April, 08 2021, 12:00am EDT
"Don't Feed the Greed Kristalina": Citizen Call for Debt Reform (or Revolt) at IMF/WBG Spring Meetings
To mark the start of two important days of debt negotiations, the international campaigning group Avaaz has invited a special guest to perform in front of IMF headquarters at the spring meetings: Evita Peron.
Singing in English, an activist dressed as Evita performed a debt-restructured version of the hit "Don't Cry for me Argentina," which includes the refrain: Don't feed the greed, Argentina / The truth is you give them Nature / All through your wildlife / Your green resilience /Just keep your glaciers / And save the planet!
WASHINGTON
To mark the start of two important days of debt negotiations, the international campaigning group Avaaz has invited a special guest to perform in front of IMF headquarters at the spring meetings: Evita Peron.
Singing in English, an activist dressed as Evita performed a debt-restructured version of the hit "Don't Cry for me Argentina," which includes the refrain: Don't feed the greed, Argentina / The truth is you give them Nature / All through your wildlife / Your green resilience /Just keep your glaciers / And save the planet!
Evita's composition is intended to draw attention to the fact that while Argentina holds a significant IMF debt, it also shares crucial climate and biodiversity wealth, free of charge. A similar imbalance (of monetary poverty despite biodiversity wealth) exists in the majority of highly-indebted poor countries (HIPC) whose IMF debts are set to be renegotiated to allow for additional urgent needs resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The lyrics highlight the fact that Argentina has one of the biggest environmental surpluses in the world, in contrast to its financial creditors, the majority of whom have a green deficit.
Avaaz is calling upon Argentina to start an international debt rebellion which would take into account contributions of climate and biodiversity wealth in overall debt calculations. This would allow poor countries to stop paying money to rich countries and invest instead in the well-being if their people and the protection of their natural wealth, with a benefit for all of us. Avaaz also calls upon the IMF's Managing Director, Kristalina Georgieva to stand her ground in negotiations towards a radical debt reform.
Oscar Soria, Campaign Director at Avaaz, said in a press conference at the front of IMF HQ:
"To mark the start of these crucial spring meetings, Avaaz brought an Argentine icon to call for social inclusion and ecological justice in the current debt negotiations. The ecological debt should be considered in any further negotiations between rich and poor nations."
"Given the emerging global recognition of the need to include nature in economic models it is time that debt calculations take into account the biodiversity and climate protections provided by many developing countries, usually for little or no financial reward. By rethinking who is indebted to whom we will establish a new green economy that protects our planet while tackling debt through a sustainable and equitable lens
The perpetual renegotiation of sovereign debt between rich and poor countries is a cruel feature of a colonial mindset that believes it is fine for the wealthy to profit from the natural riches and resources of the poor, with little concern for helping them out of poverty. As a result, too many governments, especially in the Global South, find themselves stuck in spirals of indebtedness that prohibit them from investing in the health and well-being of their citizens. We fear this will only be exacerbated by the social and economic blows of the Covid-19 pandemic."
What Avaaz would like to see happen at the IMF/WB Spring Meetings:
Special Drawing Rights (SDRs): The world's wealthiest countries (primarily G7 and G20) should be called upon to:
* Reallocate a significant proportion of
their SDRs to support rapid access to liquidity for vulnerable countries. A collective target of 90% of SDR allocation to G20 countries should be reallocated to vulnerable countries.
* Put these new SDRs to good use: whether the new SDRs remain at the IMF or are poured into a new "SDRs Trust Fund" to make grants and concessional lending, the actual use of the money should be aligned with recipient countries' development priorities, and always be fully aligned with fulfilling the SDGs and the Paris Climate Agreement objectives.
Modernizing the Role of the IMF: The IMF should seize the opportunity of the ongoing Comprehensive Surveillance Review (CSR) (which will reform the IMF's surveillance for the next decade) to implement steps that ensure it is up to the challenge of supporting a more resilient and sustainable global economy. These steps could include:
* Strengthen the IMF's surveillance mechanisms and funding to recognize and avoid increasing risks posed by climate change and biodiversity loss. Despite the emerging threats they pose to macro-stability, the IMF has yet to include such risks into Article IV surveillance. Several publications (including from Carbon Tracker, IRENA, Mark Carney) show increasing "transition risks" due to the rapid transition to a net zero economy, including the growing risks of stranded assets estimated between $3-7 trillion by IRENA.
* The Fund's debt policies should be tailored to the challenge of addressing climate change. The joint World Bank-IMF Debt Sustainability Analysis Framework (DSA) should include climate related risks (including transition risks) and better assess the fiscal multipliers associated with green investments. With a longer term time horizon, the DSA must recognize the benefits of green (and blue) over grey investments, as recommended by the Joint V20-IMF Action Agenda, and the increasing risks of investing in unsustainable fossil-based infrastructures. Key points to support from the V20-IMF Joint Action Agenda are:
1. Mainstreaming systematic and transparent assessments of climate-related financial risks in all IMF operations.
2. Consistent, systematic, and universal appraisal and treatment of physical climate risks and transition risks for all countries in Article IV consultations and Financial Sector Assessment Programs.
3. Advancing disclosure of climate-related financial risks and promoting sustainable finance and investment practices.
4. Exploring synergies between fiscal and monetary policies.
5. Mainstreaming of climate risk analysis in public financial management and supporting the development of a climate disaster risk financing and insurance architecture.
6. Supporting climate vulnerable countries with debt sustainability problems.
7. Developing the IMF toolkit for climate emergency financing.
8. Exploring options to use Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) to support climate vulnerable countries.
9. Supporting the design and implementation of carbon pricing mechanisms.
10. Institutionalizing collaboration between the Fund and the V20.
Avaaz.org is a new global web movement with a simple democratic mission: to close the gap between the world we have, and the world most people everywhere want. "Avaaz" means "Voice" in many Asian, Middle Eastern and Eastern European languages. Across the world, most people want stronger protections for the environment, greater respect for human rights, and concerted efforts to end poverty, corruption and war. Yet globalization faces a huge democratic deficit as international decisions are shaped by political elites and unaccountable corporations -- not the views and values of the world's people.
LATEST NEWS
In Wake of Killing, UnitedHealth CEO Admits 'No One Would Design a System Like the One We Have'
One critic said UnitedHealth Group chief executive Andrew Witty should "resign and then dedicate every dollar he has to dismantling the current system brick by brick and building one based on public health in its stead."
Dec 13, 2024
UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty wrote in a New York Times op-ed Friday that the for-profit U.S. healthcare system "does not work as well as it should" and that "no one would design a system like the one we have," admissions that came as his industry faced a torrent of public anger following the murder of UnitedHealthcare's chief executive.
Witty declared that his firm, the parent company of UnitedHealthcare and the nation's largest private insurer, is "willing to partner with anyone, as we always have—healthcare providers, employers, patients, pharmaceutical companies, governments, and others—to find ways to deliver high-quality care and lower costs."
But critics didn't buy Witty's expressed commitment to reforming an industry that his company has helped shape and profited from massively. Witty was the highest-paid healthcare executive in the U.S. last year, and 40% of the private insurance industry's total profit since the passage of the Affordable Care Act has flowed to UnitedHealth Group.
"It is (barely) true that UnitedHealth didn't design the U.S. system of corporate insurance, which kills tens of thousands of people a year through denial of care," Alex Lawson, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works, told Common Dreams. "But they certainly have perfected it and turned it into a medical murder apparatus at industrial scale. They not only block all attempts to change the system in the direction of public health, they bribe and bully with their billions in blood money to make it even crueler."
"Andrew Witty is the high priest of the temple to Moloch and Mammon, murder and money," Lawson added. "And there is no way for him to wash his hands of it, except perhaps to resign and then dedicate every dollar he has to dismantling the current system brick by brick and building one based on public health in its stead."
"Medicare for All is the only proposal on the table capable of delivering universal, continuous coverage for everyone, while also securing the efficiency and savings only possible through the elimination of private insurance."
While publicly pledging to cooperate with reform efforts, Witty has defended his company's care denials in private and urged his employees not to engage with media outlets in the aftermath of Thompson's murder.
Contrary to Witty's depiction of his company in his Times op-ed, UnitedHealth has historically been an aggressive opponent of reform efforts aimed at mitigating the harms of for-profit insurance and building public alternatives. The Leverreported in 2021 that UnitedHealth Group "held a webinar to pressure its rank-and-file employees to mobilize against efforts in Connecticut to create a state-level public health insurance option."
At the national level, UnitedHealth has spent over $5.8 million this year lobbying the federal government, according to OpenSecrets.
Witty, who was born in a country with a public healthcare system, did not detail the kinds of reforms he would support in his op-ed Friday, but it's clear he would oppose a transition to a single-payer system such as Medicare for All, which would effectively abolish private health insurance and provide coverage to all Americans for free at the point of service—and at a lower total cost than the status quo.
In a column for The Nation on Friday, writer Natalie Shure argued that "the appalling amount of resources and energy we put into maintaining the existence of health insurance is wasted on an industry with no social value whatsoever."
"You could eliminate every one of these corporations tomorrow and build a system without them that works better, for less money, and with less hassle," Shure wrote. "Other countries already have systems like this. Medicare for All is the only proposal on the table capable of delivering universal, continuous coverage for everyone, while also securing the efficiency and savings only possible through the elimination of private insurance."
"None of that means that murder is justified or useful," Shure added. "But anger can be. Some politicians, from Bernie Sanders, to Elizabeth Warren, to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have begun to make public statements ascribing the reaction to Brian Thompson's murder to widespread fury over the health insurance industry. The next step is to harness it, and to build something new."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Why Can't We Fund Universal Public Goods? Blame the Tax-Dodging Billionaire Nepo Babies
"In 2024, these billionaire families used their enormous wealth to make record-breaking political contributions to secure a GOP trifecta," reads a new report.
Dec 13, 2024
The children of the richest families in the U.S. are well-known for spending their vast wealth on frivolous luxuries—constructing a replica of a medieval church on their acres of property, in the case of banking heir Timothy Mellon, or starting a brand of T-shirts described by one critic as "terrible beyond your wildest imagination," as Wyatt Koch, nephew of Republican megadonors Charles and David, did.
But a report released by Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) on Thursday shows how "billionaire nepo babies" don't just waste their families' fortunes. They also benefit from "a rigged system" that allows them to "pass that wealth down over generations without being properly taxed–often without being taxed at all."
In addition, the heirs of the country's biggest fortunes spend vast sums "to elect politicians who protect their unearned wealth and manipulate the country's economy in their favor," said ATF.
Along with Mellon and Koch, the report profiles Samuel Logan of the Scripps media dynasty; Nicola Peltz-Beckham, daughter of billionaire investor Nelson Peltz; Gabrielle Rubenstein, whose family has made its fortune in private equity; and President-elect Donald Trump's son, Eric Trump.
The nepo babies are part of a small group of billionaire families in the U.S. who benefit from tax loopholes that ensure little of their immense wealth ever goes to benefit the public good.
At least 90 billionaires have passed away over the last decade, leaving their beneficiaries $455 billion in collective wealth.
But according to ATF, "$255 billion (56%) of that amount was likely entirely exempt from the capital gains tax because of a special break called 'stepped up basis.'"
"Trump and his allies in Congress are doing their donors' bidding by rigging the system in their favor and pushing a $4 trillion giveaway to wealthy elites and giant corporations."
Without loopholes included the stepped up basis tax cut, the current estate tax on billionaires and centimillionaires would yield enough revenue to fund universal childcare, preschool, and paid family leave for U.S. workers, with hundreds of billions of dollars left over, according to ATF's report.
The wealthy heirs profiled in the report and their families are some of the Republican Party's top donors—contributing hundreds of millions of dollars to candidates including Trump in the hopes of securing even more tax cuts.
Mellon, for example, is Trump's "biggest supporter, giving $140 million to a pro-Trump PAC in 2024 alone," reads the report.
A previous analysis by ATF found that as of late October, just 150 billionaire families had spent $1.9 billion on the 2024 elections.
As the Center for American Progress found earlier this year, Trump's plan to extend the tax cuts that he pushed through in 2017 would cost $4 trillion over the next decade.
"The vast wealth inherited by centuries-old billionaire families is staggering. While these heirs and their billions go undertaxed, enormous sums are squandered on lavish mansions, private jets, and vanity projects instead of funding crucial public investments," said ATF executive director David Kass. "In 2024, these billionaire families used their enormous wealth to make record-breaking political contributions to secure a GOP trifecta. Now, Trump and his allies in Congress are doing their donors' bidding by rigging the system in their favor and pushing a $4 trillion giveaway to wealthy elites and giant corporations—all while advocating for cuts to vital programs that working and middle-class Americans depend on."
The report calls for Congress to pass "proven, pragmatic proposals to unrig the tax system that enjoy high levels of popular support," such as the Ultra Millionaire Tax Act that was proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) this year. The bill would tax fortunes between $50 million and $1 billion at 2% and wealth above $1 billion at $1 billion.
The small tax on enormous wealth would generate "a whopping $3 trillion over 10 years," said ATF.
The estate tax could also be "restored so that it can play a meaningful role in promoting fairness and equal opportunities" through the passage of the For the 99.5% Act, which was introduced in 2023 by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.).
Under the bill, the estate tax exemption would be lowered to $7 million per couple and the current 40% flat rate would be replaced with a sliding scale that would charge higher rates as a family's wealth grows.
"None of these tax reforms would impoverish the ultra wealthy, nor even inconvenience them in any meaningful way–but they would reduce the concentration of wealth that is so corrosive to society," reads the report. "At the same time, they would raise trillions of dollars that could be used to reduce inequality and improve the lives of families that can only dream of the kind of security and opportunity enjoyed by the nation’s richest clans."
"And if rich families ever did need to tighten their belts a bit to pay their taxes," the report continues, "the economizing might begin by reducing the flow of money funding the extravagant lifestyles of America's Billionaire Nepo Babies."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Next Recession Starts Here': Trump Team Weighs Abolishing Bank Regulators
The president-elect's advisers are reportedly discussing plans to shrink or eliminate key bank watchdogs, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Dec 13, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump and his advisers are reportedly considering plans to weaken—or abolish altogether—top bank regulators, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
The Wall Street Journalreported Thursday that members of Trump's transition team and the new Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency have asked nominees under consideration to head the FDIC and OCC if the bank watchdogs could be eliminated and have their functions absorbed by the Treasury Department, which is set to be run by a billionaire hedge fund manager and crypto enthusiast.
"Bank executives are optimistic President-elect Donald Trump will ease a host of regulations on capital cushions and consumer protections, as well as scrutiny of consolidation in the industry," the Journal reported. "But FDIC deposit insurance is considered near sacred. Any move that threatened to undermine even the perception of deposit insurance could quickly ripple through banks and in a crisis might compound customer fears."
The Trump team's internal and fluid discussions about the fate of the key bank regulators broadly aligns with Project 2025's proposal to "merge the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Federal Reserve's non-monetary supervisory and regulatory functions."
The FDIC, which is primarily funded by bank insurance premiums, was established during the Great Depression to restore public trust in the nation's banking system, and the agency played a central role in navigating the 2023 bank failures that threatened a systemic crisis.
Observers warned that gutting the FDIC and OCC could catalyze another economic meltdown.
"The next recession starts here," tech journalist Jacob Silverman warned in response to the Journal's reporting.
Eric Rauchway, a historian of the New Deal, wrote that "even Milton Friedman appreciated the FDIC," underscoring the extreme nature of the incoming Trump administration's deregulatory ambitions.
Musk, the world's wealthiest man, is also pushing for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
The Journal noted Thursday that "Rep. Andy Barr, a Republican from Kentucky and Trump ally on the House Financial Services Committee, has backed the plan to eliminate or drastically alter the CFPB and said he wants to get rid of what he calls 'one-size-fits-all' regulation for banks."
Barr has received millions of dollars in campaign donations from the financial sector and "introduced many pieces of pro-industry legislation, including significant rollbacks of protections stemming from the 2008 financial crisis," according to the watchdog group Accountable.US.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular