ABSTRACT: With the recent push towards globalization, restricting capital flow and the role of the International Monetary Fund have been hotly debated. Restricting capital flows has negative effects on both the investors and the receivers of the capital. With diminished access to capital, entreprenuers in less developed countries have difficulty getting started, thus depriving society of the benefits of new businesses. Improved capital flow would increase productivity, lessens risks of investment, stabilizes economies, and improves standards of living. The IMF’s role also needs to decrease to achieve a more efficient global economy. In the past, it has consistently bailed out international investors that make poor decisions, and it fails to sufficiently encourage economic reforms. Removal of the IMF as a ‘lender of last resorts’ would encourage more efficient use of capital and investments. It would also encourage countries not getting much investment to reform their system, creating a better environment for investment, and consequently promoting economic growth. Through a global capital market, the world can experience massive economic growth, improving the situations of people in all countries.