>India and China between them are >half the developing world, and have >been
growing very fast indeed >since the early 1980s.
>Mr. Wade has an interesting >definition of "most"...
Mr Wade, like the people at http://www.cepr.net/IMF/The_Emperor_Has_No_Growth.htm
seems to be able to count higher than two (as can MOST people), though I'll give you credit for simple fractions (you did say half). And then there is the issue of who gets credit for what, since India and China seem to be quite successful at avoiding WB and IMF requirements--perhaps the key term here would be something like 'degree of liberalization'.
Excerpt from the Mark Weisbrot, Robert Naiman, and Joyce Kim article :
The official data for the last two decades (1980-2000) tell a different story. Economic growth has slowed dramatically, especially in the less developed countries, as compared with the previous two decades (1960-1980). For example:
n From 1960-1980, output per person grew by an average, among countries, of 83%. For 1980-2000, the average growth of output per person was 33%.
n Mexico would have nearly twice as much income per person today if not for the growth slowdown of the last two decades; Brazil would have much more than twice its current per capita income.
n Eighty-nine countries ? 77%, or more than three-fourths ? saw their per capita rate of growth fall by at least five percentage points from the period (1960-1980) to the period (1980-2000). Only 14 countries ? 13% ? saw their per capita rate of growth rise by that much from (1960-1980) to (1980-2000).
n In Latin America, GDP per capita grew by 75% from 1960-1980, whereas from 1980-1998 it has risen only 6%. For sub-Saharan Africa, GDP per capita grew by 36% in the first period, while it has since fallen by 15%.
Even where high growth rates were achieved, as in Southeast Asia, they were still better in the earlier period. The only regional exception to this trend was East Asia, which grew faster from 1980 to 1998 than in the previous period. But this is due to the quadrupling of GDP, over the last two decades, in China (which has 83% of the population of East Asia).
In short, there is no region of the world that the Bank or Fund can point to as having succeeded through adopting the policies that they promote? or in many cases, impose? in borrowing countries. (They are understandably reluctant to claim credit for China, which maintains a non-convertible currency, state control over its banking system, and other major violations of IMF/Bank prescriptions).
End of excerpt, digression:
BTW, on this list we've been discussing stocks and things like p/e ratios. Here is a good article at CEPR:
http://www.cepr.net/stock%20market/stock_returns_for_dummies.htm
Charles Jannuzi