Neilson Nails It...again.

Am I the only who is just not impressed with what he writes? It's like elevator talk in my building on paper. Ho-hum.

He tacitly suggests that Argentina should follow Brazil and Chile's footsteps. However, Brazil is going through some of the same troubles as Argentina; they just have the FX reserves and access to credit markets to stave off a massive devaluation. The same can be said for Chile, but to a lesser extent. What's happening in Argentina is a regional/global phenomenon.

It would be nice to hear real proposals from the critics, Mr. Neilson included. Otherwise, all I see is that they can write — and that's pretty much about it. For example, how would he recommend solving the inflation problem, and how would he manage the political cost of whatever the solution is?
 
I'm not sure whether Mr Neilson is an economist and as such would not be in a position to offer a solution.
Bradly, you say that what is happening here is a regional/global phenomenon. Are you sure you meant that?
 
I cannot abide Neilson, he represents everything wrong with that paper. I really do not like the FpV government, let me say that at the outset.

He offers scant little in the way of analysis and his prose is awful. First sentence:

Legend has it that, on becoming prime minister, Margaret Thatcher invited the members of her Cabinet, all of them men in respectable dark suits, to an expensive restaurant for lunch.

That is a sentence butchered by the inappropriate use of the comma. Did his keyboard break? Artless. Sentences starting with But, I feel like I am being butted in the face. You could go on raking over his prose all day, in any number of articles but after a while you probably have to confront the reality that this stuff is written in poor enough tabloid style as that's his audience.

I suppose the paper's editor deserve a kick in the proverbials as well, is someone paid to proof read this? It feels like a struggle through bad punctuation and unimaginative writing.

This is pub chat, at best:

It was expected that he would set about persuading Cristina to forget all that populist nonsense she filled her head with when she was a student in La Plata U back in the 1970s and start behaving like a normal 21st century politician. Perhaps he did give it a shot; if so, she refused to listen.

Expected by who, on what basis ? Facts, research? Nope, just cookie cutter opinion pieces thrown together in the laziest way. He's preaching to the crowd here, he has no one to convince, no point to make other than one he made last week. As an excercise in investigative journalism it's useless, as in it serves no useful purpose. What is a normal 21st politician exactly? In what part of the world? South America, Africa, Asia?

What is the basis for this?

To get where he currently is, Kicillof must have told Cristina that she is right, everyone else is wrong, and that, thanks to her brilliance and his willingness to help her, the Argentine economy will soon start performing as it did before she took office.

This is tabloid guff. Dumbed down to the language of petty adolescents.

Not one fact or figure, not one illustration of a point, not one suggestion for a corrective action, not one reference to a historical event. This is what I imagine it would sound like if a foreign college graduate had a rake of beers and someone asked them who Kiciloff was. Absolutely desparate.

I truly believe Mr Neilson to be smarter than the average bear if he is getting paid to publish the same article in different words almost every week. Hats off. I'd say that's a good 20 minutes worth of work there. Lobbed out in the deckchair in Miami I guess.
 
I'm not sure whether Mr Neilson is an economist and as such would not be in a position to offer a solution.

Well, if true, this pretty much describes the state of mass media today. They know so little about so much. (Credit: Amy Goodman)

Bradly, you say that what is happening here is a regional/global phenomenon. Are you sure you meant that?

Yes, and I've discussed it many times in other threads on this forum. Almost every country in South America is running current account deficits and trade deficits, and they're financing their expenditures with debt. Domestic economies are growing slightly, but global demand remains stagnant.

Argentina won't/can't take on the debt it needs to stabilize its FX reserves and its domestic economy. There are several reasons for that (e.g. the fight with Mr. Singer), but some of it is also due to post-2001/2 apprehension. Instead, it has turned to the BCRA to finance the domestic economy amid stagnant demand globally, which has exacerbated the inflation issues even more because of 1) increased ARS supply and 2) dwindling USD reserves (no debt to reinforce them). So, inflation here in Argentina can partially be attributed to the global economic tailwinds.

In addition to stabilizing the exchange rate, the government might also reduce the generous subsidies to the middle and upper classes, as well as increase interest rates on personal loans and credit cards. This would decrease a significant amount consumer spending (of money they don't have), and thus bring down inflation considerably. The question is: Who wants to be responsible for decreasing the purchasing power of the middle-upper classes? Who wants to pay the price politically?

There are no easy choices here. The problem with what Mr. Neilson writes is that he makes it seem as if there are.
 
That is a sentence butchered by the inappropriate use of the comma. Did his keyboard break? Artless. Sentences starting with But, I feel like I am being butted in the face. You could go on raking over his prose all day, in any number of articles but after a while you probably have to confront the reality that this stuff is written in poor enough tabloid style as that's his audience.

Precisely!
 
Increase interest rates on loans and cards? Is household debt an issue here? I can't find any figures and I don't see any above. I think that's a clumsy measure to tackle inflation.

I think you need to stimulate the ability to invest rather than punish spending, right now only the very rich can invest. Inflation means that anything left in your account at the end of the month is losing value, better turn it into a physical asset is the current thinking. Increasing loans on housing would crush a stagnant housing market, less investment opportunity equals even more fervour to dump cash and acquire "stuff".

Those generous subsidies are geographically specific to B.A. They really should cut the cord, why do Rosarinos pay more than their porteno cousins? Class specific cuts are ideologically motivated surely, make them across the board. Again, show us the figures, how do those cuts stack up in cuts in inefficient spending to prop up football para todos...carne para todos and other populist spends? I genuinely don't know but I don't believe a class war is what Argentina needs (partially tongue in cheek).

Your proposal would strangle any business relying on credit, kill off start ups and murder the property market surely. Better to bite the bullet and re-engage with the international credit market no? Invest heavily in infrastructure and education in attempt to create jobs (infra projects) and improve education. No debt is not necessarily an ideal end state when it means a strangled local economy. The 2000+ crisis had it's roots in Menem's awful sell off state assets to a bunch of crooks and unfit fools (former owners of Aerolineas have been convicted in Spain I believe, the ones he sold up too) not necessarily in using international credit lines to build infrastructure. Managed FDI and stimulation of local industry can be an excellent driver for growth an job creation, making it even harder to access credit in one of the most locked down countries in the world to so smacks of madness to me?
 
Whether you agree or disagree, James Neilson shows us the art of writing.
http://www.buenosair...istina-and-axel

There are a couple of very predictable posts on this site:

1. ajoknoblauch's one-liners against anything that involves god or religion.
2. matiasba bringing the moderated leftist viewpoint.
3. Camberiu talking anything airplanes or Brasil vs. Argentina
4. Gringoboy lauding a recent James Neilson writing.

My take:

1. Gringoboy is actually James Neilson trying to be incognito.
2. Gringoboy is in a relationship with James Neilson.
3 Gringoboy is a very, very, very good friend of James Neilson and they are having a bromance.
4. Gringoboy is a paid PR firm working for James Neilson.

I haven't quite figured it out yet, but working on it. :)
 
Am I the only who is just not impressed with what he writes? It's like elevator talk in my building on paper. Ho-hum.

He tacitly suggests that Argentina should follow Brazil and Chile's footsteps. However, Brazil is going through some of the same troubles as Argentina; they just have the FX reserves and access to credit markets to stave off a massive devaluation. The same can be said for Chile, but to a lesser extent. What's happening in Argentina is a regional/global phenomenon.

It would be nice to hear real proposals from the critics, Mr. Neilson included. Otherwise, all I see is that they can write — and that's pretty much about it. For example, how would he recommend solving the inflation problem, and how would he manage the political cost of whatever the solution is?

ps...we shouldn't be too hard on Neilson, until we see a concrete proposal from any politician in Argentina in terms of a inflation and national debt solution it might be a bit much to expect one from a hack in Miami.
 
Back
Top