Many other means than through NEEEF

Thomas H writes:
There is no stable and growing economy in the world that infringes on property rights.
As long as the individual needs to fear that what he/she owns is actually not theirs, there cannot be prosperity and growth. This is irrespective of skin colour.
The class disparity in Namibia is a huge problem but it cannot be solved through the forced buying and selling of property. After all, the term “equitable”­ means to be fair and impartial to all involved, which the National Equitable Economic Empower­ment Framework/Bill clearly does not seem to be.
But not proposing a solution would just mean the above statement is fuel to the fire.
Very little efforts have been made to use Namibia’s strategic position as a source of income.
The opportunity of revenue from transport to landlocked countries such as Zambia, Zimbabwe and Botswana has never been properly capitalised on. The railway, which offers an efficient and inexpensive means to transport goods over large distances, has never been brought to the standard where this is possible.
Furthermore, Namibia, a land of abundant natural riches, does very little­ in terms of value addition once we have pulled the ore from our ground and sold it off to others.
Namibia, land of the sun. But once again we did not capitalise on this as we failed to erect solar power stations in time that could supply surplus energy to our neighbours who are in desperate need of it.
Sadly, Namibia offers very little exceptional services or skills to the Sub-Saharan region; no manufac­turing of medicines, no technological innovation, no exceptional banking services and no analytical specialities of any sort which can be considered­ a significant contribution to the economy.
Namibia is facing a drought, but the technology does exist by which crops can be generated from the little water we do have in the northern regions. Hydroponic technology can produce an abundance of different crops with very little water consumption.
Why are 500 000 Namibians still in urgent need of drought relief? The establishment of such farming schemes in the north of Namibia would have brought with it national food security, regional development, employment, empowerment, and prevented the current rural-urban migration pattern that has caused Windhoek’s water crisis in the first place.
Why does the government not enforce companies to pay for education and training of PDPs? Is it not the old saying of “give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he has food for a lifetime”?
My logic here is that even if PDPs buy 25% of a company, they are minority shareholders. Never mind the fact that PDPs, by definition, cannot afford to buy into a company.
Why not give them the skills to become 100% shareholders of their own companies?
Another way to aid the PDPs is through VAT revenue. Why not increase VAT and make more products essential to daily life VAT exempt? In this way the poor can afford the necessities while the additional revenue generated can be used to fund poverty alleviation programmes. This way the ones who buy nice watches, suits, handbags and cars generously donate to the less fortunate in a systematic and organised manner. It seems to be working well for the stable Scandinavian countries.
Yes, I am Namibian and I am proud of it. I want to help. I also no longer want to go to bed at night knowing there are fellow countrymen/women who are hungry, homeless and hopeless. But taking away my "weapons" to lead the good fight against poverty helps nobody.