payment of debt by the governement

This thread should either be in the Open forum or the bussiness forum. IMHO that is.

And on topic: So, the country is broke. That's hardly news. We need the IMF, we need them bad. It all comes down to that.

But that's really the conumdrum Hipo is facing.

IMF: Bail out money (good for him)
IMF: Strict expenditure control (bad for him)

Is he interested in signing before election comes? That we will know when the PRD chooses a candidate. Sunday is the day people. Fasten your seatbelts.

Think "short term greed" on Hippo's part, and "long term greed" on the IMF's part, and all answers become clear.

MerengueDutchie, when did you change your mind about basing an argument on DR Central Bank data?

I have never thought IMF ever has intent to debunk a country
when funding a country, the concern is always what the leader
does with the money when he/she gets it.

IMF needs to aapply tough love funding countries.
After all, it is their money. What other options would
The DR have when they need money. Raise Taxes?

So how much control would Hipolito have with the money?
Or will IMF have complete control of the spending?

Who is DR's equivilent to Greenspan, or does Hipolito play that role?

Dominican Greenspan?

Well, let's see....

We have Jos? Lois (supposedly Louis but who cares) Malkum who was Finance Minister when BanInter broke. He is now head of the Central Bank, and a lakey of Hippo's.

We have Albert Athallah (or something like that) Who was Superintendent of Banks when BanInter went under. He is now elsewhere in the government. Another Arse kissin' buddy.

Then we have Carlos Despradel, who was head of the Central Bank when the schitt hit the fan, and he is now Presidential Minister for Technical Affairs, or rather the guy who is supposed to know everything and explain it to the President. Sort of like the White House Chief of Staff. His face is so brown that you just know what he is!

None of these guys went against the President when he said to pay off all the BanInter depositors, both here and off shore.. Nobody explained the results of this stupidity, called "the greatest economic error inthe history of the Dominican Republic" by people that should know.......And ...... Now the BanCredito's depositors want the Government to pay them their deposits off shore too!! HAHAHAHAHAHa!!!!!!!!!

You can take all three of these guys, mix them up and you won't get one good set of balls. To steal, or ruin the economy, or as "spin doctors" they are real good, but to fix it? No way!!

Greenspan? They are not fit to carry his dirty laundry....

HB

Porfi!

I'm gonna comment on your comment about greed! Get ready!

I would remind you that without the IMF and other organizations like it that lend money to the governments who can't/won't keep their financial skirts clean and thus have a stable economy, your country and a lot of others would forever be in deep do-do.
You rant and disparage the IMF money suppliers as being greedy, no-good bastards; well if it weren't for them what would you have, huh???
As for greed, why don't you point your rhetoric to the real greedy ones who cause all the problems in the first place? Is it too painful to be part of the cause of the problem because you won't speak out in the Domestic public Forum, but hide behind the DR1 medium and thus not visible to the Public, except for a select few?
If you really wanna do something, grab yourself between the legs and go to the 'political' rallys and speak out there where everone can take note of your comments.
Don't point your finger outward in excusing the self inflicted problems of this country by blaming someone else for them.

Texas Bill

Hipponomics

Country deficit, the pay off plan was set based on the peso being 35 to 1.
Now I read the budget is based on the peso being 40 to 1.
Read this: http://www.dr1.com/#10

I sure doesnt make sense, IMF bailout will only put more dollars in the crooks pockets. Dollars not peso's.

Would the real exchange rate pls. stand up?!

Customs is calculating taxes at 37.20 if I recall correctly.

Texas Bill said:

Porfi!

You rant and disparage the IMF money suppliers as being greedy, no-good bastards; well if it weren't for them what would you have, huh???
Texas Bill

Click to expand...

Without the IMF I would have: A wealthy and thoroughly corrupt political class, poor infrastructure and an impoverished, hungry population deeply in debt.

With the IMF I have: An even more wealthy, powerful and thoroughly corrupt political class (thanks to your Dollars) fully capable of buying reelection without regard to spending, poor infrastucture and an impoverished, hungry population deeply in debt and now owing Dollars.

The great IMF-aided financial heist from the developing world makes the Robber Barons look like choirboys! I'm sorry, Texas, if they taught you differently back at Waco Junior High.

Porfi;

Gomen Nesia. I thought you were talking about the 'Greedy American Bankers" whom you accuse of charging exorbitant interest rates(12%) and who keep lending money to those whom you refer to as being local greedy bastards. Am I correct?
Regardless of everything said, I don't believe you have the big picture even now.
You are blaming too much on outside capital investors who have the right to charge a reasonable interest rate for the money they lend to already shacky economies through the medium of the IMF, the Worls Bank and other International lending agencies.
That the common people in the countries which borrow the money remain destitute is ,by no stretch of the imagination, the fault of the lender, but rather the fault of the borrowers. Or am I missing something??I don't call the lenders greedy. Perhaps a little stupid for continuing to loan money to a corrupt government/system who have proven that over and over again they're incapable of managing their finances.
Until the countries learn fiscal responsibility, they'll always need to borrow and borrow, somewhat like the average citizen of the USA who needs to learn the same lesson in managing personal finances.
And I didn't attend Waco Junior High.
And I'm not trying to make excuses for the IMF or anyone else, just a little teed off at your rhetoric, which I consider to be without substance or authority. You can bleed and blame all you want to, but the fact remains the problems are self-inflicted and not reallly caused by 'outside' forces.

Texas Bill

Texas,

You once admitted that the IMF essentially exists to pay the governments of poor countries to "play ball" with the US. Why now pretend that the IMF has some other beneficial purpose? Have you come out of retirement to join the USIA (a.k.a. CIA)?

All corporations, including JP Morgan and Citibank, are, necessarily, amoral. That is not to say that they are immoral. Obviously, their sole purpose is to seek profit. My point against the "financeers" is that it is only they and the corrupt political classes that benefit from this. Regular Dominicans, and even regular Americans, do not.

The predicament of the developing world, TO THE EXTENT THAT IT IS NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY INTERNATIONAL DEBT, is the result of two types of ignorance.

The first, which the Americans on this board make sure that nobody forgets, is the ignorance of the electorates in the developing world's "democracies". They allow the crooks to take office, steal the treasury and then enter into dollar loans to steal more - indebting the countries with no public benefit.

The second type of ignorance is that of Americans and many in the rest of the developed world who believe, as you have posted, that the IMF/World Bank exists to help the developing world and, overall, that IMF backed international debt is a good thing for poor countries. I believe you wrote something like "without the IMF, where would the DR be now", or something like that. And I wrote in response that the DR would be better off.

This ignorance is because Americans refuse to accept that there is an ongoing conspiracy whereby financial institutions lend money to known crooks in the developing world for unidentified or non-identified "projects" knowing full well that 80%, 90% or 100% of it will be stolen - giving crooked political leaders more power and money to continue corruption than they would have ever had otherwise if they could only borrow in their local currencies. The finanical institutions know that this will become "bad debt", but that the IMF will pay them back at the expense of the struggling peoples, who must pay back the debt over time through "austerity plans" that have no impact on the political class that stole the money in the first place.

Do you dispute that this is the result? Are you so blinded by your sense of American "rightness" that you cannot see it before your own eyes? Can you site an example of where the IMF has actually helped a Latin American country?

If the American people understood this, I believe they would be against it. In fact, ensuring the continual impoverishment of the developing world is only good for the financeers, and not for the American economy in general which would benefit from enhanced markets in Latin America.

Texas, I hope that, over time, your DR experience will give you a new perspective on the relationship between wealthy and poor countries.