Entry 5: Microlending in the U.S. vs. Belize

Microlending programs in a developed nation, such as the United States, are meant to work essentially the same as programs in a developing nation. As Yunus points out in Banker to the Poor, there is a substantial number of low-income individuals who can benefit from a microloan here in the United States. However, the way an entrepreneur develops his or her business with a microloan in Belize is much different than the way a loan recipient would develop a business in the United States. For example, the American entrepreneurs Yunus mentions in Banker to the Poor all operate their businesses out of their homes. In Belize, it is extremely plausible for a microloan to pay for the construction of a new building from which to operate a new business. In the U.S., constructing a building from which to run a business would require much more capital than a microloan would be able to provide.
Another key difference between microlending in a developing nation and in the United States is the level of competition experienced by entrepreneurs. Big business has become so dominant in the United States that it has become increasingly more challenging for a small business to prosper. For example, an entrepreneur who receives a microloan in the U.S. to start his or her own business, whether it be selling food or making clothes, will face tremendous competition from already well established businesses that can sell essentially the same product at a very low cost. In Belize, an entrepreneur beginning a business will face some competition, however, they are not competing against corporations that are the caliber of a Wal-Mart or similar company.
In conclusion, mircolending programs can succeed in the United States, as there are a number of successful impoverished individuals who have received microcredit. I believe it is much more difficult to have success in the United States than in Belize, but it can still be done.