Amazon.com Widgets

Should the Western states' control over the International Monetary Fund be ended?

  • Leave the IMF management where it is.

    The western states should control over the International Monetary Fund for good. There is no reason to change this now. The only people who are saying this are those who do not feel so kindly towards the West. The IMF has been taken care of by the current operators without fail in judgement.

  • No! absolutely not.

    The International Monetary Fund was founded by the west. a very high percentage of the funds the IMF has is donated by the west. If any other country has any problem with how the fund is run then they should by all mean be willing to put up the money for the fund to continue operations.

  • International does not mean Western

    The international monetary fund should be jointly controlled by every nation. If only one area of the world controls the fund, then the desires and opinions of the rest of the world will not be properly represented. The issue with that is that there could be some problems in other parts of the world, but if they're not in the best interest of the people who control the fund, they will not be addressed.

  • Too much corruption to end.

    No, I don't think it would be a very good idea for the Western states to end their control over the International Monetary Fund. At least not just yet. The amount of corruption that happens in the Third World nations shows that they are not yet responsible enough to take on this responsibility.

  • The most powerful

    No, these western states should keep control over the International Monetary Fund. They have had control over it for a long time, and know what they are doing. They do a great job with it, and will continue to do a good job as long as they are in control.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.