But today we delve into details about that, because again today publish an excellent text on AMLO and not to structural reforms. Some will already be cursing because I will not be again for your review only. To those readers I ask you not to be biased and read the guest commentary today, and then make judgments and draw their own conclusions. Without further ado, here is what I explain.
INFORMAL ECONOMY - NO REFORMS
By Macario Schettino
In the presidential debate, Andrés Manuel López Obrador said, clearly, it is not prepared to carry out structural reforms. In his opinion, these are changes that only benefit the rich, and therefore it should be left behind.
It is unfortunate that a presidential candidate, especially one that has the support of one third of the voters, so little understanding of the economy and what happens in the rest of the world. Well, he insisted that not to do too much attention to what happens outside, and rather should concentrate on domestic policy.
When an economy grows, it is difficult to make the people enjoy better living standards. To grow, you need to be more productive. In fact, there is no other way to grow steadily. If a worker produces the same, year after year, it may not earn more, and if it produces each year is sold cheaper, because eventually earning less. It's that simple. If, however, a worker can increase output, you can sell more and have more income.
important thing, then, is how to be more productive: precisely what they wanted reform. Productivity is the result of two things, above many others that may help: irons serve and people who can use them. Or if you want it in technical terms: physical and human capital. Or as is more commonly called, investment and education. If you buy the most modern machinery, but does not train operators will not win anything. If you have the best craftsmen, but with old tools, as well. It is the combination of both what makes a company competitive, or country.
Consequently, everything that serves to increase the quantity and quality of investment and education, will lead to greater productivity and, therefore, to sustained growth.
But we today do not have a cultural and legal framework to attract investment. Or have a minimum educational level. Let alone competitive, but only decent. On several occasions I have commented on the PISA test, followed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, where the average in developed countries received 500 points, and we just 385. Just 5% of our high school students would be able to pass that level in any of the countries of Western Europe, to give more evidence.
Well, countries that have made reforms have been able to attract investment, improve their education and grow for many years. And it is not already developed countries, but others have been like us dependent underdeveloped labor ejectors.
are five countries have made progress in economic reforms: Chile, Spain, Israel, Ireland and China. All of them have grown more than Mexico in the last 20 years, thanks to the reform process. Ireland takes two decades to grow 6% annually per capita. Chile, which implemented the reforms in the 80's, growing more than 4% per capita, also for 20 years.
And for comparison, five countries have failed to make reforms, or have stopped, like us. Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Mexico. If you see overlap between the group "Chavez" and no growth, is not fortuitous. Just Venezuela is a great example of how to destroy a country. In 2005 are, practically speaking, the same per capita income they had in 1950. The fall in the country matches the oil success in the 70's, but also in the years recently, with Chavez. Or see you in Argentina, which increased 1% per capita from 1950 to 1985, and slightly less from then to date. A shadow of the power that was before he came Peron, who still does not go, always revived his disciples. There are
data. The reforms grow, compete and win. But this is beyond the understanding of many people. Including the aforementioned presidential candidate. FIN
My conclusion
By Damián García Gómez
This article is explained simply and generally negative effects do not imply structural reforms. Failure to follow the economic logic is quite dangerous for the developing economies like ours. AMLO must understand that Mexico's economic problems are not caused by the rich, but obese and obsolete system in place to help, hinders national development. AMLO accuses many entrepreneurs do not pay taxes and prowl the world peacefully, but if anything is clear is that the rich are paying more taxes due to the volume of transactions they handle.
Without structural reforms Mexico is not going to grow and develop. López Obradorl proposes a major development which will involve changing the economic model, but does not whether Mexico will turn to socialism or similar. What is logical is that the only way to change the economic model is structural reforms, it would change for the better. If Mexico has not grown as it should with the current system, it is logical to keep it as is will not generate the enormous growth and development that promises Andrés López. A shift to socialism and to phase out the economy will prove counterproductive and the country will lose everything he had achieved.
Once having an efficient system will not be enough just to have it, but must be constantly maintained and inspected discipline. George W. Bush has created a fiscal mess and finance United States public, and the world is suffering from high inflation in the U.S. that involves the raising of interest rates and stock a lot of turmoil in international financial markets. Imagine what would happen if the U.S. will turn to socialism just because "neo-liberalism has not worked because there are many millions of poor people in America." What horror.
0 comments:
Post a Comment