The IMF

[peaccenicked]

The IMF, democratic?
The USA accounts for 5% of the world's population but has 17% of votes in the IMF. The largest G7 industrial countries have 45% of IMF votes between them. Democracy? One person = one vote? Not in the IMF: free market policies to enslave most people on the planet and to line the pockets of multinational corporate shareholders is what counts ...

[sabre]

1 person = 1 vote? not in USA elections either

[Moskitto]

Yeah America's presidential election system is worse than the system in Britain.

In Britain it's several thousand people=1 person with 1 vote

In America it's got screwed so that 1 state=variable numbers of people with votes to vote for president. Which while on the surface looks ok, it means that different areas become more important than others.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Moskitto on 1:34 pm on Mar. 29, 2002
In America it's got screwed so that 1 state=variable numbers of people with votes to vote for president. Which while on the surface looks ok, it means that different areas become more important than others.I'm a US-born citizen, a registered voter who votes in every election, and a future employee of the US government who now works for them but gets paid nothing. I've been arrested, sure, but I've never committed a felony or hurt anyone. I pay my taxes on time and the government seems to like me enough to help me pay for college. I have never lived outside of the US or been out of the country for more than two weeks.

And I don't have a representative in Congress who has a vote, just like my 500,000 fellow DC citizens. (Most of whom, admittedly, are felons.)

[Moskitto]

I've heard about the DC issue, that isn't good.

[Michael De Panama]

See, these are the arguments that the capitalists read...and then act like they never saw.

[AgustoSandino]

well the assumption here is that "capitalists" would support the imf and similar institutions. Its a similar logic that leads people to believe that you fellas support pol pot or stalin.
The truth is that you conviniently leave out information about the US role in the IMF. You note that the US vote is disproportionate in accordance to its population, but you fail to realize that the US also contributes a large share of the IMF budget. So they are receiving votes in accordance to their share in the fund.
Though i will say that the IMF approach is only half assed, it should go hand in hand with the establishment of western style economic/legislative/judicial institutions. A great book to read on this is the MYSTERY OF CAPITAL by Hernando de Soto. In in he explains why imf sponsored fiscal policies alone can not defeat poverty, but why they must go hand in hand with an expansion of the "bell jar" of legality. I would write more on the topic, but last year i wrote these ten page responses somewhere in the General political topics forum. I'll find them and post a link.

[poncho]

"When trading with a pushy, overconfident nation to be so accommodating as to appear weak might not be the best way of saving our countries from the dangers to which a reputation for weakness has left us exposed. Wisdom lies not in living up to a reputation for weakness but rather in seizing the opportunity to show ourselves strong without danger. And as for danger, once the moment is carefully chosen and properly used, the least dangerous way is to be strong” --Jose Marti

The problem with America and its control over the IMF or simular groups is that the United States finds and uses the weakness as a gun to force policy on the applying country.

Argintina recently attempted to strengthan laws that would make it harder to pull capitital out of the country, the United States threatned to block aid if they did.

The U.S.A itself has laws and mechinism's that make it hard or in some cases impossible to remove capital when they crash.

Going to any money fund when the U.S. wants to use and abuse your countries resources is akin to making a deal with satan.

Cuba is being punished for being strong the criminal genocidical embargo is the only gun America can find to attempt to get the Cuban people to sell there soul....

[Michael De Panama]

Quote: from AgustoSandino on 7:42 am on April 1, 2002
well the assumption here is that "capitalists" would support the imf and similar institutions. Its a similar logic that leads people to believe that you fellas support pol pot or stalin.
The truth is that you conviniently leave out information about the US role in the IMF. You note that the US vote is disproportionate in accordance to its population, but you fail to realize that the US also contributes a large share of the IMF budget. So they are receiving votes in accordance to their share in the fund.
Though i will say that the IMF approach is only half assed, it should go hand in hand with the establishment of western style economic/legislative/judicial institutions. A great book to read on this is the MYSTERY OF CAPITAL by Hernando de Soto. In in he explains why imf sponsored fiscal policies alone can not defeat poverty, but why they must go hand in hand with an expansion of the "bell jar" of legality. I would write more on the topic, but last year i wrote these ten page responses somewhere in the General political topics forum. I'll find them and post a link.


No, the logic is completely different. Most communists hate Stalin. Most capitalists support the IMF. The cappies make their generalizations from ignorant perceptions. We make our generalizations from facts. Besides, no one is implying that any specific capitalist on here supports the IMF. This is just bringing up an issue.

And by the way, stop being such an ass. You certainly have a very low self-esteem. Stop acting like such a bitter little shit around the rest of us. Cheer up.

[peaccenicked]

From ''50 years is enough''
How is it that U.S. business and other companies benefit from the lending programs at the World Bank?


Development projects undertaken with World Bank financing typically include money to pay for materials and consulting services provided by Northern countries. U.S. Treasury Department officials calculate that for every U.S.$1 the United States contributes to international development banks, U.S. exporters win more than U.S.$2 in bank-financed procurement contracts.

Why is this bad?

Given this self-interest, the Bank tends to finance bigger, more expensive projects--which almost always require the materials and technical expertise of Northern contractors--and ignores smaller-scale, locally appropriate alternatives. The mission of the World Bank to alleviate poverty, not provide business for U.S. contractors

[munkey soup]

The IMF and WB's stated goals are to bring about stability and peace in the world through an economic basis, but by forcing countries to accept the 5 conditions (maximizing currency flow, creating export oriented economy, open up border for an influx of import, reduce gov't expenditures which leads to, privatization) in order to recieve a loan, they force countries to rely on MNCs.

They create a prime enviorment for the MNCs to come in and snatch up profits, as well as take advantage of the gov't programs that are being privatized (education, water systems, etc.). In turn, these countries lose all their soveriegnty over these programs.

The IMF and WB do little other than create debt and contribute to the globalization of big business.