World Bank Controversy
Political polarization is not good, but its silver lining is that 2012 will offer a clear cut choice between accepting either a liberal approach or a conservative approach to resolving tough U.S. economic troubles.
They are diametrically opposite approaches. They are largely incompatible. We must pick one over the other. The future of the nation depends on it.
President Obama’s nominee for head of the World Bank, Jim Yong Kim, is an example just how deeply seated those economic philosophical differences are. If chosen, Kim will bring a strongly liberal approach to economics that closely mimics Obama’s own world view.
Jim Yong Kim
Though some right-wingers might think so, President Obama did NOT nominate a North Korean Communist Party chief to head the World Bank.
(“That’s a joke, I say, that’s a joke, son.”–Foghorn Leghorn)
Kim is a classic American success story. He is living the American Dream.
Born in South Korea, Kim moved with his parents to the United States at age 5. He is a naturalized U.S. citizen.
In high school he played football and basketball and was valedictorian of his graduating class.
He attended the University of Iowa and Brown University where he graduated magna cum laude. Kim earned his M.D. from Harvard Medical School and Ph.D. in Anthropology at Harvard.
Kim was so devoted to community-focused health care that he co-founded Partners in Health in 1987 to promote it. He was executive director of the 13,000 employee organization in 2003 when he left to be an adviser to the World Health Organization.
He has held several positions at Harvard in teaching and promoting global health for some 20 years. He is currently president of Dartmouth University.
The World Bank Controversy
Yesterday, the Huffington Post reported that Kim’s nomination to the World Bank has generated a big flap because of a book he wrote in 2000 titled “Dying for Growth“. In that book he claims that emphasis by western global corporations on stimulating economic growth at any cost has increased poverty throughout the world.
The studies in this book present evidence that the quest for growth in GDP and corporate profits has in fact worsened the lives of millions of women and men
– Jim Yong Kim, Dying for Growth, 2000
To say the least, that is a pretty strange position to take for someone nominated to run the World Bank. Its no wonder Kim’s nomination is raising eyebrows.
Obama’s Liberal Approach to Economics
Even more stunning is that nobody, least of all President Obama, seems the least bit concerned that Kim has no banking experience whatsoever. None. Zero. Zipo. Nada!
Obama’s choice to head the World Bank has these qualifications:
- A 20-year academic career out of the Ivy League
- Promotes community-based health care around the globe
- President of Dartmouth University
- Blames pushing GDP growth and big global corporations for poverty
Nowhere in that background is there a shred of evidence that he is qualified to be the 3rd world’s banker.
You’d think the World Bank would want someone with banking experience who isn’t anti-business and anti-growth. But that is not who Obama picked.
Most interesting is that Kim follows the Obama formula for nominees and appointments. They come primarily from academic backgrounds, often Harvard, and more often than not have frighteningly little practical experience for the positions they are picked. They universally share Obama’s utopic world views.
As accomplished as he is in academia, no fiscal conservative in a million years would have ever nominated Jim Yong Kim to head the World Bank.
Some common themes found in liberal economic thinking:
- No economic growth without taxpayer supported big government solutions
- More government regulations are a panacea for problems
- Corporations are 100% profit-oriented, anti-worker and regularly ripoff consumers
- Private corporations and Wall Street are the cause of, not the solution for, economic turmoil
That is the type of liberal thinking that leads President Obama to nominate an academic holding an anti-business, anti-growth world view to head the World Bank.
Its scary to think we might just pull an academic out of his Ivy League office, shove him into an important job for which he has few qualifications or experience and expect him to help the 3rd world weather global recession or worse… and that person blames GDP growth for world poverty, ta boot!
Whatever happened to the work ethic, paying your bills, self-reliance, and everyone pulling their own weight together to confront and overcome seeming insurmountable obstacles? Why is big government the solution to everything? Why is someone else – corporations, Wall Street, the Chinese and/or the rich – and not ourselves to blame for all our problems? Why have so many of us absolved ourselves from responsibility?
If you ask these kinds of questions frequently then you have a fiscal conservative point of view. You’ll probably want to vote Republican this year.
If you share the view that government exists to solve all problems; if you believe that wealth redistribution from “them” to you is A-OK; if you believe government exists to provide you benefits and freebies because, as an American, it is your birthright; if you believe that corporations and the rich just rip everyone off; if you believe that an idealized vision of the world is all you need to solve real problems… then you’ll probably vote Democratic this year.
The two choices are crystal clear!