Jim Hlavac
| Politics Home The Practicalist The Socialist Era Politics Re-Explained Fundamentals Domestic Affairs Economic Theory Foreign Affairs Libertarian Ideas Political Theory Philosophy Royalty & Theology |
Foreign Affairs
| Foreign Affairs Sections |
The IMF supposedly works with countries to bring them into compliance with
GATT -- generally accepted taxes and tariffs. It tries to bring "fiscal
responsibility" to a distressed country. The IMF attempts to reform some
banking laws. The idea is good but the implementation cannot work so long as
the country in consideration keeps it's economic system Nearly exactly as it was
found. If there was no private property before the IMF than the IMF will not be
able to solve this peace of the prosperity puzzle.
If the tax structure stays in the socialist mode than the banking system can
never become what it needs to be. If many of the laws about starting, owning
and selling and operating businesses stay the same, all the banking reform,
and debt reduction, and rescheduling of debts, and loans to prop up
currencies -- all the things that the IMF does -- will come to nothing.
A veneer of reform on top of a rotten system will quickly fall off. And that is
why so many countries constantly have to come back to the IMF -- or never
fully put into place the promises of the IMF.
The bureaucrats at the IMF who are so concerned with the survival of the
culture, and the heritage of the country considered will not make these
systemic changes. Those bureaucrats who believe that the state should be
involved in running the economy will not make the necessary changes. Indeed,
the IMF's people probably can't even see the whole picture because they are
wrapped too much in the details.
The reconstruction of a country's economy can not be left to the very same
local people who screwed it up in the past. They are only seeking some real
money so that they can line their pockets and keep raping their own country.
Few countries actually benefit from the presence of the IMF. But it is not the
fault of the IMF itself. It is the fault of the local people, and the fault of those
national leaders of powerful countries that refuse to accept the duty to change
these countries. "Well that's just their way" is simply untenable for the future.
GATT -- generally accepted taxes and tariffs. It tries to bring "fiscal
responsibility" to a distressed country. The IMF attempts to reform some
banking laws. The idea is good but the implementation cannot work so long as
the country in consideration keeps it's economic system Nearly exactly as it was
found. If there was no private property before the IMF than the IMF will not be
able to solve this peace of the prosperity puzzle.
If the tax structure stays in the socialist mode than the banking system can
never become what it needs to be. If many of the laws about starting, owning
and selling and operating businesses stay the same, all the banking reform,
and debt reduction, and rescheduling of debts, and loans to prop up
currencies -- all the things that the IMF does -- will come to nothing.
A veneer of reform on top of a rotten system will quickly fall off. And that is
why so many countries constantly have to come back to the IMF -- or never
fully put into place the promises of the IMF.
The bureaucrats at the IMF who are so concerned with the survival of the
culture, and the heritage of the country considered will not make these
systemic changes. Those bureaucrats who believe that the state should be
involved in running the economy will not make the necessary changes. Indeed,
the IMF's people probably can't even see the whole picture because they are
wrapped too much in the details.
The reconstruction of a country's economy can not be left to the very same
local people who screwed it up in the past. They are only seeking some real
money so that they can line their pockets and keep raping their own country.
Few countries actually benefit from the presence of the IMF. But it is not the
fault of the IMF itself. It is the fault of the local people, and the fault of those
national leaders of powerful countries that refuse to accept the duty to change
these countries. "Well that's just their way" is simply untenable for the future.