Conferences Series Events
SPACE   |   EVOLUTION   |   PHYSICS   |   SOCIAL SCIENCES   |   NATURAL SCIENCES   |   DNA   |   PSYCHOLOGY   |   BIOTECH   |   MEDICINE   |   ANTHROPOLOGY   |   ASTRONOMY
INTERNET   |   NEW MEDIA   |   START-UPS   |   PERSONAL TECHNOLOGY   |   WIRELESS   |   COMPUTING   |   ENGINEERING   |   CEOS
RELIGION   |   GAMING   |   FILM   |   FASHION   |   SEX   |   PHILOSOPHY   |   EDUCATION   |   HISTORY   |   ARTS   |   MUSIC   |   TRAVEL   |   PHOTOGRAPHY
Watch Now

Monitoring the World Bank

1
Likes
0
Dislikes
RATE
3,866 Views

  • Info
  • Bio
  • Chapters
  • Highlights
  • Transcript
  • Download
  • More
Please or register to post a comment.

nikki Avatar
nikki
Posts: 2
Posted: 10.24.06, 11:02 PM
By having the billfold and political capital to back up its name, the WB could, but never will commit to mass internatio/economic-development projects (especially in developing nations) primarily because the dominant constituency, states with corporate legs, led by U.S legal and extra-legal financial alliances, demand not only strong dividends and sustainable financial growth on their capital investments in a voluntary global financial management partnership, but in such a circumstance, demand a graduated, controlled, and increasingly control-able local dog-eat-dog marketplace starving for their products and services so as to secure knowledge of and advantage over competitors in future development-focused investment opportunities in the region and according to the reason of a company or government’s choosing; that people die and suffer is an externality; The WB will never give micro-credit to members of these developing economies for the same reason it will not drastically increase funding for these crucial areas in development aid agreements- Trust with money has not and will not be established until the bank says so, and since the bank only deals with who it trusts, and those states in the WB have, at least potentially, much to gain by choosing who to trust when, then those receiving aid each year must continue to be a small percentage of those who need it so as to validate annual gains in profits from highly strategic resource exploitation ventures, (e.g. Bechtel, Monsanto). Getting the world to fit in with the systems and hierarchies of consumerist capitalism is a deliberately slow, unfortunately bloody, and yet highly managed process over which the WB and IMF have the special responsibility to determine whether entire groups of humans continue to suffer where suffering is as negotiable as it is intolerable, and for this we should be angry, vocal, and non-violent in our demand for effective global aid in the name of states that combats poverty and is as equally and uniformly tolerant of endemic domestic markets and fair international partnerships as we are demanding fair deals and respecting and rewarding trustworthiness as demonstrated.
GrantIsis Avatar
GrantIsis
Posts: 2
Posted: 10.19.06, 01:00 PM
Kid, there are a lot of countries the World Bank would have to take care of. Also, considering the countries they'd have to build in, the contractors they use would be outside help (expensive) or inside help which would also be expensive since there is no structure in those countries to pay for something like a construction job on that magnitude. They'd think "The Americans have money! Let's charge them hundreds of dollars!" And beyond that, they'd probably ruin construction on purpose just so that they'd make more money. In reality, the costs would be a lot. And, on top of that, you'd stir things up too much. Culture can't change like that over night.
TheKid Avatar
TheKid
Posts: 27
Posted: 10.19.06, 12:10 PM
I like the idea of the World Bank, but, with the amount of funding they have, they can really fix a third world country over night but they don't. She touches upon how they can't just go in and build houses because people will be suspect that the person who they're building for is doing something illega, but, as she points out, for dollars, they can build someone a full home. Seriously, if they spent 1% of their funds on building homes, everyone could have a home and no one would have to be suspect. I understand cultures are a "hurdle", I guess, but it seems rather bizarre that they can't just fix up a lot of the country only based on peoples perception. I think they can change that perception quite quickly if they seriously put effort into rebuilding.
Advertisement
NO ADS + DOWNLOADS + HQ VIEWING
UPGRADE TO FORA.tv PLUS
Advertisement