Brazil to rescue Argentina

[sesamosinsal]

In regards to the US military action in Iraq (which personally I didn't support), I think one would be hard-pressed to pont to any economic benefits that were reaped from it.

Well, Iraqi oil is being sold in dollars again.

 

[nicoenarg]

Has the US invaded its neighbors recently? If not, I'm not sure why it got dragged into the Brasil invading Argentina discussion (which would never happen).

Citygirl, its popular to bash the US. Don't let it get to you.

Its the herd mentality at work (which happens with most things in the world). Thanks to the internet, there are a lot of "jacks of all, masters of none" kind of experts out there. All they're basically doing is blindly following one rumor after another.

Just watch the sheep go back and forth like idiots and enjoy the show

 

[nicoenarg]

I am always impress by the naivete of lot of Americans with respect to foreign affairs.

Some cost-benefit analysis for you

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/03/the_economic_co.html

And this analysis does not include all the contracts (billions$) given to the companies that were close friends with the Bush administration (specially its VP).

Don't try to belittle people. Do you have PROOF to back what you're saying? Its one conjecture against another. No one knows for sure.

Doesn't economic science spell it out clearly that you can't PROVE any hypothesis to be right. Why not stick with that ideal?

And for the record, I'm not trying to say you're wrong or that citygirl is right, I'm just saying, depending on who you talk to, either one of you could be right.

 

[nicoenarg]

Back to the original post which is actually an important one.

Camberiu, what are the implications for Brazil in case Argentina does collapse? Does it face what China faces because of EU troubles or can Brazil weather the storm with minor bruises? If so, then how?

 

[expatinowncountry]

Don't try to belittle people. Do you have PROOF to back what you're saying? Its one conjecture against another. No one knows for sure.

Doesn't economic science spell it out clearly that you can't PROVE any hypothesis to be right. Why not stick with that ideal?

And for the record, I'm not trying to say you're wrong or that citygirl is right, I'm just saying, depending on who you talk to, either one of you could be right.

I have the right to be amuse by the naivete of some people in some areas/issues. I do not see that as something particularly bad as naive people are (often) the nicest in the world. I was treated with the greatest respect and kindness when I lived and worked in the States. If I did not have a family of my own I would live there as professionally you cannot beat the US.

I do not know why you get over aggressive when I made clear it was a conjecture... if you read my previous post I said (and I copy and paste) "In the view of some people (including me)" and I added "Of course, we may be wrong". If you do not call that a conjecture, what the hell is that? And I think I gave a few examples to back my perception (again, a perception)

And NO, it is NOT economic science that spells out clearly that you can't PROVE any hypothesis to be right. It was Karl Popper and his philosophy of science better know as falsifiability. More info here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
Note, Popper was Austrian, but he does not belong to the Austrian School of Economic Thought . Popper was a genius and probably thought little of economics even though he taught at London School of Economics (it is hard to make a living as a philosopher). His philosophy greatly influenced some economists, see for instance the textbook An Introduction to Positive Economics (Richard Lipsey).

 

[expatinowncountry]

Citygirl, its popular to bash the US. Don't let it get to you.

Its the herd mentality at work (which happens with most things in the world). Thanks to the internet, there are a lot of "jacks of all, masters of none" kind of experts out there. All they're basically doing is blindly following one rumor after another.

Just watch the sheep go back and forth like idiots and enjoy the show

The one blindly following one rumor after another was Collin Powell, a Secretary of State, hardly a master of none...

 

[nicoenarg]

I have the right to be amuse by the naivete of some people in some areas/issues. I do not see that as something particularly bad as naive people are (often) the nicest in the world. I was treated with the greatest respect and kindness when I lived and worked in the States. If I did not have a family of my own I would live there as professionally you cannot beat the US.

In my post to you, I wasn't talking about your opinion on the US. So the above is irrelevant to me.

I do not know why you get over aggressive when I made clear it was a conjecture... if you read my previous post I said (and I copy and paste) "In the view of some people (including me)" and I added "Of course, we may be wrong". If you do not call that a conjecture, what the hell is that? And I think I gave a few examples to back my perception (again, a perception)

You might wanna hold your horses just a bit there sparky. I was only referring to your post to citygirl which came across as condescending. That's all. I'm not being "overly aggressive", I'm merely pointing it out. You, on the other hand, seem to be "overly sensitive" about this.

And NO, it is NOT economic science that spells out clearly that you can't PROVE any hypothesis to be right. It was Karl Popper and his philosophy of science better know as falsifiability. More info here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper

I did not know that, so thanks.

Note, Popper was Austrian, but he does not belong to the Austrian School of Economic Thought .

What the hell does this have to do with what I said? I don't care about economics schools of thought and you won't find me making a case for either Keynsian or Austrian schools of thought. Some others on this forum have made that their life's goal, not me.

Popper was a genius and probably thought little of economics even though he taught at London School of Economics (it is hard to make a living as a philosopher). His philosophy greatly influenced some economists, see for instance the textbook An Introduction to Positive Economics (Richard Lipsey).

I'll check the text book out if I have the time.

 

[camberiu]

Back to the original post which is actually an important one.

Camberiu, what are the implications for Brazil in case Argentina does collapse? Does it face what China faces because of EU troubles or can Brazil weather the storm with minor bruises? If so, then how?

Very hard to say man. Define the "collapse" you are referring to? Are you talking about hyper-inflation? civil war? I mean, we are talking about a very wide range of possible outcomes here.

At any rate it is hard to see and judge things in a vacum like that. I can't picture Argentina "collapsing" all by itself, specially when the demand for commodities has remained so hot. If Chinese imports of commodities dramatically drop, things will get really nasty in Argentina. Consequently it will get bad in Brazil too. However, how much of the impact felt in Brazil will be due to economic hardship in China vs. Argentina? Hard to say.

I don't think I am knowledgeable or smart enough to make any kind of meaningful/useful forecast about this.

 

[nicoenarg]

Very hard to say man. Define the "collapse" you are referring to? Are you talking about hyper-inflation? civil war? I mean, we are talking about a very wide range of possible outcomes here.

At any rate it is hard to see and judge things in a vacum like that. I can't picture Argentina "collapsing" all by itself, specially when the demand for commodities has remained so hot. If Chinese imports of commodities dramatically drop, things will get really nasty in Argentina. Consequently it will get bad in Brazil too. However, how much of the impact felt in Brazil will be due to economic hardship in China vs. Argentina? Hard to say.

I don't think I am knowledgeable or smart enough to make any kind of meaningful/useful forecast about this.

Well the Chinese economy is cooling pretty darn fast. That one's for sure. Not sure how it'll play out for the rest of the world. Chinese economy cooling down is not just bad for Argentina but the rest of the world, I think.

 

[camberiu]

Well the Chinese economy is cooling pretty darn fast. That one's for sure. Not sure how it'll play out for the rest of the world. Chinese economy cooling down is not just bad for Argentina but the rest of the world, I think.

I agree with you here. And I think the impact of that will be nasty both in Argentina and Brazil. I'd like to think that Brazil is better prepared to handle the rocky road ahead, but the level of consumer debt there is outright scary. I have the impressions that the Argentinians are not as nearly as deep into debt as Brazilians (I could be wrong). On the other hand, Brazil holds half a trillion dollars in foreign reserves. Argentina holds almost nothing.
Also, it seems that Brazil has more solid public institutions, at least when compered with Argentina, which I admit, is not saying much. Also, Brazilians trust banks and financial institutions. After all, the last president who pulled something similar to the "corralito" in Brazil was impeached.

At any rate, I expect things to get ugly if China's economy is really about to hit a brick wall. It will be "the perfect storm" for sure. What will come out of it? For Argentina, I think something similar to Lord Humungus might not be that far off.