REMEMBER, THIRD WORLD NATION-BUILDING BY THE US FOR A CENTURY STARTS FROM A DEVELOPING NATION HAVING NO GOVERNMENT OR PUBLIC SECTOR TO MANAGE A CITY/TOWN. TODAY, THESE SAME 1% SPENT THESE FEW DECADES DISMANTLING ALL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES REMOVING ALL FUNDING SOURCES TO OUR LOCAL AND STATE COFFERS IN AN EFFORT TO BREAK THIS FIRST WORLD ---DEVELOPED NATION STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SECTOR TO REPLACE IT WITH THAT NGO STRUCTURE OVERSEAS.
When the national media or leader says the word GOVERNMENT---it is no longer connected to US citizens. When they say we have BIG GOVERNMENT---or government is spending to much----they are talking about the corporate government controlling all city and state agencies today.
BIG GOVERNMENT NOW SIMPLY MEANS GLOBAL CORPORATE BIG-----big spending now means----GLOBAL CORPORATIONS GIVEN DOUBLE WHAT IS NEEDED BY CITY/STATE OFFICIALS TO DO A JOB JUST TO MAXIMIZE PROFITS THEN USING THIS AS A REASON TO RAISE TAXES.
Those US citizens lamenting the taxes paid to maintain a social democratic government structure holding power accountable are now paying double this simply moving revenue into the pockets of the rich and corporations.
When the revolutions in the 1600-1800s brought national Constitutions, citizens with rights, education leading all citizens on pathways to leadership and affluentcy with the privilege of paying taxes-----both Europe and America shed the rich/royal patronage model of government and installed WE THE PEOPLE democratic Constitutional government. Federal, state, and local revenues came to all communities to fund public agencies that then worked for the citizens in that community. The 1% Wall Street global corporate crowd and the 5% working for them have these few decades been taking us back to the PATRONAGE AGE.
Patronage and Society in Nineteenth-Century England
By Geoffrey Finlayson
by J.M. Bourne
- Patronage and Society in Nineteenth-Century England
J.M. Bourne. ix + 198 pp. (Edward Arnold, 1986)
Below you see the same 1% using the installation of democracy and elections to displace a developing nation elite and leadership----with the goal of installing their elites and leadership. Sadly this is where America is today------except WE THE PEOPLE are now being the ones being displaced allowing political patronage society create social inequity.
THE DEVELOPED NATIONS BEING TAKEN DOWN TO THIRD WORLD PATRONAGE SOCIETY.
The Dark Side of Political Society: Patronage
and the Reproduction of Social Inequality
Development optimists in South Asia have argued that electoral politics and the reduced
role of villages as centres of economic activity have largely put an end to exploitation by
dominant castes. Although the political arrangements that have emerged out of these
changes fall short of the idealized standards of civil society, various commentators have
argued that they nevertheless benefit subordinate classes. Partha Chatterjee even argues
that the ad hoc and extra-legal nature of these political arrangements – which he terms
‘political society’ – actually serve popular enfranchisement better than the law-bound
activities of civil society, which he sees as captive to capital. On the basis of village
ethnography from the Pakistani Punjab, I argue that political society is in fact integral to
processes that dispossess people of their rights and to the reproduction of elite power. The
paper illustrates how it is not the cold rationality of the state and the rule of law that
disenfranchise subordinate classes, but their absence.
Keywords: Pakistan, patronage, inequality, democracy, dominance
No one knows better how today's capture by Wall Street and global corporations creating massive economic stagnation and government filled with fraud and corruption all while GLOBAL ZOROS OPEN SOCIETY PARTNERED IN CREATING THE SOCIAL STRUCTURES WHILE ALL THIS OCCURRED.
If you don't see how global Open Society is partnered with Wall Street in creating all these social problems in US cities---then you are not seeing them as a tag team towards an International Economic Zone that requires our US cities to crumble and with the coming economic crash----become economic failures.
But how does one justify political patronage? Patronage results in the political doping of the public service and undermines the national interest. It causes political and economic stagnation because it is not rooted or focused on the achievement of any results. Moreover, it scuppers professionalism and meritocracy:
Puncturing Political Patronage in Kenya
November 22, 2010 by Mugambi Kiai
Puncturing Political Patronage in Kenya
The following article originally appeared in The Star.
Here’s a yawning opportunity gone begging:
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 51 of the Water Act, the Minister for Water and Irrigation appoints Reuben Ndolo to be the Chairman, Board of Directors of Athi Water Services Board.
This notice was reported to have been issued in the Kenya Gazette of November 12, 2010. Because of the absence of a competitive appointing process, this may not only be a missed opportunity but also its own goal. Here’s why.
Although Section 51 of the Water Act, Chapter 372 of the Laws of Kenya, allows the Minister to make appointments of members of water services boards via a gazette notice—which should also specify the respective qualifications of each member—there is the small matter of the new constitution. Article 232 (1) (g) of the constitution provides that the values and principles of the public service include fair competition and merit as the basis of appointments and promotions. This provision is only subject to allow for representation of Kenya’s diverse communities and to afford equal opportunities to men and women, members of all ethnic groups, and persons with disabilities. And there’s more.
Under Article (10) (2) (c) of the same constitution national values and principles of governance include “good governance... transparency and accountability.” In addition, Article 73 (2) (a), (b) and (d) respectively provide that the guiding principles of leadership and integrity include “selection on the basis of personal integrity, competence and suitability...”, “objectivity and impartiality in decision making, and in ensuring that decisions are not influenced by... favoritism...”, and “accountability to the public for decisions and actions.”
The new constitution is very clear in Article 2 (4) that any law that is inconsistent to it is void to the extent of that inconsistency and also proceeds to invalidate any act or omission that contravenes it. So here’s the question: has the (re) appointment of Ndolo met this new threshold established by the constitution?
In fact, a perusal of copies of the Kenya gazette published since August 27, 2010, when the new constitution was promulgated, reveals numerous unilateral ministerial appointments made to public corporations. And it cuts both ways as these appointments have been made by both the Party of National Unity and the Orange Democratic Movement sides of the coalition government. It is submitted that there is now solid constitutional ground to contest all these appointments.
However, outside these constitutional considerations, it is important to locate this question in our current politics. In the old repressive days when the independence party Kanu straddled the political landscape like a colossus, it was not uncommon to hear complaints about the appointments to the public service of people who were considered to be unqualified and unsuitable. The likes of Kariuki Chotara, Ezekiel Bargentuny, and Mulu Mutisya held weighty public service positions even when there was public questioning about their literacy. But they were close political allies of the President and as we know, those were the days of the imperial president: mama na baba (mother and father).
These pervasive patronage networks were one reason that led to the popular revolt against Kanu. If patronage was such a significant political no-no in Kenya that it was flogged to inform the political and democratic change we see today, it cannot suddenly be okay now that it is being exercised by the reformists of yester-year. For one would need a cogent explanation why something that was poisonous yesterday has suddenly become palatable today. Otherwise, this will simply represent another missed opportunity: just as independence from colonial rule in 1963 did not bring freedom, the re-introduction of political pluralism in 1992 did not translate into hygienic democracy, and the transition from Kanu in 2002 did not bring democratic transformation.
But how does one justify political patronage?
Patronage results in the political doping of the public service and undermines the national interest. It causes political and economic stagnation because it is not rooted or focused on the achievement of any results. Moreover, it scuppers professionalism and meritocracy: with it we can kiss goodbye every developmental goal or vision being passionately advocated such as the Millennium Development Goals or Vision 2030.
It also leads to exclusion and alienation: this is particularly undesirable in the case of Kenya where social, ethnic, and political dynamics are so sharp. Indeed, it is not just smart politics anymore. The lesson to be gleaned in the recent defeat of Ndolo by Gideon “Sonko” Mbuvi in the Makadara constituency by-elections—which is why Ndolo is now being reappointed to the Athi River Water Board--is that the public is disenchanted with exclusivist politics which do not allow for open competition. It will be remembered that “Sonko” was reported to have sought the nomination of Orange Democratic Movement but was apparently rebuffed because Ndolo was considered the “stronger” candidate and this led him to contest under a Narc-Kenya party ticket.
The writing is on the wall: experience shows that those who will not learn will have the lesson taught to them again. The shouting, heckling, and jostling over YES or NO for the new constitution is now over and the dancing to celebrate the promulgation has ceased. Time has come for all our politicians to acquaint themselves thoroughly with the letter, spirit, and mood of the new constitution.
Did you know Wall Street even has a financial instrument called obligation bonds? Is tying citizens in Baltimore to a non-profit granting system offering the only avenue to an economy and job considered the bonds of obligation?
When Obama and Clinton neo-liberals allowed American student debt of a trillion dollars stand---knowing for-profit education fraud of $1 trillion is the estimate given by justice analyists AND pretended to stimulate the economy while simply outsourcing all government work to global corporations, sending stimulus funding to expanding corporations overseas, and aiding the FED and Wall Street in these manipulations of the market leading only to financial gains by the richest leaving no need for corporations to actually produce and create jobs to bring profit----- knowing all this created US economic stagnation and limited employment opportunities for newly graduating students.----they were setting the stage for the American people to look for employment outside of a normal economy STUDENTS WITH STUDENT LOAN DEBT + AMERICORP CREATES A MASSIVE SYSTEM IN US CITIES OF PATRONAGE NON-PROFITS OR NGOs. Congress sent funding to Americorp pushing college grads needing to pay student loan debt into what is now a national movement of college grads all over the nation to US cities deemed International Economic Zones and third world disasters.
So, what we are seeing in lieu of a functioning economy are city citizens in communities along with huge numbers of college grads tied to this global corporate patronage structure making sure no real local economy is created as it moves one by one global corporations and their campuses into these US International Economic Zones.
WE MUST ATTRACT NEW CITIZENS TO BALTIMORE IS THE SLOGAN.
What Wall Street Baltimore Development did through their pols is tie so much bond and financial instrument debt to global corporate campus development that there will be no economic development in communities that is not tied to global corporate NGOs or their campuses. It's this total capture of the economy by just a few global corporate campuses---like Johns Hopkins that leads to the ability to totally control all avenues of societal structure as well. These are just a small percentage of people made very wealthy from the frauds of these few decades -----now taking a Medici Patronage approach in controlling all development in US cities.
'His instruments were the bonds of obligation by which he tied his supporters to himself'.
Magnificence and Splendor
Cosimo's authority derived from his great wealth and his leadership of a faction. Vespasiano da Bisticci described a conversation between Cosimo and a political rival, in which the former articulated his political philosophy: "Now it seems to me only just and honest that I should prefer the good name and honor of my house to you: that I should work for my own interest rather than for yours. So you and I will act like two big dogs who, when they meet, smell one another and then, because they both have teeth, go their ways. Wherefore now you can attend /p. 121: to your affairs and I to mine." He demonstrated a particular talent for working behind the scenes, achieving his goals by manipulating others. His instruments were the bonds of obligation by which he tied his supporters to himself. Vespasiano wrote: "He rewarded those who brought him back [from exile], lending to one a good sum of money, and making a gift to another to help marry his daughter or buy lands...." His political enemies were not killed but exiled; the refusal to shed blood was characteristic of this cautious politician who gained his objectives by less flamboyant methods. In one sense, his style represented the triumph of the mercantile mentality. He typified the rational and calculating entrepreneur, the shrewd, toughminded realist who had banished passion and emotion from politics.
All this creates the conditions for needing people/corporations to come in to offer SOCIAL BENEFIT----the same entities creating these economic conditions are the ones donating to global NGOs in US cities offering all this social benefit. The underserved in Baltimore have been tied to this patronage economy for decades making them totally dependent on electing the people giving them grants etc----this is the political patronage capture already in place in Baltimore. Now we have the college grads from around the nation coming and connecting to these patronage organizations having no idea of the past history of Wall Street Baltimore Development, Johns Hopkins, and Baltimore pols in creating this third world mess.
College grads are now being told to check a box with strongest to least strong issue of social benefit for which they want to work off student loans. They then attach themselves to a Wall Street Baltimore Development 'labor or justice' organization tied to that social issue and head for Baltimore's underserved communities where those citizens have lived for decades getting the same patronage jobs.
IT IS CRAZY THIRD WORLD ECONOMICS------
This completely kills citizens' sense of what real economy -----real working structures are like and that is indeed what college grads brought to Baltimore are seeing. Baltimore citizens aren't lazy----they are tied to the company store.
Johnny Cash - Sixteen Tons
Uploaded on Nov 1, 2009Music video by Johnny Cash performing Sixteen Tons. (C) Mercury Records
All of this holding pattern these several years as people work within these network of NGOs is a staging for the coming economic crash. American workers unable to stabilize their incomes-----unable to build wealth-----will easily be taken down with this crisis. This time though, Wall Street and the FED with Congress and Obama are taking down our government stability with the massive bond fraud debt. This is what will create conditions calling for the IMF------to come in and tie its granting and contractual obligations to our US cities----AND YES, THIS WILL BECOME COLONIALISM.
The personal debt, the government debt, the stagnate economies, the crumbling infrastructure and decaying communities are all picture-perfect for the coming of the IMF. Don't worry------the 1% are all prepared because all these NGOs in Baltimore like Humanim and International Open Society have been the IMF team partner for decades all around the world---especially in developing nations turned International Economic Zone. Colonialism with no economy has only one solution-----PATRONAGE BY NGOS----BY GLOBAL CORPORATIONS---STEPPING IN TO BECOME THE GOVERNMENT.
Right now so much revenue has been diverted from Baltimore City coffers ---which is revenue that allows citizens to be the DECIDER of how funds are spent---when you have a functioning city hall----citizens have no public policy voice because it is now all written by the NGOs bringing in their own set of policies they push.
Americans who do basic journalistic reading knows the IMF has been operating these decades of Clinton/Bush/Obama to be that instigator now hitting the US----creating national and personal debt and economic instability around the globe. What Americans now need to WAKE UP and see-----these 1% and IMF are now long in the planning to do the same in our US cities. You know the US is heading to colonial status when the IMF and global NGOs are at your doorstep
Is the IMF an New Form of Colonialism ? - Joseph Stiglitz says "Yes"
Thread: Is the IMF an New Form of Colonialism ? - Joseph Stiglitz says "Yes"
16-05-2011, 08:51 AM #1
Is the IMF an New Form of Colonialism ? - Joseph Stiglitz says "Yes"
Stiglitz, in "Globalism and its Discontents", raises the question of whether the IMF is a part of a new form of colonialism.
Page 40-41 he talks about this picture of an IMF head standing over President Suharto of Indonesia, while the latter signs a "Letter of Intent and Memorandum", like the Irish one.
He says "The IMF is not particularly interested in hearing the thoughts of its "Client countries" on such topics as development strategy or fiscal austerity. All too often, the Fund's approach to developing countries has the feel of a colonial ruler. A picture can be worth a thousand words, and a single picture snapped in 1998, shown throughout the world, has engraved itself in the minds of millions, particularly in those former colonies.
The IMF's managing director, Michel Camdessus (the head of the IMF is referred to as its "Managing Director"), a short, neatly dressed former French Treasury bureaucrat, who once claimed to be a Socialist, is standing with a stern face and crossed arms over the seated and humiliated president of Indonesia. The hapless president was being forced, in effect, to turn over economic sovereignty of his country to the IMF in return for the aid his country needed. In the end, ironically, much of the money went not to help Indonesia but to bail out the "colonial powers" private sector creditors. (Officially, the "ceremony" was the signing of a letter of agreement, an agreement effectively dictated by the IMF, though it often still keeps up the pretense that the letter of intent comes from the country's government).
Defenders of Camdessus claim the photograph was unfair, that he did not realize that it was being taken and that it was viewed out of context. But that it the point - in day to day interactions, away from cameras and reporters, this is precisely the stance that the IMF bureaucrats take, from the leader of the organisation down. To those in developing countries, the picture raised a very disturbing question: had things really changed since the "official" ending of colonialism a half century ago ? When I saw the picture, images of other signings of "agreements" came to mind. I wondered how similar this scene was to those marking the "opening up of Japan" with Admiral Perry's gunboat diplomacy or the end of the Opium Wars or the surrender of the maharajas in India."
Stiglitz, with insider knowledge, says that the IMF has consistently indulged in "mission creep" and moved from macroeconomics into privatisation, labour markets, pensions, and so on and into development strategies.
The outcome for IMF'd countries is generally favourable to international corporations and private creditors, and devastating contraction of incomes and of indigenous production for the recipients.
In Europe, the ECB and the EU Commission turned to the IMF not only for additional funds, but also for "expertise" has it had no model for rescue of troubled economies itself and as, fundamentally, the EU is also a pro-market institution that has protection and promotion of private profit as it's dominant priority.
The IMF makes more effort at PR these days, but the famous Chopra walk across Dublin, on their arrival in Dublin to "audit our books" although clearly intended to be workmanlike and economical (no limos), just oozed with arrogance.
I use the term BAINS CAPITAL often to describe the current FED/Wall Street US Treasury/municipal bond market fraud-----if you think of how venture capitalists bring US corporations down----calling it restructuring----is to spin off all its best revenue generating business-----create unneeded debt usually capital investments that prove not be help but move the company into the red. GM and AIG were both BAINS CAPITALed into bankruptcy. This is what the FED/Wall Street are doing now with government debt. I tied Greece and its sovereign debt to this same political debt dealing----and now the IMF has Greece tied in a death grip. Baltimore City citizens may be able to survive the rising taxes from bond debt leverage this coming decade----but after a decade of economic recession which is what many economists are predicting--- -----HERE COMES THE IMF.
We have Trans Pacific Trade Pact in process that ends US Constitutional rights and national, state, and local sovereignty opening global corporations in US International Economic Zones to operate as they overseas in the works-----well, the deep economic crash will justify the IMF to send hundreds of billions of dollars in development funds to these US cities so global corporate campuses and global factories can be installed----all as a social benefit for jobs, jobs, jobs. The global corporations will receive that IMF funding------those global NGOs will receive that funding-----the American people-----FORGET ABOUT IT. This will heighten the patronage system in US cities as it will take about a decade to FIX BALTIMORE AS HOGAN AND PUGH PROMISE TO DO.
8. How do multinational corporations benefit from IMF policies?
Structural adjustment policies open up developing countries to foreign investors on terms most favorable to multinational corporations. They require countries to remove barriers to foreign investment, and push countries to orient their economies to producing exports-typically produced by or sold to multinationals. State-owned enterprises privatized under structural adjustment are frequently sold to multinationals-often at bargain-basement prices.
IMF-orchestrated bailouts of countries-assistance to countries whose exchanges rates are plummeting-provide money primarily so that developing countries can pay off their foreign creditors (including private banks). Many critics view these bailouts effectively as bailouts of the creditors who don't absorb the cost of risky loans gone bad.
This particular kind of corporate welfare can have especially pernicious effects, since it may encourage excessively risky lending by bankers and others. If they know they have free, de facto insurance from the IMF, they can make very risky loans at high interest rates without fear of paying for failures.
'Welcome to Zimbabwe, suckers. How does it feel'?
Move 20 minutes into this video to hear the talk on the US Treasury and bond market----
The IMF To Bail Out The $US?
Submitted by IWB, on June 8th, 2014
Mr Ricards, Mr Rickards, could this be the snowflake? Or this? (China is not going to be happy Ghana,brace yourselves.)
Welcome to Zimbabwe, suckers. How does it feel?
I like this guy. He uses clear and accurate terminology and does not hide the expansive criminal nature of this Wall Street/FED disaster. As he says-----the US has been in a Depression since 2008----and yes, there was no economic recovery as national media have constantly said---and he talks of recessions inside of this Depression. All of this is why there will be no real job growth for the coming decade. What he finally gets to at the end of this video is what everyone who follows finance knows----THE IMF WILL COME IN TO BAILOUT THE US. Please start listening at 20 minutes if you are not hard core public policy----I am a fanatic and listen to everything. At the 20 minute mark he starts talking about this US Treasury/municipal bond issue of which I speak.....you can see how absolutely ridiculous the bond market was allowed to become. It is important to know that the same 1% behind the IMF are the same people behind all this very bad Wall Street/FED policy and it seems very likely this is all about BAINS CAPITALING the US just to bring the IMF in to start the Installation of US International Economic Zones as the financial solution to jobs.
Tying all this to this week's global NGOs in Baltimore----the IMF funding will simply flow through all these NGOs like HUMANIM and International Open Society and this will fuel one big patronage economic as the next decade's only way to have a job for many, many people.
While you listen think how your Congressional pols-----our Maryland Assembly and Governor O'Malley and now Governor Hogan -----Baltimore City Hall -----but especially Wall Street Baltimore Development and Johns Hopkins which push all policy KNOW THIS---AND THIS VIDEO WAS FROM 2014. Maryland and Baltimore are tied to so much of this debt leverage-----all setting the stage for this IMF flow and control of our economy.
This is the legacy of Mikulski, Sarbanes, Cardin, Cummings and all Maryland Congressional Wall Street global pols----as with all our Baltimore Maryland Assembly pols especially PUGH and McIntosh----
Top Ten Reasons to Oppose the IMF
What is the IMF?
(PDF 35kb)The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were created in 1944 at a conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, and are now based in Washington, DC. The IMF was originally designed to promote international economic cooperation and provide its member countries with short term loans so they could trade with other countries (achieve balance of payments). Since the debt crisis of the 1980's, the IMF has assumed the role of bailing out countries during financial crises (caused in large part by currency speculation in the global casino economy) with emergency loan packages tied to certain conditions, often referred to as structural adjustment policies (SAPs). The IMF now acts like a global loan shark, exerting enormous leverage over the economies of more than 60 countries. These countries have to follow the IMF's policies to get loans, international assistance, and even debt relief. Thus, the IMF decides how much debtor countries can spend on education, health care, and environmental protection. The IMF is one of the most powerful institutions on Earth -- yet few know how it works.
- The IMF has created an immoral system of modern day colonialism that SAPs the poor
The IMF -- along with the WTO and the World Bank -- has put the global economy on a path of greater inequality and environmental destruction. The IMF's and World Bank's structural adjustment policies (SAPs) ensure debt repayment by requiring countries to cut spending on education and health; eliminate basic food and transportation subsidies; devalue national currencies to make exports cheaper; privatize national assets; and freeze wages. Such belt-tightening measures increase poverty, reduce countries' ability to develop strong domestic economies and allow multinational corporations to exploit workers and the environment A recent IMF loan package for Argentina, for example, is tied to cuts in doctors' and teachers' salaries and decreases in social security payments.. The IMF has made elites from the Global South more accountable to First World elites than their own people, thus undermining the democratic process.
- The IMF serves wealthy countries and Wall Street
Unlike a democratic system in which each member country would have an equal vote, rich countries dominate decision-making in the IMF because voting power is determined by the amount of money that each country pays into the IMF's quota system. It's a system of one dollar, one vote. The U.S. is the largest shareholder with a quota of 18 percent. Germany, Japan, France, Great Britain, and the US combined control about 38 percent. The disproportionate amount of power held by wealthy countries means that the interests of bankers, investors and corporations from industrialized countries are put above the needs of the world's poor majority.
- The IMF is imposing a fundamentally flawed development model
Unlike the path historically followed by the industrialized countries, the IMF forces countries from the Global South to prioritize export production over the development of diversified domestic economies. Nearly 80 percent of all malnourished children in the developing world live in countries where farmers have been forced to shift from food production for local consumption to the production of export crops destined for wealthy countries. EXPORT ECONOMY IS CODE FOR GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUSES AND GLOBAL FACTORIES.
- The IMF also requires countries to eliminate assistance to domestic industries while providing benefits for multinational corporations -- such as forcibly lowering labor costs. Small businesses and farmers can't compete. Sweatshop workers in free trade zones set up by the IMF and World Bank earn starvation wages, live in deplorable conditions, and are unable to provide for their families. The cycle of poverty is perpetuated, not eliminated, as governments' debt to the IMF grows.
- The IMF is a secretive institution with no accountability
The IMF is funded with taxpayer money, yet it operates behind a veil of secrecy. Members of affected communities do not participate in designing loan packages. The IMF works with a select group of central bankers and finance ministers to make polices without input from other government agencies such as health, education and environment departments. The institution has resisted calls for public scrutiny and independent evaluation.
- IMF policies promote corporate welfare
To increase exports, countries are encouraged to give tax breaks and subsidies to export industries. Public assets such as forestland and government utilities (phone, water and electricity companies) are sold off to foreign investors at rock bottom prices. In Guyana, an Asian owned timber company called Barama received a logging concession that was 1.5 times the total amount of land all the indigenous communities were granted. Barama also received a five-year tax holiday. The IMF forced Haiti to open its market to imported, highly subsidized US rice at the same time it prohibited Haiti from subsidizing its own farmers. A US corporation called Early Rice now sells nearly 50 percent of the rice consumed in Haiti.
- The IMF hurts workers
The IMF and World Bank frequently advise countries to attract foreign investors by weakening their labor laws -- eliminating collective bargaining laws and suppressing wages, for example. The IMF's mantra of "labor flexibility" permits corporations to fire at whim and move where wages are cheapest. According to the 1995 UN Trade and Development Report, employers are using this extra "flexibility" in labor laws to shed workers rather than create jobs. In Haiti, the government was told to eliminate a statute in their labor code that mandated increases in the minimum wage when inflation exceeded 10 percent. By the end of 1997, Haiti's minimum wage was only $2.40 a day. Workers in the U.S. are also hurt by IMF policies because they have to compete with cheap, exploited labor. The IMF's mismanagement of the Asian financial crisis plunged South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand and other countries into deep depression that created 200 million "newly poor." The IMF advised countries to "export their way out of the crisis." Consequently, more than US 12,000 steelworkers were laid off when Asian steel was dumped in the US.
- The IMF's policies hurt women the most
SAPs make it much more difficult for women to meet their families' basic needs. When education costs rise due to IMF-imposed fees for the use of public services (so-called "user fees") girls are the first to be withdrawn from schools. User fees at public clinics and hospitals make healthcare unaffordable to those who need it most. The shift to export agriculture also makes it harder for women to feed their families. Women have become more exploited as government workplace regulations are rolled back and sweatshops abuses increase.
- IMF Policies hurt the environment
IMF loans and bailout packages are paving the way for natural resource exploitation on a staggering scale. The IMF does not consider the environmental impacts of lending policies, and environmental ministries and groups are not included in policy making. The focus on export growth to earn hard currency to pay back loans has led to an unsustainable liquidation of natural resources. For example, the Ivory Coast's increased reliance on cocoa exports has led to a loss of two-thirds of the country's forests.
- The IMF bails out rich bankers, creating a moral hazard and greater instability in the global economy
The IMF routinely pushes countries to deregulate financial systems. The removal of regulations that might limit speculation has greatly increased capital investment in developing country financial markets. More than $1.5 trillion crosses borders every day. Most of this capital is invested short-term, putting countries at the whim of financial speculators. The Mexican 1995 peso crisis was partly a result of these IMF policies. When the bubble popped, the IMF and US government stepped in to prop up interest and exchange rates, using taxpayer money to bail out Wall Street bankers. Such bailouts encourage investors to continue making risky, speculative bets, thereby increasing the instability of national economies. During the bailout of Asian countries, the IMF required governments to assume the bad debts of private banks, thus making the public pay the costs and draining yet more resources away from social programs.
- IMF bailouts deepen, rather then solve, economic crisis
During financial crises -- such as with Mexico in 1995 and South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, Brazil, and Russia in 1997 -- the IMF stepped in as the lender of last resort. Yet the IMF bailouts in the Asian financial crisis did not stop the financial panic -- rather, the crisis deepened and spread to more countries. The policies imposed as conditions of these loans were bad medicine, causing layoffs in the short run and undermining development in the long run. In South Korea, the IMF sparked a recession by raising interest rates, which led to more bankruptcies and unemployment. Under the IMF imposed economic reforms after the peso bailout in 1995, the number of Mexicans living in extreme poverty increased more than 50 percent and the national average minimum wage fell 20 percent.