Thursday, January 7, 2010

More economic facts for Rich and Terry to ponder

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=514426

Since we all know that Rich never reads these links, Chile is the first country in South America to win the honor. For Chileans, it symbolizes exit from the ranks of the Third World to the First. "For the rest of us," IBD writes, "it's a stunning example of how embracing free markets and free trade brings prosperity." It's an example that we could use in the United States right about now.

The lesson has not been lost on Asia. "As the U.S. dithers," IBD notes, "East Asia has moved forward on market liberalization with a vengeance, creating the biggest free trade zones seen in years. The train is pulling out of the station, and America isn't on board."

On a related note, the Christian Science Monitor reports on Latin America's rising new economic star. If you've followed along so far, you probably have guessed that it is not Venezuela, Bolivia, or Ecuador. No, it's Peru. Also embracing free markets and free trade.

As we languish in ever more government spending and high unemployment we are proving once again that Keynsian principles do not work in the real world but Chile has again proven that "free markets for free men" is the way to go.

3 comments:

Baxter said...

Mark:

I have been to Santiago, Chile as well as Valparaiso and Vina Del Mar. I have also been to Venezuela, Peru, Paraguay, Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay. So - don't tell me about those countries. One of these days, I may tell you about South America.

I will tell you that Michelle Bachelet is the president of Chile. She is a member of the Socialist Party and she is an atheist. Her father was imprisoned and tortured by your presumed hero, Augusto Pinochet.

Chile is a very well run country. It is the "Germany" of South America while Argentina is the Italy or Spain, and it shows. I wish that more of the Latin nations would follow Chile's model. I hope to someday live in Buenos Aires and Punta Del Este for much of the year.

Brazil is also worth noting - it is run by the extremely popular Lula da Silva - a founding member of the Workers Party. This socialist has cleaned up the mess that he inherited from a right wing coalition. He is a former trade union leader and was briefly jailed by the country's right wing military dictatorship in the '70's.

I'm sure the lunatic fringe at IBD is thrilled with Bachelet and Lula. Fortunately, they have few readers that are not "true believers" to begin with.

Slowly, but surely, the continent is making real progress. Hugo Chavez represents a step backwards - he is a response to the failed right wing governments that preceded him. He will fail soon enough and hopefully, Santiago and Brasilia will lead the way to stable and sustained growth in South America.

Viva America del Sur!

Baxter said...

Mark:

After reading your two referenced articles, it occurs to me that you might not understand Keynesian economics. Chile, Peru and Brazil all enjoy center-left governments that employ Keynesian economic theory. They are not Laissez-Faire. You may be a Keynesian and simply not know it.

The Latin American governments have suffered for generations under low tax, right wing governments that espouse Laissez-faire economic policies. They have not worked. The success stories have gone the Keynesian route, without exception.

What could go wrong down south? A bear market in commodities. As well as they are doing and as diversified as they are becoming, they still rely a great deal on natural resources. A lot of progress will likely be lost if commodities reverse their bull run.

I like your choice of the Christian Science Monitor. I have read that paper for 40 years. In June of 1976, I was honored to meet Chief Editorial Writer, Charlotte Saikowski, in her office in Boston. She told me that a promising candidate for president had been in her office the previous week and she thought he would probably be our next president - Jimmy Carter.

terry said...

I know nothing about Chile. Does it have the GNP of Vermont?