Stealing ' Why Poverty? Directed By Christopher Guldbrandsen

After Zambia gained political independence their economy was doing better. Their economy was surrounded around their primary natural resource, copper. As copper sales went up, new medical buildings and schools were built, they had a promising textile industry and things were looking up. Until an unexpected rise in the price of oil in tandem with the dropping prices of copper forced Zambia to borrow from the IMF and world banks at extremely high interest rates. Soon Zambia found itself in a mountain of unpayable debts and to repay creditors, spending was cut to education and health and other infrastructure projects. Eventually all of the progress they have made goes to waste as it can not be maintained. Foreign countries currently dictate the economic policy via structural adjustment, i.e. policies that “should” increase revenue and allow them to pay the loans off. This inevitably leads to a country that is so dependent on foreign aid because their own industries have been destroyed by foreign influences.

What is surprising by most is how Africa is one of the largest known continents and being one of the richest when it comes to natural resources. However, the countries that make up Africa and the people living in these countries are known to be living in devastating poverty. How can it be that this plentiful continent of natural resources, Africa’s people are living in poverty and living in the poorest conditions? With Africa being such a rich continent of natural resources why are the countries within Africa so poor? Take for instance, the countries Ghana and Nigeria There are many countries within Africa but the main focus will be on the country of Ghana and the country of Nigeria. Both countries are poor and the people there are in poverty. Ghana has been struggling with poverty and being poor for quite some time and has been slowly trying to work its way out of poverty. In an article called “Microenterprise financing preference” There have been some laws now put in place to try and reverse the poverty and help Ghana. (Osei‐Assibey, E., Bokpin, G. A., & Twerefou, D. K., 2012). Nigeria has also been quit poor for some time and the people struggling with poverty.

Dr. Steve Maraboli once said, “The universe does not give you what you ask for with your thoughts; it gives you what you demand with your actions.” Some Africans described themselves as poor, but in order to receive enough money, they would have to be persistent in their work or searching for one to be done. The article, “12 Reasons Why Africans Are Poor, Miserable And Pitiable” explains how the people feels about the African being poor. The writer says that they are poor because of the love for foreign made goods, the way they have lost faith in their ability to use their creative ingenuity, and the little things they manage to produce.

The purpose of the Poverty Inc. is to shine a light on the poverty industry. The film emphasizes that although foreign aid is welcome and often times helpful, the long-term outcome can be very harmful. Despite this, the documentary doesn't try to make the claim that this aid is a monolith or even that it makes poverty worse. In fact, the foreign aid community has taken the steps to change the way aid is distributed and utilized. These changes include focusing on how to help these poor communities develop, such as women's health and education.

The movie Poverty Inc. has changed the way that I think about poverty. Initially I thought that poverty could be solved by providing aid to countries in need, this however is the opposite of what we should be doing. By dumping resources into poor countries, we are actually hindering their economy. Rice, for example, is a cheap and easy resource for the US to give as foreign aid, but by giving rice as a cheap resource to the poor, it hurts the local rice farmers. The local rice farmers cannot compete with the free subsidized rice that the US is supplying. Poverty Inc. sent the message that Africa does not need our help and it would be better for the US to stay out of their business.

Apparently, the IMF does not take into account the impact of its lending policies on nature, and environmental aspects are not included in the policy making process” (http://www.50years.org/controversies-surrounding-the-imf/)

During the video, I had a number of different feelings about what I saw. One being sadness for those who have to go to food shelves to survive, the ones who no matter how hard they tried can't find a way out of poverty because it just continues to follow them everywhere that they go. I felt sorry for those who have lost loved ones, and those whose families flat out fell apart. And especially those who had a family to take care of that couldn't. Those are the people that I feel bad for because they were counted on the most. I also found it difficult to wrap my head around how much poverty that there is in the world, I used to only think that there was just a handful but I now know that's not the case.

The World Bank and the IMF are among the two most corrupted financial institutions to exist today. They're also two of the wealthiest institutions in the world. While they were created after WWII supposedly to help countries recover in during harsh conditions or during economic troubles, they have seemingly done the opposite. They manipulate poor countries by giving loans out to countries that are in such harsh conditions that they must accept the loans. Once they do accept the loans, it becomes a never ending maze of debt. Examples of this corrupt dealing exists still today in countries within Africa. The institutions charge huge amounts of interest and place special conditions on the loans that are accepted which creates a great amount debt. Quickly,

In the movie “Sold”, we watch a once young and hopeful girl turned into a sex slave who is beaten, drugged, and raped every day. How does this happen, and so quickly? People like Mumtaz and Bimla are wired to manipulate families into giving up their children, and sadly for some families it may not be a difficult decision. The level of poverty in places like India and Nepal are beyond the understanding of most people in America, especially those living in the middle and upper classes. By our values, selling a child is the most awful thing we can do; but in places like India, who don’t have the same welfare programs we do, starvation of the whole family is much worse. Family structure is also much different here than other countries. Here,

This film relates to human development by talking about how poverty affects people at many stages of life, whether a person is five years old, thirteen years old, a senior in high school, or an adult. For example, the five-year-old may not understand what is going on yet. He or she may not understand why they cannot eat and must go to bed hungry; why they are living in a motel room, a homeless shelter, a car, or another person’s home; or why their parents cannot buy them a toy they desperately want. This could hinder the child’s success because if they cannot eat and their bodies may not develop properly and their minds will not function as well. The thirteen-year-old may understand more than the five-year-old and will want to do anything they can to help their parents. They may believe it is their fault that they are living in poverty because their parents must do everything they can to take care of them. This could hinder them from doing well in school because they would rather

The IMF is obviously extremely biased. They have loaned money out and want it back with interest. The only way I can see it not being bias is to give money and not expect to get all of it back. As said before, the IMF was not able to negotiate and pursue drastic action in Argentina. Though they did try. They want their money back and to gain from their investment. Not expecting all their money back would ensure they will do what is best for the country. Would they actually invest without thinking they were getting something in return? No, plain and simple.

Throughout, there is a keen sense that the IMF is completely guided by ideology which is focused on the free market and the markets’ ability to guide the economy properly at all times. It would seem that all those who work at the IMF are misguided and/or towing the party line in the form of the Washington Consensus. Moreover, of greater concern is perhaps that throughout this piece, it would seem that the World Bank could do no wrong. Stiglitz portrays himself and the World Bank as the white knight(s) who were championing the rights of those who could not fight for themselves against the US government, the US Treasury and even the Federal Reserve. He does so with little regard to any policies or actions that these organizations have done for positive reasons or with positive results. He displays unwavering support for governments to stimulate aggregate demand via social spending, so it is surprising that he is so punitive towards Western governments.

The three major international economic institutions are the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the World Trade Organization; this book mainly focuses on the IMF and the World Bank, due to the author’s first-hand experience with both institutions. The IMF, a public institution built as a guiding hand for economic stability around the world, has brought false

Africa, the world’s most-largest and second-most-populous continent, is also home to some of the world’s poorest countries. Many of these developing countries lack a stable economy which translates into the individual lives of their citizens. Since many of these countries have an unstable economy with a combination of a corrupt government and corrupt government officials (for example; money laundering amongst oil companies in Angola), they are unable to obtain access to the proper education, there is an absence of a functioning government, they have little to no access to clean and safe water, and the proper medical treatment and treatment facilities are very

2. A project of the IMF that created problems for Africa after they received it?