- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
I present the articles tag line:
But losses in the North are offset by growth in the South
Now compare:
losses in Western Europe and North America are being offset by growth pretty much everywhere else: Asia-Pacific, Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa and Latin America.
Are you geographically challenged? Central and Eastern Europe are not "South." The vast majority of Asia is further north than the US/Mexico border.
North/South is not an accurate proxy for rich/poor (or developped/developping, or whatever else you want to call it.)
It's well known that the developing world is sometimes known as the "South."
http://www.appropedia.org/Majority_world
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Third_World&printable=yes
In most of the world, erecting cell phone towers is MUCH MUCH cheaper than trying to string cables. That's why cell phone growth is exploding in poor-er countries or countries with inhospitable geography. In Chile and Brazil there probably a hundred cell phones per land line. Brazil is even experimenting with cell phone blimps to replace towers.
So yes, the growth in the south, e.g that 10th of the earth's surface where more poor people live, is actually bolstering cell phone markets.
