Replies

Seoul is a really nice place, I've been there, but not for over 20 years. I don't have any sympathy for that rabid anti-americanism of many koreans.

But if you put that condition in the loan as you described, then you'd be doing something reasonable. The World Bank puts conditions on loans. They force other countries to have policies that would be entirely unacceptable policies here in america. But those countries receiving the loans have the financial problems because they can't pay back their loans. We don't have any financial problems, we just have 3-4 trillion dollars in debt we can't pay back. So, I hear what you're saying, but the whole system I just don't trust.

I don't trust the federal reserve, I don't trust the CIA, etc.

Regarding that water problem in bolivia you were mentioning. I don't know everything about it, neither do you. But some very poor people were told that they have to pay 25% of their income for water. There were sudden large increases in water prices. And this occurred right after Bechtel bought the water utility. According to my values, I wouldn't have done what Bechtel did. If I were the World Bank I wouldn't have allowed this to happen. They're saying that the water utility needed some large investment to keep operating. Maybe so. The World Bank touts itself as a charity organization, a lender of last resort that loses money by design. Well then, they should've been on top of this water problem. I've managed real estate developments before. I know how to get things done. If I were World Bank I'd have gotten with the government of Bolivia and built a close relationship, then done the same with Bechtel and somehow induced Bechtel to provide technical analysis. Then I'd have considered getting 2'nd opinion on technical analysis. Bechtel is an expensive american company. India and Russia have experts too you know. I'd have found a way to get those improvements done without the massive cost increases even if it meant subsidy from World Bank coffers. World Bank throws so much money around maneuvering people, they could do it easily. I'd have told the Bolivian government, after identifying the cheapest source for doing improvements, that we'll finance it if they provide concessions. Concessions can be all kinds of things, whatever's required. It could even mean special preferential treatment on real estate developments so World Bank could profit. You have touse your imagination, your skill, your money even to get good results if you are a businessperson to be respected. A good banker produces prosperity for all, not just for a few elite. Those poor people in Bolivia were all of a sudden told to increase the amount of moneythey had to pay for water by a very large amount and the end-result was absolutely un-doable for them. They rioted and the Bolivian government kicked Bechtel out. Bechtel was stupid to proceed with the deal and it was good they got punished. The World bank shouldn't have anything to do with such deals.

There's been a lot of criticism of the World Bank and IMF in the financial press. These people force governments to impose draconian measures so that the people become slaves. There's got to be a better way. A banker should be a creative, imaginative, resourceful consultant with money to help a nation out when they are extremely poor. He should build friends and even preferential treatment in that nation. He should be willing to invest his own funds. He should not be a bully. People say the World Bank is a bully. It's not just third world people. I've read it in the financial press of the US.

We probably just have different experiences and images in our minds of this 'New World Order'.

Red,

Cochabamba is an excllent case in point. Here, local leftists stirred up trouble and ruined the chances for the poorest of the local people to have piped, safe, clean, and economical water.

I am attaching a link to a scholarly article appearing in the Bulletin of Latin American Research entitled "The Limitastions of Water Regulation: The Failure of the Cochabamba Concession on Bolivia" This is generally conceded to be the authoritative study of this subject.

Listen to this from the article's conclusion:

"The rapid demise of the Cochabamba water service concession has been heralded by observers as a major popular victory in the struggle against the forces of globalisation (Lobina, 2000). This analysis suggests that such an interpretation is mistaken. The evidence suggests that the lowest five deciles of the urban population stood to gain most from the successful implementation of the Contract - both in the short term (i.e. the introduction of cross-subsidisation through the IBT and reduction in leakage rate0 and over the longer term (i.e. the extension of the pipe network to poor neighborhoods currently dependent on high-cost water vendors)."

Also, to my knowledge, much of the criticism of the project was just plain concocted. Lies, if you will, which this study exposes.

Cochabamba Article