• zerfuffle
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The IMF is fucked. Anyone wondering why countries prefer dealing with China need only compare the terms given by the IMF against the terms given by China. Chinese loan terms aren’t only “reasonable”: compared to the IMF, they look like you’re robbing China blind.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Kind of. The problem with Chinese terms is that they are very long term. There is also no form of technology transfer as is typical in Western contracts.

      The Chinese model has some pluses to it, but there are some minuses to it as well which don’t really show themselves immediately.

      • zerfuffle
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technology transfer and austerity. Sort of sounds contradictory, doesn’t it?

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And yet it is usually a condition in a lot of IMF contracts that local labor be used in the construction of local works, including being taught how to.

          In contrast, China sells turn-key systems mostly designed and built by Chinese labor save for some low skill items like earthwork.