enyojo:

Yes. That is the principle that made the few banking lords become Billionaires while it rendered shareholders and the poor depositors and the vulnerable 'micro' stocks buyers highly indebted and poorer.

bidemi12:

I am sorry for you. you are starting an arguement you will never win with kobojunkie. she will tire you out with sheer staying power and stamina. strong as hell.

bidemi12:

I am sorry for you. you are starting an arguement you will never win with kobojunkie. she will tire you out with sheer staying power and stamina. strong as hell.

Stogwu123:

pdP Don finish nigeria. wat a great pity

bidemi12:

I am sorry for you. you are starting an arguement you will never win with kobojunkie. she will tire you out with sheer staying power and stamina. strong as hell.

enyojo:

Yes. That is the principle that made the few banking lords become Billionaires while it rendered shareholders and the poor depositors and the vulnerable 'micro' stocks buyers highly indebted and poorer.

Kobojunkie:

. . . .  The same principle the banking system has been built on for THOUSANDS of years though. So feigning ignorance ONLY when we Fail to use it the best way, is probably not against the banks but against us. I mean these banking rules were not made to SPITE "the poor" since the same rules APPLY across the BOARD. So why is it that when "the POOR" take out these loans, and then fail to use them appropriately, people still pretend the banks are to blame? Aren't we too old for this whine-fest at this point?

manny4life:

Although I agree with some of your theory; however, I strongly disagree with some of it. The question isn't about the banking policies rather the control of funds. Different banks have different borrowing policies for different classes of individual or companies / organizations or nations. Borrowing are based upon credit ratings and risk factors so therefore borrowing policies and repayment terms quite differ across the board with respect to that. If Nigeria has a high risk factor, there's a higher possibility that it will default on it's loan; there are risk contractual measures and obligations set in place to address default such as the lender decide to disburse money directly to the company getting the project rather than  the borrower. This kind of lending practice is most common in mortgage or student loan lending.

Kobojunkie:

. . . .  The same principle the banking system has been built on for THOUSANDS of years though. So feigning ignorance ONLY when we Fail to use it the best way, is probably not against the banks but against us. I mean these banking rules were not made to SPITE "the poor" since the same rules APPLY across the BOARD. So why is it that when "the POOR" take out these loans, and then fail to use them appropriately, people still pretend the banks are to blame? Aren't we too old for this whine-fest at this point?

manny4life:

Now back to what @enyojo said, if I'm saying correctly, and just like few argued, when funds are disbursed, a good amount of the money are awarded to western contractors for the proposed projects which does not directly create jobs or wealth to the nation, and the cycle spins again putting that nation back to ground 0 which result to default on debt.

Just to cap it all, lending is not a one size fits all,

Kobojunkie:

You are essentially repeating what I have above,only trying to make it seem it is different. What you have above is what we know as part of the principle behind the banking system and none of that is new -- much of it has been in place for thousands of years -- nothing new.

Again, I don't agree with what you state above, but AGAIN these practices ARE NOT NEW . . . They have been there for centuries. Why are the banks to blame for when "the poor" countries go out to TAKE LOANS that they know they are highly likely to default on, and will not work for them. That ought to be the question.

manny4life:
Nations take loans out because they are desperate, they are cash strapped and they need the money even when they know it costly but the cost in the short term is negligible as opposed to long term.

manny4life:

When these poor nations take out these deceptive loans, they probably enter into these contract for a short period of less than 5- 10 years on the hopes to pay back because these banks tell them all sweet stuff they want to hear, even offer them the so-called loan counseling etc and some do not discuss long range options particularly in default stage.

manny4life:

So when the egg goes bad, banks deceptive practice comes to play. Unless you have a strong binding mutual agreement, banks change their policies at any time to suit their needs and pocket their profit.

manny4life:

So unless you had a long range default plan with them, yes they will change their policies and that's how poor nations get poorer and even loose resources. IMO that's wrong and deceptive.

Sagewood:

I don't believe World Bank / IMF. They can conjure up baseless data obtained fraudulently for all I care. What were the criteria they used in measuring economic development index? Are these meaures objective? IMF can interpret any data in anyway they want, their track record is abysmal to say the least. Name one country in the world that allowed World Bank / IMF to loan them money and intervene in their economic policy and they came out of the arrangement unscathed. Check their records for yourselves and make up your mind if IMF/ World Bank truly care about world development or world domination via indebtedness.

OPEN LETTER TO PROF. (MADAM) OKONJO IWEALA

Madam Professor,can you kindly tell your successor finance minister Olusegun Aganga that no country have ever borrowed its way into prosperity.Brazil and to an extent Argentina are what they are  today when they stopped the frivolous accumulation of foreign debts to finance dubious "infrastructure projects".It is very very sad that Aganga says he shall keep borrowing until he has reached a debt to GDP ratio of atleast 25%.He obviously does not understand the deep meaning of the word "debt trap".Please tell Mr. Aganga how difficult and near impossible it was to liquidate these foreign debts when you achieved that feat that reverberated around the world.Infact, the creditor nations donot want Nigeria to ever be debt free.If you and your team had not laboured night and day to repay those debts, would Aganga still be talking about reaching the so called debt to GDP ratio of 25% ? Would he not have found alternative ways to finance whatever " infrastructural projects" without borrowing from other countries that have managed their resources well? Some of whom are fellow OPEC countries?
Please ask Mr. Aganga why he needs to borrow so much money when oil prices have remained above $100 dollars/barrel and he has already depleted the external reserve you built to a whopping $62 billion to a mere $32 billion dollars today.Yet,there is no single project in Nigeria to show for the spent $30 billion dollars and all the debts already accumulated so far. What does he need all these unnecessary foreign loans for when he could not convert the $30 billion already withdrawn from the external reserve into concrete economic infrastructure?

enyojo:

The problem i have with our government is appointing WORLD BANK/IMF SPIES all in the name of hiring Foreign based Nigerian Technocrats.
Olusegun Aganga was loaned to Nigeria from them (So I heard). Ngozi was more diplomatic in her own case. But aganga is so shameless! So many times he has appeared before Senate defending the need to take more loans!!

I found this nice write-up on Vuaguard Online Newspaper as a comment by a Reader.:

enyojo:

FOWL NYASH DON EXPOSE, SO NO HIDDING PLACE FOR THEM GEJ FANATICS.

enyojo:

Rolling on the floor!!

Donlittle:

A failure is destined to be a failure, that man has failed nigeria and as i they see am so, so many that will be install will fail nigeria!!!
what a doomed generation of politicians
the politicians of this last decades, failed nigeria, they failed africa, and they failed us the future generation.
their ERa needs to be wiped off
shameless politician

asorocker:

Why blame Aganga, how about good for nothing CBN governor whose only achievement was to discredit the work of his predecessor , uptill now he has not managed to do anything new in the banking sector he keeps promising that banks will be sold , where as the 9 banks do not loan any money they just keep servicing over heads,

GEJ should bring back those who made the economic index grow during OBJ tenure if he wants to make any economic headway by 2015.

Kobojunkie:

[b]If you really believe the above line, then why is the bank to share the blame?
[/b]I say Bull  . . . because one can argue that countries, even poor ones, that took IMF loans and used it successfully, were also fed the same sweet stuff you claim the banks feed these "poor" nations. You do know that NOT ALL poor countries take out LOANS and then FAIL to accomplish much ith it?


What egg goes bad? No one one Nation can claim IGNORANCE of the consequences of defaulting on these loans, I am sorry. Not one.  For instance, with what just happened with the banks and the loan defaulting, I bet you there are thousands of people who have even after all that quagmire, taken out loans and then turned around to blame the banks when they default or are unable to pay back. So, again, I ask, why are we so stuck on blaming the banks for the CONSUMER's MISTAKE(note: not all consumers/nations actually default on loans?


Problem with your post above is

a) NOT ALL POOR COUNTRIES default on their loans
b) There are examples of poor countries that have taken the same IMF loans, applied said loans to improving self and succeeding.
c) Nothing stops these POOR COUNTRIES from rejecting the loans -- NOTHING.