Certainly not institutionalized And the world bank has some wonderful ict initiatives going on, some of the best financial thinkers on its staff etc.
Naïve and facile generalizations are just what characterize the ron paul-ish faux libertarianism, general hatred of "big money, big government" etc rhetoric .. -- srs (blackberry) -----Original Message----- From: ashok _ <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:35:44 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [silk] aqvavit On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:50 PM, ashok _ <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Closer to home (for most in this list that is), Manmohan Singh and >>> Montek Singh Ahluwalia both receive pensions from the World Bank. >> >> I have read this stated as a worrying thing before, but why is this >> problematic ? >> If they worked for companies prior to becoming politicians or >> technocrats they would receive pensions....its a declared and >> documented and legally entitled income. I dont see anything >> inappropriate in that. Isnt this the same thing ? I mean if they ran >> the country as a communist state the world bank would not stop giving >> them their pensions. > > > It's disturbing for the same reason that it's of concern to many that > Dick Cheney and Haliburton have links in the past. We are shaped by > our past, and we are known by the company we keep. >If Messrs. Singh & > Ahluwalia cut their teeth in the World Bank circles, they are no doubt > persuaded to a greater or smaller degree by its policies, and think it > good for the world. > yeah i think cheney was the CEO of halliburton...and i remember there was a case by the nigerian govt against halliburton for the period of his tenure of his CEO. MMS and montek were consultants and bureaucrats at the world bank .... i think you are comparing oil and water in terms of designations and what it implies. anyhow, the world bank is very far away from being a closeted ideology driven unit... much like the UN you get appointed to these positions based on a mix of country quotas, domain knowledge, personal leverage etc... its far from being a club of freemasons, i dont think any sane person working for such organizations gets influenced by the organizational ideology (which itself is a cliche at best). i dont think either of them needed a world bank to make them corrupt - you can be corrupt even without that :-) taking the Cheney example ..was it Halliburton shaping Cheney ... or Cheney shaping Haliburton to his ideology ?
