can western union be considered a development mechanism? or does it just work to maintain the US' keystone position of economic superiority?
with locations in over 200 countries, western union helps migrant workers from everywhere send money out of the US economy to their families. what implications does this have for the small business in america? and is this method of sending money to needy countries better than charity? at least this money has a face attached to it. this money has a personality and a family. and (since i'm kind of anti-development agency right now) we know exactly where our money is going - for the most part its buying food for wives and children; sending a niece, or more commonly, a nephew to school; it's buying cinder blocks to add a new room on to the house.
thoughts?
1 comment:
One must caution on the purpose of development. Even with Western Unions.
First rule of finance - satisfy the shareholder.
Publicly & privately owned companies typically focus on profit, not necessary the "good" they may provide to the world/community. Think of Big Oil in developing nations as an example.
Development must have thought for the short-term AND long-term good. Typically public development tends to be influenced by short-term political goals. Good leaders will look at all perspectives available and determine the long-term benefit.
Post a Comment