Read an iPhone for bicycles. The technology is there, but we need somebody to bring it together.

I share your analysis on the bilateral agencies. At the UN-level, some norm-setting entities can be quite outspoken, while most just move with the powers that be. I would love to see the NGOs struggle, but most seem to accept the existing order.

Like there never was a famine in a democracy, poverty is clearly a matter of power, while some development might depend on technical solutions.

I’m totally with you on keeping things distinct, but a bit uneasy about a financial transactions tax. Some hedge funds of little social utility trade extremely rapidly, and taxing them a bit seems like a good idea, but I doubt the tax would have to be very high before we saw significant changes in behaviour from them. So at the level the tax would achieve some good while causing minimal harm it wouldn’t bring in much revenue. After that you’re essentially gumming up the wheels of the international financial system upon which we all depend (e.g. remittances). This is arguably no worse than taxing labour (and capital dividends!) or consumption, but not necessarily any better. Far more useful, I think, would be a whole raft of Tobin (‘polluter pays’) taxes, offset by lower general taxation. That would achieve some real social good, and I’m a little bit dismayed that the political establishment still shies away from this kind of no-brainer for fear of driving manufacturing overseas. Against that I think the Robin Hood tax is a bit of a mirage.

MJ