Article

2004-05-13 International-UN-NGOs

World Bank Corruption May Top $100 Billion

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Zenster 2004-05-13 4:25:56 PM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Ah, the house that McNamara built.

When are we going to learn that loaning money to kleptocratic elites is the problem. People in developed countries use capital to build. Kleptocrats will simply steal and launder the money. The only positive is that the money ultimately ends up in the OECD as either payments for goods and services or investments.

Posted by 11A5S 2004-05-13 5:01:33 PM|| 2004-05-13 5:01:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Here's an idea: The U.S. shouldn't contribute any more money to this scam called a "World" Bank until we have a COMPLETE PUBLIC ACCOUNTING OF WHERE EVERY PENNY WENT FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS.

Let the rest of the world fund the dictators - it's what they do best anyway.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-05-13 5:33:55 PM|| 2004-05-13 5:33:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 so would y'all approve world bank loans to countries that arent dictatorships??

Note the above was misleadingly worded - the corruption cited is all in the lender countries - NOTHING about bribes received or given by anyone at the WB itself.

Remember when US companies were attacked by the left for giving bribes - "thats just the way you get things done down there"

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-05-13 5:51:39 PM|| 2004-05-13 5:51:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 I think that you meant to say lendee countries, LH.

The problem is that when a country is ready to economically take off on its own accord, it does a fine job of accumulating capital on its own. Capital cannot be accumulated in a country without rule of law and transparency. If a country cannot accumulate capital on its own, it makes no sense to lend it capital since the very conditions that prevent capital from being accumulated will lead to any outside capital to be stolen or mis-invested.

There have been dictatorships that have rule of law (e.g. Singapore, Korea, Taiwan, Chile). It makes sense to invest there. Eventually, democracy takes root. Otherwise, we should just provide direct food, sanitary, medical, and educational aid until they evolve the appropriate institutions.

So as you can see, LH, the World Bank's charter contains a contradiction. It's goal is to solve poverty through capital investment. Poor countries either have or have not evolved rule of law and transparent institutions. If there is no rule of law, poor countries can no more use capital than you or I can digest celluose. If there is rule of law, the market will take care of the problem and readily invest. Therefore, the World Bank has no reason to exist. There is an almost mathematical purity to my little "proof."

PS Nowhere do Barbara and I accuse the WB of being corrupt in the traditional sense. I don't know where you get that from.

Posted by 11A5S 2004-05-13 6:38:46 PM|| 2004-05-13 6:38:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Poor countries either have or have not evolved rule of law and transparent institutions. If there is no rule of law, poor countries can no more use capital than you or I can digest celluose.

Kazaarts! And there you have it.

Posted by Shipman 2004-05-13 7:44:37 PM|| 2004-05-13 7:44:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 The fatal flaw of transnational institutions is the ultimate lack of accountability. At least most democratic governments can be tossed by the electorate for corruption or fraud. How does one impeach Kofi?

Posted by john 2004-05-13 9:35:46 PM|| 2004-05-13 9:35:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 The fatal flaw of transnational institutions is the ultimate lack of accountability.

Its much worse than that. AFAIAA Kofi Annan could write million dollar checks to anyone he likes, loot the UN vaults at gunpoint and shoot a couple of guards in the process, but not do anything illegal. The UN exists in a legal blackhole that makes its statements about 'international law' laughable.

Posted by Phil_B 2004-05-13 10:00:25 PM|| 2004-05-13 10:00:25 PM|| Front Page Top

10:50 Ernest Brown
10:49 Ernest Brown
10:08 Ernest Brown
05:36 Dripping Sarcasm
04:12 Howard UK
00:09 Old Grouch
23:19 Pappy
22:40 Anonymous4602
21:31 Anonymous4825
21:28 Frank G
21:18 Mr. Davis
21:06 Scooter McGruder
20:54 The Dude
20:46 Wuzzalib
20:44 Fred
20:37 Phil_B
20:32 Barbara Skolaut
20:29 Sludj
20:28 Phil_B
20:21 Fred
20:12 Jen
20:00 Shipman
19:39 Sludj
19:36 rkb