The hypothesis of ignorance suggests the way the problem of poverty can be solved. This situation of poverty can be caused by ignorance, but the information and the enlightening can be extended to the policymakers and the rules across the world that can solve the problem. The prosperity can be engineered across the world by the way of convincing the politicians and with provision of right advice in relation to what is right for economics. The engineering of these attempts is obtained in two flavours. Firstly, the international organizations, such as IMF, advocates that substandard institutions and the economic policies cause poor development with the subsequent recommendation of improvement lists that the developing countries should be adopting. The focus of such recommended lists are aimed at macroeconomic stability. The macroeconomic goals are set such as, liberalization of capital account, flexible exchange rates, and reducing of the government sector size. The microeconomic goals are also set by these international organizations such as, improvement in the public service’s efficiency, privatization, and measures of anticorruption. These reforms might look sensible in their headquarters, but there is failure of these organizations in recognizing the political institution’s role and the impediments they create on policymaking. The poor countries are hectored to adopt policies perceived to be better by these institutions.
However, more often than not this measure turns up into failure as they fail to explain the ignorant leaders of the developing nations, as to why those countries’ institutions and policies are bad. The consequence of that leads non implementation and non adoption of those policies or the implementation takes place in name only. The theory explaining stagflation, depressions, and involuntary unemployment, and other phenomena of macroeconomics has no point, making unreasonable or ad hoc assumptions regarding the behaviours of the individuals. It provides the explanation of the development pattern regarding the problems of macroeconomics over time (Friedman 2012). When all these explanations are taken together, the powerful theory emerges that is prudent as well as consoling. However, it is puzzling to consider that so many diverse phenomena can be explained by it, if mainly or wholly it is false. In case the theory is found to be totally correct, the consideration of the theory is still with respect to only one factor among many that affects the phenomena. The illustrations of the other factors can be carried out under the consideration that future findings would terminate in research and the argument that persuades the specialists.