PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA

IT WAS horror at the Alexandra Community Health Centre two weeks ago when an unknown group of men armed with knives stormed the clinic and attacked a patient, stabbing him to death in full view of other patients and staff.

The staff and patients who witnessed the grisly murder were left traumatised. As I passed by the centre last week with my Uber driver, I could picture the horrifying incident. The thought alone was an unpleasant one.

Over the past few days, I couldn’t stop thinking that something is seriously wrong with South Africa. Violent crime and murders are happening at an alarming rate.

According to Africa Check, in 2016/17, an average of 52.1 people were murdered every day – which is a staggering rate by any standard. Assault and rape are also at shocking levels.

The South African Police Service (SAPS) recorded a total of 39 828 rapes in 2016/17. Though they were down from 41 503 in 2015/16, they remain too high and unsettling. An average of 109.1 rapes were recorded each day in 2016/17.

These stunning crime levels are a serious blow to South Africa’s image around the world. The world is aware that South Africa suffers from shocking high crime rates. They probably laugh at the idea of a “Rainbow Nation” because of how violent our society is.

Now cash-in-transit heists have become the order of the day. I watched in horror a video last month on Twitter that showed a gun battle between the cash-in-transit security officers and the heavily armed gang who confronted and bombed two cash armoured vehicles in Boksburg, Gauteng.

Though the five suspects were arrested and have appeared in the Boksburg Magistrate’s Court, the incident highlighted the terrifying magnitude of South Africa’s aggravated robberies and violent crime.

On Monday last week, there were three cash-in-transit heists in Gauteng, Eastern Cape and Mpumalanga. Then the next day, on Tuesday, the police managed to foil two cash-in-transit heists in Limpopo and Gauteng. These aggravated robberies are all indicative of how serious the problem of crime is in South Africa.

In 2013, days after former president Nelson Mandela’s passing, the current president of the United States of America (US), Donald Trump, then still a private citizen, tweeted:

“I really like Nelson Mandela but South Africa is a crime ridden mess that is just waiting to explode-not a good situation for the people!”

Many South Africans took offence with Trump’s comments. They saw them as condescending. I accepted his comments because they were true and remain true even today. South Africa is a crime ridden mess – and we must all accept this fact before we embark on programs to address it.

What can we do about this high level of crime?

Previously, I have argued that South Africa’s law enforcement must be tough on crime. In the midst of a shootout with gangs – the police must not be discouraged from protecting themselves and the endangered, unarmed citizens in that moment. When a criminal is prepared to take an innocent life, law enforcement officers must not think twice about firing back in defence of their lives and the lives of innocent others. This, like other policing methods will need special and sophisticated training. The police ministry, led by the courageous Minister Bheki Cele, must ensure that it provides such training to its staff.

One of the most discomforting things to hear about is that many criminals are people who have been arrested before. They are not first-time offenders. Criminals are arrested and then subsequently released.

Recently, Cele said that they have raised the issue of bail for suspects with the minister of justice as some of the criminals continue with their criminal activity after being released. “There was a criminal we arrested who once had been out on bail 41 times before,” Cele said.

If this practice of arresting criminals and then subsequently releasing them persists, people like Trump will continue calling South Africa “a crime ridden mess”. It must stop.

South Africa’s police also need to up their game on crime intelligence. The recent spike on cash-in-transit heists suggests our crime intelligence capabilities are too weak to detect these crimes before they take place. Serious improvements are needed on this front.

Lastly, I’m not hostile to legal gun-ownership or gun rights. The law-abiding citizens who wish to legally own guns and protect their families must do so. This means the process to own a legal gun must be efficient and faster for law abiding citizens. Comprehensive background checks must be done on those who want to purchase guns. They should be encouraged to go for training before they buy their guns. In some cases, in a moment of life or death, having your legal gun to protect yourself and your family might be the only thing that saves your life.

The very few points I have laid out above to address and reduce the shocking crime levels aren’t all we need to do to address the problem. There are other, broader, long-term societal issues that need to be confronted if we are to substantially reduce these crime rates – such as the problem of children growing up without their fathers. That can’t be neglected – and at some point, we must talk about it. The sooner the better.

We must act on this crime matter with speed; it’s urgent. As long as these shocking crime levels persist, our national image around the world will remain tarnished. And in the eyes of the Donald Trump, we will remain “a crime ridden mess”. PM 

© PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI

SALT ROCK, KWA-ZULU NATAL

IT’S Christmas time again. A special time to spend with family and friends. It could have been more special – had it not been for the political elite determined to milk us our earned income – through taxes.

Have you ever thought how much you’d be earning, were you not paying taxes? Do the math. Your Christmas holidays would have certainly been much better.

Seldom do we people question government taxation policies and their disturbing impact on our lives. That I take as serious ignorance from our part. We keep silent as politicians tirelessly take our money, deny us a decent Christmas, and spend it on their ineffective and inefficient programs.

Government taxes us every day. Every day. When we buy a meal they tax us, we fill up at the petrol station they tax us, we buy nice clothes for Christmas they tax us, we buy booze they tax us. That’s separate from taxes they take from our salaries monthly. They are surely making hell of a lot of money this festive season.

What makes things worse – is that the return on the investment is sub-standard. The quality of our government services is disturbing. Truly indicative of the necessity of tax reforms that aim to slash taxes and boost economic growth.

I have always been wary of the state intervening in anything through tax payers’ money – education, parenting, healthcare, business etc. Rightly so. States tend to always overreach in their interventions in these areas – because of politicians who want to look good and get votes at taxpayers’ expense.

However, given the fact that we live in a world where some people – like my family who could not afford sending me to university – grapple with life trying to make ends meet – there has to be some form of government intervention to assist those people.

Then the challenge, I personally believe, is how do you keep that intervention as limited, pro-human choice, pro-market as possible. This basically means taxes must be limited.

We have to tilt our thinking to a direction that acknowledges taxes destroy prosperity and ought to be as low as possible. That thinking won’t be brought by politicians for sure. Most politicians want our tax money so they spread it around for the purposes of getting more votes in the next election. So we can’t expect much from them.

The initiative has to come from us active citizenry. We will first have to confront the fact that it is dead wrong of us to vote politicians who promise us “free goodies” into the public office. The “free goodies” concept is a classic left wing fraud – that envisions a society where things are free – don’t have to be paid for.  Such a world is a fantasy – it doesn’t exist and will never exist. Nothing is free. They, politicians, will use your money for these “free goodies” – and deny you a decent Christmas with your family and friends.

On taxes and politics, my favorite economist, Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution, once said “Someone once said that taxes are the price we pay for civilization. That may have been true when he said it, but today taxes are mostly the price we pay so that politicians can play Santa Claus and get re-elected.”

It’s very hard to disagree with Thomas Sowell. Indeed, today’s taxes are the price we pay so that politicians like Jacob Zuma, play Santa Claus by providing “free” education. All in desperation for votes.

Christmas comes once a year – and I believe all of us should be grateful every time it reaches us. It’s a special time with the people we love. At least it ought to be one.

It is the political elite who constrain us from having a better and decent Christmas through high taxes. We deserve better. PM

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

© PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA

THE state of South Africa’s basic education is a topic of constant debate – by political parties, the media, civil organisations and the general public. Even though basic education has had a positive impact on South Africa’s development post-apartheid, problems such as dismal educational outcomes and the absence of teachers torment us, and, especially, low-income families.

These problems aside, some progress has been made in addressing and eradicating the legacy of apartheid in education. Increased access to education has accelerated the growth of the black middle class so that, for the first time, in 2008, the size of the black middle class surpassed that of whites.

Throughout human history, education has been a big factor in the development of nations, and, therefore, South Africa’s prosperity is dependent on the quality of its basic education.

Even though South Africa’s education faces many challenges, it is fair to say that, on balance, the opening up of educational opportunities has had a positive impact on our society.

South Africa’s basic education challenges

Even with the progress that has been made since 1994, relative to the past, South Africa’s basic education is not doing as well as in other countries. Government is failing in many respects to pursue the reforms needed to improve the country’s education.

Besides the absence of teachers and dismal outcomes, other problems that challenge the provision of education in South Africa range from the shortage of educational facilities, to overcrowded classrooms, and the destructive actions embarked upon by teacher unions like SADTU (South African Democratic Teachers Union).

Most affected by government’s failure to improve public basic education are children from low-income families – where parents cannot afford to seek out alternative sources of education for their children.

Twenty per cent of South Africa’s government expenditure–the biggest allocation compared to other sectors, goes to education. Yet the outcomes still disappoint.

According to Africa Check, South Africa ranks behind poorer African countries like Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania and Zimbabwe on literacy and numeracy. That we are behind these poorer countries with all our privileges ought to unsettle us all.”

In Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), results released in 2016, South Africa ranked second last in the world. African countries like Botswana, Egypt and Morocco, performed better than South Africa.

Could independent schools be the solution to South Africa’s education problems?

As government fails to produce desirable results on public education, reforms are urgently needed to make improvements. Government needs to look into encouraging and creating an environment where independent schools can thrive and grow.

Independent schools are already having a significant impact on South Africa’s education. Between 2000 and 2010, according to an article that appeared in The Economist in December 2015, the number of government schools established in South Africa fell by 9%; while that of independent schools grew by 44%.

But parents from low income families cannot afford many of the independent schools. Private education is expensive. Government needs to find ways to encourage the establishment of low-fee independent schools to fuel not only competition between private schools, but also competition between low-fee private schools and public schools, and so improve overall basic education in South Africa.

Low-fee private schools have a huge potential. The Spark school in the suburb of Bramley, is a good example of the kind of education system the government could pursue.

“Quality independent schooling such as Spark, priced at R19,100 a year, means families with widely different incomes can afford to, or simply choose to, send their children to low-fee schools,” Lisa Steyn wrote in the Mail & Guardian in December 2016.

Schools like Spark are badly needed, and the task for government must be to encourage the growth of such low-fee schools so that education becomes competitive and its quality improved.

Competition would improve not only private education, but also public schools, because public schools would have to compete with other schools by providing quality education for South Africa’s youth.

The role played by businesses, parents, and communities in general, is critical in any effort to improve the education sector in this country. These stakeholders, other than our bureaucratic government, must assume greater control of the schools in their communities. The participation of the private sector in our schools would demand greater commitment from all involved.

Dr. Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, once said that there are no solutions in economics, there are only trade-offs. Competition will not be the solution to South Africa’s education problem – but it could be government’s first step towards bringing about significant reforms in the sector. PM

© PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA

FOR us who deeply believe in personal freedom, it is troubling. The notion that South Africa’s political elite unashamedly wants to tax us for consuming sugar and constrict our market choices, is deeply, deeply troubling.

At the present moment, I’m convinced the pistol is aimed our way. And it seems, at least to me, we can’t dodge the bullet in this situation. We will have no option but to abide by the political class’ sugar tax policy aimed at controlling our lives, if implemented. And frankly speaking, I doubt it will not be implemented.

I think the public hearing in parliament this week was not about its economic or health feasibility; well, it may have seemed like it was; but it was not, in my opinion.

The hearing was about whether the political elite should meddle in our lives, through taxes to discourage us from making personal choices about sugar; or leave us alone to decide on the amount of sugar we want to consume. That is what the public hearing was about, not the economic or health feasibility of the policy.

The department of health and the department of the treasury would be delighted to see the sugar tax policy implemented. And they are not the only people seriously wanting this. Even health experts want to see it rolled out. One of these health experts is Dr. Frank Chaloupka, a health economist from the University of Illinois, United States.

At the public hearing, Dr. Chaloupka cited Mexico as an example where the sugar tax policy, implemented in 2014, has produced desirable results – and reduced the drinking of sugary beverages by 11% by 2016.

He further said that, according to the Sunday Times report, a 10% reduction in South Africa would mean 189‚000 less people developing diabetes and could prevent 18 900 premature deaths.

The statistics pronounced by Dr. Chaloupka are statistics from his research, we cannot simply reject them. But we can certainly oppose his tax recommendations to reduce the consumption of sugar and alleviate disease.

His support for sugar tax is a clear reminder that people with fancy degrees can be very destructive to our society – when they do not uphold or believe in the principles of personal freedom.

None of us conservatives and libertarians oppose efforts to discourage consumption of sugar; at least I do not. Diabetes, tuberculosis and other diseases ought to be a concern to all of us. We all want a healthy, educated and prosperous nation. But the sugar tax approach isn’t the way to discourage sugar, quell disease and enrich this country.

A balanced approach is very much needed. As much as we want to overcome our socioeconomic predicaments, we must be cautious not to do it at the expense of peoples’ liberties, as personal freedom must be superior in public policy.

To department of health’s concern about the burden on the healthcare system, yes that may be true – but the suggestion that sugar tax should be adopted at the expense of personal freedoms, must be rejected outright.

We cannot and must not trade personal freedom for alleged low healthcare costs. We ought to think about other pro-liberty ways to discourage high levels of sugar consumption and fight disease.

Perhaps the better approach would be for government to educate people about the dangers of sugary beverages. Government can rigorously disseminate information so South Africans make informed decisions in the market. This may not be the best approach but it certainly is better than a sugar tax; because it upholds personal freedom.

We are unfortunate to live in times where government wants to be our nanny. Politicians think they can do almost anything to turn our planet earth into heaven – where there are no diseases and everybody is rich.

They see themselves as Messiahs who have come to save our world. In their pursuit of a heavenly world, peoples’ freedoms, in the process, are restrained.

We have to be very thoughtful on what our government can and cannot do, especially in a country that has a very small tax base, staggering unemployment and a rising public debt. The growing government by the ruling African National Congress (ANC) is a serious threat to personal freedoms. It must be spoken against and its potential tragedies highlighted.

This sugar tax debate must not be focused on the economics and health of the policy; individual freedom must be priority number one; the other stuff can come behind. Because it is not about whether this policy works or doesn’t work, it’s about the safeguarding of personal freedoms. PM

© PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA

I DON’T know about you, but I miss Chris Hart’s shrewd analysis on South Africa’s economic and social issues. I seriously do. I was thinking about him this week. I noticed on his Twitter account that he last tweeted on the 3^rd of January 2016. He’s been silent ever since.

It is depressing that a man so incredibly smart on matters of economics has been silent this long. I have met Chris numerous times at the Free Market Foundation South Africa (FMF) in Bryanston. Last time I saw him was when he gave a brilliant talk titled “The Watershed” at the FMF. He’s a great man. That I do not doubt.

Hart was, after a string of tweets expressing his views about South Africa’s lacklustre economy, crucified for tweeting “More than 25 years after Apartheid ended, the victims are increasing along with a sense of entitlement and hatred towards minorities…”. Many, including his employer, Standard Bank South Africa, deemed this tweet racist. He had to apologize. Standard Bank South Africa suspended him.

My fellow South Africans, we have to face the reality here: South Africa’s economic future looks gloomier – and we shouldn’t expect any positive news anytime soon.

In his recent budget speech, the finance minister, Pravin Gordhan, stated that his department projects 0.9% economic growth this year. Unemployment remains one of the highest in the world – close to 40%. The rand has become too weak. Prices have risen. Electricity is going up. E-tolls, for us living in Gauteng have gone up. Taxes went up last year and they are going up again this year. Government spending continues to rise. This economy is in a serious crisis.

And government is the architect of the crisis we are in. E-tolls are government’s project, electricity is going up because government has monopolized the energy industry by its ownership of Eskom and barriers to entry. They raised taxes to finance their airlines company called South African Airways, and, of course to finance welfare.

The unstable economy and President Jacob Zuma’s scandals in his administration are partly to blame for the weakening of the rand. Unemployment is high for many reasons, including sectoral minimum wages and government’s regulations that stifle business growth.

Chris Hart has been terrific in identifying the root source of South Africa’s above economic woes. He’s also been honest on what he believes ought to be the approach to escape this crisis. Government, should exit the economy. Clearly, it is inflicting sever harm to all South Africans, especially the most vulnerable, us the poor.

Because of these disastrous policies and programs, the economy will grow by less than 1% this year. And it could be worse. The Institute of Race Relations’ chief economist, Ian Cruickshanks, projects 0% economic growth in 2016. Given this reality, how exactly are we going to create jobs for the millions of people who are unemployed? The economy needs growth, and it’s not there, because government represses it.

And politicians never ever acknowledge the fact that it’s their policies that are a problem. What they go around telling people is that we are in a crisis because of some selfish, greedy capitalists; and that government must intervene more into the economy. It’s never ever about their policies.

The outcome of all this is serious damage to our society. We have developed the thinking that we are entitled to other peoples’ properties. That some greedy capitalists out there owe us something; and that we are entitled to taxpayers’ money. It is this sense of entitlement that has produced turmoil in our universities. Students feel they are entitled to the so-called free higher education. Well, it is not free, somebody has to pay for it. Who should it be?

I’d argue that the source of xenophobic attacks was also a sense of entitlement. We assaulted and burned our fellow Africans to death; looted their shops they have worked too hard for.

As a well-informed economist, Chris Hart sees this huge problem. I see it too, and have written a few pieces about it. He spoke the truth – we are suffering because of government’s disastrous policies. And the increasing sense of entitlement is worrisome.

It’s time to get serious about the future of this country. To move forward, from now, we’ll first need to face the reality – that government is a problem. It is we the people who can make our country a better place.

Mr. Hart should come back. He’s contributed immensely on the field of South African economics. This is a critical time for our nation. His voice is needed. PM

© PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA

AFTER President Jacob Zuma’s flip-flops with the finance ministry last week – sacking Nhlanhla Nene as head of the ministry – and appointing the African National Congress’ backbencher, Desmond van Rooyen – and then replacing him with Pravin Gordhan – all this in less than a week – thousands of South Africans had had enough. They took to the streets to protest against Zuma’s leadership.

The marches were huge, all races came out in large numbers to call for the end of Zuma’s presidency. But the huge turnout of whites raised questions from many South Africans. They branded the whites’ turnout racist – a protest against black government. Some said that they should have also protested in the apartheid era, against the then racist and oppressive government, and, in the march against the increase in university fees last October.

I was disappointed to see people speaking this way. At a time when we face a problem that affects us all as South Africans – a crippled president ruining our country; couldn’t we at least, for now, unite as citizens of the Rainbow Nation on an issue this critical? This was an opportunity to show unity and speak with one voice.

I just cannot fathom the narrative that if a significant number of whites, who are productive citizens of the country and pay taxes, is visible in a march against an incontrovertibly corrupt and incompetent state, it is racist. President Jacob Zuma has inflicted serious harm to this country. The Economist wrote a very intelligent and insightful article this week, on how Jacob Zuma has ran South Africa into the ground, since he took the presidential office in 2009; and we all feel the pain.

So I do not think it was necessary to invoke race in this march. The nation is clearly on the wrong path under Zuma – and when the implosion ensues, we will all suffer, blacks and whites.

Most of the people who discredit the march along racial lines are the same people who today, call Nelson Mandela a sell-out. Why? Because, in my assessment, by the time Madiba negotiated with the apartheid government to form a new democratic South Africa, and then became the president of the country, he had renounced Marxism. He chose reconciliation, democracy, and improved relations with the West. He had recognized that socialist policies do not work. And that to move forward in a way that benefits us all, we have to, at least to an extent, embrace free markets economics.

Now, according to these left-wing hardliners, whites’ assets should have been confiscated, they should have been taxed at a rate of almost 100%, key sectors of the economy should have been nationalized so that government can address the racial imbalances that existed at the time. In other words a Marxist revolution should have taken place.

Do they realize how catastrophic that would have been? We would be worse off, all of us, blacks and whites. The racist Marxist policies would have impoverished the country.

Even though the apartheid government claimed to be pro-market and capitalist, the fact is it wasn’t. It pursued racist, statist policies in order to suppress people’s freedoms. It wasn’t working. The net outcome was negative.

Another example is Zimbabwe. It’s racist, statist rule over the past fifteen years inflicted sever pain to the people of that country. Poverty and political violence forced many Zimbabweans to migrate to Europe and other countries, more than two million crossed the border into South Africa, most illegally.

Julius Malema and his party, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have started to violently seize people’s properties. The party wants a socialist revolution – which would produce the very chaos and human rights abuses that Mandela tried to evade.

No-one denies that racism exists. It exists here, in Europe, and everywhere around the world. But we should be careful how we deal with it. Let’s not point to racism even where it is unnecessary. Where we are all affected by the incompetent and the ever-expanding state, we should speak with one voice. By that I do not mean the protests against Zuma were people’s discontent over the expanding state and the suppression of liberties. Many of the protesters were just sickened by President Zuma the man. They have no issues with the idea of an interventionist government. But, it’s good that they reacted to Zuma’s recklessness.

Trying by all means to look beyond race and recognizing that racist policies won’t work, while addressing our challenges on unemployment, the incompetent government, poverty, and education; is the only way we can become a better country. The obsession with race, will impede our progress. PM

© PHUMLANI M. MAJOZI