Ruling a Nation State or a Traditional Village?

The next step of the Namibian Government against “the war on poverty” has been made with the conference on 26.10.15, which is commendable in itself. As an immediate measure GRN wants to establish food banks “with the assistance of our Cuban friends”. Cuba always rings favorably in Namibian ears, as a reference to the struggle and Cuban doctors. But “there are no food banks in Cuba” (John E. Jones: Faces of Capitalism and Socialism, 2009). Maybe the president refers to the Cuban Association of the Order of Malta (a Catholic charity). In his key note address to the National Conference on Wealth Redistribution and Poverty Eradication HE Geingob likes to quote authorities. This seems partly the game of 'name dropping' to impress his audience, partly to cover up his lack of own ideas. When one reads the speech carefully Geingob's intentions become quite clear: a. the organization of the food banks can (will) be used as a SWAPO Party recruitment and supervising instrument. The complete measure of the food banks might be more than the inclusion of farmers, companies and other private donors. It could also signalize the shift of responsibility from government to the civil society. This is not only a loss of the state's sovereignty but also a gateway to extortion: in a case of economic decline or the announcement of higher tax loads the civil society could refuse to donate voluntarily. Geingob sounds already like a pastor begging for alms.

b. Geingob will not touch the rich: he compares the rich in Namibia to the superrich in the oil-producing countries and the 'developed world'. Thus he endorses the entitlement level of the Namibian financial elite to those of the capitalistic oligarchs. He ignores that poverty everywhere is only the result of the elite's greed. He encourages the corrupt unqualified Namibian rich to go 'Carlos Slim'. What he avoids to do is to compare the Namibian poor to the poor of the 'developed world'. He praises the generous social grants, but defames the 100 N$ BIG proponents as 'simplistic'. So let's catch up on comparing the poor of Namibia to the poor of the 'developed world'. I would like to compare Namibia not to the USA, because the USA is rather underdeveloped on social welfare and not to the top notch Scandinavian Nations but to Germany.

The German government spent 5.9% of the net tax income to all social benefits (26,5 billion €). This amount doesn't include the payments from unemployment insurance and old-age pension insurance. The GDP (PPP) per capita of Namibia is 21% of the German one.

To illustrate the situation on an example: if someone has a total income below the poverty level, be it from exhausted unemployment aid, low pension payments or even low wage income (part time jobs) s/he can claim financial help for subsistence. The authority will pay for accommodation, health insurance and € 400 for the household head, plus € 360 for the partner, plus € 234 to € 320 for each child (depending on age). Those people also don't pay TV fees, get discounts at public transport, museums, the children get free meals at school and more help for special needs. This can easily amount to € 1000 (N$ 15,000) per month for a single person. At a 21% level of Namibian GDP it would be 3,150 per month for a Namibian single household.

This is just to put the presidents attitude into perspective: he belittles the wealth of the rich and exaggerates the government's efforts for the poor. He adopts big words:”poverty is not just about income” and “poverty is about the deprivation of basic capabilities of human beings”. What he means is: don't expect income but just warm words. Basic capabilities are nothing without an income – just deprivation! All this rhetoric points in the direction that a wealth redistribution will not really happen, but that GRN will rely on charity and mild measures to prevent that the people die from hunger. To me the program of the government looks like following the tradition of ruling an African village (Harambee) and not a sovereign Nation State with politics in economy.

Until the announced detailed plan for 1 April 2016 (not an April Fools' joke?) we have to wait and see if the president understands the economic implications of Poverty Eradication and Wealth Redistribution and the fulfillment until 2025. I hope it will not go the way of Pohamba's war on corruption or the Vision 2030.