I linked to a series of his articles on this, which really do put the economics of it in perspective.

Yes, I visited the link, but I wasn’t about to click on each story to try to find the piece of information I needed. A link to one story I might read; otherwise, it’s like a bunch of search results in Google, and I didn’t have time to look at them all. ;-)

As to “selling up” the computers… if you were barely surviving in San Diego living on $20,000/year, and someone across the world decided that your $20,000/year subsistence-level existence would be enriched by having a $25,000 hybrid vehicle for your commute, would you drive the car for a marginal benefit? Or would you “sell it up” to acquire other life improvements that would be more pressing for you?

Got it. You’re talking about reselling the device; I thought you were talking about up-selling (the practice of trying to get somebody to buy a more expensive device), which didn’t make sense in this context. Maybe “selling it up” is some local vernacular I hadn’t seen before.

Anyway, yes, the potential for reselling may be there, but so what? If it gets the people something they need more, what’s the problem? It won’t have the intended results, perhaps, but it may still have positive results. I assume the results wouldn’t be as bad as giving a homeless guy $20 for food only to have him spend it on booze.

Also, I assume they aren’t just throwing the laptops at the children and leaving, but giving them (and ideally their parents) instructions on what the laptop can be used for and why it’s a good thing in the long run.

Steve

Certainly, you need something in the schools to read the CDs, making the information available.

As to “selling up” the computers… if you were barely surviving in San Diego living on $20,000/year, and someone across the world decided that your $20,000/year subsistence-level existence would be enriched by having a $25,000 hybrid vehicle for your commute, would you drive the car for a marginal benefit? Or would you “sell it up” to acquire other life improvements that would be more pressing for you?

That’s the economic question posed, and the Give-1-Get-1 OLPC program proves the point. If it costs $400 for a well-intentioned American to get one, knowing someone in an impoverished nation also gets one, then the selling point for OLPCs on the black market would be around $250-$325. You could make a healthy living buying them from poor families happy to sell them for $200, and ship them to people in other countries who want such a device and want a better price than $400.

Flooding a market with a resource that is overvalued for its purpose, and at a price point that is well below what *others* would pay elsewhere, creates a market vacuum that will draw those OLPCs out of the areas intended and into areas where they are desired.

I know that goes against the whole spirit of the program, but Negroponte’s vision only works if one suspends laws of economics and of human nature.

The OLPCs would have a value representing more than a year’s income for a family, making it harder to quash the economic urge to sell them up.

I’m not sure what “sell them up” means here, but the OLPC program was doing a “buy one, donate one” program, so it wouldn’t cost (some) families anything.

I believe OLPC was also trying to get governments to invest in buying the PCs for the people, not making the families buy them.

Yes, there are other more pressing needs, but since when does that matter? We have lots of animal rights groups in the U.S. despite people starving all over the world. But who are we to tell people where their good works should be focused?

Atanu Dey is a very bright Indian economist, and he recommends that far more could be done by putting Wikipedia and other resources on CDs and distributing them to families. Even if they are only updated every year or two, it would be far less expensive and provide nearly the same value.

And what does Dey think those CDs will be played on? Do those families already have PCs?

Steve

While the world might indeed scare up enough resources to bring those net-books to every child, there are so many other basic needs that are more important. The OLPCs would have a value representing more than a year’s income for a family, making it harder to quash the economic urge to sell them up.

Atanu Dey is a very bright Indian economist, and he recommends that far more could be done by putting Wikipedia and other resources on CDs and distributing them to families. Even if they are only updated every year or two, it would be far less expensive and provide nearly the same value.