He added
that the IMF need not be dismantled, that it only has to refocus and should
have been done in the past, but the Fund has no clout over the major country
credits including the US.
I replied to Jop saying that when the IMF is into solving
inequality and ensuring inclusive growth, it is simply feeling hollow and
shallow and tries to step into WB and ADB forte just to make itself feel
relevant in countries that do not need it. IMF should make its presence be felt
strongly in Europe and North America where current account and BOP problems are
annual if not daily realities.
When an economy is bleeding
in its current account and overall BOP, its monetary and fiscal authorities
panic and engage in heavy currency, interest rates, and capital account
manipulations, plus tinkering with their taxpayers' level of patience or anger.
So I think the IMF is abolishable, or at least
shrinkable. Say, dismantle
their country offices even temporarily, in countries like the Philippines and
many Asian economies where they are not needed now and in the short term.
Europe and even North America
are staring them in the face point blank. The bank run in tiny Cyprus and
public anger over the bailout conditions, a high tax on bank deposits, is
challenging the IMF to address problems on huge BOP imbalances. Uncertainty in
that tiny European economy (1 million people and now needing $10 B bailout
money from ECB and IMF) even has negative repercussions in the PH
stockmarket.
It is simply lousy for the
IMF to announce its migration of function to solving inequality and
"non-inclusive" growth, when many European economies are wobbly
precisely because of their very expensive welfare system to solve inequality
and non-inclusive growth there.
In the said interaksyon
article, some comments were posted. I am reposting the more substantial
comments and my reply to them.
We should give back to the IMF as we were aided when we were
hard-up decades past. Let's not be stingy to those who helped us!
March 16 at 1:53pm
March 16 at 1:53pm
Nonoy: Hi Banno, one problem with foreign aid bodies like the
IMF is they create moral hazards problem to many corrupt governments. The
latter can over-borrow then waste if not steal, plunder the country's
resources. Anyway, there's the IMF to bail the country out when it experiences
debt crisis or other balance of payment problems, even when the plunderers are
already out of government.
March 16 at 7:36pm
Leamse Oapmaamid · Top
Commenter
Ano to kwento ng isang mahirap na tao na tinulungan ng iba para
umunlad pagkatapos nung umunlad eh wala ng pakialam sa taong tumulong sa kanya
kundi naging matayog ang lipad na tila baga di nanggaling sa lupa. Magandang
teleserye ito. Wag nyong sabihin na kapag ang mahirap na bansa ay umunlad
magiging mayabang na ito. Wag naman po oh, Dios ko. Di pa nga tayo ganun
kayaman na bansa actually napakaraming bilang ng mahihirap sa atin tapos to the
highest level na agad ang yabang...Ayos...
March 16 at 4:25pm
March 16 at 4:25pm
Nonoy: Hi Leamse, I think it is unfair and even wrong to give
too much credit to the IMF for the Philippines' economic growth. An economy
grows mainly because of the hard work of the private enterprises and citizens,
not because of dependency from borrowings with the foreign aid like the IMF.
Singapore started poor when it became independent of Malaysia in 1959, the same
with Taiwan when it broke off from China mainland after the communist victory
in 1949. They developed not because of foreign aid borrowings and IMF
dependence, but because of strong entrepreneurship.
March 16 at 7:24pm
March 16 at 7:24pm
Leamse Oapmaamid · Top
Commenter
Please educate me what are those too much that you are
mentioning about? You have also talked about the Singapore and Taiwan about
their experiences of becoming tigers of Asia in terms of economy. I don't think
there is no help coming from outside that these countries they did not accept from
World Bank, Asian Development Bank, IMF or other bank or country that can give
them loans. For instance, Taiwan was supported by the US in terms of their
economy and military establishments before and maybe a sort of it until now.
Singapore is really a good example of change because the leaders of that
country were committed and united to the prosperity and progress of their
country and its people as a whole but I don't think this country did not avail
loans from outside sources. Now, where is the Philippines? We are becoming full
of ourselves just because for a moment of having exclusive economic progress
which did not actually give benefit for the many but for only few rich and
famous. Where the gap between the rich and poor is very far from to be expected.
How can we boast such thing to the world? If that will be the case, our country
will become like a common Filipino after having acquire some richness has
changed his thinking and feelings towards others. It means such person became
full of himself and now saying a better than you are statement. How hopeless
and helpless it is to think about it?
15 hours ago
Nonoy : " tinulungan ng iba para umunlad pagkatapos nung umunlad
eh wala ng pakialam sa taong tumulong sa kanya" -- that's what I was
referring to as giving too much credit to the IMF. Previous administrations
like Marcos bungled the economy, a self-inflicted injury, IMF came to help the
country pay its big current account and BOP deficit. If dictators and
irresponsible governments did not expand, the economy should be capable of
correcting its own imbalances, no need for the IMF.
Ruel Chavez · Top Commenter · Pastor at Presbyterian Church of the Philippines
In February 7, 2001, Dr. Ron Paul, the retired Tea Party
Congressman, delivered a speech at the US House of Representatives assessing
the condition of the US Republic. In that speech, he mentioned about the real
role of international corporations like the IMF. He said that the economic
consequences of distributing foreign aid under the campaign of helping the poor
of developing countries are almost invisible. In reality, foreign aid does not
help the poor of developing countries. It only serves the interests of powerful
foreign leaders. Add to it the fact that providing foreign aid is actually a
process “of taking money from poor Americans and giving it to rich foreign
leaders, with kickbacks to international corporations” like the WB, the IMF,
the WTO, and the ICC (Pillars of Prosperity, 2008, p.30). This is an invisible
attack on the economic liberty of American taxpayers for such decision does not
come from them, but always from global elites.
March 16 at 8:36pm
March 16 at 8:36pm
Nonoy: Right Ruel. Foreign aid is government to government transfer
of money. Unlike international trade, investments and tourism where transfer of
money and other resources is people to people, or business to business, foreign
aid like IMF bail out has propped up or at least bailed out many irresponsible
and despotic governments.
March 17 at 12:26am
-------------
See also:
Foreign Aid 6: IMF is Engineerable and Abolishable, September 05, 2006Foreign Aid 8: Abolish the IMF, August 08, 2007
IMF socialism, January 04, 2009
IMF dinosaur, let it fade away, June 16, 2009
Foreign Aid 12: WB Corruption of Civil Society, March 23, 2011
Foreign Aid 13: Freedom from Borrowing, July 05, 2011
Foreign Aid 14: ADB's Electric Tricycles, April 07, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment