Talk:Microfinance/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Microfinance. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Section 2.1: Challenges/USA

Hi Amrad. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. This section may not be encyclopedic as it reads rather like a press release by Grameen Foundation USA. It could be reworked and could find a good home perhaps in the article on Grameen Bank. In addition, for the microfinance article the entry is too narrow in scope and inadequately cited. Specifically, if you wish to address the problem of microfinance in the developed world you'll at least need to:

look at some 25 years of history of efforts to start microcredit funds in developed urban areas (none of which have proved sustainable as yet),
explain why you think this one will be different, based on how it addresses the problems that plagued its predecessors (a book was published on this topic a few years ago, you could check for it on Amazon)
ideally look at the experience of aboriginal and rural microcredit in developed countries

These should provide useful content for the Wiki page on microcredit. If you want it to work for this page, you'll also need to

look at similar questions related to the larger microfinance problem (microsavings, micropensions, international remittances, microinsurance, etc.)Brett epic (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amrad. I have archived your text below for future reference. As noted above, it is about microcredit specifically, not about microfinance. If you can eliminate the bias in tone and expand the focus of interest you will be doing a service to all of us who care about microfinance!Brett epic (talk) 16:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC) Strikingly, Grameen Bank not only provides microloans in poor countries, but also in the world's richest country, the USA, where 37 million people (12.6%) live below the poverty line. [1] Grameen Bank started this operation in New York in april 2008, because the economic crisis created a need for this sort of aid. Grameen Bank founder Muhammad Yunus: "About a quarter of the US population cannot get a microloan from the traditional banks because they do not fit the pofile of the perfect customer." And this has only gotten worse with the crisis. This results in a huge market for a bank like Grameen. The plan is to give out 175 million US$ worth of loans over 5 years. If successful, Grameen will also start giving out mortgages for the poor (nicknamed sub sub sub subprime). An earlier attempt at microloans in the US, at the request of Bill Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas, failed because there weren't enough lenders, but the situation has changed now. According to economist Jonathan Murdoch of New York University, microloans have less appeal in the US because people think it too difficult to escape poverty through private enterprise.

Proposed revised structure of microfinance article

I am proposing a new draft of the microfinance article. You can preview it at Microfinance Revised Draft. It focuses on

the problem microfinance is attempting to solve
distinguishing microfinance from other related but distinct things like microcredit, informal finance, grants by NGOs, etc.
recent studies of how poor people manage their money, and what microfinance services they need
the current scale and scope and microfinance world-wide
the evolution and rationale behind the "inclusive financial systems" approach that has now been adopted by the United Nations, the Group of Eight and CGAP, and has helped propel the shift from microcredit to a more balance form of microfinance in recent years
the range of diverse institutional forms that have evolved historically to meet the demand for microfinance, and how the "inclusive systems" approach supports their development
the current debates about microfinance

My new draft removes the large but as yet very incomplete introductory section on history. I wrote that myself a few months ago, but on reflection I think there should be a brief section on history in the main article, and a separate 'microfinance history' article. This would better serve the overall goal.

My goal is to create a 'stable, non-commercial version' of this article -- one that is structured, researched and credible enough to resist random insertions of comments like "the world's most famous business magazine, Forbes recognized NGO X for this" and "NGO Y has been the fastest growing in Country Z's history". While such comments are well intentioned, they are not 'encyclopedic' and can only confuse the reader who is trying to grasp what microfinance is. There is also still a need for other articles about selected topics in microfinance (like microsavings, micropayments, informal moneylenders, rural banks, self-help groups, ASCAs etc., etc.). And of course there is room for specialized articles not just on notable institutions, but also on microfinance in Africa, India, Latin America etc., etc. Let's not try to put everything in one article!

Please review my draft (which still needs work!) and make any comments you wish about it. Of course it can always be edited after it is posted, as well.Brett epic (talk) 17:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Very impressive. I wouldn't have any objections to just moving it over and taking it from there. I added one external link to the draft, at least as a reminder for now, UNCDF Microfinance Distance Learning Program. One thing I would like to see is a cited definition of microfinance in the intro from a world-respected source. Unfortunately, the UNCDF Glossary doesn't have one. However, the Course Workbook makes some good points in Lesson 1.1 Fundamental Concepts. Within the broader discussion, they state, "Today, many speak in more general terms of microfinance as the provision of financial services to those excluded from the formal financial system." I would be very happy to see this article go in a direction like this. RichardF (talk) 17:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Just as a brainstorming tool, here's an outline of the course. Obviously, this article wouldn't be so detailed, but the outline could help define the scope of what should be included here and what could be included in realted articles.

The World of Microfinance
1. Fundamental Concepts
  1. Myth or Fact
  2. Why Microfinance
  3. The Goal of Microfinance
  4. Key Operating Principles of Microfinance
  5. Evolution of the Field of Microfinance
2. Clients and Services
  1. Myth or Fact
  2. Financial Management in Households
  3. Effective Savings and Credit
  4. Using Credit: Three Case Studies
3. Microcredit Methodologies
  1. Credit Products and Methodologies
  2. Effective Methodologies
  3. Comparison of Methodologies
  4. Tailoring Delivery
  5. Why Adaptation is Important
4. Effects of the Local Environment
  1. Self-Assessment
  2. Economic/Social Policy Environment
  3. Regulation and Supervision
  4. Self-Assessment Revisited
Financial Analysis
1. Reading Financial Statements
  1. Balance Sheets
  2. Income Statements
  3. How They Relate
2. Measuring Delinquency
  1. The Portfolio and the Portfolio Report
  2. Why Measure Portfolio Quality?
  3. Measuring Portfolio Quality
  4. Effect of Loan Loss Provisions and Write-Offs
  5. Maintaining High Portfolio Quality
3. Key Financial Factors
  1. Financial Projections: Khaled's Example
  2. Factors Affecting Income
  3. Factors Affecting Expenses
  4. Factors Affecting Growth
4. Interest Rate Practices
  1. Charging Commercial Interest Rates
  2. Types of Interest Rates
  3. Estimating Annualized Effective Interest Rates
  4. Pricing Structures
5. Measuring Financial Viability
Institutional Analysis
1. Gauging Institutional Viability
  1. Components of Institutional Viability
  2. Some Measures of Institutional Health
  3. Donor/MFI Relations
  4. An Institutional Perspective
  5. An Effective Funding Relationship

RichardF (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Richard!

Other comments on or proposed revisions to the Microfinance Revised Draft from members of this forum are also welcome!Brett epic (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Microcredit under microfinance

Microcredit is simply one of the many services which consists microfinance as has been pointed here. so we can merge microcredit as a subpage of microfinance or we can have a portal called microfinance and all the different services can have their individual pages.

Subhrajyoti —Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhrajyoti07 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Microcredit should not be merged into microfinance. The total topic would be far too large, and readers would have difficulty separating the two concepts. This would simply exacerbate the widespread and sloppy conflation of these two distinct terms (as at the "Microcredit Summit" where people discuss all forms of microfinance). Microfinance in the broader sense has gained increasing attention in the past decade among practitioners, and most people now accept that the distinctions are important and other microfinancial services matter as well as credit. It would be good to have a microfinance portal; I don't know if there's enough articles to justify one yet ...Brett epic 02:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

When I created The Sustainable development Portal, I started with a dry-run for a portal on microfinance. My intent was to develop a portal that included the topic of microfinance and I believed could receive featured portal status. To me, that meant finding at least ten each "good enough" articles, bios and pics, plus some interesting content for the other sections. From that exercise, I decided there wasn't enough good material for a featured portal candidate on the topics of microfinance or international development. I had to widen the scope to the level of sustainable development before I felt a top-level portal was possible. If a microfinance portal were to be developed, I still believe finding enough good material for it would be a challenge. RichardF 02:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Microfinance entry, NOT microcredit

This article should be separate from Microcredit, those two terms are not synonymous. Microcredit was used in the past, but refers only to credit for the poor. Microfinance is much broader, includes credit, loans, savings, insurance etc. Please do NOT REDIRECT this page again. Thank you. (Comment made by World Bank Microfinance. [2])

Perhaps Microcredit should be moved/merged into Microfinance.Jobarts^-Talk 16:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

MicroAid might be worth mentioning too - micro-grants prior to microcredit. Example: [MicroAid Projects] TobyBeresford —Preceding comment was added at 15:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

POV and cleanup

Right now this article reads like an advertisement. I've done a little cleanup and wikification, but it still needs a lot of TLC and a POV review/fix. Ken ^talk 20:32, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Huge chunks come from here. Scrapped and redirected as before: quicker than going through copyvio procedure. Tearlach 23:38, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

The edit that first introduced content from that page was made by 138.220.42.4 [3], whose IP address is assigned to the World Bank Group [4]. Later edits attempting to keep the content on the page (rather than redirecting to Microcredit) were made by World Bank Microfinance [5].

Obvious POV issue, but I suppose that means they won't mind if we keep some of it.

I say we merge Microcredit into Microfinance, moving all of Microcredit here, then seeing if there's anything worth keeping from the World Bank's edits. (Though we should get an official confirmation from them if we end up using anything.)

World Bank Microfinance, I hope you co-operate in the development in this article, as you're probably familiar with the subject, but please read (at least some of) Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers, Wikipedia:Advertisement#How_not_to_be_a_spammer, and, if that's not too much, Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial before making more edits to this page.

Jobarts^-Talk 16:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

agreed-this article is horrifying right now. I think editing is a waste in this case-this needs a complete rewrite. sorry dont know how to sign.

I second that, and agree with the idea of moving the microcredit stuff into the microfinance page. I tried editing a bit, then realized this page needs a lot more effort than I'm willing to put in to take away the advertisement-y aspects.

I added a small statement about Fazle Abed, another early microfinance person (maybe the first one?). I heard about this from a talk from Ashoka, but it could use some elaboration from someone more in the know. User:jkuner

I replaced the "advert" tag with a "magazine" tag... it's really more advocacy than anything else but there's no template available for advoacy. The article has info, it just hides under the choice of diction, etc. I don't think it's bad that someone from World Bank Microfinance is editting - remember, WP:Don't bite the newbies, they just might not know the editing rules yet. Janet13 14:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I've had a go at rewording part of the article. I don't have access to sources though so it's hard to actually rewrite. There seems to be a lot of puffery on this article. Several recent additions seem to focus on the work of organizations or people (in generally very glowing terms), rather than the mechanisms that microfinance uses and the impact it has on people's lives. I think (from looking at the edit histories of these contributors) that we have several supporters of particular organizations editing on the page. While I understand the desire of a supporter to want to highlight their org, or someone they have found inspiring, I think it is having a detrimental impact on the article.

Because of this, and the fact that wikipedia is not a directory I'd like to start trimming down on some of the magnets for this type of editing. For a start delete the list of orgs and bring the further reading and external links list to the talk page for discussion on what would make a really good spring board for a reader. Go through and remove the rest of the peacock terms, weasel words, and over reliance on unsourced or uniformative examples. Finally insist that all new edits are verified by reliable sources and eventually source or weed out the current unsourced material. Does that sound reasonable? --Siobhan Hansa 19:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I definitely think this article needs a lot of work and would be willing to try and do something, over the next 3 months or so. One concern is the lack of historical perspective and a stressing of instituional activity. My other concern is a lack of experience of Wikipedia. I will look round the site for advice but would welcome any pointers.Paulwhittaker2 12:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Paul, your input would be very welcome. A greater historical perspective and coverage of noninstitutional microlending would be wonderful. There's already a little on this in the Traditional Microfinance Systems section, but it's unsourced and not very broad. Do you know of good books or journals that cover this? --Siobhan Hansa 21:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

POV in Criticism section

I have placed more than a dozen {{fact}} tags and an NPOV in the Criticism section. It claims that there is extensive criticism of Microfinance, but provides only one link to a critical article. Failure to provide citations makes almost the entire section worthless as encycopedia material.

Lack of a specific kind of evidence in support of a practice, as in the question of measuring results, is not criticism. Counterarguments to the alleged criticisms exist, but are not mentioned. For example, Muhammad Yunus and others have provided estimates of poverty reduction through Microfinance. While one may cite articles questioning their methodology or their definitions, one may not simply ignore the published data.

For example, Q&A with Muhammad Yunus cites a World Bank study and a customer survey done by Grameen.

--Cherlin (talk) 22:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Cherlin, why do you expect neutrality in a section of this article entitled 'criticisms'? The existence of this section brings important neutrality to what otherwise could risk being an unbalanced article. I would kindly ask you to remove the NPOV dispute.

Feel free to add the evidence Yunus offers of how many people emerge from poverty each year as a result of Grameen's very good work. I have not included it as my understanding is that when those who fall back below the poverty line are netted out, the picture is decidely less rosey. Certainly the studies that have looked at the macroeconomic impact of microfinance in Bangladesh have found little to cheer about, in spite of the tens of millions reached. When you include your piece, I'll bring balance to it. But I suspect that with Grameen II, that may change, and more positive evidence may emerge in the forseeable future. A section that bashes through that debate at present may not take the reader very far, unless they have an unusual interest in the topic. Perhaps the debate merits a separate article.

And why do you believe that people have no right to criticize certain aspects of microfinance simply because the matter has not been resolved due to lack of evidence one way or the other? A section on criticisms legitimately airs the views of those who doubt the hype advanced by practitioners that itself is not substantiated.

Cherlin, I do agree that it would be useful to bring more specific citations to this section. I will do this as soon as I can. If you have time to spare and you haven't already, you might want to take a look at the article on microcredit as it is in serious need of a rewrite.Brett epic (talk) 23:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Cherlin. I have up-dated the section on criticisms with a number of new citations. There are now 5, refering to a variety of views expressed from a number of sources, in this very short section.

Kindly remove the NPOV banner.Brett epic (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the NPOV tag as the edits Brett made seemed to address the specific issues raised. If issues persist please restore the tag and leave more detail here (or better yet - improve the article!). -- SiobhanHansa 02:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Let World Bank Microfinance clean up the article

It seems The World Bank has contributed greatly to this article, with its obiuos POV problems. It would be useful if they tried to correct their mistakes. I hope they are serious wiki-users, and realy wish to follow the guidelines, and cleaning up such a long article is a big job. Kjell Ingvaldsen 09:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

List of external links / Opportunities for Microfinance Lending

How do we decide which organisations' websites should be linked to and which should not? There are thousands of microfinance institutions which have websites, so the list under "Microfinance in Use" could become very long as everybody adds their own favourite institution.

The list of links under "Online resources" is very good. I suggest retaining this list and deleting "Microfinance in Use" altogether.--Robfuller 09:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see what you people are talking about, at least at a glance. Either it's been removed or isn't visible at a glance. Added the "Opportunities for Microfinance lending" section. There needs to be something here (a section) that either is a list or directs readers to a list of resources. Ashi Starshade 01:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Add Virtual Library on MicroCredit - This site has been around for years (since 1997) at least and is a good source of m-f definitions etc - rather than simply replicating all the effort that was done by Mr Srivinas - I suggest you add it to the microfinance page on wikipedia. http://www.gdrc.org/icm/index.html Thanks Toby User:Tobyberesford 03:18, 28 Dec 07 (GMT)

Microfinance history

I integrated this

Dr. Akhter Hameed Khan - Pioneer of Microfinance/Microcredit

Dr. Akhter Hameed Khan introduced the revolutionary idea of microcredit (microfinance), thereby opening a new door for billions of destitute and underprivileged. As head of the Pakistan Academy for Rural Development (now Bangladesh Academy for Rural Development, BARD) in Comilla, Bangladesh, Dr. Khan pioneered microfinance/microcredit through the Comilla Cooperative Pilot Project in 1960.
Sources:
http://www.akhtar-hameed-khan.8m.com/statesman-10-20-06.html
"The Works of Akhter Hameed Khan" Vol: I-III. Published by Bangladesh Academy for Rural Development

"Rural Development in Action : A Comprehensive Experiment at Comilla East Pakistan" by Arthur F Raper. Cornell University Press

recent edit into the lead. It conflicted with the current lead and the sources are not great (I can't find the original of the web article, and the other references don't provide page numbers), but since the original claim isn't sourced at all, and web searches do back up Akhter's use of microfinance it seemed reasonable to keep it. It would be good however to find proper research on the history of Microfinance. All I've found in a brief search are various claims (or repititions of claims) by groups to be first at this or that. No scholarly research. --Siobhan Hansa 13:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I made some revisions to the related articles based on Khan's own writings. See here and here. While Khan's experience and the lessons of his work are important, most reasonable observers would probably agree that the claim on this page is over-inflated. In any case, there is no evidence whatever that he 'introduced' microcredit, which has been around since at least the 1860s, arguably earlier.Brett epic 02:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleting information on Grameen and Grameen Foundation in the "Microfinance in Use" section

Will someone please explain to this neophyte why the information for Grameen and Grameen Foundation was removed but the information on other organizations was not removed?Shakespearesfool 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if my edit summary wasn't clear, I can be a little terse in them. And very sorry if you think I was picking on Grameen, that's not my intent.

I reverted your edit because the wording you provided was more detailed and read more like marketing speak. It also included external links which increased the promotional aspect of the text - when we have an article on a subject we should be linking to the article, not directly out to the org because we are here to provide encyclopedic information on subjects, not promotion of them.

I don't disagree that some of the other links could be edited down some, or that briefer, less peacock wording would benefit the Grameen wikilinks. --Siobhan Hansa 21:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Explanation of my large removal of text

Per the above complaints, I've removed alot of text for the following reasons:

It was written in a rather slanted (sounding to me) direction
- Certain sections looked like they were potentially copied from a copyrighted source (Note that this happened once before)
Alot of it was riddled with {{fact}} and contained many not backed up assertions
Some of it was couched in very technical (economic/accounting) wording.
At least one person above suggested that this articel would be better off being restarted from scratch.

I agree with the last person completely, the last time I ran across such a confusing uncited articel, my attempt to source the statements that were in it bogged down immediately, while a complete redaction and rewrite succeeded. I will attempt to build this articel back up and welcome anyone else to help ;D! Thanx, 68.39.174.238 01:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Done some... 68.39.174.238 03:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Definition of Microfinance

Is it really accurate to say that microfinance is a term for the practice of providing financial services to poor people? That is of course the result, but what the term really means is providing financial services in small dollar amounts. I'm guessing that the wording here has already been debated by editors so I won't go change it myself, but it seems to me that the term could be defined more clearly. Jweisnstiecra (talk) 00:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

If you're looking at the words that make up the term literally then yes - any financial services that deal with small amounts are in a sense micro-financial ones. Lending your boss $10 for lunch could fall into that category, I guess. But I don't think that is generally what is meant by academics and practitioners who use the term. The field of microfinance, the way it is studied and practiced, is pretty much all about development of financial services for the poor and normally with the expectation and intent that it will help to alleviate poverty. -- SiobhanHansa 02:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

How to measure Microfinance success?

It appears that there is no universal index to measure Microfinance success. Actually it is rather confusing for the new comer to understand whether Microfinance is just another banking exercise, one that relaxes risk considerations to provide the poor access to capital. But was Microfinance initially conceived for this purpose alone, or was it conceived as another way to advance human social capital no matter if financial objectives are met. As it stands today, there are as many philanthropic non-profit foundations as for-profit lending institutions working in this area. Certainly there is growing interest by financial institutions to enter this space, including investment funds, hedge funds, private funds, commercial banks, etc. These institutions have a clear profitable objective, but will it be in harmony with the utmost fundamental purpose of poverty eradication? So what will the the measure for success be? Financial returns, social returns, or both? And how do we quantify them? This interrogative is a very important question that many Microfinance practitioners are struggling to answer.

Note: This section was deliberately constructed to invite your comments, suggestions and critique.Gostir (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Gostir, I've moved this to the talk page, as your note above indicates that that is where it belongs. If you were not aware of talk pages yet, please use them!

Your point about measurement is well taken. The history of microfinance vividly illustrates great ambivalence on these issues. The first wave of microfinance, beginning in rural Europe in the 1860s, measured success in terms of making a 'reasonable' profit (consciously rejecting profit maximization as a goal), and on its ability to serve those the banks couldn't or wouldn't serve, and on its ability to develop strong low-risk institutions. This wave did not target poor people exclusively, and was happy to reach of millions of them, among millions of others. The second wave, beginning in Asia and Latin America in the 1960s-70s, has also measured itself in terms of profitability, outreach (including both scale and scope of outreach) and institutional strength. Grameen Bank pioneered performance measurement in terms of its ability to target the poor exclusively. In practice there does appear to be a trade-off between outreach and profitability. Echoing the first-wave institutions, Muhammad Yunus of Grameen Bank has recently called for microfinance institutions to limit their profits to a 'reasonable' level. So the debates here are by no means over. In terms of the Western investment vehicles, they have been wholly unable to interest profit maximizing investors in their activities, but have made some progress with social investors who don't mind receiving a very small return (2-4% a year). We seem to be entering a period in which some developing country currencies will be rising steadily (or at least remaining stable) against the currencies of the West. This will put a bit more wind at the backs of social microfinance investment funds in the West. But local savings, from poor people who need local savings and are willing to accept a reasonable return on them, will continue to be the best long-term source of capital for microfinance.Brett epic (talk) 00:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

USA

For the second time now, Brett epic has removed an section I wrote on microfinance in the US without discussing it here. I just put it back. Brett, please discuss it or leave it. Amrad (talk) 06:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear Amrad: I have enumerated the problems with your press release in detail on this talk page at the top, at Talk:Microfinance#Section 2.1: Challenges/USA. As you well know, I have also tried the more gentle approach of communicating with you in detail on your talk page. As a new user of Wikipedia you may easily not be aware of how inappropriate the content you have been posting on this article is. But your insistence on re-inserting it over and over, with no effort to address the deep flaws in it in spite of the explanations, is less understandable. I have now flagged your press release in the article as advertising. Kindly refer to the policy at Wikipedia:Spam. You may remove the flag when you remove the press release or make it conform to the standards of a Wikipedia article. If you remove it before that, I will seek arbitration from an administrator. If it becomes after two weeks that you aren't trying to improve the edit, I'll remove it again. Happy editing.Brett epic (talk) 17:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, Amrad, multiple people have removed the section you keep adding citing various problems with it. Just adding it back without discussing it is inappropriate. In addition it has various problems with accuracy as a quick look at a few weblinks I added shows. I'm not even sure it is important enough to justify a section at all. Perhaps a more general section on microfinance in the developed world could be appropriate, but not the text you are trying to add. - Taxman ^Talk 03:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your good edits, Taxman! I've moved it to microcredit#microlending in the developed world and added some context and citations that are familiar to me to round out the section. It never belonged in microfinance at all, but it should be fine in its new home.Brett epic (talk) 16:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Brett, you keep insisting that I am a newbie, yet you yourself don't do things the wiki way, by repeatedly bluntly removing the entire section, without discussing it at this talk page or even moving it here so others can see it and join in the discussion. I finally started this thread, but that was your job. You said you did in your edit summary, but you didn't. Stop condescending and start playing by the rules. Oh, hold on, you placed it at the top? Why on earth there? No wonder I didn't find it. And now it's time for me to be condescending: make a quote stand out more, by indenting it and possibly putting it in italics, thus:

Strikingly, Grameen Bank not only provides microloans in poor countries, but also in the world's richest country, the USA, where 37 million people (12.6%) live below the poverty line. [6] [7] Grameen Bank started this operation in New York in april 2008, because the economic crisis created a need for this sort of aid. Grameen Bank founder Muhammad Yunus: "About a quarter of the US population cannot get a microloan from the traditional banks because they do not fit the pofile of the perfect customer." And this has only gotten worse with the crisis. This results in a huge market for a bank like Grameen. The plan is to give out 175 million US$ worth of loans over 5 years. If successful, Grameen will also start giving out mortgages for the poor (nicknamed sub sub sub subprime). An earlier attempt at microloans in the US, at the request of Bill Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas, failed because there weren't enough lenders, but the situation has changed now. According to economist Jonathan Murdoch of New York University, microloans have less appeal in the US because people think it too difficult to escape poverty through private enterprise.

Now we can see what this whole discussion is about, as well as others, so they can join in if they so desire.

Taxman, who are those multiple people? In the history, I only see Brett removing the section (twice). Anyway, I'm fairly satisfied with the way it stands now, after your edit. The main info is still there. The rest might go to another article. Still, a little more explanation on why microloans are given in the US might be useful, and possibly the 175 million over 5 years and the possibility of mortgages. And of course a broader section on microfinance in other rich countries wold be better. I just added what I read somewhere (quite a reliable source, which alas I ca'n't link to). But I'll leave it. Now that a more serious editor has dealt with it, I can focus my attention elsewhere. :) Amrad (talk) 10:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)