Blogs and Stories
How Capitalism Failed
Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus says the real victims of the financial crisis are the poor in the developing world. Read an exclusive excerpt from his book Creating a World Without Poverty.
The granting of the Nobel Prize to Grameen Bank did a lot to focus the world’s attention on microfinance as a tool for alleviating global poverty, and it is encouraging to see so many countries adopting microfinance at the local and national levels. But in other ways, the last two years have been difficult.
The problems began with soaring food and oil prices. By the fall of 2008, the world economy appeared to be crumbling, with the most formidable pillars of the strongest economies on the verge of collapse and stock markets around the world plummeting.
This financial crisis offers an interesting illustration of the social failings of the existing capitalist system. Credit markets were originally created to serve human needs—to provide business people with capital to start or expand companies and to enable families to buy homes. In return for these services, bankers and other lenders earned a reasonable profit. Everyone benefited. In recent years, however, the credit markets have been distorted by a relative handful of individuals and companies with a different goal in mind—to earn unrealistically high rates of return through clever feats of financial engineering. They repackaged mortgages and other loans into sophisticated instruments whose risk level and other characteristics were hidden or disguised. Then they sold or resold these instruments, earning a slice of profit on each transaction. All the while, investors eagerly bid up the prices, scrambling for unsustainable growth and gambling that the underlying weakness of the system would never come to light. The result was to convert traditional capitalism into what many have described as “casino capitalism,” marked by irresponsibility and limitless greed.
It has been disheartening to see many of the world’s poorest falling back toward poverty just when we thought the planet was ready for a big step forward.
With the collapse of the housing market in the United States, the whole house of cards is falling apart. Millions of people around the world who did nothing wrong are suffering. And the worst effects, as usual, will be felt by the poor. As economies falter, as government budgets collapse, and as contributions to charities and NGOs dwindle, efforts to help the poor will diminish. With the slowing down of economies everywhere, the poor will lose their jobs and income from self-employment.
It has been disheartening to see many of the world’s poorest falling back toward poverty just when we thought the planet was ready for a big step forward. We had thought food shortages were a thing of the past, but now they are back – not due to any lack of productive capacity on the part of the world’s farmers, and certainly not due to lack of effort by the poor themselves, but largely because of forces that could have been averted—the financial crisis and the world’s failure to pay enough attention to the need to improve agricultural technology to increase yields. We have to focus our attention at the global level to tackle this great new challenge to the world’s poorest.
For poor people, daily food—just staples, not “luxury” items like meat or fish—can consume as much as two-thirds of their income. The current food crisis means that achieving many of the Millennium Development Goals will become an even greater challenge. We need a comprehensive global plan to ensure that things do not become any worse and reverse decades of economic progress.









I'm so intrigued. Please explain what you mean by a social business. Can you give me an example or two. Thank you
All of these ideas as presented by Mr. Yunus seem good and workable, until you realize that most 'developing' nations are controlled by kleptocracies.
In places like Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Sudan, Pakistan these idea simply won't work because the people government simply loots the funds given them by the UN or whomever to improve conditions to improve their own condition and do nothing for the people of their country.
Resources meant to help people in the developing world will continue to be looted until the world powers that provide these funds start cutting off funds to regimes that are corrupt, that goes for NGO's too. In Zimbabwe NGO charities make life bearable enough that the people won't do anything about their unresponsive government, and the NGO's in order to stay and help allow them,selves to be bullied by the government.
It's well past time for some tough love for several developing nations. Cut two or three off completely and the rest will be more responsible and although in the short term suffering may increase, in the long term you will help billions.
Thank you, Mr. Yunus. There is a program in Seattle, WA that would appear to have developed and included a "social business in the framework of the marketplace." It is called "FareStart", and according to Wikipedia "is a non-profit, social entrepreneurial organization ... that operates a unique job placement and training program benefiting homeless and disadvantaged men, women, and youth." The encyclopedia further identifies FareStart to have a spin off enterprise called Kitchens With Mission, which "is now actively working with more than 25 Partner Programs across the country." I hope this information can be further adapted to the goals you have identified, and perhaps serve as additional catalyst for success, somewhere and somehow.
To Mr. "JaguarXJS" above, I think that blaming corruption alone is a facile criticism. Corruption is everywhere, as Enron and Ponzi Schemes make painfully obvious. By your logic, we aught to cut off Manhattan and Washington DC, too. Last time I looked, even these wealthy cities have people who suffer in poverty while working honestly in menial jobs without benefits.
Oversight is important. Advocating "tough love" from the front seat of a Jaguar (or whatever you hide behind), is simply inhumane. I hope that people who share your opinion find the same kind of love as their fancy cars are repossessed this depression.
Being charitable is admirable, but if one is advocating some sort of legal mandate to help "every person on earth", you are living in the delusional land of socialism.
Who the hell is going to pay for all of this "social business?"
"we need to create inclusive social services that can reach out to every person on earth. These include services normally treated as part of the for-profit sector (such as financial services, food supply, and housing), those usually provided by government or non-profit institutions (such as education), and those that may traditionally be provided on either a for-profit or a not-for-profit basis (such as healthcare).
While it's true many people around the world need a helping hand, especially starving children, doesn't there come a point
when certain groups/societies of people in the world, who are "less fortunate" because of their own making, need to just "get their shit together" so to speak?
The point of a social enterprise is that it doesn't require government subsidies or UN supports. It's "social" because it measures its success by multiple bottom lines, rather than just a triple bottom line. We (SeaMo) have featured a number of these social enterprises, like a company that brokers carbon credits for poor farmers in order to (a) reduce pollution and (b) make life saving improvements in their living conditions.
This user is no longer registered.
It sounds like everyone can have an idea of what caused the problems, not everyone has an idea of how to solve them.
So, now that Mr. Yumus has given an idea here, pehaps a follow up of some real like examples of that.
We have systems in place to help those who are very poor, and you do have to be VERY poor to get help. That plan in itself is a bad business model. People have to loose everything to get help, and by the time they get it they have so little to help themselves "get out" of the hole.
Then we have "bailouts" for the very rich. I could go on here, but I won't.
sophia5s comment if so typical of those who would like to make socialism a bad word while the term capitalism is revered as though it was handed down from God. Oh, yes, let's blame the poor for their poverty. I'd like to see how well sophia5 would have her stuff together if she had been born in bangaladesh. Yes, sophia5, you really have it together - because you were born into a system were you had all the benefits to allow you to achieve whatever economic success you have had. Wonder what kind of achiever you'd be if you'd have been born in the third world. Your arrogance makes me suspect I know, and your heartless selfishness is part of why there is so much poverty in todays world. We are our brother's keeper, and we'd be better off spending more on helping our fellow man and less on useless luxury items like jaguar automobiles and gucci bags.
Picachu,
Nobody blamed the poor for their poverty.
Did you miss the part about charity as a good thing and the need to help starving children around the world, but perhaps it's the typical leftist knee jerk response.
Did you miss the point about how in some cases certain societies cause their own human conditions.
Why did the Soviet Union Fall?
Because everyone loved living under the big iron thumb?
Why are the countries of China, Brazil, and India rising? Because of capitalism, not socialism. Capitalism gives people the tools to realize and execute their individual ideas and creativity, and to rise economically.
For those out there who think Chavez and Castro are the answer, well then Venezuela and Cuba are just swell.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
Lets start with the premise that there is only we, not we and them. Yumus has shown with his micro loans that it works to be a socially responsible capitalist. We all need to take responsibility. We have contributed to make poor countries poorer by our actions and policies. We for example have dumped chickens in Africa, bellow price, thus eliminating the possibility of chicken farmers to maintain their farms and to provide jobs for others. It is about providing people with the tools, cash flow being one, that will allow another human being to move from surviving, to living, to thriving. It is about demanding that businesses be ethical, socially responsible entities. It is about advocating for human rights and truly caring for others as our brothers and sisters. Remember that the poorest of the poor are women and children.
In summary there is only us. How am I as part of us contributing to the growth, development, self sufficiency of each one of us?
I noticed he didn't mention food prices skyrocketed because so much of our food was diverted for alternative fuels. I fear the concept as presented here is in total conflict with the goals of the eco-nazis who demand action before solutions are even available. Given the choice between starving and living with a little pollution, I'll take pollution every time.
His description of a failing capitalist system is also unfair. We do not allow capitalism to function. If we had, all of those banks that engaged in the recent stupidity would have gone out of business and would have been replaced by the majority of American banks which are doing fine. All of those oil speculators who drove up oil would be bankrupt. A true free market is cleansing. The problem is one I've addressed many times. Our government is run by an intellectual elite, most of whom attended the same Ivy League schools and they protect each other. I guess we just elected another one, didn't we?
One further point regarding food. America could probably raise enough food to feed most of the world, if our farmers were true capitalists. They too, have been corrupted by government subsidies and restrictions. Those collective farms in the old USSR sure did a good job with social farming, didn't they?
sophia5 writes:
Why are the countries of China, Brazil, and India rising? Because of capitalism...
No, sophia, those countries enjoyed or continue to enjoy centrally planned economies -- not capitalism. Brazil's self-sufficient energy miracle was planned by the foresight of it's repressive military dictatorship in the 70's. I could go on.
The current global financial meltdown has many layers, not least of which is that huge pools of cash were pouring into the US lusting for any investments to be had. This alone would have created a disastrous real estate bubble, but it was compounded by diminishing manufacturing, repealed financial services regulations and a primary "trade partner" who distorts its currency (China). With that "perfect storm" you have a major meltdown of capitalism itself.
I love Mr. Yunus. He is a hero and maybe even a saint. But we're in a MUCH deeper hole than even intelligent good intentions can get us out of now.
It disgusts me to read here in these responses that people are still blaming Fannie and Freddie -- and therefore the Dem Party by association (which is totally inaccurate) -- for this pesky capitalist snag we find ourselves in. Or it is somehow similar to the S&L crisis of the 80's -- throw the bums in jail, fork over some bail-out money and we'll be back to easy credit soon enough. How remarkably uninformed can anyone stay?
Ah yes, centrally planned economies work SO well.
Who can forget the wonders achieved by the USSR and China's Great Leap Forward centrally planned economies and the joy and prosperity which they showered upon their people. Indeed those people were "enjoying centrally planned economies"
Look at the world and where the US is, yes Capitalism has a certain scary violence to it as if sometimes crashes, but it has still lead the West to the top of the economic pyramid, which in itself lends me to believe that hey, maybe this capitalism thing has something going for it
If you are interested in micro-credit, one place to get started is kiva.org. In my opinion, it's better than charity, b/c you can re-loan the money as it is repaid. Thanks.
Wow, it amazes me a Nobel prize winner thinks this is a collapse of capitalism. It was socialistic policies that causes this. Mortgage companies were forced to loan to people who couldn't afford it based on government guarantees. Oversight was booed down by the socialists in US government. Skyrocketing food prices were caused by social engineering forcing a substantial portion of food crops to be converted into ethanol. Plus there were many many more examples of failed social engineering, but those were the big two.
mblips, I think that you probably need to look up who Mr. Yunus is. An 'arm-chair thinker' without a plan could not create a profitable 100 million dollar a year social business and in the process lift countless people out of poverty. Believe it or not, there's a reason the guy won a Nobel prize.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.