Posts Tagged ‘International Monetary Fund (IMF)’
Least Developed Countries (LDC): How are they fairing with the UN?
Least Developed Countries (LDC) is a name given in 1972 to the poorest nations, during the third conference of the UN on world commerce and development. How LDC are fairing after the many UN conference made in their name?
It is 1972, Santiago, the Capital of Chili, during President Salvador Allende. The UN consisted of 120 recognized States (currently, there are 189 States). In that UN conference, the richest powers qualified 24 countries as LDC.
For example, a LDC is generally an insular country (no commercial sea port), has no satisfactory sanitary and hygienic facilities, high rate of illiteracy, high rate of infantile mortality, and earning less than $200 per year per individual.
At that conference, the World Bank economic ideology was supported by the US government under the “Washington Consensus”. The guidelines under the consensus was that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) would not support State policies that refused to have open market for foreign products, or refuse to adopt loose laws permitting free flow of money, or capital managed by multinational financial companies, disposing of unregulated liberal commerce, have reduced the government involvement in social institutions and contribution to health and social security…
Tough reduction in social benefits like what current England, France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Greece… are trying to make their people swallow under the banner of balancing budgets while increasing huge gifts extended to their multinational companies, and financial institutions…
It is 1981, Paris. The first UN conference focused on the LDC that have grown from 24 to 49 poorest States. The rich powers decided to allocate 0.7% of their GNP to developing countries; 20% of that miserly aid was to be attributed to the LDC.
It was all well-intentioned promise that was not kept.
Latin America States were undergoing US pressures for avoiding social reforms and maintaining oligarchic structures…Most African States were experiencing long-lasting civil wars while multinational companies were exploiting the raw minerals at full scale.
It is 2001, Bruxelles (Belgium). The third UN conference for the LDC. The Washington Consensus on economic guidelines have proven to be the worst remedies for the developing countries. Emerging nations suffered financial crisis for obeying the guidelines of the IMF. The new guidelines are oriented toward human development in education, preventive health, equitable job opportunities, …
The civic organizations for sustainable development, conserving biodiversity, climatic changes…have been very dynamic and virulent in transforming the UN conferences from an economic and financial Davos focus to Porto Alegre spirit.
Still, the aid to development to the LDC never increased to 0.7% of GNP. Worse, the effective development aid was reduced to half: Included in the budget of development to poorer nations are paying off accumulated debts and paying employees of the main institution at home base.
Since 2001, the world witnessed serious upheavals such as invasion of Iraq that lasted 9 years, the financial crisis of 2008, and the polarization of world powers between the US and China. The US counted on for maintaining financial world stability and China being given the prerogative of world effective productions…
How are the least developed countries fairing with the successive UN conferences?
Evidences point out that central government of the powerful States have given up getting involved directly. Only civic organizations are relied upon to cover for the impotent States activities.
I decided to relegate the introduction last. Why? I have read many articles on the critical problem of Sovereign Debts and what did I discover? They are basically series of data, abridged definition of convoluted terms, and then nothing. Without any serious analysis, who cares to consider conclusions that are politically oriented but inconsequential for learning anything?
State public debts may be contracted through external creditors (government funds, institutions, or private financiers), internal resources, and hidden debts such as social security funds…
There are 9 technical ways to resolving or camouflaging excessive sovereign public debts that State governments have invented through centuries of steady accumulation of debts:
Increasing taxes, direct, indirect, and hidden taxes that most citizens are not aware that they are actual taxes.
Decreasing expenditure in the budget and allocating the savings to paying interest on debts.
Increasing production and facilitating internal trades to increasing economic growth, thus, increasing fiscal revenues.
Decreasing the interest rates on contracted debts through financial transparency and political stability.
Increasing consumer prices by forcing inflation and a fictitious decrease of the debt rate compared to GNP.
Creating wars on the “enemy” creditors to defaulting on external debts (principal and interest portions).
Refinancing the debts by decreasing the interest rate or lengthening the due dates: Creditors are willing to be paid something on regular basis than submitting to lengthy litigation procedures with the World Commerce and Trade organization.
Simply “defaulting” and letting the chips fall where they please (the most frequently adopted decision since the Middle Ages). In the last two centuries, 320 cases of States’ outright defaults have been registered with frequent consequences of wars, swapping of colonies, and mandated power over military weaker nations.
What are the signs that a State is planning to default?
One: The newer elected government immediately demands refinancing the debts and renegotiating the terms in amount, interest rate, and timetable of payments.
Two: Banking institutions threaten to declaring bankrupcy; meaning, the banks start to cut down on loans in amount and in numbers; thus, slowing down internal trade and the creation of small new enterprises.
Three: Foreign creditors stop lending for many reasons.
Four: Financial institutions actually declaring bankrupcy and setting off a financial crisis so that government reacts promptly and comes to the rescue by infusing massive liquidity of the hardworking “citizens’ savings”
Why government generally goes for the policy of accelerated inflation in order to resolving sovereign debts? First, consumer prices are allowed to increase by increasing tariff barriers for cheaper imports, encouraging monopolistic mergers, increased interest rates on loans, and slowing down internal production. Inflation diminishes export competitiveness by an over valuation of the currency. Inflation is connected by dramatic rise in Real Estates prices called “bubble”.
What is the rational for creating inflation?
Debts not “indexed” on inflated prices (fiscal revenues are inflated since generated taxes seem to have increased and the nominal GNP shows increases) reduce the ratio of the debt to the GNP and the fiscal revenue, giving the illusion that effective amount of debt was reduced. An annual inflation rate of 4%mechanically reduces the debt ration by 20% within 5 years.
What are the consequences of inflation?
If the salary is not indexed on the inflation rate then, the purchasing power of an individual diminishes and he has to borrow or find an additional job to making ends meet or be supported by his parents’ savings. Usually, the State maintains all public salaries unchanged for several years in order to keep spending “under control”.
After WWII in 1945, the public debts of the England was 250% on its GNP, France 110% (which represented 10 fiscal years of revenues), and the USA was 100% of GNP. These countries adopted the inflation plan for 30 consecutive years, factitiously reducing the ratio. With steady economic growth, and since when prices of commodities increase they never come down, the average yearly income increased, but it was mostly hidden by the inflation factor. For example, the Chinese worker with a salary less than $1,000 is saving half his earning so that the Chinese government finances the growing external debts of the “rich States” in order to maintaining the “standard of living” of their citizens that effectively reflects 30 years of inflation policy. Fact is, one of the methods for sustaining inflation was creating credit cards with limits up to 50 times the actual earning of the individual!
When a State decides to default it might start by temporary suspending paying interest on due date if refinancing negotiation failed; coupons of lesser values are issued. Property values drop 35% within 6 years; share values decline 55% within 3 years; unemployment increases 7% within 4 years, and production rate drop 9% within 2 years. If you notice that many of these consequences are effectively taking place then, your State has defaulted but was not transparent in declaring the difficult situation.
In the medium-term after defaulting, a State witnesses internal unrests, higher in frequency and in violence; government creates a preemptive war on a neighboring State to absorb the surplus unemployed citizens in the lower middle class; and the State is reduced to a vassal position to more dominant creditor nations: the defaulting State is unable to secure more loans for many years.
What kinds of financial mechanisms and financial tools (gimmicks) a powerful State resorts to amortizing the impact of a large sovereign debt?
One, the State may use special right of withdrawal from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which is starting issuing worthless banknotes. Two, the State may create special perpetual funds generated by particular taxes designed to repaying the debt (political exigencies always use special funds for missions not intended to it, under the pretext of extraordinary emergency events). Three, the State may nationalize productive sectors in the industries and then issue bonds on public properties. Four, the State may declare the land of the nation is public property and all private properties should be rented for a specific period. Five, all the time, the State is just printing money with decreasing values as long as the sovereign debts is huge.
The financial clubs and institutions that the powerful nations used to recovering their assets were: One, the “Club of Paris” was established in 1956, constituted of all the creditor nations (the G7) and international institutions, to manage the public debts contracted by the third world countries. As Germany and Japan accumulated surplusses in their economies they tended to convert their dollars to gold; Nixon decided in 1971 suspended the convertability of dollar to gold and starting the devaluation trend of the dollar. That was the end for the fictitious “Gold Exchange Standard”. Two, the “Club of London” was established in 1979 in order to gathering all the commercial banks creditors to poorer States. Thus, debtors States had to first refinance or renegotiate their public debts with the Club of Paris so that the Club of London executes the details with the commercial banks. Three, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) began getting involved after 1983 when major emerging States suffered financial problems.
Invariably, States unable to generate enough fiscal revenues so that 50% of the budget are dedicated to paying interests on sovereign debts are in deep trouble. Many developed Nations can sustain up to 300% of debt to GNP for several years, while developing countries crumble under 50% ratio, simply because the political system is unstable and unable to bring in at least 50% of the budget to cover paying interest on debts.
Women are back to being the most vocal and active members in society as in the 1840’s, though the “Mamas Grizzly” are on the wrong side for the proper political reforms. Fact is, women are not equitably represented in the political system. In economical downturns, unemployed men feel worthless and barely take on their responsibilities in the family. Unemployed men and husbands start imagining that women and wives have the magic wand to making ends meet. Unemployed men and husbands hand long faces and loaf around in the house; wives want men out of the house, away from their skirts. Wives want the government to open up free extracurricular activity centers so that men are out-of-the-way and enjoying their free time. Wives don’t need adult husbands behaving like kids, complaining and whining and expecting wives to tranquillize their unsatisfied ego.
Save a limited health care reform that is yet to be effectively executed next year, nothing is working in the US after the financial crash. The number of unemployed is increasing, the economy has not restarted, foreign policies for stabilizing world disturbances have not changed much, the environment degradation did not improve, and the troops are being relocated and reshuffled to other “hot regions”; there is diminished credibility that the dollar is worth the expense of printing it and no viable medium-term resolutions are seriously contemplated. Politics in the US is heavily biased toward short-term election timeline.
Nothing is giving the US citizens and the world communities much hope that change in on the way; any kind of change. The banks and financial institutions were salvaged but productive lending transactions have not materialized. All financial facilitation laws are encouraging the elite richest class of the 10% to resuming their disgusting flatulent life-style, as if the system was meant to satisfying their greed and large ego. The budget for the military and the thousands of “security agencies’ (old and newly established) are taking up 25% with no substantial returns for the common people. The modernization and maintenance of the infrastructure are on slow burner waiting for better times.
Women are the most vocal and active members in this economic downturn that has no light at the end of the tunnel; women are demanding transparency in the political and economic decisions, procedures, and processes; women are demanding accelerated reforms options with fair representation of their gender and all the economic classes, especially the lower middle class representing 50% of the population.
The Federal Regulatory Commission known as the FED has maintained the lowest interest rate ever for years and is now zero per cent. What for? So that the richest enterprises can borrow more money and not spending it on creating new enterprises. Actually, billions are invested in other more promising States economies such as Brazil that witnessed its currency the Real appreciates 30% in less than 20 months.
To make things worse, the FED wants to be imaginative: Its chairman Bernanke is planing on purchasing the long-term loans. With what? Printing more worthless money that has lost all credibility in the exchanges of world finance and economy. What are the consequences?
First, the ever successively devalued dollar, unable yet to compete with emerging countries, will reach a critical point that will wipe out the liquid savings of the elderly and retired people who won’t be able to survive for another couple of years.
Second, China and Japan would reduce purchasing the treasury T-Bills to the bare minimum commensurate to political concessions.
Third, The competitiveness of the US is far from being appetizing to exporting goods. China has appreciated its currency 20% up but the US could not compete: the direct consequence was for Vietnam and Malaysia taking on the slacks for Wal-Mart and other wholesalers.
The worst part is that the government has decreed a moratorium on immigration from Mexico. How can the economy restart without fresh, and young immigrants aiding small enterprises to restart or be created? Giovanni Peri, assistant professor at the University of Davis, wrote in Foreign Policy in Focus that “Mexican immigrants increase production capacity, stimulate investment, and is a catalyst for specialization. Young Mexican immigrants never had any negative consequences in the US economy in the last 40 years. In the last 40 years, the active potential doubled and salaries increased 40%.”
Peri goes on: “Immigrants are basically competing among immigrants but do not rob jobs to Americans. When immigrants are hired, productivity increases and Americans are elevated to higher ranks such as supervisors and foremen, simply because they know the language; thus, this process increases the base of the lower middle class. Immigrants complement the economy and do not substitute for existing jobs except when highly educated and specialized. An engineer cannot do anything alone; give the engineer workers and enterprises are created.”
With the dynamic market system in the USA, hundred of thousands of jobs are lost and an equal number re-appears. The more there are able and young workers on the market and the higher are the odds for creating new enterprises. Immigrant salaries are low but still high compared to what they earn in their homeland, even when the higher cost of living is factored in.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) met in Washington DC with its 187 representative members to discuss this raging war related to currency appraisal. The institution demonstrated incredible impotency to resolving this problem, giving the illusion that currency value is the main and critical factor for restarting economies and stabilizing world commerce. Chairman Strauss-Khan pointed out that more focus should be on strict supervision of the vulnerable factors in the most advanced States. Thus, the IMF is going to study the viability of zero interest rate in the US that is diverting investments to other promising economies such as Brazil.
The US brand of “capitalist liberal democracy” has to be revisited and fairer representation of women and the lower middle class be reformed in election laws and procedures. This liberal democracy guided by the elite richest 10% of the population and hoarding 50% of the wealth of the nation must reformed so that the lower classes can have a say on the kind of laws that preserve their interest during economic downturns.
The gimmicks of slightly increasing taxes on the rich classes with large loopholes cannot continue indefinitely. Political power should be reinstituted to the common people and election laws and procedures simplified to encourage the lower middle class to run for election and get organized.