Capitalism, IMF and World Bank under fire at U.N.

Source: Reuters

UNITED NATIONS, June 25 (Reuters) - Ecuador's left-wing President Rafael Correa blamed capitalism on Thursday for the global financial crisis, suggesting at a U.N. conference that the International Monetary Fund and World Bank be abolished.

Criticism of the IMF and other so-called Bretton Woods institutions established during World War Two has become a running theme at a three-day meeting of the U.N. General Assembly on the crisis.

"Patching up the Bretton Woods system, which we do not control, makes no sense for (developing) countries," Correa said in a speech on the second day of the conference.

Reforming the IMF and World Bank "would be an insufficient stopgap solution," he said, adding that "we are faced with a crisis unlike those (previously) provoked by capitalism."

If the Bretton Woods institutions cannot be abolished, he said, then they should be changed and given less authority over the world's poor countries. More financial decision-making power, Correa said, should go to the United Nations instead.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN2530051720090625?sp=true

---

Unregulated capitalism is a nasty prescription for the world.

their goal is to transfer wealth to the money class and they have succeeded.

corporate greed has been the mantra for far too long and these institutions have been the tool of destruction

K&R

What was going on in no way falls into the definition of capital formation.

the wealth and natural resources of a nation from the many to the few.

Unregulated captialism is merely organized crime -- and that is what you have

seen going on in America.

Indeed, the S&L "scandals" were "theft and embezzlements" -- a bilking of the American public!

Will America be the last to wake up to the viciousness and criminality of our own economic system????

In fact, the world went on tens of thousands of years without capitalism --

and capitalism has only been with us a few hundred years.

It's a system of exploitation very clear to the rest of the world!

Capitalism is a tool of patriarchy, invented by the Vatican to succeed Feudalism

when it became insufficient to run the Papal States.

"Capitalism is a tool of patriarchy, invented by the Vatican to succeed Feudalism

when it became insufficient to run the Papal States."

Sorry but that seems a little :tinfoilhat: could you back that up please?

He makes perfect sense. Capitalism is like a giant Texas Hold'em tournament, where many can play, but few get to cash out.

Nothing! Capitalism is a "dog eat dog" economic system which, if not strongly regulated and curtailed by democratic means, ALWAYS leads to the rich stomping on the poor. Since the 1980s, the global corporate predators who rule over us, and their fascist allies in our entrenched political establishment, have been dismantling the democratic regulatory system that protected us from the worst ravages of capitalism, and capitalism has shown its true face, in that deregulation: out of control looting and extremely destructive, rampant profiteering. This is what capitalism IS. Looting and profiteering. It is nothing more than legalized piracy and thuggery. This is not to say that human beings don't want and need markets, and creative employment, and venturesome entrepreneurs, and all the values that we associate with a true marketplace: variety--of people and material goods, basic needs satisfied in colorful and entertaining ways, rewards for creativity, cultural richness, education, satisfaction of our lust for adventure, plenty, prosperity, a chance for everyone to succeed, etc., etc. These are inherent human wants and needs. But what we have now is a horrendous distortion of that idea--the idea of the marketplace--with corporations living forever and accumulating vast wealth and power, at the expense of everyone else, and monopolistic control of all of our basic needs. That is not democracy. That is tyranny.

The propaganda machine for this system knows no bounds. It is so long-term and comprehensive that they have even generated huge public disdain for such words as "socialism" and "welfare."

They call these words out whenever something like universal health care is being discussed.

If they listen to the mass media, people in this country live in a constant state of fear. I was once a corporate propagandist and I know the techniques well and I see them employed every day.

For example, the other night on History Channel (one of the most overt propagandists around--they rewrite history in just about every program they produce) had a two-hour program on prophecy generated by both Nostradamus and some guy with a unique computer program. Well,they managed to turn just about every prediction into support for their overriding theme now, which is terrorism.

The current state of affairs is the result of a long-term plan that originated under Nixon. At one time, corporations and the business community in general was not organized in this country. Now it is and it runs the republican party in its entirety and most of the Democratic party, too.


Cher

This system of capitalism that we have now merely protects entrenched interests.

We would have had other choices in energy and cars if it had not been for the automotive industry and the oil companies working in tandem.

The same goes for the energy used to run our homes. Systems have been devised that are decentralized but as soon as they become feasible, they are bought up by the entrenched interests.

Just think about how much time you spend attaining the dollars to run your car or your furnace/AC/lights. That will give you some idea of the degree of economic servitude.

This system of capitalism has run us to the brink of disaster. I personally do not believe we will survive it.


Cher

The entire system is based around looting. Fraud and embezzlements are valid means of conducting the looting. The goal is to fill your pockets as quickly and easily as possible.

Are the stepchildren of unregulated capitalism. Slap some regulation on and down go fraud, looting and embezzlement. End the greed is good mindset. Greed drove us to war in Iraq with Haliburton being the poster child.

Capitalism is often equated with notions of freedom and liberty, especially with regards to the cultural narrative of the United States. However, it has not always been that way here -- and it has rarely been seen that way throughout many of the parts of the world that have experienced colonialism.

With regards to the development of capitalism in the United States, most "regular folks" in early America were largely opposed to the intrusions of the market into their everyday lives. The reason for this lay primarily in the "sufficiency first" outlook of yeoman farmers -- their first consideration was always making sure they produced enough food, wood, etc. to meet their sufficiency needs. Most other needs were met through kin and community networks of mutual obligations. Any leftover resources after these first two considerations might then be directed toward raising some staple crops or livestock for sale. Reliance on the market for any of a household's needs was seen as a significant loss of liberty, because it placed a man at the mercy of the market, which could result in debt and the loss of land, the primary means of production.

In fact, it was the southern yeomanry that was the last holdout from this Revolutionary ideal -- which explains upcountry southerners' resistance to capital improvements such as railroads and canals. Those improvements brought market intrusion, which threatened their cherished way of life. It was for this reason that so many nonslaveholding white males sided with the planters during the Civil War.

However, in the time since the market (and demographics) overwhelmed the idea of the self-sufficient yeoman, we have created a new narrative to replace the old, outdated one. This narrative centers upon the primacy of capitalism in setting men free to control their own labor, selling it to the best employer. What has been lost in this narrative (which you acknowledged in a subsequent post) is the natural advantage that large institutions with considerable influence over the state apparatus have with individuals in terms of bargaining power. Furthermore, given the lack of serious economic crises from the Great Depression to the current crisis, we have lost sight of the way in which modern capitalism makes people dependent upon market vagaries for the basic essentials of life, while the accompanying expansion of the modern welfare state to many responsibilities formerly filled by the community and family has served to break down those institutions while putting people at greater exposure to market whims and economic predation from concentrated capital. Note, I am not making a value judgment on the expansion of the modern welfare state, I am simply stating the way in which my reading and research informs my perspective of historical development and decay of social institutions.

But let's return to the experience of "developing" nations. Theirs is often a cultural memory of conquest and colonization at the hands of the global north. The intrusion of capitalism often undermines their ways of life, most frequently notions of communal land ownership. The result is similar to many of those areas of the post-Civil War South that became sources of cheap labor and raw materials for the industrialized North. It is not seen as an equal relationship by those who lose control of their land and are forced to take dangerous jobs they never wanted in order to purchase the necessities of life that they used to provide for themselves. Whether the ruling authority has been Spanish conquistadors, whites in South Africa, the British in India, or the IMF/World Bank, the process has always been the same. First, institute taxation requirements or laws that undermine traditional ways of life among the population, especially the legal enshrinement of individual property rights (which undermines communal ownership of resources). Second, outside investors and, more recently, local elites are encouraged to consolidate control over resources through the ruling authority guaranteeing the legal protection of their property rights. Lastly, indigenous populations are compelled to work for these investors and their institutions in order to earn wages, pay their taxes and attempt to meet their debt obligations. Of course, they are at a significant disadvantage in this relationship, so debt often becomes the millstone that is hung around their necks. For these people, capitalism is not seen as a beacon of independence and freedom -- it is seen as an insidious modern version of colonialism and exploitation for the benefit of a few.

which continue under attack --

However, in the time since the market (and demographics) overwhelmed the idea of the self-sufficient yeoman, we have created a new narrative to replace the old, outdated one. This narrative centers upon the primacy of capitalism in setting men free to control their own labor, selling it to the best employer. What has been lost in this narrative (which you acknowledged in a subsequent post) is the natural advantage that large institutions with considerable influence over the state apparatus have with individuals in terms of bargaining power.

:)

and let the market find its own level, as water seeks its level, the capitalists will make sure that such things will never happen because they interfere with the invisible hand's self regulation and that would be bad for everyone, including them.






Can I get an 'Amen'.

I was looking for a :sarcasm:

And should the "markets have found their own level" in this past season of bail-outs by

taxpayers, following a season of de-regulation?

In reality, what capitalism has provided is welfare for the rich and free enterprise for the poor.

And this began with handouts of lands to elites, special privileges like only property owners

being permitted to vote, concepts of "lesser citizens," and control of our natural resources passing

into private elite hands.

Capitalism is not about competititon. Capitalism is about killing the competititon.

If the four gas stations frequently seen at intersection corners truly competed, they would put

each other out of business - and that's also true of other "bus-i-ness."

"capitalism and democracy were synonymous" . . . !!!!

:evilgrin:

OK, I admit it. I am not the brightest bulb on the tree.

If capitalism were to fall, what would be owned by/provided by the state, and what would be owned by/provided by private individuals and entities?

Would the state/collective own "enterprises" other than the big mega industries? For example, the local grocery store, the local convenience store, the storage spot, the local landscapers, etc? What about the media? Would individuals and other non-state entities be able to own newspapers, TV stations, and so forth?

Would we own our homes, or would the state/collective own them and distribute them based on the good of society?

Would we be free to choose a career path which we might succeed or fail in, or would our employment be determined based on standardized skills testing and the needs of society?

For all my life I have heard about how terrible "non-capitalism" is. What is it really?

Neither extreme (unfettered capitalism or communism) will work.
The idea is to find the middle ground which will vary from country to country. If you really think about it, every country in the world practices some form of socialism. The US has medicade, pubic schools, and so on, and other governments might provide health care or post-secondary education or they might control natural resources or water supplies.
Having the state being involved to the point of running convenience stores would most likely end in disaster, and while forcing career paths produced some exceptional individuals (in the USSR and China in particular), I suspect the net is a loss (I believe people are more apt to perform well at something they enjoy rather than something that they are simply skilled at).

Except the CIA removed that bit of information in order to protect capitalism!

There's also an old Russian joke that goes like this . . .

"Q: What's the difference between capitalism and communism?

A: Under capitalism man exploits man

Under communism it is just the reverse"

which is probably worth about half of what it was before Bush became president.

What "state collective" . . . ?

Do you recall Commonwealth ownership -- some of it still exists even today.

Our Post Office and Public Schools and Libraries and Fire Departments --

and Medicare work as social democracy.

Remember that capitalism is only a few hundred years old -- and that it was designed

by the Vatican to replace Feudalism when that system became insufficient to run their

Papal States. Capitalism is a tool of patriarchy, of conquest -- and almost exactly

as it parallels patriarchy's organized patriarchal religion.

Capitalists are always talking about free enterprise, but it is really the last thing

they want -- what we have is welfare for rich and free enterprise for the poor.

When capitalism/corporations were first raised, they were operated under strick regulation --

they were raised for a specific purpose and then folded. Gradually, corporate power overcame

restrictions/regulations on them -- and have now risen to buy government and elected officials!

"Who owns what?" -- We can go back as far as we want -- did you ever see a "DEED" with the

Creator's name on it?

Before corporations like Monsanto own all of our water and all of our seed, it might be good

to take capitalism/corporatism back more than a few paces.

Additionally, we weren't meant to have "big mega industries" . . . that's monopoly.

Is there anyone who doesn't recognize the dangers of monopoly?

We've just bailed out -- $12 TRILLION worth of failed capitalism "too big to fail" -- !!!!

How about businesses operating as they always did before the concept of incorporation --

where people were responsible for polluting or creating poisonous conditions in their areas?

Right now we have pretty much 5 giant companies controlling our press/media. Most of them

have connections to the MIC. At election time, they also pick up 80% of the campaign finance

BRIBERY money.

Why wouldn't you own your home -- except under more just conditions?

And why wouldn't you have a freer, more liberal education -- not educated to satisfy the needs

of corporations, but educated as to your own interests, your own talents, your own desires.

And, as far as I know, your employment/education right now are "determined based on standarized

skills esting and the needs of society"!

It seems quite clear that employment is being highly controlled as capitalism/corporations

"harvest slave labor" around the world.

Businesses were flooded with engineers in order to reduce salaries -- likewise with computer

programmers, etc.

"Non-capitalism" is simply what you had before capitalism/corporatism . . . not that long ago!

Three cheers!

A dollar means so much more than any number of human lives to them.

Correa, Chavez, Castro and perhaps others could lead the world out of this predatory capitalist system. It is possible. They may yet be the last best hope of the world now that the USA experiment has failed so utterly.

Capitalims... no they have to insert that he's "left-wing".. that somehow he's synomymous with something evil or wrong. I suppose we are so used to reading propaganda, that we don't catch it often enough. This crap needs to be called out. Once a person becomes the leader of a country, I think its disgusting to constantly attack their views as "winged" anything. If they have a democracy and fair elections, then the people elected them because they like the platform that was expressed during campaigning. They like those ideas. This means that more and more of the people around the world are waking up and deciding that they don't like to live under the "slave-like" conditions Capitalism imposes. They voted for their leader; and their leader is a mouth-piece for the people's views. This is why Pres. Obama has his own mandate to move drastically to the left. He has a mandate on healthcare, the wars, the corruption, the huge gaps between rich and poor.

Its just more normal and natural for human beings to live in a collective village and help one another. Its not normal to go it alone and be in constant "survival of the fitest" mode. It causes stresses, wars, fear, and unnatural human tendencies.

one of the major problems with elite/royals is their desire to have control over others.

And, here's a thought which might explain Bushco --

"The loveless crave power because they lack both love and self"

Betty Friedan

They never label Canada's Harper for example as a right wing neo-con, or his main opponent Ignatieff as a right wing neo-liberal. But they are always sure to label the more left-centrist NDP Jack Layton as a leftist.

Some insult.

just this a.m., maybe they should appoint her president of IMF? :shrug:

Greed is a synonym for Capitalism. Greed is also faceless. The stepchild of greed is war. Need I say more?

situations. Knowing little about it, one can look at the "reform" on the table and see that it's a photo-op solution to give the appearance of "world co-operation" on a major problem.

to keep on doing what they have been doing. The people of this earth didn't do anything to deserve their handling of usury and abuse and partnership in regime changes. Disgusting.

Correa, Morales and Chavez!

I think we can all agree on this point:

Capitalism = Everything is for sale

That includes votes and political power.

This is desirable?