by wutang » Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:59 am
jra wrote:Anyway. Robert Mugabe pretty well destroyed Zimbabwe and I doubt many will be sorry to hear he's snuffed it.
TBF as much as Mugabe was a piece of shit the destruction of Zimbabwe was as much a result of the IMF/World Bank as anyone else (of course Mugabe was more than happy to implement their policies)
Loans from the IMF and World Bank in 1991 came with Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs). The IMF’s SAP for Zimbabwe required reducing trade tariffs and import duties, eliminating foreign currency controls, removing protections for the manufacturing sector, deregulating the labour market, lowering the minimum wage, ending employment security, cutting the fiscal deficit, reducing the tax rate and deregulating financial markets. Initially the country implemented these measures, however, they brought “massive closures of companies,” leading to increased poverty and unemployment. 25% of public workers were laid off and unemployment reached between 35% and 50% in 1997. By 1999, 68% of the population was living on less than $2 a day and with the collapse of wages many workers lived far below the poverty line. 3
WHo would have though that de-regulation, cutting social security, and tax cuts for the rich would end up massively fucking over the poor and driving large numbers into poverty
Cant think of any other examples of that happening
[quote="jra"]
Anyway. Robert Mugabe pretty well destroyed Zimbabwe and I doubt many will be sorry to hear he's snuffed it.
[/quote]
TBF as much as Mugabe was a piece of shit the destruction of Zimbabwe was as much a result of the IMF/World Bank as anyone else (of course Mugabe was more than happy to implement their policies)
[quote]Loans from the IMF and World Bank in 1991 came with Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs). The IMF’s SAP for Zimbabwe required reducing trade tariffs and import duties, eliminating foreign currency controls, removing protections for the manufacturing sector, deregulating the labour market, lowering the minimum wage, ending employment security, cutting the fiscal deficit, reducing the tax rate and deregulating financial markets. Initially the country implemented these measures, however, they brought “massive closures of companies,” leading to increased poverty and unemployment. 25% of public workers were laid off and unemployment reached between 35% and 50% in 1997. By 1999, 68% of the population was living on less than $2 a day and with the collapse of wages many workers lived far below the poverty line. 3[/quote]
WHo would have though that de-regulation, cutting social security, and tax cuts for the rich would end up massively fucking over the poor and driving large numbers into poverty :doomed:
Cant think of any other examples of that happening :dunno:
