Africa’s economy soaring would mean several things: People being able to buy more and contribute in making of products and services, people from all over the globe being able to find jobs and settling there because many African nations are comparatively less populated thus relieving nations with dense population and their GDP per capita, and improving the global economy and thus, standard of living.

Making non-fuel minerals available at a lower price domestically in Africa, by implementing tariffs on its export can boost the economy there, as was discussed in part 1 of this sequel article. 

Along with the United States, China and South Korea are a few other examples of countries that stood up on their feet in terms of economic and technological development when there were limits on trade.

Take Argentina and China for example. Argentina was predicted to be an economic super power and technologically farther ahead than it is now because of its mineral and agricultural resources, but China surpassed with the help of trade restrictions on raw materials among other things. China, however, did get into a slump because of overtaxing trade, which isn’t good either, if it’s not needed. As of 2000, Argentina’s gold mining tax was 42.5 percent, whereas that of China was 73.9 percent, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 

The Democratic Republic of Congo has the second lowest GDP per capita, making its people the poorest; still it is regarded to be the richest country on the planet in terms of its raw minerals, which are estimated to be valued at more than $24 trillion. Yet I haven’t seen cars made with those minerals in Congo.

Dependency on export of non-fuel minerals slows down economic growth, according to a paper by Micheal Ross, assistant professor in political science at the University of California – Los Angeles. Mining companies tend to make a lot of money without the need of many workers. In developing countries such as those in Africa, this can lead to extreme division of wealth between those with capital and those without, which in turn allows for exploitation of poor workers who haven’t had education nor food security. People that don’t have their basic needs such as shelter and safety met are often too powerless to defend themselves and their rights.

As of 2009, South Africa was losing nearly $359 million a year because of tax laws that allowed less tax for mining companies, according to the Financial Gazette.

Regulations that discourage enterprise should be unhinged. Along with having stronger regulations in mining and protecting workers from exploitation, a judicial and investigative system that helps to prevent fraud and non-transparency in transactions, the government body should protect property rights. This can be done with software that simplify account keeping of expenditures and make it accessible to the public.

Comparatively cheap land in sparsely populated African nations could attract businesses and companies, and thus job prospects for people from other places. Unemployed professionals from all around the globe could work and settle there. As more people are pulled out of poverty, they can buy more products, helping the global economy.

Providing protection of rights on real, personal and intellectual property could draw in businesses and companies. With beautiful landscapes and exotic wildlife, tourism could also be a upward pull to the economy.

When California was barren, and few people living there, the government gave out land for cheap to increase settlement there and have economic growth. Business opportunities abounded, and jobs opened up.

Less development and people being poor and unemployed affects the global society as a whole as they can’t contribute their skills to the economy and can’t have spending power. When children don’t receive proper education, poverty becomes a vicious cycle, and its tentacles extend into the global economy.