📹 Botswana: How to Make a Country Rich (From Scratch)
One man – Seretse Khama – is on a mission to turn Botswana from the poorest country in the world into a real life Wakanda. Follow …
How does minimalism affect the economy?
Minimalism is a concept that encourages a reduction in consumption, particularly in fast-moving consumer goods, which can impact industries like retail, automobile, and manufacturing. This can lead to job losses in these sectors. However, it can also generate savings, which can be invested in other sectors like energy, real estate, and agriculture. Minimalism does not mean all consumption stops; it only reduces certain types of consumption, such as physical goods, while others may increase, such as knowledge services.
This can help jobs move around as opportunities are created elsewhere. In a society that values possessions and not having enough time to use them, the pursuit of bigger and better can lead to an endless cycle of buying more. By embracing minimalism, we can create a society that values simplicity, elegance, and simplicity, leading to a more sustainable and fulfilling life.
What is a minimalist approach to life?
Minimalism is a philosophy that prioritizes meaningful experiences over unnecessary possessions in home life, focusing on gratitude, joy, calm, and quality time with family and friends. It acknowledges the negative impact of clutter on emotional wellbeing, as possessions do not lead to happiness and can cause anxiety. Overly cluttered living spaces can create barriers to a peaceful, emotionally fulfilling life, making minimalism increasingly popular. It is a practical approach to finding more in life, rather than consuming and maintaining unnecessary possessions.
Do minimalists spend less money?
Minimal living is a cost-effective method for financial freedom, focusing on accumulating fewer items and reducing expenses related to storage, maintenance, repair, cleaning, and disposal. This approach allows for more financial flexibility and allows for more opportunities to use finances. While earning more money is often considered the secret to financial freedom, spending less is the simplest solution. Prioritizing a life that accumulates only essentials is crucial for achieving financial freedom.
What is the 20 rule minimalist?
The couple has been reducing their just-in-case possessions and believing that any items needed can be replaced for less than $20 in less than 20 minutes from their current location. This theory has been proven 100 times, with no replacements needed and no longer requiring more than $20 or going more than 20 minutes. The couple has not missed the hundreds of just-in-case items they’ve gotten rid of, and most didn’t need to be replaced. This has cleared their minds, freed up space, and taken the weight off their shoulders.
What is a minimalist approach in economics?
Minimalism is a lifestyle that promotes the consumption of high-quality consumer products and services, allowing individuals to own well-designed, multi-purpose items that fulfill their needs and passions. Services become more desirable in a minimalist economy due to their affordability and time-efficiency. Research and problem-solving are essential in a minimalist economy, as Mr. Money Mustache argues that savers and investors are the true engines of economic growth.
By sacrificing current consumption, people can invest in banks or share offerings, which can be used by businesses to create new technology, factories, or human capital, increasing productivity and driving our standard of living.
What is the 90 90 rule for minimalism?
The 90/90 rule, as developed by Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus of The Minimalists, is a technique for decluttering one’s possessions. It involves determining whether an object has been used in the past 90 days and, if not, whether it will be used in the next 90 days.
What are the economy principles in minimalist program?
The Minimalist Program (MP) advances the notion of economy of derivation and representation, postulating that movements occur to align discernible and indiscernible attributes.
What is the economy principle in the Minimalist Program?
The Minimalist Program (MP) advances the notion of economy of derivation and representation, postulating that movements occur to align discernible and indiscernible attributes.
📹 The Formula For Economic Growth | Intellections
Economic growth increases when more people work more productively. However, economic growth has slowed in the last decade …
Interesting, Botswana kept former colonial officials until the population was educated enough. Don’t ask me why but, to me, this seems to have bridged the gap between a colonial past administration and a future (now, current) independent native government. Of course, the officials worked for Botswana, not for the British
How to build a country from nothing: Step one: Be an absolute Chad who isn’t corrupt or power-hungry Step two: Don’t have a military that could coup you, at least in the early years Step three: Stay ideologically non-alignmened so that the CIA or KGB don’t kill you or fund a coup. Step four: Follow this article.
Botswana impresses me like no other country. It isn’t perfect, but it actively strives to be and doing a damn good job of it too. It’s not hard to imagine how wrong Botswana could have gotten- just look at Zimbabwe, or most African countries really… Every country needs a leader like Sir Seretse Khama!
This article was a breath of fresh air. I think often times Africa gets sorted into one homogeneous blob where everything is the same throughout the continent. At least for me, many of the countries’ names were not notable, and if you asked me to talk about many of the countries, I would not know enough to be able to say something about them. It’s nice to know that Botswana has made so much progress and how they did it.
So basically: 1.) Get a big fat loan from the International Monetary Fund 2.) Use that money to get resources and tools to extract the minerals 3.) Start trading and exporting with the western world 4.) With that money pay back the loan while making the government stable 5.) Since you still have the tools keep exporting goods and become an export focused economy 6.) Negotiate trade deals so you can freely import and export goods 7.) Use the revenue to invest in health and education 8.) Ecomony booming and your country is gonna go from a low income country to a newly developing country 9.) Country legend
Two key points that were glossed over: -Nationalizing the majority of the mining industry is the kind of thing that got other leaders assassinated. Why was that model allowed to succeed in Botswana and not elsewhere? Is it that he only kept half? -the IMF loan terms: they are often a death sentence for developing economies but Botswana was able to comfortably service the debt. How? Were the mining rights worth that much? Were the British unaware of that when they were running the country?
As a South African my heart is always warmed up by how much Botswana managed to pull together for the region — that said, if we tried to pull this off with our mineral companies talking heads would implode; in a sense they were lucky that for them development followed after independence and that British were keen on keeping an eye on Verwoerd and the boys; if only this worked out as well for Lesotho and Swaziland.
At school I did an assignment about how to run any country better, I chose Namibia thinking it would be easy. Turns out I couldn’t think of anything they did wrong. So me, being the genius I am, switched to their neighbour… Botswana… Of all the countries in Africa I chose 2 of the 3 countries that are actually run incredibly well…
This was definitely a witty, interesting and well deserved tribute to Sir Khama. Most of us in Africa (maybe especially Southern Africa) do envy his leadership. Except there is only one correction in the article there by 5:51. I do not know a single African leader that was more practical than Thomas Sankara. In fact if one were to do a article on how to start a country, TRULY from scratch, by the bootstraps, from being a nobody and succeed whilst doing – then it would have to be about Thomas Isidore Noel Sankara!
I admire what Khama has done but put some respect on Sankara’s name. Sankara had an ideology but he was more practical than most African leaders. You need to learn more about him and what he has done for his country in his very short term in power. Although he didn’t have the chance to stay in power for long and his country had almost no natural resources unlike Khama. Also know that you can’t be practical without an ideology.
It angers me greatly to hear in the very opening of this article that Burkina Faso’s development has supposedly come at the expense of democracy and freedom. Sankara and the people of Burkina Faso have greatly ADVANCED their freedom from colonial oppression, vaccinated a record breaking number of people and built a thriving socialist-oriented economy, only for Sankara to be ousted by a French sponsored coup. As a Brit (and I as a German, both former colonising nations), we really should be the last ones to whine about any democracy related issue in the Third World. Burkina Faso under Sankara was much more democratic, than Britain, the US, or Germany are today. There is a good reason why multiple parties in Burkina Faso still consider themselves Sankarist.
I remember growing up and being taught only by whites and Other Africans from Ghaba Zimbabwe etc in our schools because there were very few qualified Batswana teachers. Today we have taken the baton abd are running the affairs of our country. Thanks to all foreigners who heeded the clarion call to come and help us when we needed them to run this economy. Forever indebted to you
Yes Botswana’s story is inspiring and educational, but you have to keep in mind that most of what was done is not feasible for a lot of other countries, first of all being a British colony is usually not fun but it is very potentially useful if the Britt’s didn’t fuck up your borders too bad. Not only does it increase the number of companies willing to work with you, your previous colonial administration is incredibly useful to govern untill your people are willing and able to take their place. Botswana was also lucky to not have inherited any ohh I don’t know civil wars, race violence and other such problems usually left behind when the Britt’s have to draw a border. Overall there is plenty to be learned and applied from Botswanas story but you can’t deny the fact that they got lucky.
I wouldn’t have listed Comrade Sankara. He was an incredible leader for Burkina Faso. He prioritized education, vastly improved healthcare and made the country self-sufficient in terms of food production. He removed its dependence on the West, like its former master France, and this was his undoing. It was his ideology that helped make his country better for all. But of course, France wanted to maintain its dominance over the region and backed his assassination and coup by Blaise Compaoré. Yes, he may not have been perfect but ultimately, he was a great example for the rest of the continent, to rebuild themselves and not have to rely on a bigger power.
I agree with most of the content, but I would object about Thomas Sankara association with “be practical and not ideological”. Sankara had less resources, and still did well, until they (mostly France) killed him. So he was very practical, and Burkina Faso was doing well. Also, he tried to uplift the whole region at some point, and I believe he was capable of getting positive results. By the way, rule 0 should be: don’t steal from your countrymen, love them. Both Khama and Sankara were real smart gentlemen and leaders, the latter deserved a better end.
Botswana’s economic progress is due to low taxes on wages but high effective taxes on land and natural resources. All countries that have followed this economic model have prospered. But oligarchs prefer rentier capitalism, and economic rent capture forms the incentive for conflict and crime. Read up on the economist Henry George.
As an American I see a lot of my home in Botswana (despite having no relation to the country by blood) much of what made them so successful is as the ideals we dream about here. The people of Botswana are geniuses who were able to turn a seemingly hopeless situation into a incredibly prosperous one, here’s hoping that our two great nations can help each other reach even greater heights!
Botswana is such an amazing country and an underrated one even in Africa. After colonialism, the leadership under Seretse Khama didn’t simply do as other post-colonial African leaders did i.e. he didn’t go full marxist authoritarian and instead kept the institutions and socio-economic model the British had built up and even modified it. Plus, he maintained good diplomatic relationships with the west and due to his sound leadership, Botswana continues to be a politically stable and economically stable and growing country in Africa and this is despite being between two basket case countries of Zimbabwe and South Africa (Zimbabwe 2.0)
I was perusal Trey the Explainer and there was this Botswanan dude in the comments section. So I kinda “insulted” Botswanan dude by saying “Your country is literally plains biome from Minecraft” and he basically agreed and said they also have diamonds just like Minecraft. So whenever I hear about Botswana, I can’t help but imagine a Minecraft world with plains biome everywhere. Anyway, my point is geography is also an important factor for Botswana’s success. Since huge swathes of flat land means development, building & maintaining infrastructure is easier. It’s also good for cattle grazing.
It’s crazy how well a country can thrive if the people in power actually want to lead people instead of abusing them to fulfil their own hedonistic tendencies… Honestly, I think we should only allow ideologues into the positions of power as they can’t be bargained, threatened nor bribed. They have a vision for their country which they want to fulfill and will put themselves second. OF COURSE, this is dangerous as you probably won’t find a “nice ideologue”
Honestly thank you so much for this article😄👏🏾. Learning so much about a neighbouring country that I never knew about. And as a South African I truly appreciate this as Africa in general pretty much a lot of “bad publicity”🇧🇼 I hope all under developed countries around the world end up like this one day. This proves that whatever terrible situation in life truly can be changed with ambition and drive😁
I didn’t even know about this THIS IS FUCKING AMAZING!! It shows what happens when a Country conserves what is good from the past (inc from former Colonial Rule), reject racist principles; practical instead of Ideological; & protects civil liberties & the rule of law. WOW WOW WOW Botswanans have got a lot to be proud about!
This shows how important leadership is. A while away is the country of Equatorial Guinea. The country is literally drowning in money from its oil reserves, and yet the vast majority of its population lives in extreme poverty while the elites splurge in luxury. Botswana is an example of a government that truly loves and cares for its people. All governments throughout the world should try to emulate this.
One thing I have realized is that every sovereign nation is different. With it comes challenges, some advantages and disadvantages. One thing for sure is the ability of leadership to think first about the land, people (human capital development) and how to utilize God given resources to its people development. Basic necessities of life is necessary and how to bring people along in a good leadership dreams. In short, loving one own country at heart. It’s very simple, but hard to apply. Nothing is impossible.
This made me happy because to see honest leaders and their difference is not common. Also i have to add, government induced development only works in small populations. We have to distribute the administrarive power to minimal governments. For example there is an administrative crisis in Turkey right now. Because all the power lays with Erdogan. Before that it was with the central government and it was mostly the same disaster. We need provincial governments. And boom you solved the minority issues with the economy. Because locals will have a say on more things and the fact that economy is back in track, happy and represented people won’t rebel to secede.
I don’t like the implication at the end that Thomas Sankara wasn’t practical enough to let his country thrive. Burkina Faso was on a very similar trajectory as Botswana until the french murdered Sankara to keep colonial power secure in other parts of Africa. The current state of Burkina Faso is entirely on them and the CIA, not Sankara’s devotion to his principles.
People may moan “Oh, just have a bunch of diamonds!”. But it’s spectacularly rare and difficult for a country to dig a significant amount of their wealth out of the ground without becoming corrupt, despotic hellholes – the two best examples, Norway and Australia, had strong democratic institutions and service economies before they started exploiting their bountiful resources. Australia is still considered an economic anomaly. For a country to pull this off, as a destitute, fledgling democracy, is incredible.
Do you have any other readings for Botswana, and how it managed to be an exception to other African countries? As a country blessed with mineral resources, it could have easily fallen to the resource curse, and became a predatory state. While Seretse Khama is a great man, many countries have similar men, but the system where they work in does not reward the same behavior as Khama.
wow that president is so admirable, he could’ve easily just become a dictator and kept the money to himself, since no one would stop him he had no opposition, power or wealth really never corrupted this guy and that is super impressive this guy even did all this while maintaining democracy, which once again if he seized total power, no one would stop him. anyway great article br, u gained a subscriber, and thanks for making me feel oddly patriotic to a country I’ve never even been to
5:51 shame half the world didnt get that memo… Its true thoughh, the entire 20th century has been tainted by exactly that. A struggle of idealogies, resulting in 2 world wars, the worst violence and bloodshed seen in human history. Perhaps there is some truth to that statement, in that idealogical zealotry is the root cause of all the major problems we faced in the 20th century and the consequences of which we experience to this day.
I’m just an outsider with only a very surface-level knowledge of Botswana (and Africa in general), but I think that its great advantage was also that a clear majority of its population belongs to one big ethnic group – the Tswana people (that’s were the name of the country came from). Diversity is great and all, but being a completely random and artificial patchwork of many groups with little in common can’t be good for the stability of a young nation. Unfortunately, that seems to be more or less the situation of the majority of African countries, their borders drawn by the colonial powers with disregard of the local history and culture.
actually living in the country, knowing the people and the countries problems makes it sad to think how little the outside wrld really knows about Botswana and her struggles. people still want to see her as she was in the past and not as she is now ( a haven for corruption, state capture and abuse, not to mention the inequality). to me this no better than propaganda that can be used to gloss over the reak facts about the country.
BritMonkey: Today your country ranks the lowest in Africa for corruption Me: But that’s not really a title to be proud of, so what’s the catch? BritMonkey: lists nepotism and erosion of free speech Me: ….well there it is And while an index may say they’re the least on the continent, I highly doubt that. Since this “resource” we are talking about, are DIAMONDS. We all know how people react to those, and relying on their revenues are unsustainable for the long run! They’ve talked about creating jobs and investing in other industries plus improving water/electricity supply but that’s just it, they only talk and not actually do it.
It also doesn’t hurt that Botswana is a good majority tswana. Most of the countries in Africa have a serious problem with Ethnicities as the majority of the borders don’t make much sense. However Botswana does make a fair bit of sense, even if they can be reworked slightly. Now granted this doesn’t guarantee anything as Somalia is pretty much a Nation state, being almost entirely somalian yet its literally the least stable country on Earth and South Africa one of the most stable countries on the continent and a relatively successful country has like 8 major ethnic groups and 12 official languages. However, this does give Botswana a pretty nice advantage over the majority of Africa.
Every kid in their high schools around the world should learn about this inspiring stories of leading a poor nation to its full potential and should know there were living examples of exemplary leadership, dedication and intelligence in the unseemly corners of the world that are harbingers of hope for those underdeveloped countries in the world.
The article is well made, I liked it a lot. However, I would point out two things, since you mentioned Rhodesia: 1. Rhodesia never attacked Botwsana, and even if it had, it wouldn’t have been “terror groups” either since the terrorists in Rhodesia were the soviet- and Chinese-sponsored ultranationalists from ZIPRA and ZANLA. Indeed there were accidents on the border, but the targets had always been terrorists seeking refuge in Botswana. The Rhodesian army and government had no intention to stir trouble in Botswana. If anything, it was an example of how a country could do well without communist leaders seizing the powers, banning elections, and appropriating all resources like it had happened in nearby Malawi, Zambia, and Mozambique. 2. Botswana was lucky to keep the UK as a trading partner. Rhodesia (but this likely also applies to other countries in the area) had no such luck having been placed under embargo for unilaterally claiming independence in 1965 – after having waited since 1923 for the Crown to grant it of their own accord. This aside, I think the article is very well made. I hope Botswana keeps enjoying its wealth.
Great article, but it largely ignores the role that pre-colonial, quasi-democratic institutions indigenous to the Tswana peoples played in the development of their nation along with its good governance. This important element of Tswana cultures was instrumental in their ability to transform their nation into a highly developed, rich democracy that manages its wealth rather well, in stark contrast to other African nations and all of Latin America.
The reason for Botswana’s success lies in the fact that it’s existance as a country makes sense, since 85% or more of it’s population is ethnically Tswana. And that is the only model for Africa to one day become a stable and functioning continent, dissolve the artificial post-colonial states that make no sense and allow the various ethnic groups to form their nation-states.
every time i hear about africa, it’s because there’s been some coup; a highly corrupt president for life who regularly tortured people has been deposed by a military junta, which is just as corrupt and will now torture different people. sometimes a humanitarian crisis too. it’s good to hear positive stories. gives me hope for africa.
Just a recap on the ending there about being practical vs being ideological. Captain sankara rescued his country from economic downfall but ended up being killed by his 2ic. Just a few days ago this 2ic Blaise compaore has been found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment for the killing of captain sankara.
Just a quick correction here: The lack of border security led to terrorist organizations in Rhodesia and SA to set up shop in Botswana, and using it as a base to launch cross-border raids from- as well as conscripting locals to go die in both places. Rhodesia and SA funded opposing terror groups to fight them off their soil, much like they did in Mozambique and Namibia.
this country was oppressed by the british for years serettse was held prisoner of the british but he was clever he didnt let the royals know about the diamonds that he knew about and they let him rule his country and the brits got no diamonds ..his wife was english aswell..i lived there for 6 years when i was younger and it was the best country in africa…i lived in selebi phikwe where my dad was teaching the people how to run a mine and be self reliant on themselves and not outsiders
Botswana has a high GDP sure, but it’s also the second or third most unequal country in Africa, and most people are desperately poor. It’s basically an apartheid state but instead of whites dispossessing blacks you have Tswana elites displacing San. Also that comment about the rule of law is really rich, given that the Botswanan elites literally use the security forces to massacre San people and steal their land so they can set up cattle ranches there. And also they use the security forces to attack striking workers.