Reply #18: A government is comprised of it's citizens. [View All]

[Isome]

the indicators refer to general societal corruption and clearly the facts dont count with you in any discussions that counter your hypothesis.

Oh' my, you probably need to back the truck up and calm down. This isn't about me, or you, this is about the topic of the thread. Clearly you're attempting to dismiss my assertions with a flaccid insult. Focus on what's written here and don't make assumptions about any "hypothesis" of mine not in this thread.

where you get that these countries are corrupt because you allege that they exploit other countries is bizarre.

Bizarre? No, not in the least. A government is corrupt when it intentionally exploits another country's citizens, or any group within the country itself. Though the people the government is comprised of, and is supposed to serve, choose not to acknowledge that the actions taken on their behalf are immoral doesn't negate the immorality. Exploitative laws are neither less immoral because they're laws, nor are they less deterimental to ones the action was/is against. Immorality is corruption, even if the people fail to admit it until years after the fact.

the facts of the world are that no one wants to open up a business where there is widespread corruption.

That's irrelevant.

if you want to tie in the level of corruption with the paucity of stable economic factors go ahead, but first world exploitation being the a prioori and mitigating circumstance for local corruption is not documented. in fact, there are too many instances where such local corruption is the mitigating circumstance that prevents first world business from operating in these corrupt places because the businesses can not count on stability.

Actually, the scarcity of stable economic factors attracts first world exploiters, who are also members of the WTO/IMF/WB, like shit attracts flies.

BTW you had better check on which nations are a part of the WTO, because most on the list i posted are.

No, there's nothing I better do. However, there is something you could do: take a moment and re-read the sentence to which you're referring. There's an "and" in it for a reason.

A nation that is a member of the WTO isn't necessarily "thriving on the exploitation" of other countries, via high interest loans and privatization of resources (read: allowing first world nations' businesses to monopolize any given industry in that country). Nations that are can be found mainly in the top 20 of the list you provided.

The WTO contains approximately 146 member nations, and the IMF has approximately 184. There are $107 billion in loans to only 56 countries. The loan conditions force a top-down economic pattern on those countries and its average citizens become even more powerless and impoverished.

Dam Construction funded by IMF/WB (World Bank, an integral component of the IMF)

"The WCD (World Commission on Dams) states that in general the people effected by the dam projects have not been taken into account in the decision making process. "Once a proposed dam project passed preliminary technical and economic feasibility tests and attracted interest from government or external financing agencies and political interests, the momentum behind the project often prevailed over further assessments." ...projects indebted the communities and enriched the corrupt."

Privatization of water

"In general, it is African countries, and the smallest, poorest and most debt-ridden countries that are being subjected to IMF conditions on water privatization and full cost recovery.

Ironically, ...majority of these loans were negotiated under the IMF's new Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF), a reform announced with great fanfare in 1999 when IMF officials claimed that the new loan facility would re-focus the IMF's controversial structural adjustment measures on activities that borrowing government's would identify as leading to poverty reduction. Rather than contributing to poverty reduction, water privatization and greater cost recovery make water less accessible and less affordable to the low income communities that make up the majority of the population in developing countries."

Cry for Argentina

"As the IMF's model student throughout the 1990s, the country flung open its economy (that's why it's been so easy for capital to flee since the crisis began). As far as Argentina's supposedly wild public spending goes, a full third goes directly to servicing the external debt. Another third goes to pension funds, which have already been privatized. The remaining third alone covers health, education and social assistance.

Librarians, teachers and other public sector workers, ...won't get paid at all if the provinces agree to IMF demands .... And if deeper cuts are made to the public sector, as the IMF also is insisting, unemployed workers who account for between 20 and 30 per cent of the population, will have even less protection from the homelessness and hunger that has led tens of thousands to storm supermarkets demanding food.

Argentina, ...miserably failed by its IMF professors..."