You’ve written about undervalued economies in the past, but after visiting the Bay Area, I wonder what you think are the most underperforming places in the world? Define “place” as you wish, but I mean underperforming relative to easily achievable/median policy mixes. So less “what if Albanians acted like Singaporeans” and more “what if LA improved land use.”
I ask because the Bay Area, despite its achievements, seems like a candidate (Paul Graham seems to think so), as does Southern California which cedes the world’s most livable climate to cars. Various parts of Mexico come to mind. Eritrea sits on a key trade route with little to show for it. My Bosnia is a disappointment relative to neighbors. West Virginia?
Always eager to hear your thoughts.
That is from Haris Hadzimuratovic. I have a few nominations;
1. Albania I think will end up much richer, more or less on a par with parts of the former Yugoslavia. The country has enjoyed a growth spurt lately. So Albania is a good pick, but it is converging and soon won’t be a pick anymore.
2. Egypt and Lebanon should be much richer. You cannot cite their neighbors in support of that claim, but they are both extremely cultured places. Lebanese migrants in particular have done very well elsewhere.
3. Armenia should be much richer. Armen Alchian would agree.
4. Belarus should be richer than Russia, not poorer than Russia.
5. Nicaragua should be modestly richer than it is.
6. Venezuela was once the richest country in Latin America, now it is among the poorest. Cuba too.
(You will notice that communism is implicated in 3-6, and arguably #1 too.
7. Yemen should be richer, though I would not expect it to be rich.
What else?
The post Which are the most underperforming parts of the world? (from my email) appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Comments
Post a Comment