The Great Escape Pros And Cons

Throughout “The Great Escape”, Angus Deaton introduces and supports several arguments regarding health, wealth, and inequality. I am fascinated by his arguments and viewpoints especially in regards to inequality and foreign aid. The only criticism that I have toward his arguments, is that they do not include always all of the factors that go into the issues. In this essay, I focus on Angus Deaton’s arguments regarding inequality and foreign aid. I will introduce several arguments that I found interesting and either support or counter the viewpoint.
In the beginning of the book, Deaton states that the global inequality that exists in today's world is the result of modern economic growth. He develops this argument by providing several examples

which highlight the fact that several countries were prosperous well before other countries were even created. For example, he mentioned that Chinese explorers were traveling the Indian Ocean well before Columbus did; However, due to wars and poor rulers, their prosperity was not sustained. Deaton progress and reveals to the reader that as previously rich countries begin to decline, others thrive which leads to the current global inequality. Deaton continues, stating that as certain countries grow, others such as countries in Africa remain in their current state and as a result, the inequality gap widens.
I agree with Angus Deaton's views on global inequality. From my limited knowledge of history, I recognize that wars, poor ruling, and diseases all have a profoundly negative effect on the well-being of a country. Therefore, as the country begins to either decline or continue to innovate, other countries catch up and eventually surpass the previously prosperous country. This circumstance also applies in technology. For example, Uber has been hugely successful for several years; however, as issues relating to their CEO began occurring, I began to notice that other ride - sharing companies such as Lyft were beginning to gain more funding and also popularity. Therefore, I agree with Angus Deaton’s theory that as prosperous countries decline, other countries and catch up, thus resulting in a widened inequality gap between the growing company and other stagnant countries.

Toward the middle portion of the book, Angus Deaton discusses Inequality at Work.
He begins by attributing increased inequality to changing demographics, government policies, and advancements in technology. He goes into detail concerning each of the causes and provides details concerning why each of them has increased inequality at work. In respects to demographic changes, he reveals that the increase in female workers and “power” couples is the main culprit of inequality. He also states that the rapid advancement of technology has led to a higher demand for college educated workers, resulting in increased salary which in turn increases inequality. Deaton also describes the government’s role in increased inequality by stressing the numerous roles that it has in determining rules, regulations, etc. He also downplays the increase in illegal immigrants as being a cause of increased inequality at work. Toward the end of the chapter, Deaton described inequality at work as being a key component in increasing living standards.
I agree Angus Deaton’s viewpoints of inequality at work, especially in relation to advancements in technology. As companies begin replacing their workers with robots, they no longer need to hire the low-level workers and instead hire college educated engineers and programmers. I have seen this occur in several families and although it is unfortunate, I agree with Deaton in that it is key in increasing living standards for everyone. I have also seen a steady increase in the number of families in which both adults work, and thus I can imagine that changing demographics have contributed to increased inequality. However, I believe that there has been an increase in dual income families in both high and low-income families, thus I believe that its role in increased inequality is minimal compared to that of technology. I also agree with Deaton’s argument that government policies have a role in increased inequality at work. For example, many rocket-based companies are relocating to Huntsville largely due to its low living cost compared to larger cities. This increases inequality by removing several jobs from larger cities.

Deaton begins the section on foreign aid by quoting several aid claims such as “UNICEF could save the life of a child in Mozambique for [27 cents]”.

He goes to discuss several arguments as to why poverty has not been solved if all it takes is everyone donating a few cents. He finally argues that poverty has not decreased because the poor government and toxic politics are the problems, not a lack of money. He also states that the United States gives too much money in financial aid, and explains that solving poverty is multi layered; therefore, donating more money only makes the problem worse. Deaton also states that foreign aid in the form of money removes any incentive for the country to provide services to help its

citizens.
I agree with Deaton’s argument that poverty is not a direct result of a lack of money, but the poor government. I believe that this is most evident in countries in Africa. I have always wondered why such countries, which are abundant with valuable resources such as diamonds and oil, even needed foreign aid. I believe that this is the case because the majority of the money going to the rulers instead of the residents. This realization makes it clear that many African countries lack proper governing; thus, Deaton’s argument that foreign aid in the form of money not only does not work but worsens poverty.
Another argument concerning financial aid that was particularly interesting was Deaton’s argument that “when the conditions for development are present, and is not required and when the conditions are not, and will only do harm”.() This argument is interesting in that it is indirectly implying that foreign aid should never be applied. Although this argument sounds heartless, I believe that it is partially correct. I believe that instead of focusing on sending money to poor countries, donor countries should focus on assisting the government in spreading their wealth. However, at times it may be more beneficial if money was sent directly to those in need instead of to the government in control.
August Dean continues his views on foreign aid and discusses the dynamic between politics and foreign aid.

He states that large inflows of foreign aid can potentially change local politics for the worst. He furthers this argument by declaring that the main difference between rich and poor countries are the benefits, such as a fair legal system, that paying taxes gives citizens in the rich countries. He progresses and declares that since several countries that depend on large amounts of foreign aid, do not depend on the citizens to pay for programs, the government is less likely to develop programs that benefit its people. Thus the rulers make decisions and rule without needing the people’s consent. August Dean also explains why it is difficult for donors to stop foreign aid to corrupt leaders. He lists the donors may either be unaware of the issues, ending support may interfere with the donor country’s agenda or the fear that other countries may step in as the reasons why. Dean also mentions that foreign aid has led to positive results, but he cautions that it should be weighed with the potential negative

effects.
I agree with August Dean’s arguments. Governments that require its citizens to pay taxes are more likely to provide services that the people need. This is the case because, in such countries, it is in the government’s best interest to make sure that its people are successful. Therefore, If the government receives substantial foreign aid and does not depend on the people, why should it even care about the people? I believe that limiting foreign financial aid and encouraging foreign countries to implement a fair tax system, would be much more successful than simply sending money to countries that have no incentive to help its people. I believe that it is unfortunate that donor countries are oftentimes forced to provide foreign aid to governments that do not follow the donor country’s requirements. I also disgusted by cases in which donor countries send money blindly, and do so only with political gains in mind. I believe that donor countries and companies should be more transparent as to the reasons behind their foreign aid. People who donate to such companies should know whether or not their money is going to those in those in need, and not corrupt governments.
Throughout “The Great Escape”, Angus Deaton introduces and supports several arguments regarding health, wealth, and inequality. His arguments in relation to foreign aid and inequality were especially interesting. They made me view these issues in a new light and assisted me in the realization that although there is an abundance of money being spent to solve the issues, it may not be the most efficient method. The only criticism that I have toward his arguments, is that they do not include always all of the factors that go into the issues. In this essay, I focus on Angus Deaton’s arguments regarding inequality and foreign aid. I will introduce several arguments that I found interesting and either support or counter the viewpoint.