Roughly speaking, the three primary hard-currency generators for DR are 1). Tourism 2).Remittances from Dominicans abroad 3). Free Zones exports.
While 1). and 3). directly employee DR workers, 2) benefits the families and relatives of money senders via direct cash infusion.
I have often wondered if the these "free money" are acting like an unofficial welfare system that somehow promotes dependency and reduces incentives to work. After all, US$100 a month (to throw a random number) is now far above the minimum DR wage that it's easy to see recipients forgo low-paying work.
Obviously this country needs all the money it can get. But would you say the direct remittance helps to pull people out of poverty (by given them the capital to start small business, by help funding education for kids...etc) or would you say it simply helps maintain the status quo because recipients see no need to work ?
While the net benefit for the DR economy as a whole is a plus (more money = more consumption), I have a mixed opinion about its effectiveness in improving the lives of the intended recipients.
If you drive through the streets of, say, San Pedro de Macoris during weekday work hours, you'll see plenty of able-bodies young men sitting out doing nothing. I do not know how many of them are remesa beneficiaries but it does make me ponder if the high unemployment rate in DR has something to do with "easy money" as well as with a scarcity of jobs/bad economy.
While 1). and 3). directly employee DR workers, 2) benefits the families and relatives of money senders via direct cash infusion.
I have often wondered if the these "free money" are acting like an unofficial welfare system that somehow promotes dependency and reduces incentives to work. After all, US$100 a month (to throw a random number) is now far above the minimum DR wage that it's easy to see recipients forgo low-paying work.
Obviously this country needs all the money it can get. But would you say the direct remittance helps to pull people out of poverty (by given them the capital to start small business, by help funding education for kids...etc) or would you say it simply helps maintain the status quo because recipients see no need to work ?
While the net benefit for the DR economy as a whole is a plus (more money = more consumption), I have a mixed opinion about its effectiveness in improving the lives of the intended recipients.
If you drive through the streets of, say, San Pedro de Macoris during weekday work hours, you'll see plenty of able-bodies young men sitting out doing nothing. I do not know how many of them are remesa beneficiaries but it does make me ponder if the high unemployment rate in DR has something to do with "easy money" as well as with a scarcity of jobs/bad economy.