This is Maddox Wilkinson's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Maddox Wilkinson's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Maddox Wilkinson
Recent Activity
I found this article to be very insightful and complimented our reading of Sen’s chapter on women’s agency very well. One thing I found particularly interesting was the statistic showing 38% of women over 60 go missing. Is this mostly due to unequal access to healthcare at this age or perhaps unequal economic opportunity/family support? Do welfare programs cater more towards men in some of these countries? It wasn’t surprising to read that many older women are accused as witches when times are tough, but surely this doesn’t account for all 38% that are reportedly missing. Another thing that I think is important to remember is that the statistics on missing women are exactly that and don’t consider all the opportunities that women miss out on every day. Although this paper highlights that recently women have seen some growth in access to these essential needs like healthcare, education, and workplace equality. How much more growth could there be if the current attitude towards women in many places was changed permanently, not just when times are good? One thing that occurred to me while reading this piece was Tim’s comment about his experience this summer in Mexico when a man was denied his paycheck yet still had to go to work the next week. How big of an issue is this for women in these countries as they are increasingly able to enter the workforce and given more agency? In the first paper we read by Adam Smith, he stresses the importance of trust and fairness as a central pillar to society. Obviously, this idea of fairness is largely missing in the majority of societies today. The development side of this argument appears to be the answer to this, as nations develop they will create the institutions necessary to enforce this idea of fairness and through women’s empowerment they will fight for the necessary policy changes. However, if Adam Smith’s claim is accurate, why haven’t we seen that “without fairness it would crumble”? In many poorer countries this may be more evident, but even in some of the richer countries I would expect to see more evidence of this claim as it relates to discrimination against women.
Toggle Commented Oct 18, 2018 on ECON 280 for Friday at Jolly Green General
I very much enjoyed reading this article for its insights and clarifications into economic models and how they have evolved. After reading this, it is much more clear to me our discussions in class relating to why these economists were thinking the way they had been. With only a perfectly competitive markets model to work with, it makes sense why there was so much change throughout the years as that model evolved and new ones emerged. I particularly enjoyed Krugman’s explanation of how sometimes technological advancements can lead to ignorance. I agree with what he is saying, however I believe it is not so much the technological advancements, but the accuracy they provide that can cause the ignorance he describes. Advancements that allow us to be more accurate cause an obsession with that accuracy that can drive out sound ideas on the bases of them not being backed by current modeling techniques. This paper really puts into perspective how some “truths” that economists have claimed throughout the decades haven’t held. This piece at least for me really helped me see just how limited economic modeling can be and how heavily assumptions are relied upon. At the same time though, without these assumptions we would have no holding models Krugman also stresses another crucial point in that without modeling, no matter how good your theory may be, it will eventually be forgotten and pushed to the peripherals of economic theory. This paper serves to remind that economic theory should always be revisited, no matter how long it has “gathered dust in the economics attic.”
Toggle Commented Sep 27, 2018 on ECON 280 for Friday at Jolly Green General
I found Wang, Wong, and Yip’s article to be very informative and interesting because it highlights the downside to the growth-mediated process of development as defined by Sen. Sen describes this approach to development as “postponing socially important investments until a country is already richer” (47). This article I think really helped explain more clearly the harm this approach can cause to a society. This article concludes that, although not the only factor, institutional barriers have accounted for a lot of the rapid growth seen in developing countries around the world. Those countries who chose to institute policies or procedures that systematically disadvantage certain groups of people saw a large amount of growth. This was interesting to me because Sen talks about the role of the government in a completely different way in his view of how development should best occur. Although these areas are seeing economic development, what cost does it come at? There is always a trade-off within the triple bottom line when development takes place, and this article emphasis’ the damage using institutional barriers to develop can cause. By focusing only on the economic development part, you ignore development in social inclusion and sustainability. Despite the recognized growth, the article reports the accompanying widening of income disparity and increase of social limitations. One thing I believe would be interesting to look at more closely is the actual lives those ostracized by the barriers live and whether these countries are still developing in this fashion today. At what threshold does a country become “rich enough” to transition to the support-mediated process of development as defined by Sen?
Toggle Commented Sep 20, 2018 on ECON 280 for Friday at Jolly Green General
The Millennium Development Goals marked a huge step in the right direction for the global community. I found this article to be very informative as Sach’s highlights the role the MDG’s played in the formation of the Sustainable Development Goals and the lessons learned along the way. That being said, there are still many unaddressed issues with the SDGs. Each country agrees with the triple bottom line approach, however even Sach’s admits that everyone’s interpretation of objectives within those categories differs globally. This makes sense because every country is different with differing needs, but who is determining a country’s “needs” and are they truly promoting sustainable development in that nations best interest? Additionally, the issue of accountability seems like it could be a major issue moving forward. I liked Sach’s idea of introducing intermediate milestones and think this will both encourage people to carefully record their progress, while show them progress is possible and attainable. However, some regimes are very corrupt and may report inaccurate statistics. On top of that, if a country begins experiencing hard times they may decide to cut back on the resources they are committing to sustainable development. Who will be able to decide if a country can do this and will others follow if a special case is made for one? Moral accountability appears to be the easiest solution but also the most idealistic.
Toggle Commented Sep 13, 2018 on ECON 280 at Jolly Green General
Maddox Wilkinson is now following The Typepad Team
Sep 13, 2018