Originally posted by RagnorakDo you honestly think these 'crippling rates' are the main reason for the failure of development policies? First of all, they're better than those provided by any private bank.
It may not be the fault of the IMF that the government was crappy, but it certainly is the fault of the IMF to attach crippling interest rates to loans and to attach preconditions, such as privatisation, to said loans. Also, giving poor financial advice to countries isn't a good thing to do either.
Do you disagree that the IMF were effectively working o ...[text shortened]... c policies, do you look at the social and environmental implications of these policies?
D
The main problem isn't the fact that this rates are 'crippling', it is what the hell was done with the money that the IMF lended to these countries. Wasted in white elephants and 'lost' in private bank accounts, most of it never served the citizens of that country.
I don't know enough about Cochabamba to talk about the details, but I tell you that I find much more likely that they were working with Hugo Banzer. I doubt very much that the IMF would serve as a stooge for Bechtel.
Your Exxon deal is my point exactly. It's easy to blame Exxon or the US, but it serves no point, but in the end, it was the president who sold Venezuela's oil. If it wasn't Exxon, it would have been the next highest bid into his personal bank account.
PS: This thread isn't about my work, but as to your questions, I'd say that the IMF is seriously lacking in both those categories (not that they ignore it, but they undervalue it) and the World Bank is much better comparatively and more aware of the problem.
I doubt very much that the IMF would serve as a stooge for Bechtel.Read John Perkins book before you make crazy statements like that.
Perkins worked for a company exactly like Bechtel (Chas. T. Main) and tells in detail how the whole thing works. But don't take my word for it, here it is in his own words...there's a link at the bottom if you want to read more.
Well, the company I worked for was a company named Chas. T. Main in Boston, Massachusetts. We were about 2,000 employees, and I became its chief economist. I ended up having fifty people working for me. But my real job was deal-making. It was giving loans to other countries, huge loans, much bigger than they could possibly repay. One of the conditions of the loan–let's say a $1 billion to a country like Indonesia or Ecuador–and this country would then have to give ninety percent of that loan back to a U.S. company, or U.S. companies, to build the infrastructure–a Halliburton or a Bechtel. These were big ones. Those companies would then go in and build an electrical system or ports or highways, and these would basically serve just a few of the very wealthiest families in those countries. The poor people in those countries would be stuck ultimately with this amazing debt that they couldn’t possibly repay. A country today like Ecuador owes over fifty percent of its national budget just to pay down its debt. And it really can’t do it. So, we literally have them over a barrel. So, when we want more oil, we go to Ecuador and say, “Look, you're not able to repay your debts, therefore give our oil companies your Amazon rain forest, which are filled with oil.” And today we're going in and destroying Amazonian rain forests, forcing Ecuador to give them to us because they’ve accumulated all this debt. So we make this big loan, most of it comes back to the United States, the country is left with the debt plus lots of interest, and they basically become our servants, our slaves. It's an empire. There's no two ways about it. It’s a huge empire. It's been extremely successful.
http://democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251
Originally posted by uzlessIf we're recommending authors, I recommend you to read Stiglitz.
Read John Perkins book before you make crazy statements like that.
Perkins worked for a company exactly like Bechtel (Chas. T. Main) and tells in detail how the whole thing works. But don't take my word for it, here it is in his own words...there's a link at the bottom if you want to read more.
Well, the company I worked for was a company named Chas. ...[text shortened]... 's been extremely successful.
http://democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaI'm not recommending authors, I'm recommending you understand what's really going on.
If we're recommending authors, I recommend you to read Stiglitz.
Oh, and perhaps you meant a book other than his ," Globalization and Its Discontents", where he asserts that the International Monetary Fund puts the interest of "its largest shareholder," the United States, above those of the poorer nations it was designed to serve.??
Originally posted by uzlessYes, exactly that one. Maybe you should read all of it. It's pretty close to my opinion.
I'm not recommending authors, I'm recommending you understand what's really going on.
Oh, and perhaps you meant a book other than his ," Globalization and Its Discontents", where he asserts that the International Monetary Fund puts the interest of "its largest shareholder," the United States, above those of the poorer nations it was designed to serve.??
Originally posted by PalynkaJust reread this. I never said that I blame the IMF for all these countries problems.
It's not the IMF's fault that all those countries had very crappy governants at the time.
You blame the IMF for all these countries troubles because that's what governments use as excuses for failure.
You asked me...
"How do you connect the IMF to brutal repression, by the way? "
in reply to my...
"I'm not surprised to see a supporter of the IMF policies, Perez, kill 3,000 of his own people."
Of course it takes two to tango. If I am a shady president, then IMF are going to be all over me. We'll give you this big hefty loan, which your country can give back to us plus interest, and you'll also basically give us (€20,000 for Cochabamba's water) your people's national services. We'll give you xxx for your own private charity. Happy days.
When the people of the country realise they've just been robbed, and the cost of their water became nearly 25% of their monthly income, they get angry.
Developing countries haven't been placated as much as people in the developed world, so they protest. A shady president, wanting to keep open the opportunity of more pocket fillers, invariably uses extreme force against his own people.
That's how I connect the IMF to brutal repression. Make sense?
D
Originally posted by RagnorakNot really, you were connecting IMF supporters to brutal repression, which includes murder of 3,000 people. I find that a tad over the top.
Developing countries haven't been placated as much as people in the developed world, so they protest. A shady president, wanting to keep open the opportunity of more pocket fillers, invariably uses extreme force against his own people.
That's how I connect the IMF to brutal repression. Make sense?
D
There are many other countries where that didn't happen (like my own, for example) because the IMF loans didn't meet governments that were extremely corrupt or with dictatorial presidents hiding behind a facade of democracy (ring a bell?).
Originally posted by LAHOREWay to go Chavez!
Venezuela's leader Hugo Chavez has called US President George W Bush "the devil" in a speech at the United Nations General Assembly.
"The devil came here yesterday," he said, referring to Mr Bush's speech on Tuesday. "It still smells of sulphur today," he added.
US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said it was disappointing to see a head of state spe ...[text shortened]... went on to criticise the UN system, which he said was "worthless".
ANY COMMENTS ?
Originally posted by RagnorakWell perhaps you need to watch Univision or Galavision where you will see strong arm Chavez supporters busting up demonstrations. There are more than a handful of demonstrators in those instances. chavez is a thug who is running his mouth right now because we are pre-occupied with Iraq right now. When the oil prices lower then he will shut up with his rhetoric.
Do you have any knowledge on the situation in Venezuela? The u.s. backed a failed coup in 2002. They have an embargo on Venezuela currently. Western Media, mostly american based, are engaged in a war of propoganda, whereby they show violent anti-Chavez demonstrations constantly, even if these demos involve only a handful of people. We see nothing of the ...[text shortened]... ions of so called Christians in America. Why can't Chavez do pretty much the same?
D
Originally posted by uzlessWhat he is saying that since he lives there he might have a better idea of whats going on than somebody who reads the news from the papers. I happen to agree with him.
you don't need to go to venzuela to know it's a poor country...In the same way you don't need to go to Ethiopia to know there isn't much food there, or that you don't need to go to Siberia to know it gets cold in the Winter.
Are you saying that unless you actually put your feet on the soil of a country, then you can't possibly know what's going on?