Posts Page | Capital Newspaper | The Paper That Promotes Free Enterprise

What happened in the North African Spanish enclave of Ceuta last week was tragic for everyone involved. So let’s make it a regular thing, the EU apparently decided – at least judging by its actions.

I’m not saying that anybody overtly wants migrants from all over Africa to routinely storm the borders of some far-flung part of the EU in an attempt to get a foothold on a shuttle from a migrant center into mainland Europe. In fact, Ursula von der Leyen has said that she wants more barriers and watchful eyes on the borders. By barriers, presumably she means walls or fences. And by eyes, she probably means nightclub-style bouncers with biceps the size of my thighs and not neighborhood block watch grannies. Not that she’s going to say that. Although she should. If only to counter all the virtue signaling that Spain did that contributed to the problem in the first place.

All these new measures are supposed to keep migrants out of Europe. But at the same time, the EU is doing its usual routine of mitigating its common-sense measures with self-defeating idiocy. Because what better way to encourage Morocco or any other nation bordering the EU to fumble the migration situation at home than to give them even more financial incentive.

Because that’s worked out well so far. How much EU taxpayer cash is actually needed under this racket for Morocco to do the job that it’s being paid for? From 2014 to 2022, the EU paid Rabat €2.1 billion to stem migration to the EU, plus another €631 million in 2021/2022 alone. Losing total control – or pretending to – seems to be a convenient way to get a raise. It’s like a lifeguard who lets everyone drown and then goes and asks for a performance bonus. Or a security company that gets paid more for a spike in break-ins. Or a firefighter who bills extra for every house that catches fire on their watch.

Türkiye already did this hostage routine with Brussels. In the wake of conflicts in Syria and Libya, the EU paid Ankara to hold back migrants from Europe’s borders. And what do you know – it never turned out to be enough. The tsunami seemed to ebb and flow in rhythm with the ink spilled in Brussels on checks to Team Erdogan.

Speaking of Libya – it’s been paid for the EU’s border outsourcing, too. As have Egypt, Tunisia, Mauritania, Jordan, Lebanon, and parts of the Horn of Africa, like Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda.

Wouldn’t it be cheaper to just have doors with actual locks on them at home, like the average common-sense person does? But no, Europe can’t do that because then it can’t say how open and free it is. Better to pay for the iron fist to be wielded elsewhere by someone with the financial motivation to do so. Even if their enthusiasm for the job seems to be like a carnival game where the prize appears only after the operator gets another handful of tokens.

Meanwhile, Spain is being treated like the sole author of this mess, as if this entire surge just spontaneously generated the moment a legal ruling changed deportation procedures. And yes, that ruling mattered because it altered incentives. As did Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s amnesty offer – with a reported million applicants showing interest so far.

But who else has been incentivized? As if thousands of migrants were reading EU policy briefings over breakfast. Instead, they were on social media and apparently saw a sudden onslaught of online content convincing them to drop the Doritos and make a run for the border. Who made that happen? And with all the disinformation fighting tools that the EU boasts about, how did this massive whale actually succeed in beaching itself onto a piece of Europe while the EU’s entire anti-disinformation fleet was patrolling the waters? Guess it’s a pretty good sign that the whale wasn’t Russian, huh? Because the world’s most sophisticated whale-watchers would have already mapped its migration patterns.

It raises a question that no one in official statements really seems too keen to ask aloud: who benefits from the chaos? Not Spain, clearly. Not the EU, judging from how unenthusiastic it sounds about it. But Israel and the US sure have been upset with Spain’s position opposing Israel’s genocide in Gaza and war in Iran. But upset enough to have funded NGOs to “give away” Spain’s enclave in North Africa, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son once threatened on social media back in 2019?

In any case, now Spain is relegated to begging nation-states to control their own citizens. Not exactly a position of strength. But once that amnesty signal is out there, then unfortunately you don’t get to choose who accepts it, which hidden powers could decide to exploit it in an attempt to pressure you, or how many show up to camp out in your tranquil EU garden and flatten your flowerbeds. Including those caught between the EU and the countries it keeps paying to roleplay as its contracted security guards.

Childcare seen as economic infrastructure, not just welfare

Capital News

admin

August 8, 2026

Childcare seen as economic infrastructure, not just welfare

Childcare should be treated as a core economic investment rather than a narrow social welfare expense, according to a new study presented at the 14th Africa Evidence Summit.

The study, led by Dessalegn Anshiso of the Policy Studies Institute, argues that early childhood care and development has the power to boost productivity, support women’s employment and improve household welfare, especially in countries like Ethiopia where women still carry most unpaid care work.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, women spend more than three times as many hours on unpaid caregiving as men, the study notes. In Ethiopia, women spend an average of 26 hours a week on unpaid care work, compared with about six hours for men.

Researchers say this imbalance limits women’s participation in paid work and keeps many confined to low-income informal jobs. It also slows progress in reducing poverty across generations.

The study, titled Childcare as Economic Infrastructure: Women Economic Empowerment, Household Welfare, and Children Outcomes in Addis Ababa, was conducted under the Scaling Care Innovations in Africa initiative, with support from Canada’s International Development Research Centre and in partnership with the Addis Ababa City Administration and ActionAid.

The findings come as Addis Ababa tries to expand public daycare services. Municipal authorities have set a target of 1,000 daycare centers by 2026, but existing facilities remain overstretched, leaving many low-income families on waiting lists.

According to the researchers, that shortage has turned what should be a broad productivity-enhancing service into a narrowly targeted safety net for only the most vulnerable households.

The study also points to social and cultural barriers that continue to limit the benefits of childcare services. Even when daycare is available, traditional gender expectations and household power dynamics can create conflict at home and discourage women from taking up paid work.

Dessalegn said childcare should be viewed in the same way as roads, electricity and transport infrastructure because it frees labor, expands economic participation and supports long-term development.

The research team carried out what it described as the first longitudinal difference-in-differences evaluation of public daycare in Ethiopia. It tracked 1,975 low-income households in two rounds of data collection between 2024/25 and 2025/26.

The study compared 769 beneficiary households using 29 municipal daycare centers with 1,206 similar households that remained on waiting lists.

The results show that access to public daycare reduced women’s daily unpaid care burden by an average of 2.5 hours and increased their paid work time by 6.8 hours a day.

The impact also extended to older children. Unpaid housework among older girls fell by 8.5 hours a week, while boys’ unpaid work dropped by three hours. Girls’ primary school enrollment increased from 94.09 percent to 95.91 percent.

The researchers also found that maternal stress declined significantly, as measured by standard wellbeing indicators. However, the study found no statistically significant short-term reduction in clinical depression, suggesting that childcare alone may not be enough and may need to be paired with psychosocial support.

As women’s earnings increased, the study found a modest rise in joint household decision-making, including greater shared decisions on major household purchases.

Dessalegn said the findings support a shift in policy thinking, with childcare financing moved out of welfare budgets and into national development and capital expenditure frameworks.

He said accessible, quality childcare should be treated as productive public infrastructure that supports women, children and the wider economy.

The Commercialization of Hope

Business & Economy

admin

August 8, 2026

Hope has always occupied a unique place in human society. It motivates individuals to persevere through adversity, inspires innovation, and sustains communities during times of uncertainty. Traditionally regarded as a moral and psychological resource, hope is increasingly being transformed into a commercial commodity. Across healthcare, education, finance, technology, and self-improvement industries, organizations have discovered that hope can be packaged, marketed, and sold.

While the commercialization of hope has undoubtedly expanded access to opportunities and solutions, it has also created ethical dilemmas, encouraging unrealistic expectations and exploiting vulnerability for profit. Although commercial markets can legitimately cultivate hope by offering genuine value, the unchecked commercialization of hope risks undermining trust, widening social inequalities, and reducing human aspirations to market transactions.

The commercialization of hope is not a new phenomenon. Throughout history, merchants have sold products promising health, happiness, or prosperity. However, digital technologies, globalization, and sophisticated marketing strategies have amplified this trend. Modern advertising rarely sells products alone; instead, it sells visions of transformed lives. Consumers are encouraged to believe that purchasing a fitness programme will guarantee confidence, enrolling in an online course will secure financial freedom, or investing in the latest technology will ensure future success. In this sense, hope has become an intangible product embedded within tangible goods and services.

Healthcare provides one of the most striking examples of this phenomenon. Pharmaceutical companies, private hospitals, and biotechnology firms often market cutting-edge treatments by emphasising hope for recovery or extended life. While medical innovation undoubtedly improves health outcomes, ethical concerns arise when hope is overstated or detached from scientific evidence. Patients suffering from terminal illnesses may spend significant financial resources on experimental treatments with limited probability of success.

The promise of hope can therefore become a powerful commercial tool that exploits emotional vulnerability rather than empowering informed decision-making. Harvard scholars have frequently argued that ethical healthcare communication should balance optimism with transparency, ensuring that patients understand both the possibilities and limitations of medical interventions.

Similarly, the education industry increasingly markets hope as a pathway to economic mobility. Universities, private colleges, and online learning platforms advertise qualifications as guaranteed routes to successful careers. Higher education undoubtedly enhances knowledge and employability, yet labour markets remain uncertain and highly competitive. Students frequently accumulate substantial debt based on optimistic promises of future prosperity that may never materialise. When educational institutions prioritise enrolment targets over realistic career guidance, hope becomes a commercial asset rather than an educational value. Such practices risk undermining public trust in educational systems and contribute to growing dissatisfaction among graduates facing underemployment.

The rapid expansion of the self-help and personal development industry further illustrates how hope has become monetised. Motivational speakers, life coaches, productivity applications, and wellness influencers generate billions of dollars by promising personal transformation. Many of these services provide genuine psychological benefits by encouraging resilience, discipline, and positive thinking. However, others rely on exaggerated claims that suggest success depends solely on individual mindset while ignoring structural inequalities such as poverty, discrimination, or limited access to opportunity. This narrative shifts responsibility from institutions to individuals, allowing commercial enterprises to profit from people’s aspirations without addressing the broader social conditions that shape outcomes.

Social media has significantly accelerated the commercialization of hope. Digital platforms use sophisticated algorithms to personalise advertisements that appeal directly to users’ ambitions and insecurities. Influencers frequently promote lifestyles that appear effortlessly attainable through purchasing recommended products or services. Carefully curated online identities create the illusion that happiness, beauty, or financial success is only one purchase away. Consequently, consumers often equate consumption with self-improvement. This cycle reinforces materialistic values while generating continuous demand for products that promise emotional fulfilment rather than practical utility.

The commercialization of hope also extends into financial markets. Investment firms, cryptocurrency promoters, and wealth management companies frequently appeal to consumers’ dreams of financial independence. During periods of economic uncertainty, speculative investment opportunities often flourish because they offer hope for rapid wealth creation. The collapse of numerous financial bubbles demonstrates how commercial narratives built upon unrealistic optimism can produce devastating consequences for ordinary investors. Ethical financial communication requires balancing opportunity with honest discussion of risk, yet competitive markets often reward firms that present the most optimistic narratives.

Despite these criticisms, it would be inaccurate to argue that commercialising hope is inherently unethical. Markets frequently create products and services that genuinely improve people’s lives. Medical research, educational technologies, renewable energy solutions, and entrepreneurial innovation all depend on investment motivated by hope for a better future. Businesses succeed by identifying problems and offering solutions that consumers value. In this sense, hope functions as a catalyst for innovation, encouraging both producers and consumers to pursue progress. Commercial activity can therefore generate positive social outcomes when it is grounded in honesty, accountability, and measurable effectiveness.

The central ethical challenge lies not in selling hope itself but in selling false hope. False hope emerges when commercial actors deliberately exaggerate benefits, conceal risks, or exploit desperation. Such practices weaken consumer trust and distort informed choice. Governments, regulators, and professional organisations therefore have an important responsibility to establish standards that protect vulnerable consumers from deceptive marketing. Transparent advertising, evidence-based claims, and effective consumer protection legislation can help ensure that hope remains connected to realistic expectations rather than manipulation.

Consumers also share responsibility for critically evaluating commercial promises. Media literacy, financial education, and scientific understanding enable individuals to distinguish credible opportunities from unrealistic claims. Educational institutions should therefore cultivate critical thinking skills that empower citizens to question persuasive marketing messages rather than accepting them uncritically. In an increasingly digital economy where emotional appeals dominate commercial communication, critical literacy becomes an essential democratic competence.

Ultimately, hope should remain a public good rather than merely a private commodity. Healthy societies cultivate hope through strong institutions, equitable opportunities, accessible education, effective healthcare, and social trust. Commercial enterprises can complement these foundations by delivering valuable innovations, but they should not replace them. When hope becomes primarily something to be purchased, those with greater financial resources gain disproportionate access to opportunity while disadvantaged groups face increasing exclusion. Such inequality undermines both economic efficiency and social cohesion.

In conclusion, the commercialization of hope reflects broader transformations within contemporary capitalist societies, where emotions, aspirations, and identities increasingly possess market value. Although businesses can legitimately inspire hope through meaningful innovation and responsible entrepreneurship, ethical boundaries must prevent hope from becoming an instrument of exploitation. Policymakers, corporations, educators, and consumers all have roles to play in ensuring that commercial success remains aligned with honesty, transparency, and social responsibility. Hope is among humanity’s most valuable resources. It should inspire markets to serve society, rather than allowing markets to determine the value of hope itself.

MPs Warn Insecurity Could Jeopardize Elections

ispot

admin

August 8, 2026

MPs Warn Insecurity Could Jeopardize Elections

South Sudanese lawmakers warned on Wednesday that worsening insecurity could jeopardize preparations for elections planned for December, saying persistent violence has prevented many legislators from visiting their constituencies and raised concerns over whether candidates and voters will be able to move freely ahead of the polls. The concerns were raised during a parliamentary debate on the deteriorating security situation in Tonj, Warrap State, where legislators said violence, poor access to conflict-affected areas and weak law enforcement threaten campaigning and voter participation. Ketura Yola Ambara, an SPLM lawmaker representing the Western Equatoria Women’s List, said insecurity had left many lawmakers unable to travel to the areas they represent, questioning how elections could proceed if candidates could not safely reach voters. … Bol Toby Madut, a lawmaker representing Warrap State under the SANU Party, said insecurity was a nationwide challenge and argued that military operations alone would not end recurring communal violence. … He urged the government to invest in development, employment and community-based peacebuilding, saying idle young people were more vulnerable to cycles of revenge killings and communal conflict. (Radio Tamazuj)