Quote:

"Diaz traces the growth of global poverty back to colonization in the 15th century, and features interviews with a number of economists, sociologists, and historians who explain how poverty is the clear consequence of free-market economic policies that allow powerful nations to exploit poorer countries for their assets and keep money in the hands of the wealthy rather than distributing it more equitably to the people who have helped them gain their fortunes.

Diaz also explores how wealthy nations (especially the United States) seize a disproportionate share of the world's natural resources, and how this imbalance is having a dire impact on the environment as well as the economy. The End of Poverty? was an official selection at the 2008 Cannes Film Festival."

Having studied Austrian (AKA free-market) economics over the last few years, I have to say I think the thrust of the documentary (as per the description above) is missing the point.

While colonization was most likely unjust and unwise, history as I understand it makes it clear that genuinely free(d) markets result in increased health and lifespan, increased wealth, and decreased poverty, and that these things help the poorer members of society more than anyone else.

As for the problems, it is not free markets but rather government interventions in free markets (the use of force to intervene in free association and lawful contracts) that causes poverty and its associated effects.

For more on this see the following videos, among others on the same channels:

- Why you've never heard of the great depression of 1920 - Tom Woods

- Great myths of the great depression - Stefan Molyneux

(both of the videos above are linked btw, they just don't show up as such on the black background.)

Re. credentials, Stefan Molyneux is a strict anarchist, while Tom Woods is a Libertarian/Anarchist IIRC. Both of them are highly educated men (in a good way) and highly popular presenters on philosophical and economic matters.

JP Morgan and the Invisible Pickpockets of Paper Currency! (Stefan Molyneux) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H09IQ4p91CY

Discusses the powerful yet seldom-discussed (or even thought about) state intervention/distortion of the marketplace that encourages bad behaviour, namely LLC's (limited liability corporations).

Most of the bad behaviour (fraud, theft, breaking of contracts, etc.) are not inherent to a free market within a legitimate legal framework, but rather are encouraged by state-sponsored legal protections of "corporations" which allow the owners to avoid liability for bad behaviour done under the name of their corporation. By removing this legal fiction from state protection, people could be held fully repsonsible by those they had harmed - via both imprisonment and asset seizure - by the corrupt or incompetent actions taken by their businesses.

Yeah, Monsanto is another company that has used legalistic means (patents on naturally forming plants/seeds) to hurt society.

The idea that (non- genetically modified) seeds can be patented/owned by a corporation (read: legal fiction) strikes me as absurd and dangerous in a number of ways.

Also see similar circumstances for Lincoln, Reagan, and (Andrew) Jackson when seeking to make changes to (central) banking structures.

http://www.johnperkins.org/