If anyone should obsess over in search of lost time-and-find, there is Mexico
of zeros to zeros
In a recent paper, Nobel prize in economics 2008, the American Paul Krugman resented because, from the economic point of view, the last decade American and he could give up. For Krugman, the last 10 years should enter American history as "The big zero "(The New York Times, December 28, 2009). Well, we are already at least two, because for lost time, in Mexico we paint alone. Our zero is now much, much larger than the U.S. It not only has lost time and opportunities economically but also socially and politically.
For Krugman, the indicators for your country are as clear as depressing. With regard to job creation : zero (in fact, employment in the private sector is now less than in 2000). The typical family income in constant prices not only increased but decreased, so did the stock market and the price of homes, as homeowners with mortgages now owe more than their homes are worth. Our lost time
If the same line of Krugman, in Mexico we come to consider what has happened in the past two centuries, and this year's bicentennial and centennial almost obliged to do so-we realize that the losses historical time have been many and that explains, at least partially, our underdevelopment. To begin with, are the two decades of civil strife which led to the Independence and the Revolution in the second decade of each of the last two centuries. Also include the period from the first the second empire in the nineteenth century, as it is of a chaotic time and largely wasted. But there are more recent losses and that, compared with the past are increasingly less justifiable.
Conservative critics of Luis Echeverría and José López Portillo called on the two presidential terms both presided over "The dozen lost", although from the standpoint of economic indicators, especially GDP, most were not so bad years. The right business was particularly hard on those two presidents who closed what we call "post-revolutionary cycle" of Mexico. From that angle, they criticized his order six years and in general his "populism", the harder it was not with the opposition left-Monterrey entrepreneurship Echeverría publicly blamed for the attempted kidnapping that took the lives of Eugenio Garza Sada 1973, and was attributed to the Communist League on September 23. From that perspective, they were both presidents criticized the ineffectiveness of the "State obese" both fed at the expense of an increase in external debt, its contribution to inflation and were criticized for being critical of the U.S. indirectly and maintain a good relationship with Castro's Cuba. From left, the look was too severe, but less to see these two presidential administrations and economically lost and more persistent authoritarianism, repression and corruption.
What followed the 1982 economic debacle itself can be regarded as time lost by a larger sector of Mexican society that had to live with lost wages (purchasing power since then the share of GDP to wages began systematically reduce the benefit of capital).
From the standpoint of business, the situation was contradictory, because although small and medium businesses with neoliberal reforms were initiated from 1984-1985 and radicalized during the administration of Carlos Salinas and Ernesto Zedillo, other survivors and large, benefited. Privatization and trade liberalization were and are well regarded by those groups, domestic and foreign, who benefited from them and now constitute the backbone of capitalism in Mexico (not necessarily Mexican). These large concentrations of capital are still struggling to get the state to expand the space for private capital in the last redoubts of the big state companies: oil and electric power generation. For them is wasted time it takes for Pemex and CFE privatized.
The "structural reform" promised by neoliberalism authoritarian technocrats Carlos Salinas and ran into the disaster of 1995 and its main product: Fobaproa, Mexico paid all the pieces of the mismanagement of the economy. As a result of this was re-materialize the electoral insurgency and this time did manage to oust the PRI from Los Pinos. With great optimism, many accepted the premise of winning the election in July 2000 with political democracy led by the PAN would curb economic irresponsibility, the demagoguery and public corruption. With a public sector led by businessmen accustomed to the logic of the market and very knowledgeable about our great trading partner, the United States, the return of economic growth was almost assured.
did not, did not grow and the time be lost again. Corruption continued to show no abatement. The alleged business logic was not simply the root of that is called capitalism with friends (crony capitalism). One consequence of such arrangements between the domes and economic policy was the persistence of monopolistic practices and a significant decline in the competitiveness of the country (in this regard, Mexico dropped to 60 among 132 countries). The Curse of the oiling deepened. The PAN system instead of trying to tax reform simply postponed since the 1960 oil resources used to finance current spending - 40 percent! - And not bothering anyone with a restructuring of the tax scheme. After all, doing nothing, letting the inertia that would lead the country, led the main economic indicator, GDP, grew on average annually over the past 10 years a meager 1.6 percent. And if that amount is deducted population growth, then it follows that real growth averaged less than 1 percent per year, the worst in Latin America.
Economic growth alone does not make much sense, the important thing in Mexico is associated with the production of goods and services with the welfare and equity. And this is where the loss of opportunities acquires its greatest significance: employment formal decreased (an indicator: in 16 careers, on average, only two out of 10 graduates have found employment in their area of \u200b\u200bspecialty, El Universal, 1st. January), the legal and illegal immigration to the U.S. grew to the point become, along with the informal economy, the safety valve that slowed the social explosion, but a country must depend on these factors to maintain a precarious stability is not on track.
poverty indicators tell us that time has run and the solution of our great social-historical problem remains elusive. According to figures from the Ministry of Finance, the resources to fight poverty have nearly quintupled between 2000 and 2009, but the result has not matched at all to this increase. According to figures from ECLAC, the proportion of Mexicans living in some kind of poverty has risen from 53 percent in 1992 to 47.4 percent in 2008. For the beginning of 2010, and the harsh effects of the economic crisis, ECLAC estimated that the proportion of poor exceed 50 percent, or nearly still where we were.
the foregoing and other factors, should surprise few in Mexico that support the democratic system has not increased but decreased. According to Latinobarómetro, between 1996 and 2009, support for democracy in our country decreased by 9 points. The disillusionment and frustration with public life is the strongest in Mexico.
One recommendation that we can not accept
Americans, with its huge economy battered but perhaps you can afford to do what he proposes Krugman: forget the past decade and hope that the next will be better. We Mexicans can do even that, in relative terms because we have lost more and more time. Forget and trust would not be quite the opposite solution: identify the errors, the failed strategies and responsible to then act accordingly. This we owe to 1810 and 1910 and must be paid.
0 comments:
Post a Comment