Wolfowitz? For the Bank? Seriously?? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-23-2005, 05:40 AM   #46
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 05:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen

"I can't think of anybody more qualified than Paul Wolfowitz to run the World Bank," Cheney said.
Ummm, I don't think you tried very hard there Dick.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 06:15 AM   #47
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
[B
"I can't think of anybody more qualified than Paul Wolfowitz to run the World Bank," Cheney said. [/B]
If so, that's a sad state of affairs for Washington to be in. This cannot possibly be true. I'm getting really tired of incompetence and mediocrity in Washington.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 03:46 PM   #48
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 04:53 AM
I have to claim ignorance on exactly what the World Bank is and does. I imagine there are others who posted knee jerk reactions to Wolfowitz on this thread who also don't have a clue as to what the World Bank is.

Anyone care to enlighten me? Is it a network of banks from different countries who lend to governments?
Is it's main priority to end poverty?
Why does the US have control over choosing the head?
Wouldn't the CEO of a major bank be the most qualified?
Could a CEO be bothered with this job?
Would appointment of a bank CEO elicit cries of corporate sellout?
Would a Harvard professor or a rock singer/activist be any more qualified than Wolfowitz?
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 04:10 PM   #49
Refugee
 
all_i_want's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,180
Local Time: 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark
I have to claim ignorance on exactly what the World Bank is and does. I imagine there are others who posted knee jerk reactions to Wolfowitz on this thread who also don't have a clue as to what the World Bank is.

Anyone care to enlighten me? Is it a network of banks from different countries who lend to governments?
Is it's main priority to end poverty?
Why does the US have control over choosing the head?
Wouldn't the CEO of a major bank be the most qualified?
Could a CEO be bothered with this job?
Would appointment of a bank CEO elicit cries of corporate sellout?
Would a Harvard professor or a rock singer/activist be any more qualified than Wolfowitz?
he World Bank is not a “bank” in the common sense. It is one of the United Nations’ specialized agencies, and is made up of 184 member countries. These countries are jointly responsible for how the institution is financed and how its money is spent. Along with the rest of the development community, the World Bank centers its efforts on the reaching the Millennium Development Goals, agreed to by UN members in 2000 and aimed at sustainable poverty reduction.

The "World Bank" is the name that has come to be used for the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). Together these organizations provide low-interest loans, interest-free credit, and grants to developing countries.

Some 10,000 development professionals from nearly every country in the world work in the World Bank's Washington DC headquarters or in its 109 country offices.


The World Bank is run like a cooperative, with its member countries as shareholders. The number of shares a country has is based roughly on the size of its economy. The United States is the largest single shareholder, with 16.41 percent of votes, followed by Japan (7.87 percent), Germany (4.49 percent), the United Kingdom (4.31 percent), and France (4.31 percent). The rest of the shares are divided among the other member countries.

The Bank's president is, by tradition, a national of the largest shareholder, the United States. Elected for a five-year renewable term, the president of the World Bank chairs meetings of the Board of Directors and is responsible for overall management of the Bank.



Here is Wolfensohn's background:

Before joining the Bank, Mr. Wolfensohn was President and Chief Executive Officer of James D. Wolfensohn Inc, an investment firm that advised major international and U.S. corporations. He relinquished his interests in the firm upon joining the Bank.

Mr. Wolfensohn served as Executive Partner of Salomon Brothers in New York and head of its investment-banking department, Executive Deputy Chairman and Managing Director of Schroeder’s Ltd in London, President of J. Henry Schroeder’s Banking Corporation in New York, and Managing Director, Darling & Co of Australia.

Mr. Wolfensohn has participated in a wide range of cultural and volunteer activities throughout his life, especially the performing arts. In 1970, he became involved in New York's Carnegie Hall, first as a board member and later, from 1980 to 1991, as Chairman of the Board. During this time, he led its successful effort to restore the landmark New York building. He is now Chairman Emeritus of Carnegie Hall. In 1990, Mr. Wolfensohn also became Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington. On January 1, 1996, he was elected Chairman Emeritus.

Mr. Wolfensohn has been President of the International Federation of Multiple Sclerosis Societies and Director of the Business Council for Sustainable Development. He also served both as Chairman of the Finance Committee and Director of the Rockefeller Foundation and of the Population Council, and as a member of the Board of Rockefeller University.

In addition to serving as President of the World Bank Group, he is Chairman of the Board of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. Mr. Wolfensohn is also an Honorary Trustee of the Brookings Institution and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Century Association in New York.

Born in Australia on December 1, 1933, Mr. Wolfensohn is a naturalized United States citizen. He holds a BA and LLB from the University of Sydney and an MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of Business.

Prior to attending Harvard, Mr. Wolfensohn was a lawyer in the Australian law firm of Allen Allen & Hemsley. He served as an officer in the Royal Australian Air Force, and was a member of the 1956 Australian Olympic Fencing Team.

Mr. Wolfensohn is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Fellow of the American Philosophical Society. He has been the recipient of many awards for his volunteer work, including the first David Rockefeller Prize of the Museum of Modern Art in New York for his work for culture and the arts.

In May 1995, he was awarded an Honorary Knighthood by Queen Elizabeth II for his contribution to the arts. The governments of Australia, France, Germany, Morocco, Norway, and Russia have also decorated him.


I hope those answered your questions.
The organization is explained above so I wont go into detail. It is main priority is to support development. US is the largest shareholder so they get to choose the head. Wolfensohn was CEO of an investment bank, so yes, they are qualified, and they can be bothered. A bank CEO would not elicit cries of corporate sellout. A Harvard professor with a development background or a CEO with a development background would be suitable.

The argument for Bono is that even he would do a better job than Wolfowitz.
__________________
all_i_want is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 05:40 PM   #50
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Thanks for the info
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 05:57 PM   #51
Refugee
 
all_i_want's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,180
Local Time: 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark
Thanks for the info
so, free from the shackles of ignorance, what do you think about the wolfowitz nomination now?


also, one interesting point is that 'wolfensohn' means son of a wolf, and so does 'wolfowitz'. could this be the only reason bush nominated him ?
__________________
all_i_want is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 06:02 PM   #52
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by all_i_want





also, one interesting point is that 'wolfensohn' means son of a wolf, and so does 'wolfowitz'. could this be the only reason bush nominated him ?

He probably thought no one would notice.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 06:12 PM   #53
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by all_i_want


so, free from the shackles of ignorance, what do you think about the wolfowitz nomination now?


also, one interesting point is that 'wolfensohn' means son of a wolf, and so does 'wolfowitz'. could this be the only reason bush nominated him ?
This is one issue I'm afraid I don't have an opinion on. I would only say that I didn't have a problem with Mr. Wolf. as deputy SOD so why is he being moved to a new post?
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 02:42 AM   #54
The Fly
 
s_tielemans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 59
Local Time: 05:53 AM
Look, it's probably all a simple mistake. Bush confused the nomination for World War with that of World Bank. Should be corrected in a matter of ...err...months probably
__________________
s_tielemans is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 07:39 AM   #55
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 12:53 AM
During this discussion, I've been wondering why the US gets to pick the Bank head, and the EU gets to pick the head of the IMF. No wonder the Global Souths calls it nedcolonialism! I was glad to see this statement by Rev. Jesse Jackson (who I don't always agree with but he's spot on here....)

IF IT’S REALLY A “WORLD” BANK,
THEN LET’S LOOK SOUTH
Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
March 23, 2005


The Bush Administration in general, and Paul Wolfowitz in particular, would have you believe that 1,500 Americans have died, perhaps 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed, and more than $200 billion has been spent on invading and occupying Iraq, in the name of “democracy”.

Funny then that Paul Wolfowitz is now being promoted in a secret, opaque, closely held process that freezes out most of the world. Of special note, the selection of the new World Bank head freezes out the 1 billion people who live on less than $1 per day, and the 3 billion who live on less than $2 per day. It freezes out the entire Southern hemisphere*Africa, Asia, South America. In fact, it freezes out everyone who is not a Bush loyalist in the U.S., or a nervous European elite.

It is as if fighting world poverty were a ping-pong game between the U.S. and Europe, a game in which the poorer nations are not even allowed to enter.

But why? Why should the world’s poorest people be excluded from the process of selecting one of the most important leaders who will affect their lives? Why are the nations most controlled by World Bank and International Monetary Fund policies not allowed to nominate, or even participate in any meaningful way, in the selection of new leadership?

Is Nelson Mandela less qualified to run the World Bank than Paul Wolfowitz? Or how about one of the Brazilians behind the Lula government’s innovative proposal to eliminate hunger by taxing international arms sales? Or, since we know that the most direct route to fighting world poverty is to empower and educate poor women, why not a woman from the South to lead the World Bank, say, Arundhati Roy of India, or Nobel Prize winner Wangari Maathai of Kenya, two women who actually know something about helping poor people?

These names are not even considered. Only Americans, and even then, only hard-core Bush loyalists, are in the loop. In an entirely secret process, despite his lack of development credentials, and despite the widespread rejection of the idea when the Wolfowitz name was first floated publicly, George W. Bush followed up on his divisive choice of John Bolton for the U.N. with the promotion of leading war hawk Paul Wolfowitz to head the World Bank.

Forget all that talk about reconciliation with Europe and the rest of the world. Bush’s picks were like a thumb in each of the world’s wide-open eyes.

Since Bush makes up his own rules as he goes along, so should we. After all, when George W. Bush meets with Tony Blair, that’s a minority meeting*the U.S. & the U.K. together are only one-sixteenth of the world!

It’s time for a new set of international rules. The IMF is not just the property of Europe; and the World Bank can no longer be just a tool of U.S. foreign policy.

“One-dollar, one-vote” is no recipe for democracy.

The South deserves a voice, and a candidate. The South should nominate one of their own this week, even if just to break the stranglehold the U.S. & European elites have on the process, just to crack the ice a bit.

That nominee should have a program, a “4-D” platform:


* Democracy program, to open up the WB/IMF systems to the whole world;
* Development program, to move from big energy projects to micro-, women-centered projects, with an emphasis on renewable technologies;
* Disease-fighting program, to battle AIDs and malaria, and the other dread diseases which ravage the Southern hemisphere; and,
* Debt cancellation program, to completely eliminate the debts of Africa and Latin America, to bring the “Jubilee” described in the Bible to the world’s poorest people. 100% debt cancellation, with no conditions, no tricks, no limitations, no restrictions*the single most useful step we could take to fight world poverty.


We must challenge the process, right now, by acting as if the Southern nations matter. Nominate a Southerner. Practice democracy. Cancel the debt. Wipe the slate clean, and let’s start over.

Three billion poor people are waiting.

Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., is the Founder & President of the National Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, and a former candidate for President in 1984 & 1988.
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 12:35 PM   #56
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 11:53 PM
do other members of the bank have veto power over the US nomination?
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 03-28-2005, 06:11 AM   #57
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 11:53 PM
Wolfowitz Has No Agenda for U.S. Government-Wolfensohn

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Paul Wolfowitz, the U.S. nominee to head the World Bank, has given assurances he does not plan to further a U.S. government agenda, the outgoing president of the development bank said on Thursday.

"This process was I think less than transparent. But it is my hope that the person coming in will be true to what he has been saying to me for three days: That he has no agenda for the U.S. government, that he wants to be an international civil servant," James Wolfensohn told a House of Commons committee.

"And I believe what he is saying. I hope he will be another Bob McNamara, who came out of Vietnam and was probably the best president the bank has had," he said. Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara ran the bank from 1968 to 1981.

U.S. President George W. Bush's choice of Wolfowitz, one of the architects of the Iraq war, is a controversial one but it is unlikely to be opposed.

Traditionally, Washington names the head of the World Bank while Europe appoints the head of the International Monetary Fund, its sister organization.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-28-2005, 07:17 AM   #58
Registered User
 
Norse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 53
Local Time: 04:53 AM
The problem with Wolfowitz comes in two parts. Because he is largely under experienced for this job (No UN work, No recent diplomatic ventures) I really feel that when things get tough he is going to fall back on pushing forward the US agenda. Plus the bank is a huge and sprawling institution. While Wolfowitz does have some organizational skills, the bank needs a superhuman effort, charisma and a vision to keep it firing on all cylinders. And the worst thing that could happen to the bank is if he went in there guns a firing and because of a poor understanding of how the bank works and of lack of vision, he started to screw with something that while not the most efficient body in the world is an enormously important vehicle for good.

The next problem is just a PR problem. As far as I can tell the whole world is reeling after this decision. In a largely diplomatic job, I just don’t think Wolfowitz will have any creditability to get the job done.
__________________
Norse is offline  
Old 03-28-2005, 10:54 AM   #59
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling
During this discussion, I've been wondering why the US gets to pick the Bank head, .


The Golden Rule.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-28-2005, 06:12 PM   #60
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 12:53 AM
I suspect you're right, Deep.

Power to the rich!

__________________

__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com