Neoliberal Globalization: Assessment of the Relationship between Trends and Market-Development by Renaldo McKenzie

Having presented arguments and cited examples of neo-liberal Structural Adjustment (SA) adverse effects on Jamaica...., we may now conclude with the question: Does the Jamaica inequality trend support the assertion that neo-liberal restructuring creates inequality and poverty? If so how or if not why not? It is quite clear from the presentation of the facts that Jamaica’s social and economic performance has been mixed. The political dynamics of the state, poor economic management, measured approaches, mass migration over the years, brain drain, market deregulation and poor educational outcomes have all played a role in undermining Jamaica’s growth. However, market deregulation and globalization have exacerbated the problem by worsening Jamaica’s financial burdens through a compilation of direct and indirect methods, which include the imposition of conditions that do not fit the Jamaican context. This also involves withholding aid and investment, lending at high interest rates in the short-term, financial and trade deregulation. These conditions have sunk Jamaica into abysmal debt that has created an insurmountable crisis that is difficult to overcome. The hegemonic forces of neo-liberalism have transformed Jamaica into a dependency that will take a herculean effort to override. Economic growth is dependent on their ability to purchase machines and material that can improves their manufacturing capabilities. Yet foreign dollars needed to invest in capital-intensive projects must come from exports, which is mediocre and inferior when compared to other countries. Nevertheless, the “capital” earned through exports, in turn empowers local elites who have long controlled these export businesses and see long-term development as threat to their influence. A broad base development of Jamaica’s markets would provide greater opportunity for many more Jamaicans to share in the scarce benefits and spoils, and cut the monopoly local elites have over income and wealth.

Global inequality figures suggest, that today, the OECD controls 90 percent of the world’s wealth, while all of Latin America and the Caribbean and Africa only benefits from approximately 1 percent (see figures below). The average income for a first-world citizen compared to that of Jamaica highlights a fantastic disparity. Jamaica has benefitted from tremendous investment and aid over the last 10 decades. However, this has not resulted in the investment in technological advances necessary to create growth. Nevertheless, this is the direct result of Jamaica’s vulnerability and openness to external shocks, created by the adjustment of the 1980s and 1990s.