IMF-imposed cuts blamed for contributing to Ebola spread

[alhoon]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-30575375

"Spending cuts imposed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) may have contributed to the rapid spread of Ebola in three West African states, UK-based researchers say."

There's no denying that poor healthcare funding has contributed to the spread of Ebola and the death of thousands in Africa. And IMF asked for cuts.
What I don't know is whether IMF asked for "spending cuts" and the governments decided to cut from healthcare or if the IMF said more or less "you can't afford to keep your people healthy, cut healthcare spending" hence contributing to the death of thousands.

Some researchers in Cambridge say IMF is to blame, IMF says they are not and that healthcare spending increased in Western Africa the past 4 years.

[paleologos]

It is not the spending cuts in and off themselves.
It is the entire neoliberal agenda that the IMF shoved down these nations' throats.

In all likelyhood the IMF was hoping for privatization of the healthcare industry but they did not stop to think that healthcare services were not provided in industrial scale to begin with.

Ther is also the neoliberalization of agriculture.
Traditionally farmers in these countries engaged in a particular form of agroforestry.
They would cut a part of the jungle, cultivate their crops for a fwe years on the soil rich with nutrients and when those nutrients would get depleted they would abandon that field and let the jungle reclaim the land and they would do the same elsewhere.

With the IMF imposing their neoliberal agenda, multinational agribusnesses have taken control over vast swathes of jungle, they razed that jungle and planted oil palms.
The oil palm plantations attracted fruit bats who in those places they find both a secure nesting ground and a steady food supply.
Fruit bats are carriers of the ebolavirus and this new arrangement increases the interaction with humans.
The bats will often bite the harvest workers in defense of their nests and youngs, thus transmitting the virus.

[Mayer]

The crass injustice of this global free market dictatorship is clearly evident.
Each country should be able to freely protect their local business, jobs, welfare, land, environment as they see fit. Everything else is slavery to a few multinational companies and financial sharks.

[Caligula's_Horse]

It is not the spending cuts in and off themselves.
It is the entire neoliberal agenda that the IMF shoved down these nations' throats.

In all likelyhood the IMF was hoping for privatization of the healthcare industry but they did not stop to think that healthcare services were not provided in industrial scale to begin with.

Ther is also the neoliberalization of agriculture.
Traditionally farmers in these countries engaged in a particular form of agroforestry.
They would cut a part of the jungle, cultivate their crops for a fwe years on the soil rich with nutrients and when those nutrients would get depleted they would abandon that field and let the jungle reclaim the land and they would do the same elsewhere.

With the IMF imposing their neoliberal agenda, multinational agribusnesses have taken control over vast swathes of jungle, they razed that jungle and planted oil palms.
The oil palm plantations attracted fruit bats who in those places they find both a secure nesting ground and a steady food supply.
Fruit bats are carriers of the ebolavirus and this new arrangement increases the interaction with humans.
The bats will often bite the harvest workers in defense of their nests and youngs, thus transmitting the virus.

Or maybe its the fact that most of West Africa is composed of failed states that can barely collect taxes, never mind quarantine a plague.
When Ebola started spreading to the likes of Nigeria, a proper nation state (not exactly a developed nation, but still functional), they were able to effectively contain and stop the outbreak with relatively light damages.

Stopping a plague is all about vaccination where possible, and failing that, swift and uncompromising quarantine. Various brands of capitalism have very little to do with it.

As for the IMF in general, I find it difficult to blame them. Their type of organization is usually busy juggling several dozen different causes at once, neither of which can ever get proper funding. Shorting one cause can vastly improve another, and vice verse. They really have no option but to gamble at where their money would do the most good (and cuts the least harm), and as all gambles go, sometimes you win, sometimes you don't.

[Mangalore]

The crass injustice of this global free market dictatorship is clearly evident.
Each country should be able to freely protect their local business, jobs, welfare, land, environment as they see fit. Everything else is slavery to a few multinational companies and financial sharks.

That is a rather shortsighted view. Given these countries want something from those companies creating a protected market doesn't precisely help them in any way, didn't help anyone who wasn't already advanced in the 19th century neither.

And can I get a dollar for every time someone uses neoliberalism as some kind of argument when in and of itself it isn't? The iMF hands out debt when none else would. Anyone think there was ever a finiancial establishment in world history that didn't demand to have some say on its usage in return?

[Thorn777]

That is a rather shortsighted view. Given these countries want something from those companies creating a protected market doesn't precisely help them in any way, didn't help anyone who wasn't already advanced in the 19th century neither.

And can I get a dollar for every time someone uses neoliberalism as some kind of argument when in and of itself it isn't? The iMF hands out debt when none else would. Anyone think there was ever a finiancial establishment in world history that didn't demand to have some say on its usage in return?

Do you have any more of those blanket statements? Because I like blankets and the sleep.