Pragmatopian Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7947787.stm Sri Lanka will not accept any conditions on a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the island's president has said. So we'll take your money, but we'll do what we please? Sounds like AIG... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7947787.stm Sri Lanka will not accept any conditions on a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the island's president has said. So we'll take your money, but we'll do what we please? Sounds like AIG... They sound sensible and have a good idea of the problems that IMF loan conditions might cause to the country. The loan would be a massive help but the IMF would likely demand some sort of austerity programme for the country and I can fully understand why the government would be unwilling to accept this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 The choice is simple, they accept the conditions or fuck off and do without the loan, it's only what we have to do when we ask for a loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 The choice is simple, they accept the conditions or fuck off and do without the loan, it's only what we have to do when we ask for a loan. There are differences in the consequences when you accept a loan from the bank and when a nation accepts a government accepts a loan. You do not get forces by your bank into what you can or cannot spend your money on now you have accepted the loan. But in taking an IMF loan you are told to adopt austerity programmes or make often big changes to the economy. This is often to the detriment of the livelihood and welfare of the people. http://lpa.igc.org/lpv33/imf.htm http://hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/598.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/IMF_WB/IMF_Sanders.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 The choice is simple, they accept the conditions or fuck off and do without the loan, it's only what we have to do when we ask for a loan. There are differences in the consequences when you accept a loan from the bank and when a nation accepts a government accepts a loan. You do not get forces by your bank into what you can or cannot spend your money on now you have accepted the loan. But in taking an IMF loan you are told to adopt austerity programmes or make often big changes to the economy. This is often to the detriment of the livelihood and welfare of the people. http://lpa.igc.org/lpv33/imf.htm http://hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/598.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/IMF_WB/IMF_Sanders.html It does seem a curious position for Sri Lanka to take, maybe I am not looking at this position as deeply as I should, but I thought the better thing to do would be to take the loan and then tell the IMF to piss off by not following those conditions. The IMF will likely get its money back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.