Economists? Reloaded! After the failed coup in Ecuador, I got the concern to see the economic development of some Latin American countries in recent years, were chaired by economists.
currently is an issue that has some relevance for example. in Brazil, because the candidate to succeed Lula and the Workers Party, Dilma Rousseff, is also professed Disenchantment and Science and won the first round, but not quite enough to prevent ballottage.
The first case bring on stage is that of Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de Leon in Mexico (ruled since late 1994 to late 2000). His government begins with a sharp depreciation of the peso of more than 110% (in the style Duhalde) and a deep crisis in 1995 (the Tequila Crisis).
Regarding unemployment, Mexico appears to be the darling of the last two decades with rates below 5% of the PEA (except for 1995 that exceeded mildly).
Between July 2001 and December 2006, Peru had as President Alejandro Toledo Manrique. Evolution unemployment in Peru is quite surprising: during the last 2 decades had rates below 10% of the EAP as well as Chile.
The trasandinos, when it comes to economic growth, was the country most regular of the sample. Remember that Ricardo Lagos (president from March 2000 to March 2006) is an economist and lawyer as well (would be the most completito of the sample). In the last two decades Chile showed a steady growth reaching an average rate of 5% per annum for 1990-2009, which in the past 10 years slowed going to be about 3.7% between 2000 and 2009.
However, in this first decade of S. XXI, the country grew stronger in the 5 that we consider was Peru at an average rate of 5.1%. What is Ecuador at an average rate of 4.5% annually. In this country, as we did in the previous post
, president since 2006, Rafael Correa, is also Economist (next time I leave for a further analysis of data on its mandate).
In Argentina,
Cachanosky opened the debate on the Presidents lawyers and their implication in economic terms. Orlando J.
Ferreres had previously shown that the majority of Argentine presidents were lawyers and in no case was found occupying the armchair economist Rivadavia.
Cacha worried about the logical inconsistency implies that "all of whom are lawyers, the Argentine economic problem has been caused by the absence of an adequate institutional framework for economic growth" . K
Governments would contradict that assertion.
was still Grip: "It is curious that so many presidents have been lawyers, one of our fundamental problems is the low quality on respect for property rights, lack of stability in the rules of play and lack of limits on the Executive can not change those rules that should be stable over time. "
At first glance, Kirchner policies (with the initial impetus Duhalde) show a very important performance in terms of economic growth, combating unemployment and the abolition of poverty. However, the lack of a policy income working on a somewhat more distant horizon and based on a social pact, is undermining inflation through many of the achievements of his administration.
regard, Luciano Cohan few days ago showed us how it could have impacted
inflation in poverty and destitution in our country after incorporation of the AUH (it says "could have" and no "hit" because the well-known problem with statistics officers).
But remember also that under the government of Nestor Kirchner, with the restructuring of debt, coupled with high economic growth, helped to substantially reduce the stock External Debt / GDP (in the case of graphic bn: Gross National Income) to be at a level more in line with those of other countries in the region.
the early 90's, Ecuador was the most indebted country with the outside measured in terms of its production. However, unlike the Argentine case, they started out of debt in the decade.
In short, you can not draw many conclusions. Of course it would be too foolish to believe that bear resemblance Economists and hence policies for them to be used where presidents have similar traits.
However, what is clear is that for a country to grow up really needs to be agreed among all players regardless of their professions.
Cacha went something like: " Perhaps we should explore the possibility of long-term public policies that allow us to grow based on interdisciplinary studies that lawyers, economists, philosophers, historians, political scientists and educators, cite some cases, can establish a consistent institutional order. "
But in the end, I am not referring only to production growth, but growth that allows people to stop being poor, they do not have to allow more than the poverty measure, not because bureaucrats decided to turn simply delete it from their fanciful measurements, but because before then we are building together a more just country. A country where being rich does not imply that many others have to be poor. Perhaps then we will not worry so much insecurity.
reflection I would like to share is that, while demagogues always remain shielded behind the poverty and marginalization, I have no other Advocates say that many economists have already demonstrated and as the uncompromising defense of private property, especially when it is excessive in amount and even in countries totally impoverished children starving in the streets asking for coins and scavenging to consume the leftovers of the wealthy, ends justify the unjustifiable: the condemnation of the market to kids that they happened to be born into poverty.
In my opinion, no longer needed from our government advocates the rights of the haves. Do not even need those who can show that respect for the rights of private property will bring to the long growth investment, improvements in employment, poverty reduction. And you know why? Not only because in the long run we are all dead, but is also an hijaputez not realize that the current condition, the consequences of what happens in the short term, may lead to the life of a lot of people is marked with fire by the greed of some and the long-term theories of others.
The solution seems so complex and simple: you simply need people to think how to get all be rich, but first achieved the sooner one is poor. And in this, no time to lose ...
Greetings,
MI
