TownhallNo te olvides de pasar por BlogBis
Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta crisis. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta crisis. Mostrar todas las entradas
25 de marzo de 2009
25 de febrero de 2009
18 de septiembre de 2008
5 de junio de 2008
Here we go again in this manic-depressive country?
James Neilson
Argentina is a famously manic-depressive country much given to wild swings between euphoria and gloom.
Eight years ago, the national mood was positively suicidal.
Large numbers of people thought that the only solution to their collective woes was to have the country go into receivership and let a gaggle of foreign bankers try to sort out the economic disaster.
But then everything changed.
Thanks largely to steep increases in commodity prices and a fall in the value of the US dollar, something like prosperity returned.
For the umpteenth time, pundits toyed with the idea that the future looked bright.
The main beneficiary of this was Néstor Kirchner.
As the notion that Argentina’s Lazarus-like comeback was due to his stewardship was widely shared, almost half the electorate proved happy enough to let him appoint his wife president.
Few objected to such a blatant show of nepotism or to the lack of anything resembling a party primary.
Why should they if everything was going splendidly?
It was all too good to last.
Not for the first time, pessimism has replaced optimism with quite remarkable speed.
Though the government has more than enough cash to prevent the kind of financial meltdown we have grown accustomed to, worried savers are pulling their money out of banks, changing pesos into dollars, and then stowing them under the mattress.
They do this because they don’t want to be caught napping as they were in late 2001 and early 2002 when their nest eggs were sequestered and then in effect appropriated, throwing millions into poverty.
Until quite recently, the feeling that Argentina may be heading for another crack-up was confined to places like Wall Street.
The dire assessments that emerged from foreign money-men, most of them “neoliberals” in thrall to what all true Argentines knew was a hare-brained theory, were pooh-poohed here even by economists who took it for granted that the “model” Kirchner was in charge of would one day come a cropper.
But since the farm strike got under way scepticism has spread among the general public.
Inflation, sporadic shortages, falling sales and the fear that there is much worse to come have undermined confidence to such an extent that Argentina could well think itself into an economic crisis similar to the one that erupted when another Peronist lady, Isabelita Perón, was queening it in the Pink House back in the 1970s.
According to Roberto Cachanosky in La Nación, the government has created such a mess that sooner or later someone will have to play the role of Celestino Rodrigo, one of Isabelita’s economy ministers, whose efforts to restore a semblance of sanity backfired and put an end to the Argentine middle-class dream.
When the economy seems to be doing nicely, running the country is a relatively simple matter.
People are loath to criticize the President because, they suspect, they might break the magical spell.
It is during these pleasant periods that governments make their worst blunders.
Convinced that the gods are on their side, they refuse even to consider the possibility that circumstances might change and that it would therefore be in their interest to take fewer risks.
Instead, they cling to whatever appeared to work well when times were good.
Like certain generals who in their minds keep refighting old wars, they are indignant when told that the next crisis will in all probability be completely different from the previous one.
Last year Néstor Kirchner presumably assumed that the economy would continue to grow at a decent rate for a long time to come, so all Cristina would have to do was stick to the route he had already mapped out for her.
If that was what he thought he was sorely mistaken.
Unluckily for his wife, she took over just when Argentina was about to experience a sea change.
Confidence in the government gave way to distrust.
And to make matters worse, her hectoring, know-all manner prevented her from dealing adequately with the many problems that, to her evident bewilderment, soon began to beset her.
Nor surprisingly her popularity ratings plummeted: barely half a year into her four-year term, they are now in the low twenties and people close to government are wondering aloud if she will manage to stay in office until 2011.
It need hardly be said that the suspicion that another big political crisis could be fast approaching has done nothing to encourage faith in the country’s economic prospects.
Argentine history is a tale of booms and busts.
As the cycle seems to require about ten years to go full circle, many feel that unless the government alters course very soon the economy will crash.
Though the long farm strike, plus the evidence that the farmers enjoy more public support than do Mr and Mrs Kirchner, has helped change the mood, much the same would have happened even if they had tamely allowed themselves to be clobbered by the taxman.
A rapidly dwindling trade surplus, the lack of investment, the increasing difficulties the government faces in finding the means to finance the enormously expensive subsidies it hands out in order to keep energy prices low for most consumers should by themselves have been enough to tell the government it would be well advised to make a U-turn, but being the people they are, Cristina and her husband have chosen to turn a blind eye to the flashing lights warning them that the end of the road lies ahead and that beyond it there is not much more than a treacherous swamp.
Argentina is a famously manic-depressive country much given to wild swings between euphoria and gloom.
Eight years ago, the national mood was positively suicidal.
Large numbers of people thought that the only solution to their collective woes was to have the country go into receivership and let a gaggle of foreign bankers try to sort out the economic disaster.
But then everything changed.
Thanks largely to steep increases in commodity prices and a fall in the value of the US dollar, something like prosperity returned.
For the umpteenth time, pundits toyed with the idea that the future looked bright.
The main beneficiary of this was Néstor Kirchner.
As the notion that Argentina’s Lazarus-like comeback was due to his stewardship was widely shared, almost half the electorate proved happy enough to let him appoint his wife president.
Few objected to such a blatant show of nepotism or to the lack of anything resembling a party primary.
Why should they if everything was going splendidly?
It was all too good to last.
Not for the first time, pessimism has replaced optimism with quite remarkable speed.
Though the government has more than enough cash to prevent the kind of financial meltdown we have grown accustomed to, worried savers are pulling their money out of banks, changing pesos into dollars, and then stowing them under the mattress.
They do this because they don’t want to be caught napping as they were in late 2001 and early 2002 when their nest eggs were sequestered and then in effect appropriated, throwing millions into poverty.
Until quite recently, the feeling that Argentina may be heading for another crack-up was confined to places like Wall Street.
The dire assessments that emerged from foreign money-men, most of them “neoliberals” in thrall to what all true Argentines knew was a hare-brained theory, were pooh-poohed here even by economists who took it for granted that the “model” Kirchner was in charge of would one day come a cropper.
But since the farm strike got under way scepticism has spread among the general public.
Inflation, sporadic shortages, falling sales and the fear that there is much worse to come have undermined confidence to such an extent that Argentina could well think itself into an economic crisis similar to the one that erupted when another Peronist lady, Isabelita Perón, was queening it in the Pink House back in the 1970s.
According to Roberto Cachanosky in La Nación, the government has created such a mess that sooner or later someone will have to play the role of Celestino Rodrigo, one of Isabelita’s economy ministers, whose efforts to restore a semblance of sanity backfired and put an end to the Argentine middle-class dream.
When the economy seems to be doing nicely, running the country is a relatively simple matter.
People are loath to criticize the President because, they suspect, they might break the magical spell.
It is during these pleasant periods that governments make their worst blunders.
Convinced that the gods are on their side, they refuse even to consider the possibility that circumstances might change and that it would therefore be in their interest to take fewer risks.
Instead, they cling to whatever appeared to work well when times were good.
Like certain generals who in their minds keep refighting old wars, they are indignant when told that the next crisis will in all probability be completely different from the previous one.
Last year Néstor Kirchner presumably assumed that the economy would continue to grow at a decent rate for a long time to come, so all Cristina would have to do was stick to the route he had already mapped out for her.
If that was what he thought he was sorely mistaken.
Unluckily for his wife, she took over just when Argentina was about to experience a sea change.
Confidence in the government gave way to distrust.
And to make matters worse, her hectoring, know-all manner prevented her from dealing adequately with the many problems that, to her evident bewilderment, soon began to beset her.
Nor surprisingly her popularity ratings plummeted: barely half a year into her four-year term, they are now in the low twenties and people close to government are wondering aloud if she will manage to stay in office until 2011.
It need hardly be said that the suspicion that another big political crisis could be fast approaching has done nothing to encourage faith in the country’s economic prospects.
Argentine history is a tale of booms and busts.
As the cycle seems to require about ten years to go full circle, many feel that unless the government alters course very soon the economy will crash.
Though the long farm strike, plus the evidence that the farmers enjoy more public support than do Mr and Mrs Kirchner, has helped change the mood, much the same would have happened even if they had tamely allowed themselves to be clobbered by the taxman.
A rapidly dwindling trade surplus, the lack of investment, the increasing difficulties the government faces in finding the means to finance the enormously expensive subsidies it hands out in order to keep energy prices low for most consumers should by themselves have been enough to tell the government it would be well advised to make a U-turn, but being the people they are, Cristina and her husband have chosen to turn a blind eye to the flashing lights warning them that the end of the road lies ahead and that beyond it there is not much more than a treacherous swamp.
17 de diciembre de 2007
Miami Vice
Ahora que se les están poniendo complicadas las cosas en los tribunales de Miami, es hora que pongamos un poquito más de atención en el Vice.Deputy Cletus Hogg was a fictional character featured in the American television series, The Dukes of Hazzard. He was played by Rick Hurst. Cletus was Boss Hogg's dim-witted cousin and deputy sheriff of Hazzard County. Although generally friendly to the Dukes, he would usually gladly assist Boss Hogg and Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane in their unprovoked pursuit of the family, mainly Bo and Luke Duke. (Wikipedia)
12 de julio de 2007
Cumulus Nimbus
The Latin Americanist:
Quote of the Day:
Cristina Kirchner’s weather forecast:
"The horizon holds some clouds for her. In the short term, everything seems sunny. But the forecast has to be that of a high probability of storm clouds, especially if the economic situation stagnates."Graciela Romer, Argentine political analyst commented on Cristina Kirchner.
11 de julio de 2007
Sicko bolivariano
Con la síntesis que la caracteriza, Rayma describe a la salud pública del caudillo venezolano.
4 de marzo de 2007
Bulls and Bears
Adivine cual fue la bolsa del mundo que más cayó entre el 26 de febrero y el 2 de marzo.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
