the G-20 set up

The G-20 just happened. Why was the G20 setup?


http://www.g20.org/about_faq.aspx#5_What_are_the_criteria_for_G-20_membership
2. Why was the G-20 set up?
The G-20 was created as a response both to the financial crises of the late 1990s and a growing recognition that key emerging-market countries were not adequately included in the core of global economic discussion and governance. Prior to the G-20 creation, similar groupings to promote dialogue and analysis had been established at the initiative of the G-7. The G-22 met at Washington D.C. in April and October 1998. Its aim was to involve non-G-7 countries in the resolution of global aspects of the financial crisis then affecting emerging-market countries. Two subsequent meetings comprising a larger group of participants (G-33) held in March and April 1999 discussed reforms of the global economy and the international financial system. The proposals made by the G-22 and G-33 to reduce the world economy's susceptibility to crises showed the potential benefits of a regular international consultative forum embracing the emerging-market countries. Such a regular dialogue with a constant set of partners was institutionalized by the G-20 creation in 1999
3. How does the G-20 differ from the G-7?
The G-7 was established in 1976 as an informal forum of seven major industrial economies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The G-7 conducts dialogue and seeks agreement on current economic issues on the basis of the comparable interests of those countries. The G-20 was established in 1999 and reflects the diverse interests of the systemically significant industrial and emerging-market economies. (see: About the G-20). It has a high degree of representativeness and legitimacy on account of its geographical composition (members are drawn from all continents) and its large share of global population (two-thirds) and world GNP (around 90 per cent). The G-20's broad representation of countries at different stages of development gives its consensus outcomes greater impact than those of the G-7.******(so then why have a G-7?)


Who are the G-20? Who are the G-7?

• Argentina: President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner

• Australia: Prime Minister Kevin Rudd

• Brazil: President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva

• Canada: Prime Minister Stephen Harper

• China: President Hu Jintao

• France: President Nicolas Sarkozy


• Germany: Chancellor Angela Merkel

• India: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

• Indonesia: President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono

• Italy: Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi


• Japan: Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama

• Mexico: President Felipe Calderón

• Russia: President Dmitry Medvedev

• Saudi Arabia: King Abdullah

• South Africa: President Jacob Zuma

• South Korea: President Lee Myung-bak

• Turkey: Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

• United Kingdom: Prime Minister Gordon Brown


• United States: President Barack Obama

3. How does the G-20 differ from the G-7?

The G-7 was established in 1976

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1976

The United States presidential election of 1976 followed the resignation of President Richard Nixon in the wake of the Watergate scandal. It pitted incumbent President Gerald Ford, the Republican candidate, against the relatively unknown former governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, the Democratic candidate. Ford was saddled with a slow economy and paid a political price for his pardon of Nixon. Carter ran as a Washington "outsider" and reformer and won a narrow victory.

as an informal forum of seven major industrial economies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The G-7 conducts dialogue and seeks agreement on current economic issues on the basis of the comparable interests of those countries. The G-20 was established in 1999

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1976

On February 12, 1999, the five-week impeachment trial of Bill Clinton comes to an end, with the Senate voting to acquit the president on both articles of impeachment: perjury and obstruction of justice.

and reflects the diverse interests of the systemically significant industrial and emerging-market economies. (see: About the G-20). It has a high degree of representativeness and legitimacy on account of its geographical composition (members are drawn from all continents) and its large share of global population (two-thirds) and world GNP (around 90 per cent). The G-20's broad representation of countries at different stages of development gives its consensus outcomes greater impact than those of the G-7.
• 5. What are the criteria for G-20 membership?

• In a forum such as the G-20, it is particularly important for the number of countries involved to be restricted and fixed to ensure the effectiveness and continuity of its activity. There are no formal criteria for G-20 membership and the composition of the group has remained unchanged since it was established. (when it’s loosey goosey like this it’s easy too say you can’t play) In view of the objectives of the G-20, it was considered important that countries and regions of systemic significance for the international financial system be included. Aspects such as geographical balance and population representation also played a major part.

4. Can all member countries exert equal influence?

Achieving consensus is the underlying principle of G-20 activity with regard to comments, recommendations and measures to be adopted. There are no formal votes or resolutions on the basis of fixed voting shares or economic criteria. Every G-20 member has one 'voice' with which it can take an active part in G-20 activity. To this extent the influence a country can exert is shaped decisively by its commitment.(how does one “prove one’s commitment?)

The more I look at this sham organization the more I see that things are shady. Why do I always find Jimmy Carters name associated with everything that sound squirrely?

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-09/26/content_12113854.htm

Group of 20 (G20) Summit, which was widely expected to seek a new direction for the global economy,

True, G20 Pittsburgh Leaders' Statement addressing comprehensive global economic and financial issues totals 23 pages.

The No. 1 result worth mentioning is the confirmation of the legitimacy of the G20's status as the top coordinating mechanism of the world's economic issues.

The move means that the G20 supplants the G7 and G8, institutions dominated by rich Western economies that will now be forums for discussing geopolitical issues, experts say.

Notably, a breakthrough has been made for international financial institutions' governance reform, with developing countries' rising strength being recognized. The G20 committed to a shift of at least five percent in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) quota share to dynamic emerging market and developing countries.



On rebalancing the world economy, G20 leaders agreed "to reform the global architecture to meet the needs of the 21st century."

"After this crisis, critical players need to be at the table and fully vested in our institutions to allow us to cooperate to lay the foundation for strong, sustainable and balanced growth," the statement said.

That rebalancing act involves the debt-laden United States saving more and export powerhouse China consuming more.

On world trade issues, the G20 set a timetable to secure a deal next year in long-running world trade talks. "We will fight protectionism. We are committed to bringing the Doha Round to a successful conclusion in 2010," the statement said.

The leaders also vowed to support the poorer, especially African countries.

In the short term, the demand-driven recovery, to some extent, has appeared. But in the long run, the structural shift of the world economy is still uncertain.

Second, there are still differences over financial regulation reform.

From Fox new :

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/25/obama-announce-expansion-global-cooperation/

"This decision brings to the table the countries needed to build a stronger, more balanced global economy, reform the financial system, and lift the lives of the poorest," the White House said in a statement.

The G8 will retain its national security focus, but be replaced by the broader G-20 on the issues of climate change, financial regulatory reform and global imbalances.

Though the news itself was an unexpected turn, the reasoning behind it was written in the tea leaves Thursday when Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner sang the praises of broadened global cooperation; making special note of the strides China, a non-G-8 country, has made in financial reforms.

>>>>>tea leaves- seriously do they really think that we are that stupid? So, they think that they have to send out a little hint. Like, here, look here. See this is proof that we are doing the right thing. Do they for one minute think that we don’t know that Tim Geithner sang the praises China and the great strides it was making so that later on when Obama took a stand they could use it as a point of reference? It’s an old trick that carnival people would use to trick people. Say something at the beginning of the show and make it sound as a fact, even if it’s made up. Then, use that fact to support another “fact.” It doesn’t even have to be the same exact thing it just needs to sound sort of similar to it. And this is FOX news. Conservative? Please. <<<<


Well at least BBC news is a bit more truthful

http://www.simonbaker.me/2/hi/business/7980394.stm

The G20 summit has ended in a global deal to boost world growth.
Is it the beginning of a new world economic order?
At first glance, there is less than meets the eye in the G20 communiqué.
Communiqué? So, now we all are supposed to speak French?
And it is the shift in the US position, which was previously the strongest opponent of international regulation, that has opened the way for a much broader attempt to regulate the financial sector.
These go far beyond banks' capital requirements to include the global regulation of hedge funds, tax havens and executive pay - something that would have been unthinkable before the crisis broke.
And in the new Financial Stability Board, which will now incorporate all G20 members, there is the potential for a powerful new global financial regulator.
Even more significant is the increased power given to the international financial institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, who have been subcontracted by the G20 to monitor and run many of their policies.
IMF managing director Dominique Strauss Kahn was jubilant after the meeting, saying that the IMF "is now truly back."
Scary!
Instead of Hitler, one man, we have a OLIGARCHY of world communism. They say it’s for the good of everyone. That’s what ushered in Communism to one country and another. Where that happened it quickly became a Tyranny, because that’s where they all wind up. And now they are doing the same thing, but it’s on a grander scale. World dominance by not one country, but the tyrants of a few countries. They will achieve World ORDER. What happens when they don’t come to amicable conclusions? What happens if one doesn’t go along? What happens one hard decisions need to be made? Like a mother who has to decide who lives and who dies between her two children, because she can’t support both or OVERSEE both at the same time?

The new world order will quickly determine that running the world with 1 “point of contact” is much smoother, than many all at once and then they will appoint a “leader” for a said term. Then the term will seem too small and too disturbing. Why upset the balance of things? Give the workers just enough freedom to be willing slaves. Have one leader and lets not try to CHANGE too many things now that we have things the way we want them. That’s where this thing is going. It’s a road to H^LL paved the G@@D intentions.


I have HOPE that we have at least ONE bad SEED, because all these people with good intentions are killing me….. killing US.