Wednesday, April 20, 2011
David Cameron Is Wrong, Gordon Brown Should Be Next IMF Director
So says James Wolfensohn, former head of World Bank.
One day after British Prime Minister David Cameron offered a scathing denunciation of Gordon Brown’s qualifications to oversee the world's economic and financial affairs as head of the IMF, James Wolfensohn told The Huffington Post that the conservative leader was still "a little bitter" over the nasty campaign his Tory Party narrowly won last election. If "internal politics" are extracted from the debate, he said, "there is no one better than Gordon Brown".
But of course the British are notoriously stingy and mean, compared to the rest of the world. For example, the relatively poor small country of Taiwan has already donated at least $2.5 billion to the Japan tsunami victims, and the British have donated next to nothing. With Cameron as Prime Minister, even poor British people are left to starve, as long as Cameron and his old friends from the Bullingham club are happy.
IMO: Of course Wolfensohn is right. From the UK standpoint, Brown may be too fair to the poor. I'm not sure that I would favour aid to the EU myself, as many of its members seem to be better off by far than the UK, and the Brits do not really want a further EU coalition, generally speaking. Portugal, for instance, is hardly a third world country and the Indians are still suffering indirectly from the Portuguese imposed Goan Inquisition though most Indians would prefer to forget it. And Cameron even tried to help British telecom companies to dodge millions in tax evasion in India. Cameron possibly should be sharing a cell with A. Raja.
One day after British Prime Minister David Cameron offered a scathing denunciation of Gordon Brown’s qualifications to oversee the world's economic and financial affairs as head of the IMF, James Wolfensohn told The Huffington Post that the conservative leader was still "a little bitter" over the nasty campaign his Tory Party narrowly won last election. If "internal politics" are extracted from the debate, he said, "there is no one better than Gordon Brown".
But of course the British are notoriously stingy and mean, compared to the rest of the world. For example, the relatively poor small country of Taiwan has already donated at least $2.5 billion to the Japan tsunami victims, and the British have donated next to nothing. With Cameron as Prime Minister, even poor British people are left to starve, as long as Cameron and his old friends from the Bullingham club are happy.
IMO: Of course Wolfensohn is right. From the UK standpoint, Brown may be too fair to the poor. I'm not sure that I would favour aid to the EU myself, as many of its members seem to be better off by far than the UK, and the Brits do not really want a further EU coalition, generally speaking. Portugal, for instance, is hardly a third world country and the Indians are still suffering indirectly from the Portuguese imposed Goan Inquisition though most Indians would prefer to forget it. And Cameron even tried to help British telecom companies to dodge millions in tax evasion in India. Cameron possibly should be sharing a cell with A. Raja.
# posted by uv : 9:30 PM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
