on on the debt, Brazil now owes $121 billion. This illustrates the viscous cycle that the IMF puts its borrowers into. In Russia, the IMF contributed to Russia’s collapse in 1998. Competition combined with intelligent privatization and correctly channeled investments in capital markets could have brought about the growth that Russia was so desperately searching for, but the IMF never emphasized competition and economic growth. Instead they imposed their rigid, set, standard formula_reducing inflation and cutting budget deficits. Insisting on a fixed exchange rate, it destroyed all prospects for export of oil, gas, and energy, which earns Russia half of its money leaving the country in tatters.Whenever the IMF’s policies fail, they give the standard excuse of poor implementation by government officials, corruption and the lack of political will. Policies are made within constraints. The IMF refuses to acknowledge these constraints just as it refuses to make country to country adjustments. No two situations are alike. How can the IMF expect one standard plan to solve every type of problem? It is obvious to laymen in economics that it cannot. Yet the geniuses at the IMF cannot see this.It is not the fault of the IMF that countries have taken loans and are now in debt. On the other hand, they are completely responsible for the havoc their policies have caused, and are causing, in victim countries where hunger and poverty have increased many fold instead of having been reduced.The particulars of the IMF and World Bank’s policy in Pakistan were recently announced and by the Government of Pakistan and were approved by the overseeing organizations. The three-year structural reform agenda is basically focused on the budget and on the restructuring and strengthening of the financial position of public enterprises. Substantial efforts are to be made to broaden the base of domestic taxes, revamp tax administration, implement the r...
