Economic Freedom: Anywhere but home

El score de Argentina

2009 Index of Economic Freedom
The Link Between Economic Opportunity & Prosperity
The Heritage Foundation
Wall Street Journal

Argentina 138 de 179 países

Informe (pdf)

At the other end of the scale, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Argentina, and the Central African Republic all lost at least 10 points on the economic freedom scale.

Argentina cayó 55 lugares desde 1995

The two countries that slipped farthest down the rankings over the 15 years were both from Latin America. Argentina and Venezuela were surpassed by more than half of the world’s countries in terms of economic freedom. Ecuador was the fifth worst performer in relative terms, surpassed by 28 percent of the world’s countries. What these three countries share is a commitment to a brand of populist socialism that had lost favor for a time in Latin America but has resurfaced in recent years. The effects on the people of these countries are devastating, with average per capita GDP growth of less than 1.5 percent per year. In fact, the countries of Latin America are lagging significantly behind the rest of the world in the promotion of economic freedom. Eight Latin countries (Argentina, Venezuela, Ecuador, Paraguay, Panama, Bolivia, Colombia, and Guatemala) dropped 10 percentage points or more on the percentile rankings.


No te olvides de pasar por BlogBis

Corruption Perception Index

Transparency International

Corruption Perception Index: Argentina

Año	Puesto	Total de países	Indice
2008	109	180	2.9
2007	105	179	2.9
2006	93	163	2.9
2005	97	159	2.8
2004	108	146	2.5
2003	92	133	2.5
2002	70	102	2.8
2001	57	91	3.5
2000	52	90	3.5
1999	71	99	3.0
1998	61	85	3.0
1997	42	52	2.81
1996	35	54	3.41
1995	24	41	5.24

No te olvides de pasar por BlogBis

Freedom of the world 2008 (Freedom House)

Argentina (2008) Capital: Buenos Aires Population: 39,400,000 Political Rights Score: 2 Civil Liberties Score: 2 Status: Free Overview Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner of the center-left Peronist party became Argentina’s first elected female president in 2007, easily winning the October election. Her campaign was helped by the weakness and fragmentation of the opposition, as well as four years of strong economic growth under her husband and predecessor, Nestor Kirchner. He remained popular through the end of his term despite a string of corruption charges involving his party that emerged during the year. Argentina gained independence from Spain in 1816. Democratic rule was often interrupted by war and military coups over the following century. The end of Juan Peron’s populist and authoritarian regime in 1955 led to a series of right-wing military dictatorships that spawned left-wing and nationalist violence. Argentina returned to elected civilian rule in 1983, after seven years under a far-right military regime whose repression of leftist guerrillas and other real or suspected dissidents was known as the “dirty war.” Provincial governor Carlos Menem, running on an orthodox Peronist platform of nationalism and state intervention in the economy, won a six-year presidential term in 1989 amid hyperinflation and food riots. As president, however, he implemented—mostly by decree—an economic liberalization program and unconditionally allied the country with U.S. foreign policy. While traditional Peronists criticized his policies as betrayals of the party’s principles, his convertibility plan, which pegged the peso to the U.S. dollar through a currency board, finally ended the country’s chronic bouts of hyperinflation. Buenos Aires mayor Fernando de la Rua, of the center-left Alianza coalition, was elected president in October 1999. Facing an opposition-controlled National Congress, de la Rua sought to cut spending, raise taxes, and push forward an anticorruption agenda and unpopular labor reforms. De la Rua reappointed Menem’s former economy minister in an effort to restore government credibility and stave off default on Argentina’s public sector debt. Record unemployment and reduced and delayed wages to government workers, effects of the highly overvalued and inflexible currency, spurred social mobilization and protests with an intensity that had not been seen for nearly a generation. In December 2001, government efforts to stop a run on Argentina’s banking system sparked widespread protests along with riots and looting. As the death toll reached 27, de la Rua resigned. He was replaced by an interim president, who himself was forced to quit less than a week later. On December 31, Menem’s former vice president, Eduardo Duhalde, was selected by Congress as Argentina’s new president. A steep devaluation of the peso and a debilitating default on its foreign debt left Argentina teetering on the brink of political and economic collapse throughout 2002. Unemployment soared to levels unheard of since the founding of the republic, and violent crime spiraled out of control. Nestor Kirchner, a little-known governor from the Patagonia region and a member of the Justicialist Party (PJ, commonly known as the Peronist Party), was elected president in April 2003 with just 22 percent of the vote, becoming Argentina’s sixth president in 18 months. While working to stabilize the economy, Kirchner quickly moved to purge the country’s military and police leadership of authoritarian elements. Seeking to make human rights a trademark of his administration, Kirchner also took steps to remove justices from the highly politicized Supreme Court—considered the country’s most corrupt institution—and signed a decree that permitted the extradition of former military officials accused of human rights abuses. The 2004 admission by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that it had contributed to the Argentine economic crisis, and the role international financial institutions and private banks had played in financing the hated military in earlier decades, gave the Kirchner government unaccustomed room to maneuver in repaying foreign creditors. After making some efforts to put a brake on government spending, Kirchner presided over a long-hoped-for economic recovery bolstered by high international soya prices and increased demand for Argentina’s principal exports. However, corruption and extrajudicial action by the country’s law enforcement institutions continued to be a major problem, particularly in Buenos Aires province. By March 2005, Economy Minister Roberto Lavagna was able to declare an end to the three-year battle to restructure Argentina’s defaulted debt, with more than three-fourths of the holders of Argentine foreign bonds agreeing to a nonnegotiable offer of 30 cents on the dollar. The economy grew, and unemployment and poverty rates began to show improvement. Economic stability, along with the achievement of the largest debt reduction ever by a developing country, helped the Peronists increase their legislative majority after the October 2005 legislative elections. In June 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that laws passed in the 1980s to protect the military from prosecution—justified at the time as a way to help avoid a military coup—were unconstitutional, thus making Argentina a world leader in efforts to fight military impunity. The decision laid the foundation for the prosecution of other military crimes. Kirchner’s aggressive pursuit of former officials involved in the dirty war included a police sergeant connected with the military junta who was sentenced to 25 years in prison in 2006, and the reversal of presidential pardons granted by Menem to three military leaders. In addition, Isabel Peron, Juan Peron’s third wife, who served as president from 1974 to 1976, was detained in Spain in 2007 for her alleged role in the disappearance of students during her time in power. In October 2007, a former priest was sentenced to life in prison for his complicity in seven murders and other human rights abuses. In 2006, Kirchner implemented a series of measures centralizing political and economic power in the executive branch. Congress granted the president the authority to reallocate government spending as he sees fit, as long as the overall appropriation remains the same. Kirchner also changed the tax system to limit the influence of historically powerful provincial governors, and created new state-owned enterprises while nationalizing privatized ones, such as the postal service and Buenos Aires’s water utility company. In spite of Kirchner’s initial pledge to combat corruption, it continues to pervade Argentina’s public institutions. In March 2007, government officials were accused of receiving improper payments from a large gas-line project. Then, in June 2007, Economy Minister Felisa Miceli was forced to resign after more than $60,000 was found in her office bathroom. The series of scandals also hit the defense minister, who was accused of tax evasion. Finally, in August 2007, $800,000 in cash discovered in the suitcase of a Venezuelan businessman traveling on a private plane chartered by Argentina’s state oil company was seized at the Buenos Aires airport. The source of the funds as well as their intended destination remain under investigation, but the incident raised further suspicions. Kirchner’s wife, Senator Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, won the October 2007 presidential election with 45 percent of the vote, 22 points ahead of her nearest rival. The margin of victory negated the need for a runoff. Her campaign was helped by a strong economy, which had grown by 8 percent each year since her husband took office. The clear victory was also attributed to divisions within the opposition, which fielded 13 different candidates and diluted the “anti-Kirchner” vote. The new president took office on December 10. Her party, the Frente para la Victoria (FV), emerged from the legislative elections with a stronger majority in both houses. Politcal Rights and Civil Liberties Argentina is an electoral democracy. As amended in 1994, the constitution provides for a president elected for four years, with the option of reelection for one additional term. Presidential candidates must win 45 percent of the vote, or 40 percent with a 10-point lead, to avoid a runoff. The general elections in October 2007 were considered free and fair; midterm congressional elections are scheduled for 2009. The National Congress consists of the 257-member Chamber of Deputies, directly elected for four years, with half the seats up for election every two years; and the 72-member Senate, directly elected for six-year terms, with one-third of the seats up for election every two years. The right to organize political parties is generally respected. Major parties include the PJ, FV, the Radical Civic Union (UCR), the Alternative for a Republic of Equals (ARI), and the Republican Initiative Alliance (PRO). The Peronists have been a dominant force in politics since 1946. Nestor Kirchner’s government initially made anticorruption efforts a central theme, and Decree 1172/03 established the public’s right to information and other transparency guarantees. However, leading anticorruption activists have accused the administration of stalling on its good-governance agenda, particularly by failing to ensure the effective functioning of administrative controls. Argentina was ranked 105 out of 179 countries surveyed in Transparency International’s 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index. Freedom of expression is guaranteed by law, and government meddling in the press is not nearly as heavy-handed as during the presidency of Carlos Menem. However, government officials are still accused of verbally mistreating independent journalists, and provincial governments continue to manipulate official advertising to favor media outlets they consider friendly. After five years of debate in Congress, a Freedom of Information act failed in 2006. The constitution guarantees freedom of religion. Nevertheless, Argentina’s Jewish community, the largest in Latin America, is a frequent target of anti-Semitic discrimination and vandalism. Neo-Nazi and other anti-Semitic groups remain active, and the memory of the 1994 bombing of a Jewish cultural center still looms. No one has been convicted of the bombing, although it was found to have been planned and financed by the government of Iran. Nestor Kirchner catered to the Jewish population, creating a special commission to investigate the cultural center case and meeting with Jewish leaders several times each year. In November 2006, arrest warrants were issued for the eight individuals suspected of involvement in the attack. Academic freedom is a cherished Argentine tradition and is largely observed in practice. The rights to freedom of assembly and association are generally respected. Civic organizations are robust and play a large role in society, although some fall victim to Argentina’s pervasive corruption. Labor is dominated by Peronist unions. Union influence, however, has diminished dramatically in the past decade because of corruption scandals and internal divisions. Menem’s manipulation of the judiciary undermined the country’s separation of powers and the rule of law. Although positive steps have been taken under Nestor Kirchner, including the appointment of magistrates of professional quality, the tenure of scores of incompetent and corrupt judges remains a serious problem. Moreover, in February 2006, Congress voted to change the composition of the body responsible for selecting judges, making it less professional and more political. Public safety is a primary concern for Argentines, especially in Buenos Aires where crime has increased markedly over the last decade. Much of the increase has been fueled by a growth in illegal drug use that began during the Menem years, and by the complicity of high-ranking judicial and law enforcement authorities in the drug trade. Police have been accused of misconduct including growing numbers of extrajudicial executions. The Buenos Aires provincial police have been involved in drug trafficking, extortion, and vice. Arbitrary arrests and abuse by police are rarely punished in the courts owing to intimidation of witnesses and judges, particularly in Buenos Aires province. The torture of detainees in police custody in the province is endemic, and the provincial penal service is rife with corruption. Prison conditions are generally substandard throughout the country. Argentina’s indigenous peoples represent between 3 and 5 percent of the total population, and are largely neglected by the government. Approximately 70 percent of the country’s rural indigenous communities lack title to their lands; however, the Nestor Kirchner administration returned lands to several communities. In 2002, Buenos Aires became the first South American city to pass a domestic partnership law, and the country as a whole is considering following its lead by allowing same-sex unions. Women actively participate in politics in Argentina, as reflected most recently by the election of Senator Kirchner as president and the second-place showing by another female candidate. However, domestic abuse remains a serious problem, and child prostitution is reported to be on the rise. An estimated 3,000 children are homeless in Buenos Aires, double the number prior to Argentina’s 2001 economic collapse.

Estados débiles

Index of State Weakness in the Developing World
Brookings Institution

click en las imágenes para ampliar









Hat tip: PSDBlog

International Property Rights Index

El índice está compuesto de la siguiente manera:

1) Legal and Political Environment (LP)

• Judicial Independence
• Confidence in Courts
• Political Stability
• Control of Corruption

2) Physical Property Rights (PPR)

• Protection of Physical Property Rights
• Registering Property
• Access to Loans

3) Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

• Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
• Patent Protection
• Copyright Piracy
• Trademark Protection

La puntuación general obtenida por Argentina fue de 4.4, ubicándose en el puesto 81 (sobre 115 evaluados), lo que nos coloca en el cuarto quintil estadístico. (MAL)

La puntuación en Legal and Political Environment fue de 3.6, ubicándose en el puesto 91.

La puntuación en Physical Property Rights fue de 4.7, ubicándose en el puesto 100.

La puntuación en Intellectual Property Rights fue de 4.8 ubicándose en el puesto 64.



CASE STUDY #2: BUENOS AIRES,ARGENTINA
by Sebastian Galiani and Ernesto Schargrodsky
Introduction

The fragility of property rights is considered a crucial obstacle for economic development. The
main argument is that individuals underinvest if others can seize the fruits of their investments. In today’s developing world, a pervasive manifestation of feeble property rights are the millions of people living in urban dwellings without possessing formal titles of the plots of land they occupy.

Land-titling programs have been recently advocated in policy circles as a powerful instrument for poverty reduction. Hernando De Soto emphasizes that the lack of property rights impedes the transformation of the wealth owned by the poor into capital.26 Proper titling could allow the poor to collateralize the land. In turn, this credit could be invested as capital in productive projects, promptly increasing labor productivity and income. Inspired by these ideas, and fostered by international development agencies and private institutions, land-titling programs have been launched throughout developing and transition economies as part of poverty alleviation efforts.

The important question is then the following: Are land-titling programs a powerful tool to reduce
poverty or will the societies that adopt them face another policy delusion? In other words, what are the causal effects of urban land titling? To answer this question is not easy at all. To identify what would happen to a family if they receive the title to the plot of land they inhabit instead of staying in that piece of land without the legal title is complicated: the problem is that we do not observe the same families in both situations.

A natural experiment
Thus, any attempt to answer the above questions has to compare families with and without land titles.
However, the allocation of property rights across households is usually not random but based on
wealth, family characteristics, individual effort, previous investment levels, or other mechanisms built on differences between the groups that acquire those rights and the groups that do not. Exogenous variability in the allocation of property rights is necessary to solve this selection problem.
In a series of recent papers we address this selection problem by exploiting a natural experiment in the allocation of urban land titles to a very deprived population in Argentina.27
The natural experiment exploited in these papers actually started in 1981, when about 1,800 landless families organized by a Catholic chaplain occupied a wasteland in the San Francisco Solano area, on the outskirts of Buenos Aires, Argentina. At the time of the occupation the squatters thought the land belonged to the state, but they later found out that it was private property. The occupied area turned out to be made up of 13 tracts of land belonging to different private owners, which were partitioned by the squatters into small, urban-shaped parcels for each household. The squatters resisted several eviction attempts during the military government. After Argentina’s return to democracy in 1984 the Congress of the Province of Buenos Aires passed a law expropriating the land from the former owners, in exchange for monetary compensation to be paid by the government, and allocating it to the squatters.
The resulting titling process, however, was incomplete and asynchronous. The government made a compensation offer to each original owner calculated in proportion to the official tax valuation of each tract of land, which had been set by the fiscal authority to calculate property taxes before the land occupation. The government offers were very similar (in per-square-meter terms) for the 13 land tracts.
Each of the original owners had to decide whether to accept the expropriation compensation proposed by the government or to start a legal dispute with the aim of obtaining higher compensation.
In 1986 eight of the 13 former owners accepted the compensation offered by the government.
The formal land titles that secured the property rights to the parcels were then transferred by the state to the squatters in 1989. However, five former owners did not accept the compensation offered by the government and disputed the expropriation payment in the slow Argentine courts. Thus the process of expropriation was incomplete. One of these five trials ended in 1998, and this tract of land was transferred to the squatters. The other four lawsuits were still pending at the time of writing.

A random allocation
A result of this episode is that today there are two groups of squatters living in very close proximity to each other, one of which has formal property rights (because its members live on parcels of land that used to belong to the former owners who accepted the expropriation or whose lawsuit ended) and the other of which remains untitled (because its members occupied parcels of land belonging to the challenging owners). This allocation of land titles was unrelated (more precisely, exogenous) to the squatters’ characteristics. At the time of the occupation the squatters did not know that the land had private owners, nor that an expropriation law was going to be passed, nor which parcels of land had owners who would accept (or dispute) the compensation offer, nor which eventual lawsuits could end first. Titled and untitled households arrived at the same time and were similar at the time of their arrival.
A statistical comparison of the household characteristics of these two groups prior to receiving the treatment (that is, prior to one group receiving titles) shows that the hypothesis of random assignment of land titles during this natural experiment cannot be rejected. That is, there are no significant differences between the treatment and control groups in the age, gender, years of education, and other characteristics of the family member who was the household head at the time of the occupation. There are also no differences in plot characteristics. Moreover, the squatters had no participation in the legal process between the government and the former owners, and the values of the dwellings they constructed were explicitly excluded from the calculation of the expropriation compensation.
Obtaining property rights depended on the decision of the original owners to challenge the
expropriation as well as on the resolution of these legal processes. Given that these factors were
exogenous to the squatters, it is possible to study the effect of the intervention “to give property
rights” by comparing individuals who received and did not receive land titles, but who live in very close proximity, had similar pretreatment characteristics, and have been exposed to similar life experiences (with the exception of the treatment).

Experimental results

On credit
Do titled households have more access to credit? The evidence provided suggests that there is not much difference on this respect. In addition, we do not find differences at all in their actual
earnings. Titled and untitled households have similar total earnings.28 Thus, should we conclude that entitling the urban poor is not a sensible policy? Not necessarily.

On housing investment
The possession of land titles may affect the incentives to invest in housing construction through
several concurrent mechanisms, beyond credit access:

1.) The traditional view emphasizes security from seizure. Individuals underinvest if others may
seize the fruits of their investments.
2.) Land titles can also encourage investment by improving the transferability of the parcels.
Even if there were no risk of expropriation, investments in untitled parcels would be highly
illiquid, whereas titling reduces the cost of alienation of the assets.
3.) A third mechanism is that land titles provide poor households with a valuable savings tool.
Poor households, especially in unstable macroeconomic environments, lack appropriate
savings instruments. Land titles allow households to substitute present consumption and
leisure into long-term savings in real property.

Empirically the impact of legal land titles on housing investment indicates that entitled families own today much better houses than untitled families. There are large effects of land titling on the
probability of having walls and roof of good quality. The proportion of houses with good quality
walls rises by 40 percent under land titling, while the increase reaches 47 percent for good quality roof. The results also suggest a statistically significant increase of about 12 percent in constructed surface under the presence of land titles. Finally, the study finds that a variable summarizing the overall aspect of each house using an index from 0 to 100 shows a large and significant effect of land titling on housing quality. Relative to the baseline average sample value, the estimated effect represents an overall housing improvement of 37 percent associated to titling.
Thus, we can conclude that moving a poor household from usufructuary rights to full property rights substantially improves housing quality. The estimated effects are large and robust, and seem to be the result of changes in the economic returns to housing investment induced by land titling. Thus, this micro evidence supports the hypothesis that securing property rights significantly increases investment levels.

On household size and structure
The possession of land titles may also affect the size and structure of households. There are several potential reasons for that to happen. Insurance motives seem to be the most important. The poor lack access to well-functioning insurance markets and pension systems that could protect them during bad times and retirement. With limited access to risk diversification, to savings instruments, and to the social security system, the need for insurance has to be satisfied by other means. A traditional provider of insurance among the poor is the extended family. Another possibility is to use children as future insurance.

Moreover, the lack of land titles might reduce the ability of household heads to restrict their relatives from residing in their houses. In addition, untitled households may feel the need to increase the number of family members in order to protect their houses from occupation by other squatters.29
Indeed large differences exist in household size between titled and untitled families. Untitled families have an average of 6.06 members, while titled households have 0.95 members less. The difference in household size seems to originate in two factors. First, there is a higher presence (0.68 members) of non-nuclear relatives in untitled households. Untitled households report a much larger number of further relatives of the household head who are not her/his spouse or offspring (i.e., siblings, parents, inlaws, grandchildren, etc.) than entitled households. Second, the entitled households show a smaller number of offspring of the household head born after the title allocation.30

On children’s outcomes
Earlier seminal work advances the presence of parental trade-offs between the quantity and the
quality of children. This trade-off appears because limited parents’ time and resources are spread over more children. If land titling causes a reduction in fertility, it could also induce households to increase educational investments in their children.31
We explore this hypothesis by looking at differences in educational outcomes. They show that for
the offspring of the household head in the 5-13 age group in the early-treated households (the
group of children for which they find a reduction in the number of members), there is a large effect on school achievement. The children in the control group show an average delay of 1.09 years in their school achievement, whereas this delay is 0.42 years shorter for the children in the early-titled parcels.32

Moreover, exploring the effects of land titling on child health shows that children in the titled
parcels enjoy better Weight-for-Height scores than those in the untitled parcels, although there are no significant differences in Height-for-Age measures. In addition, finds that teenage girls in the titled parcels show lower pregnancy rates than those in the untitled parcels. In the sample under study, teenage pregnancy is an important problem. 11.4% of the 14 to 17 years-old girls for whom an answer to their question on teenage pregnancy was provided, were or had been pregnant at least once. They find that the pregnancy rate was substantially higher in the untitled parcels (20.8%)
than in the titled parcels (7.9%).33
Thus, entitling the poor enhances their investment both in the house and on the human capital of
the children of the entitled families, which will reduce their poverty in the future.

On formation of beliefs
Finally, exploiting this rare natural experiment, we most recently studied the formation of beliefs among squatters and found a significant difference in the beliefs that squatters with and without legal titles declare to hold. The measure of beliefs are obtained through survey questions designed to broadly capture beliefs that appear important to the workings of a market economy, namely individualism, materialism, the role of merit, and trust.34

The set of beliefs declared by squatters with property rights are significantly different from those held by squatters without titles. The change in beliefs is consistently in the direction of what can loosely be called “Market Beliefs” (for example, in the sense that they are more individualist and materialist). This is interesting because of the strong similarities in the lives of squatters with and without titles. Moreover, the estimated causal effect is sufficiently large so as to make the beliefs of squatters with legal titles comparable to those held by the Buenos Aires general population. This is interesting because of the remarkable differences in the lives these two groups lead.35

Conclusion
The study of institutions and their effect on behavior, economic development, and beliefs presents an opportunity to isolate and identify those policies that are most effective in helping societies defeat poverty. However, rare is the opportunity to study the effect of policy changes in an experimental nature such as the one discussed here. Doing so allows us make confident assessments about changes caused by the policy change itself (the “treatment”), rather other factors which may be simply correlated to the change and caused by other unobserved phenomena.
Thus the studies presented here, using a fortunate but uncommon exogenous change in titling status of squatters outside of Buenos Aires, allows us to peer into the decisions of households under different ownership status but with everything else held constant. Our results present evidence on the different channels through which policies on property rights could affect development and ultimately reduce poverty. By examining differences in housing quality, household composition and size, child health and education outcomes, and beliefs, we find that land-titling programs are indeed effective in causing changes in outcomes; changes that are positive and likely to aid in families’ battle against poverty.

Editando al Opinador y a Norberg

Agregué los valores (a ojo, claro) de Argentina en el gráfico sobre el índice de libertad económica de la Fundación Heritage que hizo Norberg y publicó el Opinador

El cuarto peor en 14 años

El Lacha informa que salió en Indice de Libertad Económica de la Heritage Foundation.

click para ampliar

Argentina tiene su cuarto peor índice en catorce años.

Argentina's economy is 55.1 percent free, according to our 2008 assessment, which makes it the world's 108th freest economy. Its overall score is essentially unchanged from last year. Argentina is ranked 23rd out of 29 countries in the Americas, and its overall score is below the regional average.

Compared to the typical country, Argentina has only one economically favorable institution: relatively small government in terms of expenditures. Most advanced economies are cutting their corporate tax rates, but Argentina's top corporate and income tax rates are 35 percent. Yet tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is low, as is expenditure, as a result of tax avoidance and evasion.

Property rights, labor freedom, and freedom from corruption are low, but financial freedom is especially problematic. The foreign debt crisis remains unresolved, and local capital markets are not healthy. Political interference with an inefficient judiciary hinders foreign investment, and popular and official obstructions of due process make international courts preferable to Argentine courts.

Background:
The government of President Néstor Kirchner, whose term ended in December 2007, intervened heavily in the economy and in 2006 continued the trend by imposing price controls in many sectors as a means of slowing inflation. Mineral resources are abundant, and agriculture has always been important, but the principal industries are food processing and beverages, chemicals, petrochemicals, and automotive manufacturing. Tourism is growing. Economic growth in the past few years is largely attributable to high commodity prices and the predictable recovery process that follows a mega-devaluation and severe economic crisis. A debt moratorium and government borrowing from Venezuela have eased the government's fiscal pressures. Credit markets are not likely to return to normal until all unresolved international debts are paid.

1984

Vía Samizdata encuentro este mapa de intrusión del estado en diferentes países.

Del Summary of Key Findings: "Argentina scored higher than 18 of the 27 EU countries."

Sobre Argentina:

• Constitutional right in Article 18 and 19, and habeas data right in Article 43; with important jurisprudence from Supreme Court
• Comprehensive privacy law, and several provincial laws; jurisprudence is emerging
• Data Privacy Authority has powers to investigate and intervene through both administrative and criminal sanctions; though is based in the Ministry of Justice
• Only one penalty has been imposed
• Data retention law previously called for 10 year retention period, but the President suspended the decree to allow for 'evaluation'
• Judicial warrant required for interception, and domestic surveillance can not be conducted by military personnel; many changes in the law since the 1990s

Aquí el informe completo de nuestro país.

Falling or Flying

World Economic Forum
Global Competitivenes Index 2007-2008

Un poquito más abajo...

Sabemos lo que este gobierno hace bien

Hacernos caer en todos los índices posibles. En este caso el Globalization Index de Foreign Policy y A.T.Kearney. Del puesto 43 al 54.

Periodistas en Argentina

Reporters Sans Frontieres da su índice de libertad de prensa mundial:

Argentina:

2002 Puesto 42 (nota: 12.50)
2003 Puesto 67 (nota: 15.17)
2004 Puesto 79 (nota: 21.33)
2005 Puesto 59 (nota: 13.57)
2006 Puesto 76 (nota: 17.30)
2007 Puesto 82 (nota: 24.83)


Viendo la evolución del índice se ve claramente que Kirchner abandonará su cargo con el peor índice de libertad de prensa, en la peor posición y con la peor nota.

Otro logro de este gobierno.

Brecha que se cierra

UTDT

Cuando asumió la brecha entre imagen positiva y negativa era de 70%, ahora, a meses de su fin, la brecha se cerró al 10%.

Putrefacción

Transparency International Corruption Perception Index 2007

ARGENTINA	Puesto	CPI Score	surveys used	confidence range
2007	105 de 179	2.9	7	2.6 - 3.2
2006	93 de 163	2.9	7	2.7 - 3.2
2005	97 de 159	2.8	10	2.5 - 3.1
2004	108 de 146	2.5	11	2.2 - 2.8

Otro logro de este gobierno.

Doing Business in Argentina

Salió el ranking Doing Business 2008

Estos son los datos (sobre 178 países evaluados) para Argentina:

(Para atrás en todos los items, menos dos en los que nos mantenemos igual)

Ease of...	2007	2006	Change
Doing Business	109	..	..
Starting a Business	114	110	-4
Dealing with Licenses	165	160	-5
Employing Workers	147	147	0
Registering Property	96	72	-24
Getting Credit	48	45	-3
Protecting Investors	98	96	-2
Paying Taxes	147	146	-1
Trading Across Borders	107	101	-6
Enforcing Contracts	47	47	0
Closing a Business	65	59	-6

Note: Doing Business 2007 rankings for fiscal 2006 are being recalculated to reflect changes to the methodology and the addition of three new countries.

Los datos están completos y detallados en el sitio.

hat tip: PSD Blog

Failed states 2007

Fund For Peace
Foreign Policy

Social Indicators

• Mounting Demographic Pressures
• Massive Movement of Refugees or Internally Displaced Persons creating Complex Humanitarian Emergencies
• Legacy of Vengeance-Seeking Group Grievance or Group Paranoia
• Chronic and Sustained Human Flight

Economic Indicators

• Uneven Economic Development along Group Lines
• Sharp and/or Severe Economic Decline

Political Indicators

• Criminalization and/or Delegitimization of the State
• Progressive Deterioration of Public Services
• Suspension or Arbitrary Application of the Rule of Law and Widespread Violation of Human Rights
• Security Apparatus Operates as a "State Within a State"
• Rise of Factionalized Elites
• Intervention of Other States or External Political Actors

Una imagen vale más que mil palabras

Argentina en el mundial de competitividad:
Zona de descenso

Hat tip El Opinador Compulsivo

Reporte IMD

Libertad de prensa.

Libertad de Prensa en el Mundo
Freedom House

(Hat tip: Perfil)

Argentina aparece como Parcialmente Libre.
(Que es lo mismo que parcialmente esclavo, ¿no?)

De 195 países evaluados, 63 son no libres, 58 (incluida Argentina) son parcialmente libres, y 74 son libres.

Argentina, con una calificación de 49, ocupa el lugar 105 entre los 195 países.
En el continente americano, se ubica en el lugar 28 de 35 países.

Este es el informe:

Argentina
Status: Partly Free
Legal Environment: 13
Political Environment: 20
Economic Environment: 16
Total Score: 49

Local and national politicians followed President Néstor Kirchner’s lead in 2006, showing little tolerance for press criticism. Tactics used against critical media included control of government advertising and access to information; termination of programs on private and state-owned broadcasters; and use of authoritarian press laws, threats, and physical assault to intimidate journalists.

While criminal insult and defamation laws no longer exist in Argentina, “crimes against honor” prohibit intentionally accusing someone of committing a crime, as well as impugning their honor. Civil laws call for the accuser to pay fines for any material or “moral” damages caused, while criminal laws carry jail time of up to three years. Both laws were used against journalists in 2006. Investigative reporter Mariano Saravia received a grant from the World Press Freedom Committee to fight charges of civil crimes against honor filed by a retired military officer and a former policeman who appeared in his book, La Sombra Azul. The journalist’s defense is that what he wrote was true. Prior to the charges, Saravia received death threats and was harassed. Although not used against Saravia, crimes against honor also exist in the federal Penal Code to which truth is a defense if the accusation is made in the public interest. The minister of culture in Rio Negro province filed criminal charges against journalist Angel Ruiz in 2006 after his reports linked the official to fossil smuggling. Prior to the charges, the journalist received threatening calls. Other criminal laws were used against journalists during the year. In Córdoba province, radio journalists Néstor Pasquini and Hugo Francischelli were jailed in December on charges of inciting violence and arson during a riot they covered.

The press also faced various forms of political pressure. President Kirchner continued to criticize conservative journalists and publications for complicity with the 1976-1983 military dictatorship. These publications, especially the daily La Nación, provide the most critical coverage of his government. First Lady and Senator Cristina Fernández called journalists covering congress “ignoramuses” and “dimwits.” These comments seemed to have incited attacks on journalists, including threats made against La Nación columnist Joaquín Morales Solá and the publisher of the critical newsmagazine Noticias, Jorge Fontevecchia. On state-owned Channel 7 television, “irreverent” journalist Victor Hugo Morales’s program, Desayuno, was cancelled after a seven-year run. The order came after the station management’s replacement and unexplained dismissal of anchor Marcela Pacheca after she criticized a gathering that President Kirchner organized on the anniversary of his inauguration. Similarly, Radio Nacional discontinued José Eliaschev’s commentary program. Three current affairs programs on privately owned media suffered the same fate.

Reporters Sans Frontieres reported that 34 Argentine journalists were physically attacked in 2006, often by politicians, bureaucrats or police. In the Quilmes town hall in Buenos Aires province, a local leader of the Peronist Party beat radio journalist Pedro Navarro unconscious. The mayor of Quilmes convinced the Federal Broadcast Commission to revoke the licenses of two local radio stations, Navarro’s Radio Quilmes 106.9 and Fan 103.9. The lower house of Congress unsuccessfully called upon the commission to restore their licenses. Furthermore, three well-known journalists’ email accounts were hacked, giving perpetrators access to names of confidential sources.

The use of state advertising to reward or punish media outlets is considered the biggest threat to press freedom nationally. According to the U.S. State Department, national government spending on advertising increased from approximately $5 million (15.4 million pesos) in 2002 to approximately $47 million (127.5 million pesos) in 2006. Shows were cancelled on privately owned Radio Río Gallegos in Santa Cruz province, LT 24 radio in Buenos Aires province and on TV 5 in Tucuman after local authorities threatened to withdraw advertising. In May, Grupo Editorial Perfil sued the national government for discrimination after withholding official advertising from some of its publications. Legislation that would set market-based or program-oriented criteria for the distribution of state advertising was stalled in congressional committees. The media company Perfil, owner of Noticias, has sued over the government’s refusal to award state advertising or grant its reporters interviews with top officials. All print media in Argentina are privately owned. The internet was unrestricted by the government and utilized by 34 percent of the population.

Libertad (o su ausencia)

Indice de Libertad Económcia 2007

Oid mortales el grito sagrado
Libertad! Libertad! Libertad!
Oid el ruido de rotas cadenas...

Argentina

Posición 95 de 157

Posición regional (América) 21 de 29

La economía de Argentina es libre en un 57,5 por ciento, según nuestra evaluación para 2007, lo cual hace que ocupe el puesto 95 entre las economías más libres del mundo. Su puntaje general es 0,2 punto porcentual más que el del año pasado, reflejando parcialmente nuevos detalles metodológicos. Argentina ocupa el puesto 21 entre 29 países de la región americana, y su puntaje general es levemente inferior al promedio de la región.
Argentina posee una alta calificación en libertad fiscal, libertad frente al gasto gubernamental y libertad monetaria. El nivel impositivo máximo se compara con el de los Estados Unidos, recauda tasas impositivas corporativas y tasas impositivas máximas sobre los ingresos del 35 por ciento. Si bien esto es relativamente alto, los ingresos fiscales son bajos como porcentaje del PBI y el gasto es también bajo. Asimismo, la propiedad estatal de las empresas es comparativamente insignificante.
Los derechos de propiedad, la libertad laboral y el nivel de corrupción son los problemas de Argentina (la libertad laboral en menor proporción que el resto). La interferencia política junto con una justicia ineficiente dificulta una mayor inversión extranjera y numerosas obstrucciones oficiales y populares a juicios justos, hacen que los tribunales internacionales sean preferibles a los tribunales argentinos. No resulta sorprendente que la corrupción también sea un problema. En cuanto al tema laboral, emplear y despedir empleados es complicado, costoso y otro obstáculo para la flexibilidad económica.

SITUACIÓN:

Con Néstor Kirchner, quien fue electo Presidente en mayo de 2003 luego de la quinta elección presidencial desde el retorno de Argentina a la democracia en 1983, se ha ampliado el papel del Estado en la economía, principalmente a través del control de precios en algunas industrias y en la creación de empresas estatales. Argentina posee abundantes recursos naturales y la agricultura siempre fue importante, pero las principales industrias son la alimenticia y la de bebidas, productos químicos, petroquímicos y automotores. El importante crecimiento en el PBI durante los últimos años se atribuye en gran medida a los altos precios de los productos básicos, a la moratoria de las deudas y a una recuperación económica de la crisis del 2001, más que a la implementación de políticas económicas gubernamentales sólidas.

LIBERTAD COMERCIAL — 65,5%

Establecer una empresa lleva un promedio de 32 días, comparado con el promedio mundial de 48 días. La actividad empresarial debería ser más sencilla para una máxima creación de puestos de trabajo. Obtener una licencia comercial y cerrar una empresa puede ser difícil por las regulaciones. Las empresas todavía deben afrontar serios problemas como la aplicación arbitraria de las regulaciones. La libertad general para establecer, operar y cerrar una empresa está relativamente bien protegida por el ámbito regulatorio nacional.

LIBERTAD DE COMERCIO INTERNACIONAL — 61,4%

La tasa arancelaria promedio ponderada de Argentina fue del 9,1 por ciento en 2004. Muchas barreras no arancelarias se diseñan para restringir el comercio y proteger las industrias locales, incluyendo precios mínimos a las importaciones, control de las importaciones, cupos, normas sanitarias restrictivas y cuestiones relacionadas con el cumplimiento y protección de los derechos de propiedad intelectual. El proceso aduanero es oneroso y está debilitado por la corrupción. Por consiguiente, para dar cuenta de estas barreras no arancelarias, se deduce un 20 por ciento adicional del puntaje de libertad de comercio internacional de Argentina.

LIBERTAD FISCAL — 82,3%

Argentina tiene tasas impositivas altas. Tanto la tasa impositiva máxima sobre los ingresos como la tasa impositiva máxima corporativa son del 35 por ciento. Otros impuestos incluyen un impuesto al valor agregado (IVA) y un impuesto a las ganancias. En el último año, el ingreso fiscal general como porcentaje del PBI fue del 14,2 por ciento.

LIBERTAD FRENTE AL GASTO GUBERNAMENTAL— 89,6%

El gasto gubernamental total incluidos el consumo y los pagos de transferencias, es bajo. En el último año, el gasto gubernamental representó 20,9 por ciento del PBI y el Gobierno recibió el 0,8 por ciento de los ingresos de empresas estatales y de las propiedades pertenecientes al Gobierno.

LIBERTAD MONETARIA — 71,3%

La inflación es relativamente volátil, alcanzando un promedio del 8,7 por ciento entre 2003 y 2005. Los precios relativamente altos e inestables explican en mayor parte el puntaje de independencia monetaria. El Gobierno impone controles sobre los precios de distribución de electricidad, agua y gas a nivel minorista, junto con el transporte urbano y servicios telefónicos locales. Por consiguiente, se deduce un 10 por ciento adicional del puntaje de libertad monetaria de Argentina para reflejar las distorsiones en el control de precios.

LIBERTAD DE INVERSIÓN — 50%

Registrar una empresa es muy simple, y los inversores extranjeros pueden ser propietarios exclusivos de la mayoría de las empresas locales. La inversión extranjera sólo está prohibida en ciertos sectores, como el de la construcción naval, la pesca, los bienes raíces en zonas limítrofes y la generación de energía nuclear, y se restringe en empresas de Internet y medios de comunicación. El factor más significativo es la incertidumbre legal respecto de los derechos de los acreedores, los derechos contractuales y los derechos de propiedad. El flujo de capital está restringido y la repatriación está sujeta a algunos controles.

LIBERTAD FINANCIERA — 40%

El sistema financiero de Argentina se vio devastado por el incumplimiento de pago de la deuda y la crisis bancaria de 2001-2002. El sector se está recuperando y en algunos casos regresó a los niveles anteriores a la crisis. Los préstamos bancarios en mora disminuyeron, pero los argentinos aún dudan en depositar fondos en bancos locales. El Gobierno no ha compensado totalmente a los bancos por la conversión de los depósitos en dólares a pesos. El banco principal es estatal y funciona como la única institución financiera en algunas regiones del país. Una cantidad de bancos extranjeros operan en Argentina. El papel del Gobierno en el sector financiero aumentó luego de la crisis, los servicios financieros están sujetos a la supervisión y regulación del mismo. El mercado de valores es activo, a pesar de que la capitalización del mercado está dominada por algunas empresas.

DERECHOS DE PROPIEDAD — 30%

El Poder Ejecutivo influencia al Poder Judicial argentino y encuestas independientes indican que la confianza pública sigue siendo débil. Muchos inversores extranjeros recurren al arbitraje internacional. Otra importante violación de los derechos de la propiedad es la de los “piquetes”, una nueva forma de protesta en la que los manifestantes toman el control de empresas privadas y provocan graves pérdidas sin que la policía o el Gobierno apliquen sanciones efectivas. Los tribunales argentinos son extremadamente lentos, ineficientes, reservados y corruptos.

LIBERTAD FRENTE A LA CORRUPCIÓN — 28%

La corrupción se percibe como generalizada. Argentina ocupa el puesto 97 entre 158 países en el Índice de Percepción de la Corrupción de Transparency Internacional para el año 2005.

LIBERTAD LABORAL — 56,6%

El Mercado laboral opera bajo regulaciones de empleo restrictivas que obstaculizan el crecimiento del empleo y la productividad. El costo no salarial de emplear a un trabajador es muy alto y despedir a un empleado superfluo es costoso. Las barreras para la creación de más empleos incluyen costos de indemnización, pagos de pensiones, contribuciones obligatorias a planes de salud dirigidos por sindicatos, vacaciones obligatorias y horas extra. La flexibilidad del mercado laboral de Argentina es uno de las 20 más bajas en todo el mundo.

Otro índice más: Are you ready?

Mientras en el World Economic Forum esperan que por fin el gobierno de Kirchner mande como delegada a Beatriz Nofal, se entretienen sacando índices que hacen quedar bien a nuestro país.

Ahora le tocó el turno al Networked Readiness Index:

The Networked Readiness Index (NRI) measures the degree of preparation of a nation or community to participate in and benefit from information and communication technologies (ICT) developments. The NRI is composed of three component indexes which assess:
- environment for ICT offered by a country or community
- readiness of the community's key stakeholders (individuals, business and governments)
- usage of ICT among these stakeholders.

Argentina

• 2004 Posición 76 de 104
• 2005 Posición 71 de 115
• 2006/2007 Posición 63 de 122

Hat tip: Pablo

Las comparaciones son odiosas.

Hat tip: Mackinlay's

Salió el "Capital Access Index" del Milken Institute. El índice mide el grado de "democratización del capital", es decir la facilidad relativa con la cual un emprendedor accede al capital.

Argentina
Año	Indice	+/-	Posición	+/-
2006	4.57	+0.34	57	+9
2005	4.23	+0.56	66	+10
2004	3.67	+0.15	76	-8
2003	3.52	-0.50	68	-23
2002	4.02	-0.29	45	-10
2001	4.31	-0.02	35	-3
2000	4.33	-	32	-

Mackinlay's, quien analiza sólo los últimos tres años, destaca la "sorpresiva mejora de Argentina".

Nótese que a pesar de tener una calificación un 6% superior a la del año 2000, perdimos 25 lugares en el ranking.

En este mundo competitivo no sólo hace falta mejorar, hay que mejorar más que los otros países.