Topic: Sea Piracy, it's effect on the local economy - page 5. (Read 735 times)

In a bigger picture you have to see Africa. An extremely rich continent where majority of people live in poverty because they have been colonized and their wealth is being pillaged by the colonizers.

In a situation like this, specially when you add the lack of a powerful government, crimes grow because people would have no choice but to turn to a life of crime to make a living. Piracy is only one of its results.

I wouldn't say "it helps local economy" though because the money won't be spent in the economy, it would be a vicious circle of more crime, buying guns, and other criminal activities as the gangs form and the crime becomes organized.
The reason why I started my post with the root cause of the situation is because we all know that to eliminate any problem we should eliminate the root cause which is foreign intervention ie the colonizers again...

I've heard of this problem, and I think that it's important to focus on the roots of the issue and preventive measures (positive, not negative ones) to help make things better. So ships should not travel too close to the shores, disrupting the fish movement patterns and polluting the seaside where people rely so heavily on it as a source of food and work. It would also be good to invest, if possible, into programs that would help people from these regions to obtain additional education and skills and find reasonable jobs. Ultimately, piracy is having a very bad impact because people don't want to invest in a region where it's happening, don't want to risk going on a holiday there etc.

If they lack job opportunities, they should hold their government responsible and not attacking business. They don't have any excuse to kidnap and collect ransome from businesses engaging in legitimate businesses. If they are not comfortable with the government they should vote them out during elections. Sound maritime policies should be able to checkmate the impact of shipping activities on the fishing business.

Proceeds from crime cannot be considered a means of wealth distribution because it will cause more destruction to the economy than growth. An increase in criminal activities will discourage investors from coming to the country which will create unemployment. These criminals don't really spend on items that contribute to economic development, they spend money mostly on arms and ammunition, hard drugs and prostitution. Most of these pirates are security threats to the local community they live. They end up my terrorising the local community until the people end up in poverty and death. There is nothing economically good about criminal activities.

You can't fight evil with evil. If you do then give does that make you different from the very thing you fight? Saying the impact of ships on the sea led you to be a pirates is just an excuse to do it. Saying lack of job opportunities is just an excuse. So if everybody who doesn't have a job opportunity in the region decides to go into piracy, there would be no jobs for some pirates.

There should be a proper system and proper security in the seas of the affected region. The problem with issues like this is that governments are so nonchalant about these issues. And most times security agents and governments are part of these pirates one way or the other. Either by giving information or protection.

Things like this derail an economy. Shipping companies might decide to stop shipping to that region or make their services very expensive because of the heavy security they have to pay for and the risk involved. This will in turn make the prices of goods very extension the region and gradually, many businesses would begin to go out of business. Foreign companies that do not feel safe and can't afford to protect their staff may leave and all these hurt the economy.

Even if piracy significantly contributes to a country's economy, I don't think the country should just take and support those piracy, that is highly unethical. More than that, if any country took advantage of a piracy in their sea jurisdiction it will give bad influence on the international  relationship with other countries.

Piracy as it exists is a form of terrorism. And the "touching tales" that "we became pirates because we couldn't get a job" is a very pathetic attempt to justify the choice of a criminal path. I think pirates will not take it easy if their neighbor loses his job and, for example, hijacks a relative of a pirate and surrenders her organs explaining "I am a surgeon, I am out of work, don't worry, everything is fine". All terrorism and criminal violence must be destroyed. The problem is that "you can't play by gentleman's rules with criminals", they don't understand the words law, right, value of human life. They are the cancer of our world. The only cure is annihilation.
PS Yemen and Russia should be added to the list - countries purposefully engaged in maritime terrorism against civilian ships.

I have watched documentaries about Somali pirates, and it appears that the country is suffering from economic disintegration, brain drain, and high levels of unemployment. children resort to weapons and piracy in order to obtain ransom money to free the ship’s crew or its contents. Some governments resort to negotiating with them because the most they may ask for is 10 million dollars, while Insurance costs and tracking the movement of tankers can cost companies trillions of dollars. Piracy is sometimes linked to politics, as is happening now on the right, where some groups there are closing the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

I agree with the previous comments, and it is that the OP starts from a simplistic view, while the interrelationships in economics are much more complicated than that. Those regions would benefit more from an open economy, without pirates and where many people could earn an honest living. The little that pirates can spend is not a solution to anything.

If I read your description above, one thing that can be taken away is that the first problem is temporary because and secondly, sustainable economic growth will continue to be maintained, not by piracy and will only be enjoyed by irresponsible parties. certain groups that have power because when legal economic opportunities are limited, individuals may view piracy as a necessary means of survival and indeed it is also seen as a form of wealth distribution, which functions as an economic emergency system but does the activity actually encourage sustainable economic growth??

Piracy is illegal act, most countries aren't allow that except the untouchable one. Most people like when it comes to money regardless it's obtained by legal or illegal ways.

If the country is consider privacy is a crime and anyone who doing or support that will be jailed, it's just a law. The government can't stay or watching their seas for 24/7, so that's why there are many sea piracy not get punishment.

"You can't end your suffering by instigating suffering on other people" Martin Luther King Jr. Whoever enjoys the fact that a certain person got kidnapped or ship hijacked and the money generated through it would help their local economy is rendering himself a bad service. He's nothing better than a thief. One day the pirates will come hunting the same people who think they're beneficiaries of the evil act. Are you saying in regards to Robinhood methods, where the stolen money would be used to help the poor? You need to know that stolen money doesn't help the economy of any locality. Rather it diminishes the economy. How do you expect a local area depending on thieves to survive. That locality will face abject poverty. Because thieves don't help the society. They only take away money meant to be circulating in society and waste it on a lavish lifestyle. What the pirates do, ain't good for the society, despite the fact the goods aren't headed to their nation or country.

The owners of the hijacked goods, families of the kidnapped will suffer and cry for their loss, while some are happy believing it's a great service to their society. First, they won't be able to manage the stolen goods and money, hence it won't circulate properly. Second, the price of things in that locality will skyrocket, because vendors believe they're dealing with thieves, and they won't bother buying things at any price. Generally, every human in that society will suffer huge losses for supporting stealing. Then taking it on a more realistic aspect, the way you want to see it, is it possible for money derived through kidnapping and stolen treasures to feed millions of people in a society? remember the pirates will take their share of the money, and hoard huge amounts, for weapons and armories. If that locality doesn't produce weapons, the utility of the pirates, how is the economy going to be helped? How many times will those Pirates patronize the food market, compared to the bullets and weapon sellers? It makes no sense, however, that Navy officials don't put more effort in endeavor to reduce such problems, as it's bitter to hear that so many businesses crumble due to their ship being hijacked.

In the world of transportation, air and sea shipping are vitally important. However, while air shipping is used for its speed, sea shipping is chosen for the amount of cargo it can carry. One recent issue troubling sailors is sea piracy, especially in regions around countries like Somalia, Djibouti, and Kenya. Vessels are hijacked, entire crews are kidnapped, and they are held for ransom for months or even years. In some interviews with pirates, they claim that the lack of job opportunities led them to piracy, while others assert that former fishermen turned to piracy due to the impact of ships on fishing.

I am here to ask if anyone has considered this. We always have a choice. Piracy cannot be the sole option for personal economic growth unless it significantly contributes to the economy of these countries. It brings in quick and substantial money for the pirates, who then spend the money in their local economy. It functions as a wealth distribution system. Even people in these places might not want piracy to end because of the indirect benefits on their local economy. Do you think I am correct here?