Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty Jack
If you really can't see why this is wrong, then that is very worrying.
For example the Zambia debt was originally to buy tractors. They were repaying the debt for 20 years, and now they still have to pay back at least $40m. How is that fair? Do you really think Zambia ever received anything close to $40m? This has nothing to do with repaying what they were given. This is being held over a barrel and squeezed dry just because they can. Global loan sharks.
Surely you can see that's wrong?
|
Isn't that the same deal home owners get every time they apply for a mortgage? Okay, I can see that they maybe didn't get the best deal, but the fact is their government was still responsible for the debt. Neither the original creditors nor the ones now in possession of the debt ever made any claims towards philanthropy, so why should they liquidate an asset worth millions of pounds?
I'm not saying I would do what they're doing, but I can see why they're doing it.