When Will She Ever Learn?

[EdRooney]

Indeed. Named many that don't invest in Argentina is easy. The hard part is to name ONE that does. I am yet to see them named.
The "consumption based growth" that I see is through massive wealth redistribution done mostly through taxation and inflation. That is all fine and dandy until you run out of other people's money, which is what I think will happen sooner or later. Remember that Cuba, Mao's China and even USSR experienced a limited ran of incredible growth while the redistribution takes place. The problem is when you have nothing left to re-distribute.
If the Chinese levels of consumption driven growth is so real, CFK would have no problem attacking dollars as international businesses would be parachuting into Argentina. Where are they?
Finally, I question the integrity of both Krugman and Steiglitz, but that is me.

Ok so you agree that the Oppenheimer article was spewing false facts about the commodity boom, but you dislike the idea of internal consumption.

I have yet to see where this model of foreign investment has built a successful economy. The world's largest economies such as the US, UK, Japan, Germany were all built on the same basis of protecting and subsidising local industry whilst developing internal markets. Even Henry Ford was famous for doing the same thing on a local scale in Michigan. Can you think of any counter-examples?

As for other issues, the figures in the Weisbrot article are in dollars, so inflation is not a huge deal. And I agree Krugman and Steiglitz are not my personal favourites, but they do have couple of Nobels to justify their mainstream status.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Indeed. Named many that don't invest in Argentina is easy. The hard part is to name ONE that does. I am yet to see them named.
The "consumption based growth" that I see is through massive wealth redistribution done mostly through taxation and inflation. That is all fine and dandy until you run out of other people's money, which is what I think will happen sooner or later. Remember that Cuba, Mao's China and even USSR experienced a limited ran of incredible growth while the redistribution takes place. The problem is when you have nothing left to re-distribute.
If the Chinese levels of consumption driven growth is so real, CFK would have no problem attacking dollars as international businesses would be parachuting into Argentina. Where are they?
Finally, I question the integrity of both Krugman and Steiglitz, but that is me.

It's not hard to name countries that have pulled out of Argentina, though. On the other hand, the integrity of Krugman and Stieglitz is beyond reproach, though I might question their understanding of Argentina.

 

[germano]

Indeed. Named many that don't invest in Argentina is easy. The hard part is to name ONE that does. I am yet to see them named.
The "consumption based growth" that I see is through massive wealth redistribution done mostly through taxation and inflation. That is all fine and dandy until you run out of other people's money, which is what I think will happen sooner or later. Remember that Cuba, Mao's China and even USSR experienced a limited ran of incredible growth while the redistribution takes place. The problem is when you have nothing left to re-distribute.
If the Chinese levels of consumption driven growth is so real, CFK would have no problem attacking dollars as international businesses would be parachuting into Argentina. Where are they?
Finally, I question the integrity of both Krugman and Steiglitz, but that is me.

What does it tell us if companies are investing and opening plants in other countries? Why have US auto makers invested in Mexico and closed plants in Michigan and elsewhere? Because the economy is so bad in the US? Are the engineers and workers not well trained in the US? Is the government in the White House incompetent and corrupt? And this is all better in Mexico? - Of course not ...

Why had companies like Nokia closed plants in Germany and then instead opened plants in Romania? Is the economy in Romania so solid? The country so much safer? Is the infrastructure so much better? Are workers better educated than in Germany? - Of course not ...

So now think again ... why do you think Daimler opened a plant in Brazil?

 

[CarryOn]

The problem is not her. She is just the symptom. The problem is that most Argentinians, but specially the ones who attend UBA, are thought that there is such thing as "free lunch".

And you are now inhabiting the ultimate outcome of that philosophy.

I agree to a point, but at this point in time, I think it has reached a stage where she is primary part of the problem. She's an ideologue without pragmatic political skills, which for all other faults, is something that Nestor had a much greater share of than she did. Not to mention virtually no willingness to change direction. She's basically listening to a smaller and smaller circle of ideologues - little more than Maxi, Moreno and Kicillof at this point. Even over the course of this year, Echegaray, del Pont, Lorenzino, Randazzo, de Vido are being marginalized for trying to pivot into tackling the big issues of inflation, insecurity and economic stagnation. And these were part of an even smaller circle than the year before.

This level of ideological intransigence, which sees FpV retreating deeper and deeper into its client-voter base, has created a government where policy decisions are being made for the bottom 20% of the economy. Not unlike what is being done in Venezuela or Ecuador, but the share of the population in that economic circumstance is far larger in those countries. There aren't enough voters at that economic level for the FpV to win elections, unless the opposition splits in so many ways.

With all due respect, I think many of us here don't have your faith in the panacea of fully liberalized markets. Argentina is not wrong to be protecting elements of its economy from competition, because it can't win nor would it be able to in the future without a willingness to drive most of its population into abject poverty for a generation. With that being said, the current government has gone so far as to intervene in the economy in such ludicrous ways (dollar clamp, trade substitution) that hardly anyone is benefitting in a stagnant economy.

But baring an economic collapse in the 1-2 years, the situation has been set up for the successor to potentially realize huge gains in economic growth (over the short term) simply by winding down some of the barriers and releasing pent-up demand. But there's a pit that has to be worked up out of.

 

[camberiu]

So now think again ... why do you think Daimler opened a plant in Brazil?

Not for export, I can assure you that. Most of the foreign investment going into Brazil is for the DOMESTIC MARKET, unlike the examples that you cited of Romania and so forth. And I am not talking just about foreign investment either. Domestic companies like Vale, EMBRAER, Marcopolo, Brazil Foods, AMBEV, Itau, Agrale, AVIBRAS are also investing heavily, and that is again, for domestic consumption. Where is the investiment on chinese growing Argentina, even from domestic companies? Who is investing here?

 

[germano]

Not for export, I can assure you that. Most of the foreign investment going into Brazil is for the DOMESTIC MARKET, unlike the examples that you cited of Romania and so forth. And I am not talking just about foreign investment either. Domestic companies like Vale, EMBRAER, Marcopolo, Brazil Foods, AMBEV, Itau, Agrale, AVIBRAS are also investing heavily, and that is again, for domestic consumption. Where is the investiment on chinese growing Argentina, even from domestic companies? Who is investing here?

Your example was Daimler investing in Brazil and not Argentina - not a domestic company. How about investments from GM (Chevrolet)? Volkswagen etc.? Lots of their cars made in Brazilian plants that I see on the streets here ...

 

[ARbound]

To Dear Leader's defense, she never said which nation grows...

 

[Bajo_cero2]

From the article:
"But the reality is that the economic expansion has been led by domestic consumption and investment."

Really? Investment? By whom? I'd love to know who are these entities that are investing in Argentina. I see money going out. Going to Miami. But the newest Daimler factory in Latin America is not going to Argentina. It is going to Brazil.
The Google data center is going to Chile.
Maybe some of the 7.5 billion dollar investment that FIAT is making in the region is going to Argentina? Nope, it is pretty much all going to Brazil too.
So, I'd love to learn more about this "investment driven growth" the author is talking about.

Indeed. Named many that don't invest in Argentina is easy. The hard part is to name ONE that does. I am yet to see them named.
The "consumption based growth" that I see is through massive wealth redistribution done mostly through taxation and inflation. That is all fine and dandy until you run out of other people's money, which is what I think will happen sooner or later. Remember that Cuba, Mao's China and even USSR experienced a limited ran of incredible growth while the redistribution takes place. The problem is when you have nothing left to re-distribute.
If the Chinese levels of consumption driven growth is so real, CFK would have no problem attacking dollars as international businesses would be parachuting into Argentina. Where are they?
Finally, I question the integrity of both Krugman and Steiglitz, but that is me.

You don t mean Steiglitz the Nobel Award of Economy. I understand to question the integrity of the Peace nobel Award.

Interesting, no comments. Well, perhaps a few. Keynes theory says that is the State that invest not the companies. Nobody is going to invest during a crisis and the Keynes model was developed to recover a country after a big crisis.

There is no big difference between the AR economy policy and the new deal. The second worked out to rise the US after the big depression. Why the same recipy shouldn t work here?

 

[Rich One]

CFK is in the Hospital Favaloro for a Routine Check-up ? overnight

 

[Bajo_cero2]

If you read properly the US economy, it is still Keynessian. They print money and the economy depends on the State investment but instead of investing in improving the life of its citizens, they invest in war supplies. Now we also know that the huge development of software and internet companies was thanks to public founds.