What are the criticisms of the WTO AND THE IMF ?

Question

Does anyoen know any criticism of the WTO( WORLD TRADING ORGANISATION) AND THE IMF( INTERNATIONAL MONETORY FUND)

Answer 1

No, not really, but  soon all their resources will be towards IndoChina and Brazil as the emerging nations.

Answer 2

They s***w developing nations. End of.

Answer 3

pointless organisations, basically corporate business run from the USA, exploiting poor countries, with loans they can never pay off!

Answer 4

They each have their own criticisms.

For the IMF, their lending policies towards developing nations is one of their most severe criticisms, particularly in Africa.  The IMF was originally created, along with the WB, to help reconstruction in Europe after WWII, but found little to do afterwards.  It then took on the task of helping other nations develop.  The problem that many critics see is that the IMF requires states to have certain financial policies before they will give them a loan.  Typically, these policies involve forcing the recieving state to focus its economy and economic resources on exporting and comparative advantage.  While this is fine for some states, it leads to less investment in infrastructure (roads, education, water, etc.).  Certain policies require that the funds given must go to very specific things (like $100K to develop roads, but only those for industry purposes) or money to build a shipping dock, but they are not allowed to use the money in the ways that they seem fit.  While it could be considered that the IMF is attempting to stop fraud and corruption by having these policies, they also deter infrastructure from being built and can have a negative impact on the state.  Also, focusing on comparative advantage can be a risky venture.  If IMF policy for a loan requires a state to produce exports for comparative advantage in some product (typically agricultural) then what happens when markets for this one product fall?  The entire economy of the developing state will collapse.  

The WTO falls into similar criticism for its policies in developing nations as well.  To become a member, states have to meet rigerous requirements before being allowed in.  Many of these requirements are that they must open up their economies to foreign investment and to all other members markets.  The problem here arises that since all states basically have a free-trade system within the WTO, how are the developing countries going to stand any chance against developed states with well established industry?  Would Camaroon or Chad have any kind of a chance of out competing China in making textiles?  There is no way.  And since the IMF has given them loans to only focus on their comparative advantage (which was textiles) then their economy is completely tanked.  You are then left in a worse situation then when the country began and now they also have a multi-billion dollar loan to repay.  A loan that the IMF has been very tough on and unwilling to allow for debt-forgiveness.