shift to society some portion of the revenues from “Papa’s Land” in the form of jobs creation, food production or to finance welfare benefits, etc.

In 2016, the Secretary General of the ANC, Mr. Gwede Mantashe mentioned about South Africa’s current economic problem, but failed to say how South Africans will benefit from the enormous minerals of South Africa.

In 2008 and 2012, white Americans swallowed the bitterness of racism and gave the presidency to a black son of Africa, Mr. Barack Obama.

They elected him because of the harsh economic conditions as well as foreigners taking over small businesses-Dunkin Donuts-motels-fish markets-gasoline stations-taxicabs.

Excluding a few cosmetic changes such as saving the financial industry and the automobile industry, due to the 2008 financial debacle, and the enactment of Obamacare, which is about eight percent of the 319 million Americans, big business and foreigners continue to benefit, according to U.S. Senator, Mr. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority leader.

In his (7/24/17 NY Times) article called “A Better Deal For American Workers, he stated that, “We will not repeat the mistakes” of President Obama Eight Years.

“This…new vision…” will disallow special interest from writing the rules and to prevent government from making “ – things easier for an already-favored few.” 

Across five thousand miles of the Atlantic Ocean, America’s stepchild (Liberia) is searching for its own new liberator in 2017 since the first female President of Africa has shifted more benefits of Liberia’s “Land” to the elites.

Is it true that government is trying to shift some benefits of “Papa’s Land” to a majority, as indicated by some of the recommendations from the panelists at the March 13, 2017 Conference on Agriculture Concessions.

Some panelists explained that communities could get a fairer share of the benefits if they utilize the ECOWAS Laws to protect community’s land rights and privileges since Liberians laws are inadequate or limited in scope.

The disclosure from the Good Governance Conference that Liberian Concessional laws are inadequate along with numerous assertions by U.S. officials that the U.S. economic system, the same economic system that Liberia embraces, is also inadequate, could not have come at a better time.

The combined information provides an opportunity for the incoming president to create the necessary environment conducive for the majority of the population to benefit from “Papa’s Land,” since the rich will always fight to accumulate more wealth at the expense of society.

If I may remind you, the need for Liberia to increase its revenue, especially from its natural resources, is urgent because donors’ aid is dwindling and Liberia’s debt is approaching $1 billion. Worse, the Central Bank of Liberia cannot account for Liberia’s US$189 million “Foreign Reserves,” an amount that could be used as a rainy-day fund.

Yanqui Zaza, jyanqui@aol.com, Contributing Writer

World Leaders Condemn Capitalism – Africa Or Liberia, Which Way? 

Is capitalism having a bad coverage? Well, many voters under capitalism are having more doubts about the benefits of this economic system or “trickledown theory.” In a 2016 Poll, Harvard University found that 51 percent of young American voters rejected capitalism and have positive views about socialism, similar to the conclusion of the 2011 Pew Poll.

President Donald Trump, then U.S. presidential candidate stated that, “America’s economic system is rigged;” U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders stated that had Americans been under socialism the price of a medicine would not have increased from $40 in 2001 to $40,000 in 2016. In the 6/14/17 NY Times newspaper, he concluded that capitalism “is a dismal failure.”

In Europe, French Democratic presidential candidate Mr. Jean Luc Melenchon wants his government to have a role in the economy; current German Chancellor; Mrs. Angela Merkel stated that a government’s ownership in corporations does not only increase government revenue, it also discourages outsourcing of jobs as well as reduces the practice of violating laws.

The current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Ms. Theresa May was quoted as rejecting the “free market ideology of Thatcherism,” and reminded British voters that her “…Party still believes in a post-war Keynesian consensus of government intervention…”

The result of capitalism in Africa is even worst. Living conditions within its oldest Republic, founded in 1822, Liberia, with enormous natural resources, is a nightmare, especially for those residents living on $2 a day. Why is Liberia a sad story? Well, when capitalists offer bribes to bureaucrats, they (capitalists) end up paying to the government minuscule revenue earned from natural resources and inflating prices of goods and services such as housing units.

President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and the World Bank introduced the idea to pay excessive salaries to a few advisers in order to dissuade them from accepting bribes. Ironically, the rate of corruption has increased because the anti-bribery measure, a disparity in salary, in itself, is a source of corruption, while bribery, one of the lifelines of capitalism, has continued.

If Africa or Liberia wants to prosper, should it reform capitalism? By the way, what is the difference between the idea of public-profit-making (socialism) and private-profit-making (capitalism)? Capitalism is the economic system that allows private-profit-making investors to own and, or manage lucrative resources, while socialism allows government bureaucrats to make profits for society from owning and, or managing major lucrative assets.

Proponents of socialism say a majority of society benefits when governments build housing units, manage utility entities, mine diamonds and, or cut and sell logs for profits. On the other hand, capitalists, because of  greed to make more profits, will always use any means, including practices against the tenets of fairness, honesty, transparency, etc.

The debate about the benefits of government-profit-making activities versus the benefits of private-profit making activities has been around for centuries. However, the European leaders’ denunciations of capitalism and their positive view of socialism came at a bad time for capitalism. It came at a time when the African Union Committee accused big business of siphoning $50 billion out of Africa yearly because capitalists coerce or bribe African leaders into signing flawed concessionary agreements.

Additionally, the report that capitalists, and not government bureaucrats, promote bribes offering is another bad news for capitalists. This second bad news is not only reported by John Perkins, in his book called “Economic Hit Man;” but it is also reported by International Transparency (IT). Big business is the key promoter of bribes offering, IT Study concluded.

This latest rejection of capitalism is pale as compared to the condemnation expressed by other European leaders after the 2008 financial economic meltdown. France former President, Nicolas Sarkozy stated “either we re-found capitalism or we destroy it…because financial capitalism is irresponsibility.”

British former Prime Minister, Tony Blair said modern-day capitalism based on speculation had been “perverted” and was “an immoral system.” Mrs. Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany stated that capitalism should be reformed.

Is capitalism redeemable, or do the past and current shortcomings of capitalism indicate that the century-old economic system is irredeemable? For this article, let us review how profits of lucrative assets are distributed between government and private-profit-making investors since profit is the residual of the total economic activities of communities or countries.

For example, how come governments operating under capitalism continue to experience budgetary problems, while those operating under socialism do not? Or why government such as the United States and United Kingdom charge higher users’ taxes, but Germany does not because it receives other types of revenue such as dividends from T-Mobile International, 400 Banks, Volkswagen, Airbus, etc.?

Alternatively, the United States of America ($18 trillion) and United Kingdom ($8 trillion) owe 34.0% ($26 trillion/$69 trillion) of the total $69 trillion debt owed by 147 countries, all because these countries do have limited role in the economy.

If none of the above explanations is convincing, let us review the public-profit-making entities of China, which have generated $3 trillion reserves. Chinese state-owned entities do not only make huge profits for society, but they are efficient, according to 6/16/2017 NY Times.

The Editorial stated, “…Interestingly, when Britain handed control to private companies to upgrade London’s subway system more than a decade ago, the result was substandard, budget-busting work, etc. By contrast, China, under socialism, has engineered one of the most effective economic transformations in modern history in part through relentless investment in infrastructure, traditionally financed…” all because state-owned entities own and, or manage lucrative assets.

Finally, if Liberia were to reduce its reliance on the practice of taking more money away from the pockets of its citizens in the form of users’ taxes and, or reduce its reliance on borrowed money form lending institution such as the World Bank, then it should at least adopt the Botswana’s economic policy and play a role the diamonds industry, gold, logs, etc.

It could also accept certain aspect of New York City’s Rent Control Policy, for example, by constructing affordable housing units near the proposed government ministerial office-complex to be built by the Chinese not only to reduce the cost of living, but also to retain skilled manpower. 

Well, yes, profiteers such as the World Bank, Monrovia-landlords, diamonds dealers, etc., will insist that capitalism is good and socialism is inefficient. But remember, the World Bank would not survive if countries become solvent such as Botswana, which covers about 50% of its budget from revenue of the diamonds industry.

Equally too, Monrovia-landlords would not be in the position of influence to dictate national policies if government had ownership of buildings for government offices and for employees to use as personal homes. Remember also, an insolvent country cannot dictate its own destiny, a recipe for chaos. 

Yanqui Zaza, jyanqui, Contributing Writer

Liberians, once again, are hoping that a change in leadership after 2017 their country will address Liberia’s issues: generate adequate revenue, finance electricity to entice good-paying-job investors, finance social programs, fight corruption, etc.

Yet, the candidates are focusing on ethnicity, number of endorsements of preferred candidate or vice-Presidential running mate rather than the issue of adequate revenue, for example. Why does Liberia, with significant deposits of natural resources such as diamonds, continue to rely on excise taxes (i.e., money taken away from the pockets of citizens) to finance its budgetary documents?

Well, is it not too late for experts and politicians to search for reasons as to why Liberia continues to receive inadequate diamond revenue or search for an alternative economic policy that can put more diamond money into government coffers?

 In fact, the $50 million diamond revenue story of Sierra Leone could be a beginning.

This is because the NY Times issue dated 3/26/2017 ran an article called “Miners Found a 706-Carat Diamond in Sierra Leone. Who Should Get the Profit” that also describes the diamond operation in Liberia. Public records indicate that Sierra Leone and Liberia, both neighboring countries, have diamonds, but do not receive a fair share of the diamond revenue.

In that same NY times article, Mr. James Yaya Bary explained how the current Sierra Leonean economic arrangement has created an environment conducive for private investors (i.e., predominantly, Lebanese, Guineans, Gambians or Malians) to accumulate huge revenue of the diamond industry at the expense of the government and miners. The Sierra Leonean-government does license miners such as Rev. Emmanuel Momo who discovered the $50 million 706-Carat diamond.

The miners, on the one hand, are not only poor and desperate for money, but also have limited knowledge of the diamond industry. On the other hand, dealers, who have gained vast experience in the diamond industry within Africa and elsewhere, know the inner workings of the Sierra Leonean government. So, the dealers deliberately, but deceptively, encourage the miners to spirit the diamond out of the country, which has porous borders.

By spiriting the diamonds out of the country, dealers are not only escaping government offices in order to pay minimal taxes, but are also avoiding independent diamond appraisers; thereby, allowing the dealers to pay very little money to the miners since the dealers’ estimated value of the diamonds (i.e., usually lower estimated value of the diamonds), is at most times used to determine the miners’ share of the diamond revenue.

So, is the spiriting of the diamonds outside of the country part of the reason why Sierra Leone gets 3% to 10% of the diamond revenue? Of course, the answer is yes. Botswana’s diamond revenue provides about 50% of the country’s national budget primarily because Botswana government and private investors, collectively, dictate the diamond policy and share the revenue reasonably. In Sierra Leone, however, private capitalists dictate the operational method, the kind of expenses, the profit margin, and tax avoidance and tax evasion strategies.

Remember, diamond dealers, like other privateers, usually do whatever it takes to make money, according to Miya Tokumitsu. In the NY Times article called “Why Social Justice and Capitalism Don’t Mix,” Tokumitsu stated a profiteer who does not exploit workers, wants to honor moral values, obeys government regulations and, or is not ruthless with his/her competitors, is deluding himself/herself.

Alternatively, when a government partners with diamond investors, such an economic arrangement allows the government to build a diamond cutting factory, thereby, not only adding value to diamonds and increasing government revenue, but also providing more good-paying jobs. That is the economic system Botswana has instituted.

So, let us change the debate from the issue of personality (Native or Congo) to the issue of putting more diamond revenue into the Liberian government coffers. This is important because Liberia’s primary source of revenue (i.e., excise taxes) would not be adequate to finance infrastructure, social programs, etc.

More so, Liberians are now rejecting any new taxes as evidenced by the recent public demonstrations organized by Liberian entrepreneurs to denounce new taxes. Furthermore, now that Liberia is stable, our International Partners’ assistance, excluding external debts, would not be around $500 million.

The “Citizens Guide To The Budget…” stated “… in 2013/14, donors will contribute $649 million in project aid in addition…” to the $476 million UNMIL will spend in 2013/14. Note, donors’ money is different and donors’ money is not included within the Liberian National Budget.

Okay, I understand why indigenous advocates are focusing on ethnicity as a litmus test for the presidency and not focusing on the real issues such as the sharing of diamond revenue. This is because many past Presidents, whether Congo origin or coopted Congo candidates continue to support policies that protect influential Liberians, especially real estate owners, diamonds and gold dealers, etc.

In addition, influential citizens and private investors have and continue to prevent honest and less corrupt candidates from winning political offices of influence.

Further, indigenous advocates believe that candidates of Congo origin are less likely to enforce regulatory policies against their kinsmen even if they were to discuss and provide diamond revenue policies, all because of money, etc. 

Indigenous advocates also state that the imperial power of the Liberian presidency coupled with the internal working requirement of the Legislative Branch make it difficult for indigenous lawmakers, who are in large number, currently, to launch policies that the Presidency does not approved. It is true that the presidency in many countries uses arm-twisting, bribes, etc. to coerce lawmakers.

However, in Liberia, President Sirleaf did expand the money-culture attitude. She is paying excessive allowances to her advisers and is bribing lawmakers, implying that bribery (i.e., her advisers refer to as lobbying) is good for Liberia. The money culture continues to supersede any real and good issues of development. 

Nonetheless, indigenous advocates should focus on issues such as diamond revenue because investors have and will always use portion of the profits of lucrative assets, for example diamond, to coopt or lure candidates of any ethnicity to protect their interest at the expense of society. Let us debate these programs in order to change the practice and belief that “…profit motives and property rights are more important than the people…” as stated by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at the Riverside Church in New York City.

More so, the debate exercise might help candidates as well as voters to understand how and why the current economic system usually creates an environment conducive for private investors to accumulate more diamond revenue at the expense of society.

Yanqui Zaza, Contributing Writer
jyanqui@aol.com

The rapid increase in rent or mortgage, which makes up a significant portion (45%) of the high cost of living (www.citylab.com), is making life difficult for citizens as well as governments around the world. And the high cost of living, experts complain, creates an unfavorable economic environment for good-paying job-investors. Instead of debating a reform policy in order to reduce the housing cost, politicians look for a scapegoat.

Well, reducing housing cost (i.e., a revenue for real estate tycoons) might be a hot issue for many candidates, who are friends of real estate owners. In any case, a debate of real estate reform might not only reduce cost, it could help owners to understand the impact of the cost of housing and encourage voters to remain engaged within the political process. 

How does the cost of housing increase? Additional cost in housing begins with factors of the economy. However, the practice by private owners to increase rent through an economic policy such as reducing the number of housing units and, or violating pertinent regulations is a key factor. The high rent or mortgage increases cost of doing business as well as food, electricity, healthcare cost, education, etc.

In Liberia, the National Housing Authority (NHA), established to help solve the housing problem of Liberia, had already begun a housing reform in 2011. In its 2011 Report, NHA stated that the Liberian government must increase Liberia’s total housing units from 327,000 (www.unhabitat.org) to 678,000, if the country is to reduce the high cost of living and help become sustainable by 2030. Also, country must construct additional 278,000 units if 2 million additional residents will be added to its current population of 3.4 million, the NHA stated. 

Sadly, the NHA 2011 Report also acknowledged a few reasons why Liberia might not build the housing units required by 2030. The government is not committed to the idea. For instance, in the 2012/2013 budgets, the Liberian government allocated $700,000 for NHA, while it allotted twice that the amount to the National Oil Company of Liberia, a fiduciary entity. Nor, did foreign and local partners respond to its funding request; therefore NHA has little capacity to finance the construction of the needed number of housing units.  

One of Liberia’s external partners that could lend housing funds to NHA, but did not, is the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), one of the units of the World Bank. In fact, a chart on page # 16 of IBRD 2016 financial statement did not show any amount allocated to finance building construction in any country, even though IBRD reported a net income of $495M in 2016. So, why would an institution not allocate funds in order to reduce the cost of living, if it were organized to end poverty? I guess IBRD does not want to increase housing units, because profits of its allies would decline. 

NHA 2011 Report is a good beginning, but the debate, if any, should not just be about peripheral policy issues such as constructing a few additional housing units without instituting a genuine reform, according to Mr. Connor Dougherty. In a May 8, 2017 NY Times article called “Cars Decline in Value, Why Not Homes,” he advised that if the U.S. government intends to reduce cost of housing, it should drastically cut back land-use regulations that cap new development. In the absence of effective reform, rental payments did increase even though the late President William R. Tolbert constructed additional buildings in Matadi, Barnesville, Gardnerville, etc. during the 70s. 

Historically, higher rent payment had bred chaos, including the 1789 explosion in France, according to Thomas Piketty. Also, the increase in the cost of housing was partly responsible for the housing bubble in 2008 in the United States of America, as well as the bankruptcies of Greece and Cyprus in 2009 and 2012/2013 respectively, according to Mr. Paul Krugman, NY Times Columnist. 

Nonetheless, these historical events have not provoked the thinking of the Liberian 2017 Presidential aspirants about the high cost of housing; hence, the need for Liberians to begin a dialogue now and not after elections. Assumingly, they forget or are naïve to realize that real estate owners will bribe policy makers and implementers for more profits, especially if voters do not participate in the debate. Describing the attitude of private-profit-making investors during elections, Joseph Schumpeter stated in 1942, that capitalism is not an ideology in which the will of the people is fulfilled. Instead it is a process by which elites compete to protect their interest.  

Will Liberian elites use the capitalistic system to illegally protect their interest? If there is any doubt, let us visit and understand the article called “South Korea’s Powerful Business Ties could Be Tough to Cut,” since the two countries embrace capitalism. The article written by Jonathan Soble, Jeyup Kwaah and Choe-Sang-Hun describes how the rich manipulates politics, and by inference how the rich demand money from the poor in any country, including Liberia. They stated, “… that South Korea richest business clans have the game,” or they know how to thwart any reforms. For instance, they will bribe anybody, minimize tax liability, and, or merge old-entities in order to consolidate power. 

The President-elect of South Korea Mr. Moon Jae-In had promised during the election that he would prevent families from using non-profit foundations, monopolizing businesses and exploiting regulations in order to reduce tax liability, they added. However, Mr. Moon will find it difficult to enact many of these constitutional reforms since his Democratic Party’s 119 seats cannot outdo the 300 seats in parliament. 

In the Liberian 2017 election, a winning party will not gain a majority within the Legislature. And even if a winning party were to coopt a majority of the lawmakers, records indicate that real estate owners will continue to bribe lawmakers.

Therefore, the debate for real estate reform should begin now, rather than later. Beginning the reform process now will allow voters to demand answers from candidates and also identify those candidates who might already be in the pockets of real estate tycoons.

Finally, Liberians should not postpone the idea of debating reforms as we did in 2005. Without debate, we wrongly concluded then that the rich are honest and the poor are thieves, therefore, excessive salaries paid to advisers will encourage them to reject bribes offered by big business. Guess what, such a financial reward to a privileged few has now replaced the idea of patriotism and honesty with the culture of “get rich quick,” a culture from which private profit-making capitalists usually win over society.

Yanqui Zaza, Contributing Writer / jyanqui@aol.com

It is a general knowledge that mankind is not only endowed with his/her genes, but endowed with family norms, educational developments, religious upbringings, community influences, etc.; or as Ms. Carolyn N. Kinder of Yale University puts it: “The genes you are born with influence your behavior. Your social environment including your family, school and neighborhood also influence your behavior.”

Opinion by Yanqui Zaza, Contributing Writer

So your protégé’s character was not only impacted by the values from Lofa County and the Monrovia-ghettos’ diverse culture, but also impacted by two less obvious things among the different developments in the 70s. These two things, A Song And A Pair Of Sandals, grounded in the goodness of simplicity, also added a meaningful interpretation for me to what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. meant when he said; “…they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

In addition, I understood later that when Dr. King, Jr. used the phrase “the beloved community” he was restating God’s demand on human to seek an “equitable society,” not just ordinary love, according to Rev. Otis Moss III, the pastor of Trinity Church of Christ of Chicago, IL.

The message of equity was mentioned in many songs Liberians sang. And the song called “Blue Diamond Says,” preaching the message of equity, was among the many informative and poor-people’s uplifting songs Mr. Anthony Nagbe sang. The message in “Blue Diamond Says” taught me a lesson.

The lyrics of the Song did inform someone that his/her wearing of an expensive shirt as compared to my inexpensive shirt did not indicate he/she was more important than I am. To me, and some friends, this Song reminded us to appreciate ourselves and respect others. I used the lyrics of this Song to mentally insulate myself from the shame of wearing cheap clothes/shoes, living within huts/zinc shacks or eating malnourished food.

I do not know whether Mr. Nabge’s songs influenced Dr. Togba Nah-Tipoteh who introduced the idea to wear a pair of sandals (called “Tipoteh Sandals”) made out of used tire of a vehicle or vice versa. Dr. Tipoteh, who could afford any kind of expensive pair of shoes, wore this pair of sandals to all gatherings, both private and public, in order to spread the issues of Rice and Rights within the monthly newspaper published under the name GWEI FEI KPEI. This monthly newspaper, produced by the 70s progressives, called on Liberians to seek justice at any time, and anywhere.

Dr. Tipoteh was one of the progressives in the 70s whose agenda was to change the mentality of the Liberian people, especially the youth. They did believe that the “unchecked gap between the Monrovia-elites and the masses could lead to Catastrophe if the masses did not speak out. The masses’ rejection of the harsh economic conditions was a better remedy since Liberians could not depend on the benevolence of society to care for those who are left behind.

These progressives were educated and had the experience to earn high salaries either at private companies or public offices, but they chose to work in places where they would interact with the youth.  In addition to teaching Liberians at formal gatherings such as academic environment, they organized intellectual forums or monthly meetings to discuss issues ranging from Liberia’s social, economic, cultural and political conditions to issues affecting other poor countries.

Unlike the stories about the issues of Rice and Rights in Liberia published in the GWEI FEI KPEI, wearing the “Tipoteh Sandals” was a message that was visible and eye-catching. Besides being loud, clear and convincing, wearing of the “Tipoteh Sandals” indicated to the poor that all Liberians are equal irrespective of economic or social status. Implicitly, it indicated to the onlooker to respect the person wearing the “Tipoteh Sandals” and he/she will be respected. Also, implicitly, the pair of “Tipoteh Sandals” did not represent the individual.

If it were so, Dr. Tipoteh, someone who had earned a doctorate degree in economics, would not have worn shoes made out of tire of a vehicle. Further, to the onlooker, the message was not to allow material things to be the priority; rather to encourage people to acquire knowledge. Finally, the message invited the onlooker to join the idea of enhancing knowledge and rejecting material things, bigotry, ethnicity, hatred, religious prejudice, etc. Dr. Tipoteh’s colleagues joined him in wearing not only the sandals made from used tire that are found on dump sites, but wore khaki pants and inexpensive shirts. The progressives’ attire became the dress code for many people, especially students attending the University and night schools.

I got the message, that is, be yourself and do not pretend to be someone else. In any case, I wore the “Tipoteh Sandals” because of necessity, not necessarily to appreciate the goodness of simplicity. This is because I did not only save myself the money I did not have, but it allowed me to attend the University of Liberia without the shame of being perceived as an unwanted student.

This is because there was an unwritten rule for all students to wear nice shoes and clothes to attend classes, which I did not have. More so, being aware that many other students living in better communities in Monrovia will wear nice shoes and clothes, I would have to secure money to purchase for myself a niece pair of shoes and clothes, if Dr. Tipoteh did not introduce the idea of wearing khaki pants and the “Tipoteh Sandals.”

Well, since attitude is contagious, students of the haves and have-nots at the University of Liberia began wearing the progressives’ attire. Interestingly, the “Tipoteh Sandals” –wearing students were smart, had acceptable characters, and had excellent family upbringing, etc. I joined many Liberians who accepted the clarion call to wear simple attire including the “Tipoteh Sandals” and seek advance knowledge. In fact after the April 12, 1980 military coup, the late Cephas Mabandee, a professor at the University of Liberia, refused to accept his appointment as an Associate Justice of the Republic of Liberia because the legal system did not allow him to wear his cultural shirt. Also, Dr. Boima H. Fanhnbulleh paid US $50 fine because he wore his African shirt and refused to wear western attire during his confirmation hearing in 1980. 

The idea of simplicity and honesty began to have an impact in Liberia before April 12, 1980. Government officials of the William R. Tolbert Government participated in the famous Student Intellectual Discourse Symposium at the University of Liberia where the audience asked any questions affecting the country. Students debated unlimited issues under the Palava Hut at the University of Liberia. The University Spokesman, a newspaper produced by the Student Government at the University of Liberia, carried stories narrating the ills of the Liberian society. 

Certainly, there were many other factors that impacted my life, but the activities undertaken by the progressives, especially the “Tipoteh Sandals,” issues carried within the GWEI FEI KPEI newspaper and University Spokesman, made a memorable impact and helped to make me what I am today.

So, I say thanks to Dr. Togba Nah-Tipoteh for a job well done. I hope Liberians will follow the philosophy of the progressives by moving away from this money culture or get rich quick culture, bigger house, bigger yards, ostentatious lifestyles, etc. to the culture of the virtue of simplicity, demonstrated by getting affordable attire, reasonable home, etc. 

Sable Mining, Mittal Steel, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Firestone, etc., or predatory investors, as President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf called them, have and continue to offer bribes in order to amass wealth at the expense of society.

Consequently, they reduce government’s resources to create, etc., jobs; thereby increasing income inequality, hatred, etc., according to David Kingston, the author of the book called “Free Lunch.” However, using “Information Propaganda, they have shielded their identities as the thieves that drain government’s coffer.

Investors say bribes grease the wheels of business or they are the costs of doing business; efficiency, they argue, means limited law or less enforcement of regulations to prevent the violations of labor laws; good business environment means lower taxes; or small government, investors say is less corrupt, means to shift the ownership and management of electricity, water and sewer, education, or lucrative assets (diamond, gold, etc.) to profiteers.

Lawmakers are bad guys when they receive bribes from Mittal Steel. On the other hand, it was good for business, for example, when President Sirleaf, acting on behalf of Mittal Steel, gave a vehicle to each Liberian Lawmaker. It is a good economic decision for the government to abate taxes owed by Monrovia-landlords, I guess in exchange for political contribution, but government is inefficient when it finances projects in order to create jobs.

Government Pays excessive salaries to a privileged few in the name of fighting bribery, but ends up creating unsustainable appetite by exposing gullible advisers to expensive lifestyles; the perfect recipe to engage in corruption. Bribery prone government bureaucrats should not only be prevented from playing a significant role in digging and cutting diamonds, producing food, providing utility services, but should also reduce regulations, argue profiteers.

Oaky investors agree that bribery is bad and some countries have created a series of laws to fight bribery. America created the US Foreign Corruption Act in 1977; The Chinese created the Bribery Act in 1997; The United Kingdom created the Bribery Act in 2010, or the Russian created the Bribery Act in 2011.

Liberia is now a member of the Club established to reduce bribery. Unfortunately, the content as well as the legal language makes it difficult for officers to reduce bribery. In fact, it might be difficult to prove bribery cases if a prosecutor cannot prove that there was a pro between the quid and the quo. More so, it is very rare that a prosecutor will find a written agreement, where someone says, I will pay you this bribe and you will do this favor for me.”

“Predatory investors,” during slavery, did not only get rich from slave labor, but they stated that slavery was a necessary order to prevent the slaves from self-destruction. But when the slave master wanted to enjoy North America’s resources, by declaring Independence, they excluded their slaves they promised to protect form self-destruction, according to Mr. Robert Parkinson. (NY Times, 7/4/16).

He stated, “…separation from Britain was…about racial fear and exclusion,” and not “…about inalienable rights.” Preceding the slave era, the Roman Empire employed the “Information Propaganda War” to control the masses, according to an American scholar who is scheduled to appear in London to present a documentary. Mr. Joseph Atwill claims that the Roman Empire created Christianity as a propaganda exercise to exploit the poor.

If President Sirleaf is sincere in accusing investors as the purveyors of corruption, it would appear that the poor people are winning the “Information Propaganda War” and investors are losing it.” Adding his spiritual voice, Pope Francis has accused investors of promoting income inequality. So, are the two United Sates Presidential candidates, Mrs. Hilary Clinton and Mr. Donald Trump who have both accused investors of being corrupt.

The question is if investors are predatory purveyors of bribery or corruption, which is “Liberia’s enemy number one,” why is President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the Commander-In-Chief since 2006, just identifying the real culprit of underdevelopment and income inequality? President Sirleaf has not only accused big business as “predatory purveyors of bribery or corruption, but has appealed to Mr. David Cameron, a leader of one of the countries that believes that bribery greases the wheels of business.

Is President Sirleaf, former employee of the World Bank, United Nations and a graduate of Harvard University, a victim of the “Information Propaganda War?” Or is she playing the blame game? If it is the former, she is not alone, according to Anup Shah of Global Issues.

Paraphrasing an August 1996 U.S. Army Field Manual, he stated, Information propaganda is another warfare where truth is a casualty. In a warfare, he added, “the ‘good guys’ and the “bad guys’ can often both be guilty of misleading their people with distortion, exaggeration, subjectivity, inaccuracy fabrication, in order to receive support and a sense of legitimacy.”

ow, if President Sirleaf is not playing the blame game, then when did she have a change of heart about the identity of those who promote and offer bribery? Is President Sirleaf implying that investors such as Firestone, Exxon Mobil or Chevron did not offer bribes to Big Boy #1 and Big Boy #2 in exchange for the 66 flawed concessionary agreements out of the 68 signed by her Administration?

Better yet, is President Sirleaf also implying that she is unaware of the history that investors’ greed resulted into the Tulip Madness in1637; the speculative Bubbles in 1716-1720; the economic depression in 1929 to 1940; and the 2008 financial crisis because of Wall Street speculative (gambling) transactions?  Hasn’t she read studies of Transparency International, which indicate that investors Exxon Mobil, Firestone, Mittal Steel, etc., offer bribes because they want higher profits? Well, deniability does mislead.

Certainly, President Sirleaf and the World Bank know that owners of lucrative businesses will always offer bribes in order to write flawed policies at the expense of communities; or offer bribes in order to relocate from a community with high labor cost into a community where there is cheap labor; or offer bribes to change policies in order to hire lower-wage employees; or offer bribes in order to enact policies that will shift economic power from local citizens into the hands of unpatriotic residents, etc.

A better remedy to reduce corruption and, or bribery is to minimize the individual profit motives, by increasing government role. But such an economic arrangement is adverse to the theory of higher profits for investors or anathema to the theory of massive accumulation of wealth by a privileged few, therefore, President Sirleaf and her allies, might pretend to fight corruption, but their economic principles do not support any measures that reduce profits for a privileged few.

Yanqui Zaza, Contributing Writer,
jyanqui@aol.com