Respected analysts of the world economy are starting to question whether the IMF is indeed essential. Better to get rid of the IMF, some libertarian economists argue, than to allow national governments to think they are too important to go bankrupt. Some on the left agree that the IMF should go. But rather than using the agency's death as an invitation to experiment with fewer rules on the international economy, they would build a more just and effective system in its place. The world economy does need a lender of last resort.
Global capitalism is too unstable to let governments bear the full brunt of the market's whims.
It is one thing for investors, customers and lenders to punish a corporation for its mistakes. When Ecuador goes bust, it's not government officials but the country's poorest citizens who suffer most. So any successor to the IMF would have to assume the responsibility of bailing out some countries under certain circumstances. But this doesn't need to be handled by gray functionaries beholden to the economic establishment. Then it should draw on a wide panel of distinguished citizens, from all walks of life, to establish a set of goals for its technocrats.