As I understand it, the International Monetary Fund provides two services:

1) Help nations convert their local currency to foreign currency in order to export and import goods
2) Loan money to nations

They are usually lumped together with the World Trade Organization, but I'm not familiar with specific ties to WTO. Whenever they meet, anti-globalists stage protests. What are they protesting? Is the IMF anything more than a service that nations may freely engage? Is there some coercion that forces nations to use the IMF that I'm not aware of?

As I understand it, the International Monetary Fund provides two services:

1) Help nations convert their local currency to foreign currency in order to export and import goods
2) Loan money to nations

They are usually lumped together with the World Trade Organization, but I'm not familiar with specific ties to WTO. Whenever they meet, anti-globalists stage protests. What are they protesting? Is the IMF anything more than a service that nations may freely engage? Is there some coercion that forces nations to use the IMF that I'm not aware of?

Two reasons. First, there are still anti-capitalists out there who see this as imperialism. In order to get assistance, the IMF requires economic reform. Apparently, it is better that people starve and nations stagnate than it is for McDonalds and Starbucks to set up shop. Not that that is going to happen very soon in some of these places, but you have to think long term. Once the greedy capitalists get a foothold in a country, somewhere down the line there will be total enslavement of the population.

Second, the World Bank and IMF make loans, and loans have to be repaid. There are many out there who demand that World Bank and IMF cancel the debt of the world's impoverished nations.

When I lived in Paris, I got to tour the World Bank. It's just an office building. No tellers. No ATMs. No safety deposit boxes.

The first reason could conceivably make sense, from a anti-capitalist point of view, but the second reason seems irrational to me. A bank provides a service (loan), which comes with a fee (interest). Everyone knows the exact terms when signing the dotted line.

The first reason could conceivably make sense, from a anti-capitalist point of view, but the second reason seems irrational to me. A bank provides a service (loan), which comes with a fee (interest). Everyone knows the exact terms when signing the dotted line.
"The World Bank Group’s mission is to fight poverty and improve the living standards of people in the developing world. It is a development Bank which provides loans, policy advice, technical assistance and knowledge sharing services to low and middle income countries to reduce poverty. The Bank promotes growth to create jobs and to empower poor people to take advantage of these opportunities."

It's not as simple and straight ahead as a car loan. The World Bank doesn't exist in theory to make profits for shareholders.

As I understand it, the International Monetary Fund provides two services:

1) Help nations convert their local currency to foreign currency in order to export and import goods
2) Loan money to nations

They are usually lumped together with the World Trade Organization, but I'm not familiar with specific ties to WTO. Whenever they meet, anti-globalists stage protests. What are they protesting? Is the IMF anything more than a service that nations may freely engage? Is there some coercion that forces nations to use the IMF that I'm not aware of?

To really understand why poeple protest against the IMF, WTO and World bank, you must first understand what money is and how it is valued or more appropriately devalued. You're probably thinking $10 is $10, but not really $10 today is not the same as $10 5 years ago or 10, 20, 50 years ago. To complex to go into here but bascially the value of money is manipulated by banks (mainly national banks like our Federal Reserve bank becasue they have the power to create money as well as by the World Bank and IMF because they have large influence in foreign currency exchanges). The WTO is used to establish laws on trade and along with the World Bank and IMF to enable/enforce policies within a country (and not via any democratic process) so that foreign "investment" can take place and improve the country's economy. What really happens is that foreign imvestments do happen like buying large sections of natural resources or major financial institutions but very little of the profit (if any) from these "investments" stay in the country. But rather captial, resource and the country's wealth are sucked out of the country.

For example in Argentina (I've forgotten exact dates and names), they took an IMF loan (oh I didn't mention yet that the politicians are usually corrupt too and make out like bandits in the scam as well) and had to "open up" their economy to foreign investments. Investments came and bought the major bank chains as well as companies invovled with natual resources like fish, cattle and probably some gold, diamonds too but I think their main exports are beef and fish. With the IMF finger on exchange rates they (the foreign investors) can now pay very little for the beef and fish in Argentina and make lots of profit in selling the beef and fish in EU (which they do). The Argentine peso used to be 1:1 with the USD. In I think it was in 2002, the major banks decided to no longer value the peso 1:1 with the USD and overnight made the ratio 1.4:1 (peso/dollar). They kept peoples bank accounts in pesos but made any loans (like a mortgage) in dollars. So before, if you had say $10k in the bank and $100k on loan it was the same value in pesos or dollars. After the peso devaluation you would have $7k peso in the bank and $140k pesos in loan. Nice. Can almost here that sucking sound. Also the exchange rate went to like 3:1 by years end.

Anyway if you look at the history of the involvment of the IMF with poor countries those countries are still poor or poorer. Its just a scam to keep them poor and rob them of any wealth they generate.

Happens here (US) too. Every dollar you make starts to lose value as soon as you cash your check. Which is why you can work hard all your life and still be **** poor when you die.

Oh forget to mention that those foreign investors can also be the same investors in banks that make up the World Bank or IMF or national bank. Want to be an investor in our Federal Reserve bank? Buy stock in Bank of NY or any major bank cause they elect who sits on the board. Only the chairman is choosen by the prez and it is only he who needs to give a report to house, congress and prez.

I haven't splained a lot cause its rather complex but hopefully its enough for you to do your own investigation.

It sounds to me like people are more upset at the world bank than the IMF, which simply facilitates the process. I have followed the Argentina situation, but it seems like a poor business practice to make it hard for your customer to pay back the loan, or potentially default.

The points you make about the changing value of money is one I've read and thought on for years. I consider inflation to be a hidden sort of tax. Concerning monetary policy, I'm a little old fashioned in that I think a nation's money should be founded on hard currency (gold, for example) rather than pure trust in the treasury department. The latter has the capacity to print more money, thereby diluting the value of outstanding dollars. But alas, all modern money is based on trust.

It sounds to me like people are more upset at the world bank than the IMF, which simply facilitates the process. I have followed the Argentina situation, but it seems like a poor business practice to make it hard for your customer to pay back the loan, or potentially default.

The points you make about the changing value of money is one I've read and thought on for years. I consider inflation to be a hidden sort of tax. Concerning monetary policy, I'm a little old fashioned in that I think a nation's money should be founded on hard currency (gold, for example) rather than pure trust in the treasury department. The latter has the capacity to print more money, thereby diluting the value of outstanding dollars. But alas, all modern money is based on trust.

You're a little confused on the Treasury Dept. and the Fed. The Treasury Dept. does not have the power to print more money. The Fed can. Treasury only protects the money from conterfeiting or from someone not wanting to use it as legal tender (this doesn't happen anymore). They also protect the prez. Treasury does not have a say in the setting of interests rates. Nor how much money is passed through the "discount window" (which is a loan between banks). BTW, loans are listed as assets and deposits are listed as liabilities. Loans bring in revenue from the interest charged, and Banks have to pay interests on deposits. So from a banks balance sheet perspective you want more loans than deposits. When the money given out for loans (in any form) is more than deposits money is created and hence dilution occurs.

Treasury does sell bonds to meet government budget requirments. But this is a loan in which the Treasury (well more like we the people) pay interests on (i.e., the bond yield).

So the major ways our money is diluted is from Treasury bonds and from the "discount window" which has no limits placed on it. The Fed decides what it wants, or in other words the banks decide what they want. Which makes it easy to create a bubble (like the tech bubble of a few years ago) because they can make it really cheap to get the loan but in addition to that (which often gets overlooked by the news) they can change the requirements for the loan. The requirements being what is needed to get the loan or in other words and put simply how good someones credit rating needs to be to get a loan (even though individuals generally not invovled here but other banks and corporations). Tough requirements means its hard to get the loan but the loan will most likely get paid back. Easy requirements means just about anyone can get money. Which is how they create bubbles. And why create bubbles you ask. Cause they are money making opportunities on the way up and the way down. Also the whole time the finance industry is cleaning up with all the fees generated. This is a good time to point out all the deregualtion that happened in the finance industry in the 90s where banks can now own brokerage houses and insurance companies. Makes this process easier.

Btw, take a look at a US dollar (any denomination). It clearly states it is a Federal Bank Note (which dispite its word "Federal" is NOT a part of the government but a collection of banks) and it only has a seal from the Treasury stating that it is legal tender and given nothing else has legal tender we must use it or be put in jail.

Ok, I've gone on enough and maybe rambled a bit. But again there should be enough here for you to put the picture together with google and some books.

When you refer to the Fed, are you talking about the Federal Reserve?

The IMF sets conditions for it's help, and sometimes those conditions don't keep the best interests of the countrie's population in mind. Take as an example Argentina about 2-3 years ago. Most of that fiscal mess was caused by lousy advice from the IMF and the World bank.

When you refer to the Fed, are you talking about the Federal Reserve?

I guess you don't watch any financial news channels. Yes, the Federal Reserve Bank... aka the Fed. Although Bank of U.S.A. would be a better name.