Miercurea trecuta am scris urmatoarele in Financial Times
William Rhodes may be right to call for International Monetary Fund intervention (November 15), but he does so for the wrong reasons. He calls on the IMF to “rekindle its old strengths and glory” as a powerful central authority capable of dealing with the current eurozone quagmire. There is abundant evidence that associates the economic reforms pushed by the IMF in Latin America during the 1980s with the ill-famed “lost decade” in this region, rather than with the sustainable growth he claims.
The call for a massive IMF intervention in the eurozone may merit support, not for what the IMF was in the 1980s but for what the IMF seems poised to become. Indeed, through its recent endorsement of the use of macroeconomic activism in surplus countries, the IMF may be the last hope for those who want to save the euro from the scissors of its own designers.”
Ce am vrut sa spun?
Abordarea europeana este atat de conservatoare (austeritate, austeritate, austeritate) ca FMI apare ca singurul actor cu influenta si resurse reale pentru a impinge tarile cu excedente inspre adoptarea de pachete de stimulare fiscala a economiei. Iata dovada aici: