Rapid Responses to:

REVIEWS: Barbara Stocking The World's Banker: A Story of Failed States, Financial Crises, and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations BMJ 2005; 330: 736 [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

The Wolfies’ war on poverty

Mark Struthers   (24 March 2005)

Poverty of Nations a Great Success?

John P. Heptonstall   (26 March 2005)

The Wolfies’ war on poverty 24 March 2005
Mark Struthers, General Practitioner Bedfordshire, UK. mark.struthers@which.net Send response to journal: Re: The Wolfies’ war on poverty	President George Bush has decreed that Paul Wolfowitz will succeed Jim Wolfensohn as the World’s Banker. ‘The Wolfies’ are America’s gift to the world and the war on poverty. “The Wolfowitz appointment is in the spirit of the Marshall Plan and all the other generous initiatives over the past 60 years by the US to help less favoured nations.” Mr Wolfowitz apparently “believes that all mankind is entitled to the same opportunities as are now enjoyed by the West”. [1] With 5% of its population, the US squanders 25% of the world’s energy. Mr Wolfowitz believes that in spreading US freedom and democracy around the world that it is possible for humanity (6.5bn and rising by 75m per year) to aspire to the American way of life and levels of consumption. Mr Wolfowitz is an intellectual and an idealist. He will become God’s Banker. [1] Bruce Anderson. Editorial & Opinion. The Independent. 21 March 2005. Competing interests: None declared
Poverty of Nations a Great Success? 26 March 2005
John P. Heptonstall, Director of The Morley Acupuncture Clinic and Complementary Therapy Centre. Practitioner of TCM -acu LS27 8EG Send response to journal: Re: Poverty of Nations a Great Success?	Surely Barbara Stocking's comment that Macnamara's inroads into 'poverty reduction' somehow failed is incorrect? She says "Robert MacNamara's earlier vision of poverty reduction had faded, and the bank had become cautious, technocratic, and out of touch with the effects of its policies on poverty. It was under severe challenge from non -governmental organisations (NGOs), including my own, Oxfam, because its structural adjustment policies were making poor people poorer by reducing public services such as health and education, as well as taking away support to poor farmers. As a result of the rise in oil prices and the decline in income from other commodities, many poor countries had also built up enormous debt, and NGOs were calling for debt relief—although this was ignored by the bank". I would say the policies were an enormous success - the banks got richer and people got poorer - isn't that what banks generally desire, for local banks to amass local peoples' assests and global banks global peoples' assets? Regards John H. Competing interests: None declared