Re:18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1
by kedean on Monday November 16, 2015 @01:12PM
(#10575980)
You may be thinking of this example: http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1987628,00...
TLDR; sending a surplus of tshirts to Africa did nothing but crash local textile industries by introducing a surplus of existing, cheap product. Guy wanted to do good, didn't think about the consequences, and screwed up.
Re:18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1
by Jtsummers on Monday November 16, 2015 @01:23PM
(#10576050)
That was exactly the example that was in my mind, but I didn't have time when posting to look it up. Thanks.
Re:18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1
by djrogers on Monday November 16, 2015 @06:53PM
(#10578222)
Except you clearly haven't read the article - he didn't send the shirts, he listened to the aid workers and criticism over his plan and decided against it.
The local textile crashes referred to in the economy were from cheap second hand imports, not aid.
I'm lacking specific articles and lines of research, but charity seems to be better when it's establishing people on their own (teaching them a trade, providing them a global market for the goods they already produce, education, medical, etc.) than giving them a thing. We have to be careful when giving to others that we don't simultaneously diminish them. All of this is a balance, and the correct balance very much depends on the extent of the need and the existing capabilities and limitations of the people involved so no universal line can be drawn.