 |

Top Ten Reasons to Oppose the IMF
What is the IMF?
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. 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.
|
 |

|
 |