How could have Mexico become a Developed Country on par with Spain?.

Prevent the American military interventions in Central and South America, as well as preventing the "War on Drugs", and Mexico has a better chance.
Mexico wasn't affected by millitaty interventions in the 20th century. It was instead governed by a very corrupt one party system. Perhaps if this system wasn't implemented Mexico could have become a developed country. After all countries that suffered under military dictatorships like Spain, Chile, Portugal have developed more than Mexico despite that Mexico had peace and an a stable government.
 

Deleted member 97083

Mexico wasn't affected by millitaty interventions in the 20th century. It was instead governed by a very corrupt one party system. Perhaps if this system wasn't implemented Mexico could have become a developed country. After all countries that suffered under military dictatorships like Spain, Chile, Portugal have developed more than Mexico despite that Mexico had peace and an a stable government.
Spain and Portugal had a higher starting point though, in terms of industrialization.

However preventing the one-party system could help.
 
Prevent the American military interventions in Central and South America, as well as preventing the "War on Drugs", and Mexico has a better chance.

Personally, I am very wary of blame America for every issue. Let's not point out the same so called revolutionary party has ruled Mexico for over 100 years. Yeah, it's the war on drugs that causes the rot at the center of Mexico.... Yeah..... It is also interesting how we (you) assume only Americans buy drugs, so ridiculous.

Anyway, I will not respond to whatever you say.
 
Spain and Portugal had a higher starting point though, in terms of industrialization.

However preventing the one-party system could help.

Indeed. Spain and portugal are more industrialiazed than Mexico. What Mexico truly needs is get rid of its generalized corruption, that and a consisted economic policy every sexenio the President made whatever he wanted with the nation resources.
 

Deleted member 97083

Personally, I am very wary of blame America for every issue. Let's not point out the same so called revolutionary party has ruled Mexico for over 100 years. Yeah, it's the war on drugs that causes the rot at the center of Mexico.... Yeah..... It is also interesting how we (you) assume only Americans buy drugs, so ridiculous.

Anyway, I will not respond to whatever you say.
Did I say America was to blame for every issue? I never said anything of the sort.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Your year 2000 limit does not give it much time, but perhaps if US - Chinese trade relations were hobbled from Tiananmen Square on, Mexico could be used as a major platform for outsourced production, with this tendency hitting overdrive after NAFTA with a Maquiladora book fueling revenues and broader public investments.

Probably still does not get you there unless you have an EU-like subsidy system harmonization of NAFTA labor standards at a high level.
 
Why discussions after 1900 when it's in the before section?

Anyway, I could think of a few things. Perhaps something that leaves the country in better shape after independence, or something that greatly reduces the hardships in the decades after intedepence, or... well, I think that last one would be a good start. Breathing room, basically. If not, PoD's as far as the Porfiriatio can still do the trick, I think.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
1. Prevent the Texas Revolt.

2. Prevent the 1846 Mexican-American War

3. Keep the country out of ruinous debt thereby preventing the French Occupation/Maximilian.

Manage all that (no, I can't begin to figure out how) and Mexico now includes Arizona, California (pre Gold Rush), Colorado (pre Pike's Peak Gold Rush), Nevada (pre Comstock strike), New Mexico, and Texas. Just the major mineral strikes (not even considering the amount of oil in the Permian Basin in TX & NM and the Midway-Sunset Field in CA which, to date, exceeds 4 BILLION barrels of production) produced around $20B in 2015 USD. Mexico could be a Top 3 global economy (IOTL just California is equal to the #6 National Economy, ahead of, among others, France & India, Texas is # 11, ahead of Canada and South Korea) if all three of the factors listed could be achieved (and the incredible corruption that has periodically infected various Mexican Administrations is also stopped).
 
It's not that hard. Mexico shares a border with the world's most dynamic economy, but they never properly set themselves up for success.

I remember my business partner called up several factories in Mexico trying to outsource to them and we couldn't even get through to someone who spoke English. It's easier to find English speakers in a Chinese company than a Mexican one. That tells you a lot about why Mexico is not more developed. Most European and East Asian countries have compulsury foreign language education. It's incomprehensible Mexicans are not bilingual. I'd bet if Poland shared a border with America it would be just as rich as Canada now.
 
Last edited:
I might be in the minority here, but I think Max could have done it. Assuming he can navigate the delicate balancing act of courting the landowners and the church while simultaneously trying to push for land reform so that the peasants aren't mired in hopeless poverty. If he can do that, break free of the ruinous deal economic deal he signed with the French (pretty easy after the Franco-Prussian War) and maybe conquer Cuba or Guatemala in his lifetime he's got a solid shot of cementing Mexico as a minor power in the Americas.

There are a good deal of ifs in this scenario but I'd still say it's possible.
 
Mexico wasn't affected by millitaty interventions in the 20th century. It was instead governed by a very corrupt one party system. Perhaps if this system wasn't implemented Mexico could have become a developed country. After all countries that suffered under military dictatorships like Spain, Chile, Portugal have developed more than Mexico despite that Mexico had peace and an a stable government.

So, how did Mexico and Spain respectively fare between 1939 and 1975?
 
It's not that hard. Mexico shares a border with the world's most dynamic economy, but they never properly set themselves up for success.

I remember my business partner called up several factories in Mexico trying to outsource to them and we couldn't even get through to someone who spoke English. It's easier to find English speakers in a Chinese company than a Mexican one. That tells you a lot about why Mexico is not more developed. Most European and East Asian countries have compulsury foreign language education. It's incomprehensible Mexicans are not bilingual. I'd bet if Poland shared a border with America it would be just as rich as Canada now.

But why couldn't you find someone who spoke Spanish on your end?
 
It's not that hard. Mexico shares a border with the world's most dynamic economy, but they never properly set themselves up for success.

To be fair, they were never really given a chance to do so for themselves, first as the colony of a declining empire, and later as the satellite of a growing one. :p
 
To be fair, they were never really given a chance to do so for themselves, first as the colony of a declining empire, and later as the satellite of a growing one. :p

Of course. For much of history it was a case of "Poor Mexico, so far away from God, so close to the United States". Nowadays access to the US market is a resource countries would kill for, and many countries half way around the world has made better use of it than Mexico. They missed out on a lot of growth IMO. Spain has "only" three times higher GDP per capita, I think Mexico could have caught up with a POD as recently as 50 years ago with a slightly higher growth per year.
 
The problem with Mexico, and much of Latin America, is at best only partly due to the evil gringos. A good number of locals of Hispanic heritage supported the California and Texas breakaways from Mexico because of the corrupt and incompetent government far away in Mexico City. True they got screwed in the long run mostly, but at the time that was not the expectation. Significant US interference in Mexico/Latin America did not start until the late 19th century - issues with EUROPEAN interference such as Maximilian in Mexico, the later Venezuelan Crisis etc was more the rule.

The bottom line is that Mexico, and much of the rest of Latin America, had a home grown dysfunctional social system of a semifeudal nature coupled with endemic corruption that has echoes to this day. Revolving door governments, then replaced by a one party system and the like. This is not a recipe for either home grown investment and entrepeneurship nor foreign investment except in resource extraction (oil, mineral, agriculture). The reality is even if your country has decent natural resources and an adequate population base unless you have an internal society with rule of law, social mobility, educational opportunity, and a reasonable level of civil rights you won't get the sort of development that is being discussed. Extractive industries, initially developed by foreigners with foreign money - sure. These may be nationalized later, usually to the detriment of the industry. Balanced development across the board - no way.

If you want to change Mexican development prior to the recent past, you need to have Mexico be a different society. You could give Mexico all that land, you could sink the USA under the sea, but if Mexican society remains what it was OTL...
 
Top