what are your opinions about the World Bank. Are they a positive or negative influence in developing countries?
2006-08-25 08:39:41 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Both. They can help with countries development. Because they concentrate on big projects, they will help build a dam to furnish water and electricity. They are not helping to create small businesses which are the live blood of all economies, including ours. They also make countries comply with requirements to curb their own fiscal policy.
2006-08-25 08:43:53 · answer #1 · answered by Woody 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
World Bank is trapped in a catch-22 situation. The problem isn't repayment of loans; 98% of those loans will never be repayed anyway. That's not the problem for the countries that borrow, at least not now. The big problem is that for every dollar of financial aid the World Bank provides, about ten dollars leaves the country and never comes back. It eventually returns to the west in the form of illicit funds, so basically it just vanishes.
How is a country supposed to build an infrastructure with all their money leaving the local economy? It's common sense; if the money stayed in the country, it would go to banks/local businesses/public services/etc. That's why there's a money muliplier in the GDP function. Money stays in, it gets spent over and over again, and the economy thrives.
Now, here's the catch-22. Putting restrictions on dirty money leaving those countries would hurt the same men funding the World Bank. On one hand, you can't really help these countries until you crack down on the outflow of funds, but you can't crack down on on the outflow of funds without biting the hand that feeds you. It's a frustrating situation, but the World Bank can't really help anyone until something is done about this problem.
2006-08-31 09:33:59 · answer #2 · answered by jps245 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The world back is the worst tool of international slavery there is. The actions of the world bank are too despicable to put in words. In former times we have had slaves working on our fields picking cotton. Slavery came out of fashion and didn't look good on the wrap-sheet of a nation that calls itself the cradle of democracy. But Slavery was too sweet, the fruits too easy. We couldn't keep out fingers away from it, so in 1949 we came up with an idea: "Let's have those people all over the world enslave themselves. Let's give them loans from which we know they cannot repay." Sooner or later those countries would come crawling to ask for new loans in order to make just the interest payments, let alone the premiums. Sooner or later they might need some more money and ask for more loans. That will just push them deeper into the abyss. Then, once they are near bankruptcy, we come as the saving knight in the shiny armor. We give them more loans, but only when they give us their essential utilities, such as water and electricity companies. Once we have them we will increase the prices for those essentials and milk the population at our will. And if the country wasn't enslaved to the world bank already, now it surely is.
The world bank is a tool of the devil.
2006-08-25 15:52:54 · answer #3 · answered by The answer man 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
World Bank is negative, as they don't know how poor countries work. You will see that all poor countries will only pay the interest on the loan they take from the World Bank which means that the World Bank is making money by charging interests on poor countries and that will go forever as those countries can't bay their debts.
2006-08-25 15:45:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Oh I don't know. Who's currency? I know Satan is huge backer of one currency. How about 1 World Government while we are at it and 1 World Police Force. No countries, no culture, no politicians - just 1 leader - do as I say, not as I do.
How do you like the World Bank so far. Actually one does exist, in Belgium, it is used to collect and store in a single database all the citizen minions of the world. But you already knew about this right?
Bad very very effing bad!
2006-08-25 16:24:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great for the World Bank, horrible for the people of nations who borrow money.
2006-08-25 15:50:59 · answer #6 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Negative influence - give us all of your natural resources and we give you money. Go into default and we'll take more of your natural resources. We don't expect repayment - we'll take your whole country as collateral if necessary.
2006-08-25 15:42:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like a buzz word to me. Like ' World Court '. Meanwhile, where the hell is justice?
2006-08-25 16:01:51 · answer #8 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bad anything world I don't like.
2006-08-25 15:47:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely the worst idea I have ever heard!
2006-08-25 15:42:57 · answer #10 · answered by therandman 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋