Nigeria's currently owing $32billion to both local & international peeps, open your eyes, subsidy would be used to finance the debt, IMF is evil

i will  say two things about the UK

1. I really do not know what you mean by ALMOST EVERYTHING is subsidized. at best an exaggeration at worst it would be impolite to say.
2. It is almost  impossible for you to spend money without paying tax and we must ask  WHAT PROPORTION of their budget is spent on subsidies

Whether we should subsidize petrol and why is an interesting debate to have and not one on which I claim superior knowledge

but we cannot ignore the facts claimed by the FG i.e that they spend 25% of their budget on this subsidy and because of our growing population and economy(the economy is growing) that the total spend on this subsidy will CONTINUE to grow. and at its currrent rate could reach 50% of our budget.
There is another fact which is convenient to ignore. It is likely that in 50 years time we may become a net importer of crude . How will we pay for subsidy then? Or should we leave that problem for our children to sort out??

IMF has members who fund it, of which Nigeria is one,NOT American banks It is better to hide ignorance in silence than to speak and remove all doubt.

To say that countries that have received IMF loans are in disaster is like saying countries in which the sun shines are in disaster.
IMF loans are a variable among many others.
I really do not think we are ready to make progress in Nigeria if we say that our failure to develop is down to the IMF.

We have a problem with rational thinking preferring fantasy for reality and God for hardwork
as long as that continues we shall never make progress,

Is it really in the interest of anyone that we do not have electricity,that we don't have roads .that our airport is in the state it is or that we can't hold elections.

Britain and Korea are two countries that have done well with IMF support. Coincidentally they did so at a time when they were doing less God.
Part of our problem in Nigeria is too much God. We need to kick him out

If If is involved then it is a no no. We don't need those morons to give us any advice or orders. If we need to consult people about our economic policies we know where to find the independent ones. Bleep off Imf. Nigeria is not to be bleeped with.

IMF is owned by Europe &  America, the earlier you know this the better, it started to help countries rebuild after WW2, now tell me Nigeria was part of WW2, America has veto power in the IMF, Wall street controls the white house, American banks own IMF, simple.

All I know is this, the current subsidy regime only started because of this same IMF people, remember that World Bank guy with the ponytail once told us that its cheaper & better for Nigeria to refine crude outside Nigeria
Its another IMF gimmick, mark my words

Name one African Country that has benefited from this IMF help?
Remember SAP, another IMF policy
China, Brazil, India & Libya shut their doors to IMF & they were the better for it

imf have never meant well for africa. check history and tell me any african country they've helped to develope.

aribisala, are u aware dt when u take loan frm IMF they'll start advising u on how to manage ur economy? UK took loan frm IMF and suceeded because they are one of d drivers of IMF. Why are they/IMF nt dictating to China and India? because these countries dnt listen to them. They know what IMF ppl knows. IMF ppl are d G7.Are u aware dt their mode of borrowing and repaying their loan is different from that of others?

cjfavour:

aribisala, are u aware dt when u take loan frm IMF they'll start advising u on how to manage your economy? UK took loan frm IMF and suceeded because they are one of d drivers of IMF. Why are they/IMF nt dictating to China and India? because these countries dnt listen to them. They know what IMF ppl knows. IMF ppl are d G7.Are u aware dt their mode of borrowing and repaying their loan is different from that of others?

how is that relevant to us here and now ?do we owe IMF ? how much? Since when??

Anybody who knows economics would know that the IMf is never in the mood to help countries get better. They want to keep them enslaved. SAP doesn't work for everyone. It is not a one size fit all policy. It works for some and not ALL.

How much money does the west owe to China and other people? Like TRILLIONS. Before they talk about our economy, they better talk about theirs.

Cap28,


HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU! 

                          [img]http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRZZ4NIyE9TIRuB7Ky73-rQ0Hz0BcHYCQqhO5zFN-v131Tr9Viw[/img]

                          [img]http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRil4j--qTrsdjNb_i-AjApx3JQalQoYvT_JOnA2qNKo6jIo_gD[/img]

I want to reproduce a post I made recently with regards to the IMF. Any nation leaning towards the IMF/WB is already in trouble and it is simply naive to blame the woes of such nations on the IMF. Having said that, there have been nations such as the UK that have repaid their loans. And not all loans carry heavy interest rates; it all depends on the duration of the loans. There are facilities such as extended credit facility, standby credit facility, etc that carry zero rates if loans are repaid within 10 and 8 years respectively. The problem usually is that, most countries are so indebted that they will require loan facilities for longer periods, thereby triggering the IMFs SAP.

Now I am not about to absolve the IMF or world bank of any wrongdoing.

The IMF and World Bank are lenders of last resort. When a sovereign nation goes to the IMF, it is because it doesn't have a choice. The IMF and WB will come in and ask the nation to implement a series of programs that is supposed to make the nation leaner and meaner. Afterall, if there was good management in the first place, you wouldn't approach the IMF or WB. The perception of the IMF or WB in most countries where the IMF mandated these programs is usually bad because the citizenry will usually face austere measures. Unfortunately most of the countries that have faced these austere measures are third world countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia. But there are rich world examples as well.

You don't have to go far for rich world examples. Greece, Portugal and Ireland are all implementing IMF mandated Austere measures. The UK, one of the founders, of those institutions had to implement Austere measures in the 1970s. The top rate of tax in the UK was 83% because the Labour governments of Harold Wilson and James Callaghan were profligate. The IMF demanded cuts to public spending and a tax rise because the UK applied for a loan of $4 Billion. Even when Thatcher reduced the top rate to 60% in 1979, she introduced stealth taxes to plug the reduced revenue.

The citizens will feel the effect of IMF policies regardless of whether the policies are implemented correctly or not. The IMF or WB is similar to a loan shark. If you owe money to a loan shark, you can't be sending your kids to the choicest schools and buying fur coats for the wife. The loan shark will demand that you only keep enough to feed your family and put a roof over their heads. If you drive a BMW, he will demand that you sell it and buy a skoda.

Having said all these, I am not ruling out IMF complicity in political intrigues.

Katsumoto:

I want to reproduce a post I made recently with regards to the IMF. Any nation leaning towards the IMF/WB is already in trouble and it is simply naive to blame the woes of such nations on the IMF. Having said that, there have been nations such as the UK that have repaid their loans. And not all loans carry heavy interest rates; it all depends on the duration of the loans. There are facilities such as extended credit facility, standby credit facility, etc that carry zero rates if loans are repaid within 10 and 8 years respectively. The problem usually is that, most countries are so indebted that they will require loan facilities for longer periods, thereby triggering the IMFs SAP.

Now I am not about to absolve the IMF or world bank of any wrongdoing.

The IMF and World Bank are lenders of last resort. When a sovereign nation goes to the IMF, it is because it doesn't have a choice. The IMF and WB will come in and ask the nation to implement a series of programs that is supposed to make the nation leaner and meaner. Afterall, if there was good management in the first place, you wouldn't approach the IMF or WB. The perception of the IMF or WB in most countries where the IMF mandated these programs is usually bad because the citizenry will usually face austere measures. Unfortunately most of the countries that have faced these austere measures are third world countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia. But there are rich world examples as well.

You don't have to go far for rich world examples. Greece, Portugal and Ireland are all implementing IMF mandated Austere measures. The UK, one of the founders, of those institutions had to implement Austere measures in the 1970s. The top rate of tax in the UK was 83% because the Labour governments of Harold Wilson and James Callaghan were profligate. The IMF demanded cuts to public spending and a tax rise because the UK applied for a loan of $4 Billion. Even when Thatcher reduced the top rate to 60% in 1979, she introduced stealth taxes to plug the reduced revenue.

The citizens will feel the effect of IMF policies regardless of whether the policies are implemented correctly or not. The IMF or WB is similar to a loan shark. If you owe money to a loan shark, you can't be sending your kids to the choicest schools and buying fur coats for the wife. The loan shark will demand that you only keep enough to feed your family and put a roof over their heads. If you drive a BMW, he will demand that you sell it and buy a skoda.

Having said all these, I am not ruling out IMF complicity in political intrigues.

Okay, all you did is define the IMF and World Bank. Now can you comment on the topic? Do you want to tell us that the G7, including the Euro Zone will not get favorable lending terms than some african country? The duration of the loan is simply not the only factor on the rate of the loan given. Othe rmeasures are taken into consideration. These measures already make African countries vulnerable to being taken advantage of and being given loans with a high rate of defult which enslaves these countries. IMF and World Bank, no matter the "good" their intentions, their policies simply will never favor african countries. We are where we are because of their "concern", and numerous policies. So i call Bullsh*it on them this time.

2mch:

Okay, all you did is define the IMF and World Bank. Now can you comment on the topic? Do you want to tell us that the G7, including the Euro Zone will not get favorable lending terms than some african country? The duration of the loan is simply not the only factor on the rate of the loan given. Othe rmeasures are taken into consideration. These measures already make African countries vulnerable to being taken advantage of and being given loans with a high rate of defult which enslaves these countries. IMF and World Bank, no matter the "good" their intentions, their policies simply will never favor african countries. We are where we are because of their "concern", and numerous policies. So i call Bullsh*it on them this time.

Where did you get that from? The following African countries all have extended credit facilities: Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Niger, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Togo, etc which are all at zero rates of interest if they pay before maturity while Greece, Iceland, Ireland, and a host of other European countries are servicing Standby Arrangements (SBA) that all carry slightly higher interest rates than what can be obtained in money markets. I am sure you have seen all the protests and riots in Greece, Ireland, Portugal because of IMF conditions for the loans to those countries.

Despite my post on the IMF, I am against subsidy removal because it will only enrich the corrupt imbeciles running Nigeria and impoverish ordinary Nigerians.

Katsumoto:

Where did you get that from? The following African countries all have extended credit facilities: Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Niger, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Togo, etc which are all at zero rates of interest if they pay before maturity while Greece, Iceland, Ireland, and a host of other European countries are servicing Standby Arrangements (SBA) that all carry slightly higher interest rates than what can be obtained in money markets. I am sure you have seen all the protests and riots in Greece, Ireland, Portugal because of IMF conditions for the loans to those countries.

In an economic crisis, countries often need financing to help them overcome their balance of payments problems. Since its creation in June 1952, the IMF’s Stand-By Arrangement (SBA) has been used time and again by member countries, it is the IMF’s workhorse lending instrument for emerging market countries. Rates are non-concessional, although they are almost always lower than what countries would pay to raise financing from private markets. The SBA was upgraded in 2009 to be more flexible and responsive to member countries’ needs. Borrowing limits were doubled with more funds available up front, and conditions were streamlined and simplified. The new framework also enables broader high-access borrowing on a precautionary basis.


The Extended Credit Facility (ECF) provides financial assistance to countries with protracted balance of payments problems. The ECF succeeds the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) as the Fund’s main tool for providing medium-term support LICs, with higher levels of access, more concessional financing terms, more flexible program design features, as well as streamlined and more focused conditionality
http://www.imf.org/external/about/lending.htm

Streamlined and focused conditionality. I am sure they never expose their lending conditions and terms with each country. If they do, i would like access to this information to compare those given to so called emerging markets vs poor countries which Africa mostly falls under.

My fellow Nigerians, THE GOVERNMENT IS OURS, WE ARE NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S. So what are we going to do to halt the raving excesses of these misguided civil servants of ours, whom we employed with our own votes in the sun and rain, but have proclaimed themselves masters.

What are you all ready to do?

The economic choas in western world prompted them to force African leaders to remove fuel subsidy even if its against the wish and will of their citizens, ( a true democracy indeed?), so that we can have a share of their crisis,and our crisis is their chance to steal our wealth, Bleep African leaders!

isale gan - just wanted to wish you a happy new year and hope this new year brings you all that will ensure your happiness and prosperity, my previous post to you has been deleted so i thought i'd repeat what i said in it.

igbo 2011 - happy new year, keep dropping that knowledge son, you are very knowledgeable.

2 much - happy new year bros, my previous post to you was deleted for reasons known to the moderator , all the best for this incoming year my man.

cap28:

in the UK almost everything is subsidised - for example housing is subsidised for low income earners, food is subsidised (but not alchol), transportation is subsidised for unemployed people, health care including prescription drugs and dental care is subsidised for unemployed people.  I therefore find it hard to understand why you say that an oil producing country like nigeria should not subisidise petrol, given the extreme hardship that many nigerians currently live under.  The knock on effect of removign this subsidy will push many nigerians under the breadline and create enormous suffering and misery.
If subsidies are such a bad thing why are they encouraged in western countries but discouraged in african countries where there is no social welfare safety net?

Nigeria negotiated the cancellation of its debts by paying the paris club $35 billion dollars in full and final settlement of various debts it owed to a number of western banks  this deal came with various conditions attached and this is one of them.

Nigeria may be a member of the IMF but it has no leverage when it comes to anything affecting IMF policy.  america alone controls 18% of voting rights while the entire sub saharan countries control only 9% - this gives nigeria zero control over anything concerning IMF policy.  

IMF seeks to exploit african economies not advise them on how to develop their economies - you only have to look at the disastrous state numerous IMF loan recipients are in today.

The main beneficiaries of IMF loans are american and european banks who receive massive interest which increase at unjusitifable rates.

other beneficiaries are european and american construction companies who are awarded millions of dollars from these loans to carry out unecessary white elephant projects - one notorious recipient of IMF loans in nigeria is an american construction company owned by the former vice president of america - di.ck cheney.

In the end the nigerian tax payer has to pick up the tab by way of higher taxes or in this case removal of subsidies to pay off american and european creditors.

Why compare apples with oranges? The bolded part of what you wrote, answers why Nigeria can not afford to continue to subsidize for ALL.

In the UK, while those who are unemployed or can't pay for services etc dont pay, CRUCIALLY THOSE WHO ARE IN EMPLOYMENT, EVEN IF IT IS PART TIME OR STUDENTS DO PAY, THESE MAKE UP THE MAJORITY, AND THAT IS PRECISELY[b] HOW THE MINORITY CAN BE ACCOUNTED FOR.[/b]



I really wish people would stop talking about Nigerians surviving on less than a dollar a day, at the same time, these same Nigerians spend much more than that daily, just on recharge cards.



The government needs to stem the unecessary spending on the population, including the political machine.

The next move is to develop a working system of taxation, where those who [b]truly cant afford [/b]are taken account of and those who can pay, are MADE TO PAY.

Katsumoto:

I want to reproduce a post I made recently with regards to the IMF. Any nation leaning towards the IMF/WB is already in trouble and it is simply naive to blame the woes of such nations on the IMF. Having said that, there have been nations such as the UK that have repaid their loans. And not all loans carry heavy interest rates; it all depends on the duration of the loans. There are facilities such as extended credit facility, standby credit facility, etc that carry zero rates if loans are repaid within 10 and 8 years respectively. The problem usually is that, most countries are so indebted that they will require loan facilities for longer periods, thereby triggering the IMFs SAP.

Now I am not about to absolve the IMF or world bank of any wrongdoing.

The IMF and World Bank are lenders of last resort. When a sovereign nation goes to the IMF, it is because it doesn't have a choice. The IMF and WB will come in and ask the nation to implement a series of programs that is supposed to make the nation leaner and meaner. Afterall, if there was good management in the first place, you wouldn't approach the IMF or WB. The perception of the IMF or WB in most countries where the IMF mandated these programs is usually bad because the citizenry will usually face austere measures. Unfortunately most of the countries that have faced these austere measures are third world countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia. But there are rich world examples as well.

You don't have to go far for rich world examples. Greece, Portugal and Ireland are all implementing IMF mandated Austere measures. The UK, one of the founders, of those institutions had to implement Austere measures in the 1970s. The top rate of tax in the UK was 83% because the Labour governments of Harold Wilson and James Callaghan were profligate. The IMF demanded cuts to public spending and a tax rise because the UK applied for a loan of $4 Billion. Even when Thatcher reduced the top rate to 60% in 1979, she introduced stealth taxes to plug the reduced revenue.

The citizens will feel the effect of IMF policies regardless of whether the policies are implemented correctly or not. The IMF or WB is similar to a loan shark. If you owe money to a loan shark, you can't be sending your kids to the choicest schools and buying fur coats for the wife. The loan shark will demand that you only keep enough to feed your family and put a roof over their heads. If you drive a BMW, he will demand that you sell it and buy a skoda.

Having said all these, I am not ruling out IMF complicity in political intrigues.

You have totally failed to understand that there is a hidden agenda masquerading as genuine economic policy here -

In the 1970s the international financial institutions such as the paris club encouraged african nations to borrow billions in order to implement unecessary white elephant  infrastructure projects - a few years later the western controlled WTO forced down the prices of african exports -this meant that african countries were no longer making enough money to pay off the money they borrowed from these foreign banks.

the african natiosn had no choice other than to go to the IMF and borrow huge loans to finance the paying off of their debts, african leaders who refused to borrow were either assassinated or toppled - this is the reason Buhari was removed and replaced with IBB.

the western international financial institutions realised that you dont have to physically occupy a nation in order to enslave it - you can use debt and this is what they did to almost every african nation with the exception of libya.

Even if you tried to pay off what you owed, they could still  keep you enslaved by hiking up the interest rate - IT IS A FIRST CLASS SCAM USED TO KEEP AFRICAN NATIONS POOR, WEAK AND ENSLAVED.

Any african leader who resists it is taken down - there are a long list of casualties - Sankara of burkina faso, Buhari, Gbagbo of Ivory Coast, Qadaffi of Libya.

Once you fall prey to these economic gangsters you have no choice other than to give up the sovereignty of your nation.

How do you explain the fact that despite nigeria not borrowing a dime from these vultures since 1993 we ended up with a bill which far exceeeded the initial loan? - ITS THE INTEREST - THIS IS HOW THESE VULTURES KEEP YOU ENSLAVED - THEY HIKE THE INTEREST RATE TO A LEVEL THAT THEY KNOW YOU WILL NEVER EVER BE ABLE TO REPAY, FORCING YOU TO INVITE THE IMF INTO YOUR COUNTRY - THE IMF THEN LAYS OUT CONDITIONALITIES these  conditionalities are the final nail in the coffin which finalise total relinquishment of your sovereignty. they include:

privatisation of your public services which means selling off essential services like telecommunications, water services, electricity, airline services to FOREIGN VULTURES who are only interested in MAKING PROFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE ALREADY IMPOVERISHED POPULACE

cutting public spending on essential social services such as education and health care - the monies used to fund these services are then diverted into servicing the interest on these loans

removal of all trade tarriffs in order to create an environment favouralbe for foreign investors but totally unfavourable for domestic businesses which leads to the flooding of domestic markets with foreign goods and the collapse of local businesses.

ALL OF THE ABOVE ULTIMATELY LEAD TO mass poverty, unemployment and suffering of the indigenous people - why are we still fooling ourselves and refusing to face up to the reality of what our govt is doing to its own people?

IT DOESNT END THERE - THESE WESTERN VULTURES ARE SO SATANIC THAT THEY  EVEN GO AS FAR AS FUNDING, ARMING AND SPONSORING COUP D'ETATS TO ENSURE THAT MALLEABLE PUPPETS (LIKE OKONJO IWEALA, OBASANJO AND IBB) WHO ARE WILLING TO CONDEMN THEIR OWN PEOPLE TO LIFELONG ECONOMIC SLAVERY AND INDEBTEDNESS TO THE WESTERN BANKING FRATERNITIES AND THEIR MULTINATIONAL COHORTS ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO EVER  GET ANYWHERE NEAR THE CORRIDORS OF POWER - You better wake up and understand what is at stake here, these people do not want you to ever become economically independent because that will mean taht they will have to give up their position of economic dominance in the world order and allow you to develop and industrialise your own nation, thereby enabling to be a competitor with them as opposed to a docile and weak consumer of their manufactured and overpriced exports

the role they have designated for africa is - supplier of cheap raw materials and cheap labour and consumer, any attempt to industrialise and become self sufficient is smashed and crushed ruthlessly - WAKE UP.

londoner:


Why compare apples with oranges? The bolded part of what you wrote, answers why Nigeria can not afford to continue to subsidize for ALL.

In the UK, while those who are unemployed or can't pay for services etc dont pay, CRUCIALLY THOSE WHO ARE IN EMPLOYMENT, EVEN IF IT IS PART TIME OR STUDENTS DO PAY, THESE MAKE UP THE MAJORITY, AND THAT IS PRECISELY[b] HOW THE MINORITY CAN BE ACCOUNTED FOR.[/b]

I really wish people would stop talking about Nigerians surviving on less than a dollar a day, at the same time, these same Nigerians spend much more than that daily, just on recharge cards.



The government needs to stem the unecessary spending on the population, including the political machine.

The next move is to develop a working system of taxation, where those who [b]truly cant afford [/b]are taken account of and those who can pay, are MADE TO PAY.

first of all the nigerian govt has never had a comprehensive social welfare safety net to protect its citizens from poverty and destitution - reason - because it doesnt give a shi.t about its own people - you can take it or leave it but that is the truth.

Are you trying to tell me that the nigerian govt can not afford to provide low cost housing, subsidised quality education and healthcare for the people of nigeria but can afford to pay bloated salaries for useless and underperforming  members of the house of representative and equally useless senators?

when are we as a people going to face up to the reality of our situation and accept that our govt has been abusing and exploiting us for years?

when are we going to stop making excuses for people who dont give a sh.it whether we live or die?

if the average nigerian is willing to do just about anything to survive in nigeria including armed robbery, prostitution, ritual killings, kidnappings - what does that tell you about the quality of life of the average nigerian?

the federal and state govts generate enough revenue from taxation to provide the most basic services ie properly maintained roads, adequate housing, utilities, education and health care services but they are not interested in doing so.

If a tiny country like Cuba that has been under a US sponsored trade embargoe for over 51 years can provide free healthcare, quality education and free housing to its citizenry is it not a major shame and disgrace that the second highest oil exporter in africa cant even provide the same for its own people?

cap28:


the role they have designated for africa is - supplier of cheap raw materials and cheap labour and consumer, any attempt to industrialise and become self sufficient is smashed and crushed ruthlessly - WAKE UP.

I coudln't have said it any better man. Happy new year to you too. I hope Nigeria doesn't go to civil war and stops killing each other over ethnic tribe.

You are very right, the west doesn't want Africa to add value to resources. They want less compettition for their industries. If Innoson and Zinox get too big then foreign car and computer companies make less money. Corporate America has the American government behind them to do crazy imperialism. This is just neocolonialism. They have been making money of Africa for 500 years. First stealing our people, the colonialism stealing resources and binding ethnic groups together. Now neocolonialism. They will keep coming back to us unless we fight back.

Of course Nigeria has never had a comprehensive system of social welfare, they have never had a nation of taxpayers. Even if the politicians were not corrupt, they could not do it without a taxpaying workforce.

I will not say that the government gives a s.hit about its people, but to be honest Nigerians as citizens don't give a s.hit about their fellow Nigerian either.

If you are not prepared to be a law abiding tax paying citizen, you dont deserve a nation that has a functioning social security/welfare system. It can't be sustained.

That is the truth.

Even the over expenditure on a few hundred politicians is something the government cant afford, do you think the government can afford, from its own coffers to provide housing for 150 million people which they will also subsidise? Do you think it will cost them less? Not to talk about roads and other services, not forgetting that as well as income tax, in other countries we also pay separately for council tax, road tax, water rates etc, you know this as you are a living in the UK.

I agree Nigerian politicians have abused and exploited, yet people here are complaining that they can no longer be beneficiaries of the misuse of resources. As far as I am concerned the average Nigerians, views Nigeria in the same light, a place to exploit where you can and never to add any value to it as a citizen.

The average Nigerian is willing to engage in criminality, not because of quality of life, but because of a lack of quality values to live by. We are in a continent full of citizens who are poor and struggling, they don't turn to be a nation known to be criminals or use that as an excuse because they don't worship money and material things.

How many Nigerians would consider going back to their village, where in most cases they can live rent free and can actually eat from what they can grow freely on their land?

Nigerians need a lesson in humility and need to learn to live within their means. They chase quick riches and don't mind whether it comes through criminality. Other Africans who are just as poor and in many cases poorer do not descend so low as to make such poor decisions.

Nigerians, get used to it, there is no free lunch!

Maybe now, you can stand up and protest against the corruption in higher places,

cap28:



first of all the nigerian govt has never had a comprehensive social welfare safety net to protect its citizens from poverty and destitution - reason - because it doesnt give a shi.t about its own people - you can take it or leave it but that is the truth.

Are you trying to tell me that the nigerian govt can not afford to provide low cost housing, subsidised quality education and healthcare for the people of nigeria but can afford to pay  bloated salaries for useless and underperforming  members of the house of representative and equally useless senators?

when are we as a people going to face up to the reality of our situation and accept that our govt has been abusing and exploiting us for years?

when are we going to stop making excuses for people who dont give a sh.it whether we live or die?

if the average nigerian is willing to do just about anything to survive in nigeria including armed robbery, prostitution, ritual killings, kidnappings - what does that tell you about the quality of life of the average nigerian?

the federal and state govts generate enough revenue from taxation to provide the most basic services ie properly maintained roads, adequate housing, utilities, education and health care services but they are not interested in doing so.

If a tiny country like Cuba that has been under a US sponsored trade embargoe for over 51 years can provide free healthcare, quality education and free housing to its citizenry is it not a major shame and disgrace that the second highest oil exporter in africa cant even provide the same for its own people?

What do expect when you foolishly appoint Okonjo-Iweala, an eternal agent of the IMF/World Bank as Finance Minister? She will always work for the interest of her imperialist masters. She did the same thing under Obasanjo, and even rushed to pay a whooping $12billion to the London/Paris Clubs when other developing nations were making progress for outright cancellation of their debts, e.g Senegal and Egypt.

I laugh when I hear some ignorant people thinking she has anything positive to comtribute and Jonathan has shown how clueless and shallow he is by appointing her. I listened to her presentation during the fuel subsidy debate and I was shocked at her lack of depth in analyis. She could not put up any scientific analysis but just referring to a prepared template/slide on a screen.

We are doomed if we keep relying on people like Okonjo-Iweala as Finance Minister because they will sell us to the West. Can you imagine a Finance Minister that demanded for her salary to be paid in a foreign currency(dollars)? That shows she never had any confidence in or plans to defend the national currency!

We should rather seek for alternative ideas from tested ,patriotic and committed professionals like Prof Aluko and others in the country that can call off the bluff of IMF/World Bank

[B][SIZE=4]IMF Forces African Nations to Remove Fuel Subsidies[/SIZE][/B]
http://www.newsrescue.com/2012/01/imf-forces-african-nations-to-remove-fuel-subsidies/

January, 1, 2012


Christine Lagarde, IMF boss {Alt-Market}

NewsRescue- Nigeria on New Years day removed fuel subsidies in accordance with an order from the IMF (International Monetary Fund). This created a jump in the price of automobile fuel from about 55 Naira per liter to 140Naira per liter overnight, Sunday. This brings fuel/gas prices in Nigeria to about the same price it is in the US, though lower than many European nations.

Nigerians used to pay about $0.38 / gallon, the European average is about $5-6.00/gallon, while the US average is $3-3.70/gallon. While other oil producing nations, like Venezuela, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are about $.12, $0.78 and $0.91 respectively. This hike in fuel prices was compelled on African Nations by the IMF due to supposedly rising global oil prices and the Europe recession.

The Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Christine Lagarde visited Nigeria to meet with the President, Goodluck Johnathan in December 2011 to drive home this directive.

Related: NewsRescue-How The IMF-World Bank and Structural Adjustment Program(SAP) Destroyed Africa

—

The meeting was not just coincidental. Analysts believe it was predetermined. The IMF has been canvassing for the removal of subsidy among African countries.

[B]This pronouncement has seen governments in Nigeria, Guinea, Cameroon, Chad and Ghana moving to cut state subsidies on fuel.

Yesterday, Ghana cut subsidy and it was learnt that the development was due to pressure from the IMF to do so because of rise in the price of crude.[/B]

The Chief Executive Officer of Ghana’s National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Alex Mould said the cumulative effect of the rise in crude oil prices this year and the about 5.7 percent depreciation of the cedi meant a 25 percent increase in cedi terms in the cost of procuring crude oil and petroleum products since January.

[B]For instance, the IMF has urged countries across West and Central Africa to cut fuel subsidies, which they say are not effective in directly aiding the poor, but do promote corruption and smuggling.[/B]


The price change will see the cost of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) increase by 30 percent while petrol and diesel will go up 15 percent at pumps in Ghana.

Mould said Ghana has spent about 450 million cedis on fuel subsidies in 2011.

Ghana’s Minister for Finance Kwabena Duffour said the removal of subsidies would have a positive impact on Ghana’s economy.

Duffour said: “Subsidising fuel is not sustainable. It is the right thing to do so we can sustain our fiscal consolidation.”

This is the same music that the protagonists of subsidy removal in Nigeria, like the Coordinating Minister of Economy and Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala; the Minister of Petroleum, Diezani Alison-Madueke and the Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Sanusi Lamido Sanusi are singing.

While Sanusi insisted that the economy would breakdown if the subsidy is not removed, Ngozi said Nigerians would be better off without subsidy.

Ghana’s subsidy removal yesterday confirmed people’s speculations that Western powers are behind the move to stop subsidy. Development in Ghana has also gone to confirm that the Nigerian government would boycott the public outcry on subsidy removal and go ahead to remove.

There is no provision for subsidy in the 2012 budget proposal submitted by President Goodluck Jonathan.

The Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) has said that from next year they would not pay for subsidy because there is no provision for it in the budget.

[B]The development also negates the IMF’s saying that it does not tailor policies for any country to follow, but only provide technical supports.[/B]

But during the visit of Lagarde to Nigeria, she said, “I came here primarily to listen to our African members, and to find out how we can better tailor support to countries in this region in the current difficult global environment.”

Nigeria is indeed in serious economic problem. For instance, the value of the currency has been devaluing against major foreign currencies. The official value of naira against dollar is currently 156 to a dollar and at the Bureau De Change, it goes for 165 against the dollar.

The governor of central bank, Sanusi sometime this year faulted the IMF for suggesting that the value of the naira be devalued to protect further depreciation of the foreign reserves.

[B]However, the governor bowed to pressure and got the naira devalued. It is the same pressure from the Western powers that is pushing the government to remove fuel subsidy.
[/B]
In Nigeria, removal of subsidy would necessarily lead to hike in fuel pump and such hike would trigger increment in the price of other commodities and services.

It is already been speculated that by next year, when subsidy might have been removed, Nigerians would have to pay as high as N140 per litre of petrol. The price is currently N65 per litre.

What this means is that Nigerians should gird up for tough times next year. This is because any increase in the price of fuel would push the cost of production in the manufacturing industry up.


Also, cost of transportation would go up and even operators of Small, Medium Scale Enterprises would not be able to continue in business because most of them relied on generators to power their machines and generators are powered by fuel.

Some civil society organizations and organized labour are urging Nigerians to come out and protest subsidy removal. The question is, can Nigerians occupy the “Three Arm Zone” as Americans “Occupied” the “Street.”

Subsidy removal is turning out to be another Bretton Woods Institutions’ anti-peoples’ policy. It is a neo-liberal agenda developed by those in authority. It is not a popular idea but that of the ruling power. It is becoming a dominant idea because in every political setting, the dominant idea is the idea of the ruling power.

Now that the government is bent on removing subsidy from fuel against people’s outcry, the question to ask is if this is the “Fresh Air” that President Goodluck promised Nigerians during his campaigning?