Kobojunkie:


1) Where can I find this DIRECT IMF article you claim you read instead

2) I am NOT comparing Nigeria to China but simply putting forth the idea that if China can take advantage devaluation, then it is NOT EVIL to devaluate especially when you probably may need to since you cannot afford to keep propping up your currency

_{I'm not an economist -- just looking at this from a layman's angle since  . . .lol}

Kobo, your layman's view is wrong. First off we need to to understand what devaluation is all about. As we well know that it’s the reduction in the value of a country’s currency with respect to goods and services that one currency can be exchanged with. There is a direct relationship with “goods and services”; if you devalue without “goods and services” like China does, that would create an imbalance. When you produce goods and services, you devalue to attract buyers, which increase demand, and when demand goes up supply goes up as well increasing our money. As you can see, to encourage more demand we need foreign investment, and the more a foreign investor can buy, the more value we have.

manny4life:

As for my opinion on devaluation, Mr. Sanusi should not YIELD to the IMF; it's just a ploy. Nigeria DOESN'T HAVE a stable manufacturing base to offset the devaluating currency. They do that, when we are not manufacturing to export; that would definitely increase our trade deficits with no foreign investments and all we keep doing is borrowing into debt.

But is this really about the IMF?

The way I see it, it is likely the case that the Naira is overvalued and like some posters already explained, that is costing us money. So, why not let the value fall to where it ought to( forget the IMF's suggestion now), and then we can sought ourselves out then, rather than continue to throw money away trying to prop up the value of our naira?

manny4life:


Kobo, your layman's view is wrong. First off we need to to understand what devaluation is all about. As we well know that it’s the reduction in the value of a country’s currency with respect to goods and services that one currency can be exchanged with. There is a direct relationship with “goods and services”; if you devalue without “goods and services” like China does, that would create an imbalance. When you produce goods and services, you devalue to attract buyers, which increase demand, and when demand goes up supply goes up as well increasing our money. As you can see, to encourage more demand we need foreign investment, and the more a foreign investor can buy, the more value we have.

Wait a second. . . . as it stands, it is claimed that naira is currently OVERVALUED. If you stop propping it up, it falls -- well maybe not devaluation but I am sure there is a term for this. I don't get what you have above .

EzeUche_:

The IMF and World Bank destroyed many African economies through the SAPs. I will never forgive them for this. We are still feeling the effects of their policies that wrecked throughout the continent and cause many Africans to go hungry and lose their life savings. Our money became worthless!

They told us to open up our economies to free trade.

They told us to devalue our currency.

They told us to lower the allocation to our education and social programs.

They told us to stop subsidizing agricultural sectors.

They told us to privatize state owned industries.

Now what do we have to show for this? A county that has retrogressed, in which more people were wealthier in the past than now.

I never knew there are intelligent folks on here. IMF and World bank have 60% of the poverty problem in Africa today. To support your point on free trade - after independent, Africa agriculture grow-ed with 8% average every year. For instance Hydén (2005) notes that “between 1966 and 1970 net agricultural export from the region averaged 1.3 million tons per year” (148). Agriculture if you remember was the backbone of Africa's growth before the discovery of numerous resources.

IMF and World bank told us that free trade is the answer and we should stop given out incentive. The negative impact of SAP program was coated with unfair trade practices on the part of the EU and the United States. The Structural adjustment led to sequence of policy modification across Africa that favored subsidized U.S. and European Union agricultural dumping and Asian exporters over African farmers. Please understand that even this period America and Europe farmers remain the most subsidized farmers until date. Europe spend billions on subsidies, a British cattle for example is subsidized with 2 pounds everyday.

A chief economist of World Bank accepted that the program was a failure, in his words, “We did not think that the human costs of these programs could be so great, and the economic gains would be so slow in coming”

The IMF did not remove Soludo; Yar adua and his northern brothers did.

Under Soludo I was beginning to see how a country can grow economically without really manufacturing. His plan was to make Lagos and Nigeria the financial services hub in Africa where investments pour in.
It was working and beginning to take shape, but alas, Nigeria struck! Everything was tossed overboard.
Today, we still don't manufacture, and investors are fleeing Nigeria. The only choice now is to shore up the Naira with our oil receipts, which can never be enough.

That is where we are today! So, please unless someone can show me how IMF fired Soludo, I ain't buying it.

EzeUche_:

The reason why the IMF is saying this, is because the U.S. is getting worried about oil prices rising as the Arab world is going through a lot of problems. This of course will push crude prices into the sky. That is why they need Nigeria to devalue of currency, so they can purchase our oil cheaply.

GOD WILL BLESS YOUR FAMILY

It is not just about the arab world's problems, there are speculations that crude oil has peaked, even Saudis have come out to say that they overstated their oil reserve estimates. IMF wouldn't be recommending anything to us if we didn't have anything to offer, they don't have a history of helping any poor country in the long run.

Financial services is one field in which Nigeria can actually boast of having enough manpower and skills to challenge the best in the world. 
We could have created a Zurich in Nigeria through which all investments into Africa and even the world could be funneled.

That was Soludo's vision.

It was killed by Nigeria, not IMF.

Kobojunkie:

But is this really about the IMF?

The way I see it, it is likely the case that the Naira is overvalued and like some posters already explained, that is costing us money. So, why not let the value fall to where it ought to( forget the IMF's suggestion now), and then we can sought ourselves out then, rather than continue to throw money away trying to prop up the value of our naira?

I wouldn't say it's overvalued; however, I don't see how it's costing us because I've not seen any recent development. A currency that is overvalued can only cost a foreign buyer/exchanger if there's something to buy. We don't have anything, nor are you referring to oil? Let's sought ourselves out first, and then we set up our base before devaluing our currency. One of the reasons why we have one of the greatest foreign reserves (though it’s depleted) as compared to other African nations is because our money is holds value to the Gold standards. Bring down that value and you see reserves would deplete to the null (because surplus would go down), and when you don’t have exports (real exports) to balance and offset balance of trade (surplus), you are running into trade deficits.

Kobojunkie:


Wait a second. . . . as it stands, it is claimed that naira is currently OVERVALUED. If you stop propping it up, it falls -- well maybe not devaluation but I am sure there is a term for this. I don't get what you have above .

Overvalued, maybe that is because our Nigeria has trade surplus from oil but the moment you devalue naira, if shell use to buy 1 barrel for $50 (140 naira), devalue it by 5% point, they get N7 as their extra money and when you don't have goods and services to offset that N7, that becomes a trade deficit. Hope that makes sense, I was explaining why Nigeria needs manufacturing to offset devualuation (shock). The only way it's costing us as Nigerians is through inflation; devalue your currency and yes you would bring down inflation cost because more items can be bought for that same naira, but again when you don't have good (demand rising), do the math here and tell me what happens?

yeswecan:


I never knew there are intelligent folks on here. IMF and World bank have 60% of the poverty problem in Africa today. To support your point on free trade - after independent, Africa agriculture grow-ed with 8% average every year. For instance Hydén (2005) notes that “between 1966 and 1970 net agricultural export from the region averaged 1.3 million tons per year” (148). Agriculture if you remember was the backbone of Africa's growth before the discovery of numerous resources.

IMF and World bank told us that free trade is the answer and we should stop given out incentive. The negative impact of SAP program was coated with unfair trade practices on the part of the EU and the United States. The Structural adjustment led to sequence of policy modification across Africa that favored subsidized U.S. and European Union agricultural dumping and Asian exporters over African farmers. Please understand that even this period America and Europe farmers remain the most subsidized farmers until date. Europe spend billions on subsidies, a British cattle for example is subsidized with 2 pounds everyday.

A chief economist of World Bank accepted that the program was a failure, in his words, “We did not think that the human costs of these programs could be so great, and the economic gains would be so slow in coming”

Thank you! May your lineage be blessed my brothers. Instead of Africans seeing each other as enemies, we have to see ourselves as brothers in order to become a united front against the West conquest of Africa's resources. They used their agents, The World Bank and IMF to push their agenda. Anyone who has not noticed should look no further than our very own nation.

Maybe this article should drive home the point of how the SAPs caused many problems in Africa.

Experience of SAP's

In Sub-Saharan Africa and South America, where these IMF prescriptions have been rigorously adopted for the past two decades, one would be hard pressed to find any country better off today as a result of these programs (22-25). Most of the countries that have adopted these programs have seen their foreign debt increase astronomically, unemployment and poverty rates have risen, the foreign investment that was supposed to flood their countries has never materialized and trade terms have deteriorated (26-29).  Capital inflows in the form of Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) had, according to the IMF, “fallen to a historic low of 0.22 percent of donor GNP by 1997” (30).

Prior to the 1970's, the total outstanding debt of developing countries was approximately US$62 billion. In 1996, after nearly two decades of widespread implementation of SAPs, the foreign debt had risen to US$2 trillion (9). Yet the IMF is still imposing SAPs (8,9,13).

In Uganda, which is frequently cited by the IMF as a success story, the debt servicing in 2000 was almost twice as much as expenditures on health and infrastructure and 10 times more than for the agricultural sector (31). After two decades of SAPs, the debt-to-export ratio is still double the amount deemed sustainable by the IMF (31). The only gain is in the education sector where, in the year 2000, education expenditure amounted to twice that of debt servicing  (22,31,32).  However, the gains achieved in the education sector in Uganda are not representative of the experience of most Sub-Saharan countries that have undergone SAPs.  The WB asserts that compared to the 1980’s, per capita expenditure on education decreased in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin American countries that implemented SAPs (33).

On the other hand, countries that resisted SAPs have prospered and improved the lives of their population. The Asian Miracle of the past three decades that has put countries like China, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia at the economic forefront was achieved precisely because these countries avoided adopting IMF prescriptions in the form of SAPs (13).

Contrary to IMF mandates, the governments of these countries played a major role in all aspects of development (13). They instituted high tariffs, let state-owned industries flourish, invested in education and health, and adopted trade liberalization after strengthening their industries (13).  The U.S. and Europe followed similar paths to achieve their current prosperous status (9,13).  During the Great Depression, the U.S. disassociated the dollar from the IMF’s gold standard, instituted steep import tariffs and allowed its industries to flourish before opening its doors to foreign competition and the international trading system (9).

This same strategy applied to Europe. At the end of the Second World War, Europe benefited from the U.S. Marshall Plan, which poured over US$13 billion dollars into rebuilding its economy (9).  Europe followed the path that the U.S. had taken during the Great Depression ensuring the survival and prosperity of its industries when it eventually opened its doors to the international trading system (9,13).

In am ready to take the other side of the argument that Niara needs to be strengthened not weakened. Like manny4life rightfully pointed out: the only ready why foreign reserve is an issue is because of the strength of the Naira in relative to other Africa currency, if it lost its value reserve will deflate fast.  

Oil seems to be our problems it's propping up this false growth (IMF are only concerned with statistics- read the report and the growth fugues keep coming up like it is real growth ) and leave the government with less incentive to develop other sector "after all they can sell oil and make money" The government isn't concerned about tax, oil is there to bring revenue. We are occupied on how to spend money not how to create them. Oil is just like foreign aid to me - it is a real problem in Nigeria today.

manny4life:

Overvalued, maybe that is because our Nigeria has trade surplus from oil but the moment you devalue naira, if shell use to buy 1 barrel for $50 (140 naira), devalue it by 5% point, they get N7 as their extra money and when you don't have goods and services to offset that N7, that becomes a trade deficit. Hope that makes sense, I was explaining why Nigeria needs manufacturing to offset devualuation (shock). The only way it's costing us as Nigerians is through inflation; devalue your currency and yes you would bring down inflation cost because more items can be bought for that same naira, but again when you don't have good (demand rising), do the math here and tell me what happens

Again, Price of Oil is set in dollars, not in Naira.

If you believe that it is possible that our naira is Overvalued, do you not see how that could actually be costing us some?

The IMF's suggestion is just that -- a suggestion at this point but we are missing billions from our reserves and it is because of the value of our naira.

I found this article on the cost of doing such in Brazil back in 2008 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10709

^^^ I agree with you 100%

To follow up on EzeUche "how is it that they are promoting free trade in Africa while closing their market to Africa Exporters?

Mark Malloch Brown, former head of the United Nations Development Program, estimated that farm subsidies cost Africa countries about USD$50 billion a year in lost agricultural exports: "It is the extraordinary distortion of global trade, where the West spends $360 billion a year on protecting its agriculture with a network of subsidies and tariffs that costs developing countries about US$50 billion in potential lost agricultural exports. Fifty billion dollars is the equivalent of today's level of development assistance."

United State is in the forefront of free market promoters yet spends the highest amount of subsidy on farmers that any other country on earth. In fact, after introducing reforms to reduce subsidies in 1996, the United States has since increased its level of protectionism. The 2002 farm bill further increased federal subsidies—to some farmers by more than 80 percent. Across the Atlantic, France, Spain, Ireland, and Portugal have resisted changes to the European Union’s broad agreement on farmer payments, known as the common agricultural policy (CAP).

Agriculture and fisheries subsidies receive over 40% of European Union budget. As the EU budget is around €120 billion, this means that €48 billion is spent on these subsidies, or about 0.3% of the entire EU's GDP. Since 1992, the EU's Common Agricultural Policy has undergone major change as subsidies have been decoupled from production. About €30 billion is spent as direct support for farmers (the Single Farm Payment). The next major reform of the CAP is scheduled to run from 2013. The OECD estimates that EU market price supports in 2002 exceeded $57 billion. EU producer support costs (in cluding subsidies, tariffs, and other protectionist measures) in 2002 came to over $100 billion, compared to about $40 billion for the United States. Oxfam recently estimated that British taxpayers alone pay £3.9 billion ($7 billion) per year to maintain the CAP.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture paid out over $12 billion in subsidies in 2002. The OECD estimates that the cost of U.S. market price supports for agricultural products—which include tariffs, quotas,and price guarantees—amounted to over $15 billion in 2002.

Currently, the United States pays around $20 billion per year to farmers in direct subsidies as "farm income stabilization" via U.S. farm bills. These bills date back to the economic turmoil of the Great Depression with 1922 Grain Futures Act, the 1929 Agricultural Marketing Act and the 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act creating a tradition of government support.

For every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion.

Top states for direct farm subsidies in US include Iowa ($501 million), Illinois ($454 million), and Texas ($397 million). Direct payments of subsidies are limited to $40,000 per person or $80,000 per couple.

America operates the highest Agricultural protectionism the world has ever known. In the 2002, Farm Bill for every bushel of wheat sold farmers were paid an extra 52 cents and guaranteed a price of 3.86 from 2002–03 and 3.92 from 2004–2007. That is, if the price of wheat in 2002 was 3.80 farmers would get an extra 58 cents per bushel (52 cents plus the $0.06 price difference)

Kobojunkie:

Again, Price of Oil is set in dollars, not in Naira.

If you believe that it is possible that our naira is Overvalued, do you not see how that could actually be costing us some?

I found this article on the cost of doing such in Brazil back in 2008 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10709

Ms/Mrs. Kobo, don't you think I know price of Oil is traded in $$$?  

It is in dollars because $$$ is a common trading currency, not because it's mandatory they have to trade in $$$. When you devalue your currency, on the international exchange rate/platform, it would affect the Naira. At devaluation, just because you buy oil in $$$ does not mean you cannot buy it for lesser $$$. Like I stated above (thought you would have caught it), assuming the devalue at 5% points and oil was bout @ $50 per barrel for (140 Naira), it would give them more buying oil companies more buying power (that’s what devaluation does) for the same $50 they can buy 1.1 barrel or 1barrel of less than $50. However you choose to put, it comes up the same answer. Now because Nigeria belongs to OPEC; that might not be the real case, but I was giving an example using oil companies.

OAM4J:

Am surprised we are spending more time debating the recommended solutions from IMF without debating at the real issues themselves.

At the time of oil boom, fact remains that we are spending far more than our earnings - WHY?

What exactly are we spending our earnings on? What do we have to show for it?

Why & What justification does CBN has in using the reserve to stabilise the Naira?

Something is definitely wrong somewhere, and until we we deal with the real cancer eating our economy, we will just be addressing the symptoms with kids' gloves

That is the real question but until these questions are addressed, devaluing it causes more harm than good. It does no good at all to the economy. What are we producing? What are we servicing? How do we encourage foreign investments and development? How do we increase surpluses to our reserve? Until we fix ourselves and get rid our “devils” following suit would only cause disaster and Mr. Sanusi and former CBN Governor knows that.

manny4life:

Ms/Mrs. Kobo, don't you think I know price of Oil is traded in $$$?  

It is in dollars because $$$ is a common trading currency, not because it's mandatory they have to trade in $$$. When you devalue your currency, on the international exchange rate/platform, it would affect the Naira. At devaluation, just because you buy oil in $$$ does not mean you cannot buy it for lesser $$$. Like I stated above (thought you would have caught it), assuming the devalue at 5% points and oil was bout @ $50 per barrel for (140 Naira), it would give them more buying oil companies more buying power (that’s what devaluation does) for the same $50 they can buy 1.1 barrel or 1barrel of less than $50. However you choose to put, it comes up the same answer. Now because Nigeria belongs to OPEC; that might not be the real case, but I was giving an example using oil companies.

Don't give me a lecture. Please just focus on the questions asked.

OAM4J:

Am surprised we are spending more time debating the recommended solutions from IMF without debating at the real issues themselves.

At the time of [b]oil boom, fact remains that we are spending far more than[b] our earnings[/b] - WHY?

What exactly are we spending our earnings on? What do we have to show for it?

Why & What justification does CBN has in using the reserve to stabilise the Naira?

Something is definitely wrong somewhere, and until we we deal with the real cancer eating our economy, we will just be addressing the symptoms with kids' gloves[/b]

Everything is wrong.

Our earning - my friend we have no real earnings. What we have is money derived from sale of our resources. Tell me a powerfull economy that achieved real growth - not figures- from selling off resources. Russia never really experienced growth until it moved into Production, now she is part of of emerging world not because of her gas but production and sales. Even all through the cold war years Russia was never an economic power because all she does was sell off resources without creating wealth.  Creation of wealth is what empowers the people, what creates the bourgeois needed to drive the economy. you sell off resources and share the money among governor and senators - use less than10 % of the amount sold for development and you are talking about economy. Economy is the system of production and distribution and consumption, we have none.  Don't be deceived.

We have to start allover again. Yes we need true capitalism in Nigeria where government gets out of the way and allow those who owns the oil sell them and pay tax for it, create policies that will make people flourish. The government needs to be hungry for the people's tax not people's resources.

manny4life:

That is the real question but until these questions are addressed, devaluing it causes more harm than good. It does no good at all to the economy. What are we producing? What are we servicing? How do we encourage foreign investments and development? How do we increase surpluses to our reserve? Until we fix ourselves and get rid our “devils” following suit would only cause disaster and Mr. Sanusi and former CBN Governor knows that.

Please re-read his question, take time to understand the question a bit more.

Kobojunkie:

Don't give me a lecture. Please just focus on the questions asked.

Yes Ms. Kobo, NO MORE LECTURE.

Kobojunkie:

Please re-read his question, take time to understand the question a bit more. 

Whose question? Please rephrase the question again? I have been responding to you all along, but I will be more than glad to know what question you're talking about.

@OAM4J's question, something similar to what I have been asking all this while.  We have lost billions to keeping the naira where it is and yes, we have not been producing any real goods or services either. Why continue to loose these billions? Why not let the naira fall as it would.

manny4life:

That is the real question but until these questions are addressed, devaluing it causes more harm than good. It does no good at all to the economy. What are we producing? What are we servicing? How do we encourage foreign investments and development? [/b]How do we increase surpluses to our reserve? Until we fix ourselves and get rid our “devils” following suit would only cause disaster and Mr. Sanusi and[b] former CBN Governor knows that.

Most of you are allergic to the truth. You conveniently avoided the issues I raised and now you are trying to blame Soludo through the back door! You people are incorrigible.

Soludo wanted to create a financial services hub in Nigeria. He started by growing the banks and having them venture into Africa and beyond. He was trying to grow an industry in which Nigeria can boast of skills. Our economy could have done that, but alas it was not meant to be. Suddenly Sanusi comes in and scares the living daylight out of investors and destroys the banks, acting out of incongruous and unnecessary puritanism.

Today, that industry is limping and Nigeria lost an opportunity.

Blaming IMF has been our favorite past time. When are we going to tell ourselves the truth about Nigeria?  

Onlytruth:

Most of you are allergic to the truth. You conveniently avoided the issues I raised and now you are trying to blame Soludo through the back door! You people are incorrigible.

Soludo wanted to create a financial services hub in Nigeria. He started by growing the banks and having them venture into Africa and beyond. He was trying to grow an industry in which Nigeria can boast of skills. Our economy could have done that, but alas it was not meant to be. Suddenly Sanusi comes in and scares the living daylight out of investors and destroys the banks, acting out of incongruous and unnecessary puritanism.

Today, that industry is limping and Nigeria lost an opportunity.

Blaming IMF has been our favorite past time. When are we going to tell ourselves the truth about Nigeria?

I am not blaming anyone, I merely saying the truth from what I see. Mr. Soludo did, previous years back, but now CBN is not in his hands, is it? The truth remains what is Nigerian servicing or producing? If Nigeria is producing, what % level of our output represents foreign investment in our GDP?

Im very bad in economics. Please can someone explain in laymans language what the o.p is saying?

manny4life:


I am not blaming anyone, I merely saying the truth from what I see. Mr. Soludo did, previous years back, but now CBN is not in his hands, is it? The truth remains what is Nigerian servicing or producing? If Nigeria is producing, what % level of our output represents foreign investment in our GDP?

That is the only issue here as far as i am concern.

Kobojunkie:

@OAM4J's question, something similar to what I have been asking all this while.  We have lost billions to keeping the naira where it is and yes, we have not been producing any real goods or services either. Why continue to loose these billions? Why not let the naira fall as it would.

I believe I have answered the same question previously. We lose billions because we don't have any revenues let alone earnings at all from export to balance our trade. @yeswecan answered most part of it. The sale of oil isn't a true source of earnings; it's just revenue. If I begin to explain now u would say I'm lecturing. Nigeria has no earnings (profit) is zero. Unless the govt starts earning (taxes, foreign devs, developments, investments, etc) other than sale of oil, we would continue to plummet and borrow etc. If the Naira fall, then you would wish the worse never happened.

manny4life:


I am not blaming anyone, I merely saying the truth from what I see. Mr. Soludo did, previous years back, but now CBN is not in his hands, is it? The truth remains what is Nigerian servicing or producing? If Nigeria is producing, what % level of our output represents foreign investment in our GDP?

When Soludo was there, he figured it was not within his power to provide constant electricity which would empower manufacturers and improve exports; so he set out to do what he can as a CBN governor and former chief economic adviser to the president. He decided to create A NEW GLOBAL INDUSTRY in Nigeria - THE BANKS.

To support his strategy, he proposed the "Strategic Initiative on the Naira" which basically means to revalue the currency and make it the currency of reference in Africa. He was trying to dodge all these international traps and place Nigeria on a pedestal of world leadership. The man had ambition and vision.

Guess how Nigeria responded? They yanked him off his job and replaced him with a clueless mallam.

Today, all Soludo's fears are materializing. We still don't produce, and we are defending the value of the Naira with our scarce foreign exchange.

What a country!  

LoveKing:

Im very bad in economics. Please can someone explain in laymans language what the o.p is saying?

The issue at hand of what @op is saying that IMF wants Nigeria to devalue its currency (reducing the value of Naira) so that inflation can drop to about 9% to stimulate growth. Meanwhile, growth has been estimatedly reported to be at 7% of our GDP (Gross Development Prodcut) aka the amount that a country produces.

However, Devaluation has a indirect relationship with GDP aka goods and services produced. Before you devalue, you want to make sure you have enough goods and services producing base.

Kobojunkie:

@OAM4J's question, something similar to what I have been asking all this while.  We have lost billions to keeping the naira where it is and yes, we have not been producing any real goods or services either. Why continue to loose these billions? Why not let the naira fall as it would.

Can you explain to me how we lost billions by keeping Naira where it is? There is a difference in saying "we are losing billions" and "we will gain billions".

The truth is that folks on here don't understand the concept of money in economic sense. Money refers to the volume of economic activities not paper form. You can print paper money like Zimbabwe  and remain poor.

manny4life:

I believe I have answered the same question previously. We lose billions because we don't have any revenues let alone earnings at all from export to balance our trade. @yeswecan answered most part of it. The sale of oil isn't a true source of earnings; it's just revenue. If I begin to explain now u would say I'm lecturing. Nigeria has no earnings (profit) is zero. Unless the govt starts earning (taxes, foreign devs, developments, investments, etc) other than sale of oil, we would continue to plummet and borrow etc. If the Naira fall, then you would wish the worse never happened.

Did you read the article at all? We had Billions in reserves but we lost them to propping up the naira. I don't believe you are answering the question at all and @Yeswecan's rant on how the IMF is to blame is unacceptable as answer to what @OAMJ asked.

Don't lecture me, just answer the questions. Or should I say that your answers so far do not seem to be making sense to me considering the much I know of the situation.