English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If you were responsible for running an inter-governmental agency which had the job of managing the global economy, what policies would you be advocate to prevent the economic effects of terrorism and why?

2006-11-14 21:20:11 · 3 answers · asked by Colin G 1 in Social Science Economics

3 answers

I can see at least two kinds of economic effects terrorism might have. First, the actual damage caused by terrorism to infrastructure (damaged roads, etc.), capital (equipment that might get blown up) and labor and human capital (people dying) obviously affects the local economy of wherever the attack comes. Sort of like the effects of a natural disaster. Stuff gets destroyed and people die and that certainly drags down the economy in the affected region. Because of that, and because the economic downturn would affect other regions that trade or otherwise interact economically with the affected region, I would advocate something like FEMA. Your agency might have the authority to declare an emergency and then swoop in and come to the rescue (hopefully more effectively than the real FEMA). How are you going to pay for this? Well, I guess you can tax everybody a little bit.

A different kind of economic effect of terrorism might come from the risk people perceive. You see, risk is bad. Economic actors don't like risk. But if they trust that your FEMA will be effective, they might think that risk is neutralized and go on in their economy-enhancing ways. In effect, your super-FEMA is a big insurer. Alternatively, you could promote a market in terrorism insurance and take care of the risk that way. Either way, whoever the insurer is will have an interest in making sure they have to pay to clean as few terrorist messes as possible, so they'll have an interest in stopping terrorism altogether. Good luck with that. I guess you can try to keep it to a minimum.

2006-11-14 21:45:03 · answer #1 · answered by Eddie 1 · 0 0

Firstly, I would not interfere with other country's internal or external policy. This is the biggest mistake a superpower can make. By being a rich country, no one has the right to give orders to the poorer countries: to steel their natural resources like oil, gas, uranium, copper, diamonds and giving back all kind of weapons. This is what happened with Middle East countries and the result is the now-days terrorism war.

2006-11-14 21:32:21 · answer #2 · answered by m_kiss2010 3 · 0 0

Following the standards of Fair Trade would be my top priority in such a postion.

2006-11-14 21:22:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers