1 edit
Originally posted by dk3nnyIndeed a sad day .... but ..... the hawk is not there yet. He is nominated for the job by the US government.
Oh brother..
More forced privatisation of water supplies etc in developing countries in exchange for badly needed loans so..
Not a good day for developing countries i would say.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4354839.stm
There still is a ray of hope !
From the link you gave (thanks by the way):
"For the appointment to go ahead, Mr Wolfowitz must be formally approved by the World Bank's executive board.
In a statement, the Bank said its directors were responsible for making the selection and were "in the process of consultations with the member countries they represent".
"An official announcement of the outcome of the deliberations and actions of the Executive Directors will be made as soon as a decision has been reached," the Bank said."
Originally posted by dk3nnyWhat gets me about this appointment is the breathtakingly arrogant disregard for world opinion. George Bush couldn't have made a more unpopular appointment if he'd tried, and I really think he did try. Whatever the guy's theoretical merits, his very unpopularity is reason enough not to appoint him. How can you be a success in a job which involves coordinating world opinion if the whole world hates you?
Oh brother..
More forced privatisation of water supplies etc in developing countries in exchange for badly needed loans so..
Not a good day for developing countries i would say.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4354839.stm
Rich.
Originally posted by richhoeyThe world bank is not about world poplularity.
What gets me about this appointment is the breathtakingly arrogant disregard for world opinion. George Bush couldn't have made a more unpopular appointment if he'd tried, and I really think he did try. Whatever the guy's theoretical merits, his very unpopularity is reason enough not to appoint him. How can you be a success in a job which involves coordinating world opinion if the whole world hates you?
Rich.
It's about getting third world nations to do what the richer countries want.
Originally posted by shavixmirGetting third world nations to do what richer countries want still involves coordinating world opinion. Although when you put it that way, maybe it's a good think that Wolfowitz is likely to be a disaster.
The world bank is not about world poplularity.
It's about getting third world nations to do what the richer countries want.
Rich.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyWell if you want it from the horses mouth then have a look here
I really don't know enough about borrowing money to have an opinion. I borrowed for a house one time. Other than that -- nada.
What's the world bank for? I really don't know.
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTABOUTUS/EXTARCHIVES/0,,contentMDK:20053333~menuPK:63762~pagePK:36726~piPK:36092~theSitePK:29506,00.html
If you want a more detailed analysis then have a browse through this.
http://www.citizen.org/cmep/Water/new/wbwatch/
Basically it was setup after world war two to help with the reconstruction of europe. Since then it has evolved and its charter moved towards the stated goal of eliminating poverty worldwide.
However, as Shavi said, its really just used by the rich countries to exploit the developing nations.. One of those ways being to force developing countries to open up their markets to western corporations in exchange for giving that country loans. As i said, a lot of times this means selling off a countries crown jewels to the highest bidder, the corrupt government getting a windfall.
They obviously are doing some good projects too but overall its just an exploitation tool.
If you are really interested then read a book by the World Bank’s former Chief Economist, Joe Stiglitz, called "Globalisation & its discontents"
Here is an interview with him.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=78&row=1
Originally posted by ivanhoeHistorically the US has appointed the head of the world bank (generally an american) and Europe has appointed the head of the IMF (generally a european) so i don't really see any reason for him not to get it, it would piss off the US government too much.
Indeed a sad day .... but ..... the hawk is not there yet. He is nominated for the job by the US government.
There still is a ray of hope !
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI have over half a million US Dollars worth of debt, - fortunately my assets are worth more than my debt. However if I had never borrowed the money I wouldn't have the assets
Borrowing money never helped anybody. I do know that much.
"Credit cards are the play-things of fools."
Another famous old saying.... yada yada... etc.
"better to spend someone elses money rather than your own"