Prosperous Argentina

samcster94

Banned
Argentina had potential to be a second tier power with a high living standard, but corruption, uneven development, and proto-fascist military dictatorships, one of which lost a short war over some islands to the British, all got in the way of that. With a POD no later than 1900, is there a way to make Argentina into a Spanish speaking analog to OTL Australia economically???
 

PhilippeO

Banned
Steadholding. Argentina make two mistakes 1) by grant of large area of land, it fall into trap of landlord-peasant and huge rich-poor difference 2) it become obsessed with cattle farming instead of diverse economy.

following policy of US Steadholding will make it nation of small farms with more diverse economy and richer population.
 
You need to avoid the Great Depression and the 1930 coup to keep Argentina's economy open to the global markets. The former especially triggered Argentina's shift to import substitution industrialization which stiffed Argentina's export for 60 years in favor of inward-based industrialization. Argentina didn't have enough resources and capital to trigger a successful industrialization through heavy industry and the only comparative advantage for Argentina was agroexports. Had Argentina remained loyal to agroexport economic model beyond 1930, Argentina would have been as well-off as New Zealand, the country that has similar economic history as Argentina and continued to rely on agroexports after WWII.
 
Argentina had potential to be a second tier power with a high living standard, but corruption, uneven development, and proto-fascist military dictatorships, one of which lost a short war over some islands to the British, all got in the way of that. With a POD no later than 1900, is there a way to make Argentina into a Spanish speaking analog to OTL Australia economically???
Argentina had the potential to be a first tier power and many economists in the late 19th century and early 20th century predicted that it would be.

Argentina in it's golden age was primarily an agrarian export economy and for the most part was reliant on trade with europe (Britain specifically) and the United States for technology.
 
It takes very little- raising the growth rate by just 1% a year for a century would get its per capita income higher than the US. The same formula works everywhere- free people and free markets. Argentina was blessed with great natural wealth , no real enemies and an easily taxed agricultural sector. Avoiding the Peronist policies of Import Substitution Industrialization, high tariffs, over regulated industry, an overvalued currency and overly powerful labor unions would do the trick and more
 
Argentina had potential to be a second tier power with a high living standard, but corruption, uneven development, and proto-fascist military dictatorships, one of which lost a short war over some islands to the British, all got in the way of that. With a POD no later than 1900, is there a way to make Argentina into a Spanish speaking analog to OTL Australia economically???
Argentina needed industrialization. All western Powers, and Japan and now CHina, arose from massive protectionism and subsidizing of heavy industry in its nascent stages.

Listen, I am a free market guy. I don't like countries acting like India and subsidizing decrepit, inefficient iron smelters and such. Plus, tariffs create trade wars, which kill economies. I realize it is counter-intuitive.

But, to quote one of my favorite rock bands The Scorpions, "No pain no gain."

The problem with Argentina is that they had it too easy. They had a cattle economy and so, trade barriers and protectionism would have really hurt as they were resource-export based.

Just think of a victorious confederacy...they would be like Argentina today if they continued with slavery, open trade borders, and a pure-agro based economy. King Cotton is a pauper when compared to Mr. Industry.

So, Argentina needs protectionism. It's going to such initially. They can boost their agriculture by giving away free land to European and domestic homesteaders. They will have to subsidize heavy industry and pretty much give up on their military. They will have to squander tons of money on ambitious industrialization projects, like SOuth Korea in the 60s and 70s.

Then, perhaps after WW1 after they get rich exporting to desperate western allies (who are in no position to care about tariffs), they need to start rescinding these things, as the US did in the 20s. Then, come 1930 when the US starts a huge trade war with their tariff, if Argentina avoids protectionism and gets off the gold standard quick, and goes full blown Keynesian in investing in domestic infrastructure (particularly rails, port facilities, an roadways) Argentina may be in a good position to export manufactured goods in WW2, even if they have to import tons of iron from the US.

After WW2, Aregentina can outbid devastated Japanese companies in bringing in manufacturing experts W. Edwards Deming, Homer Sarasohn and Charles Protzman. Plus, they can have very friendly immigration policies for Europeans looking to leave Europe after WW2. With a flood of cheap labor, and a shot in the arm with the masterminds of lean manufacturing, Argentina could actually be a modest industrial power (it lacks the population of Japan, so I still think Japan would be the true rising star of the post ww2 period.)

Today, Argentina would not be like Japan (which thrived of dirt-cheap labor), but it could be a modest industrial power more wealthy per-capita than modern Italy ( which it was at the turn of the 20th century, and Italy OTL was devastated after two big wars.)

Of course, you would need a lot of lucky elections without dummies running the country to make this happen. Probably, something that gets their military completely out of the picture (not sure how, perhaps a quick lost war against the US, such as an Alliance with SPain during the SPanish American war) could do it.
 
pattersonautobody has a good point.
During WW1, Argentina could start industrializing by building farm equipment.
Post WW1, it would also help if they encouraged European skilled workers to immigrate. These skilled refugees would cheerfully build factories if they expected long-term profits.
 

samcster94

Banned
Argentina needed industrialization. All western Powers, and Japan and now CHina, arose from massive protectionism and subsidizing of heavy industry in its nascent stages.

Listen, I am a free market guy. I don't like countries acting like India and subsidizing decrepit, inefficient iron smelters and such. Plus, tariffs create trade wars, which kill economies. I realize it is counter-intuitive.

But, to quote one of my favorite rock bands The Scorpions, "No pain no gain."

The problem with Argentina is that they had it too easy. They had a cattle economy and so, trade barriers and protectionism would have really hurt as they were resource-export based.

Just think of a victorious confederacy...they would be like Argentina today if they continued with slavery, open trade borders, and a pure-agro based economy. King Cotton is a pauper when compared to Mr. Industry.

So, Argentina needs protectionism. It's going to such initially. They can boost their agriculture by giving away free land to European and domestic homesteaders. They will have to subsidize heavy industry and pretty much give up on their military. They will have to squander tons of money on ambitious industrialization projects, like SOuth Korea in the 60s and 70s.

Then, perhaps after WW1 after they get rich exporting to desperate western allies (who are in no position to care about tariffs), they need to start rescinding these things, as the US did in the 20s. Then, come 1930 when the US starts a huge trade war with their tariff, if Argentina avoids protectionism and gets off the gold standard quick, and goes full blown Keynesian in investing in domestic infrastructure (particularly rails, port facilities, an roadways) Argentina may be in a good position to export manufactured goods in WW2, even if they have to import tons of iron from the US.

After WW2, Aregentina can outbid devastated Japanese companies in bringing in manufacturing experts W. Edwards Deming, Homer Sarasohn and Charles Protzman. Plus, they can have very friendly immigration policies for Europeans looking to leave Europe after WW2. With a flood of cheap labor, and a shot in the arm with the masterminds of lean manufacturing, Argentina could actually be a modest industrial power (it lacks the population of Japan, so I still think Japan would be the true rising star of the post ww2 period.)

Today, Argentina would not be like Japan (which thrived of dirt-cheap labor), but it could be a modest industrial power more wealthy per-capita than modern Italy ( which it was at the turn of the 20th century, and Italy OTL was devastated after two big wars.)

Of course, you would need a lot of lucky elections without dummies running the country to make this happen. Probably, something that gets their military completely out of the picture (not sure how, perhaps a quick lost war against the US, such as an Alliance with SPain during the SPanish American war) could do it.
An Italy, I can see that level easily. Easily higher than some OTL Eastern European countries though.
 
Contrary to what people keep saying, the most prospreous moments of Argentina's history both in growth and prosperity have been when the state invested in the economy, infrastructure and industry. Most people weirdly seem to think Argentina never tried a free market agroexporter model: it did, many times, with a boom and bust cycle of catastrophic consequences and never lasting prosperity and the highest inequality of our history (and that is suppossed to be a 'golden age'????). The policies of privatization, cutting spending and the agroexporter model were often supported by brutal conservative dictatorships. Not to mention that the main benefiters from that model were rich landowners and foreign investors, not the argentine people: that Argentina was rich before that populist bastard Perón came around is one of history's biggest myths: it was a resource rich country with all wealth concentrated in few people, many of them foreign. Barely out of the Great Depression, undustry was dying, welfare was non-existent, the government was incompetent and capitalists and landowners only cared about export, export, export instead of developing the country. There was a reason Argentina turned to protectionism and social spending, it wasn't just to spite the free market.

So based on the history of my own country I'm going to be contrarian here and say: screw free trade and the granary of the world crap. Consistent policies in favor of industrialization, social spending and import substition, and here is the key, NO MILITARY COUPS, could have made Argentina a prosperous industrial nation, perhaps a scientific power with the right investments in science and education.
 
Last edited:
You need to avoid the Great Depression and the 1930 coup to keep Argentina's economy open to the global markets. The former especially triggered Argentina's shift to import substitution industrialization which stiffed Argentina's export for 60 years in favor of inward-based industrialization. Argentina didn't have enough resources and capital to trigger a successful industrialization through heavy industry and the only comparative advantage for Argentina was agroexports. Had Argentina remained loyal to agroexport economic model beyond 1930, Argentina would have been as well-off as New Zealand, the country that has similar economic history as Argentina and continued to rely on agroexports after WWII.
Hmmm. Let's say that after a CP victory in WW1 Argentina is courted by a victorious Germany as a not-quite-ally, both as a food supplier (and a non-supplier to the UK in the Inevitable Next War)[1] and a useful spot for a naval base. German inward investment, perhaps Keynesian analogue economic policies, might help greatly. Certainly Germany would be eager to avoid instability in an ally.



[1] There are a few nearby islands that the Germans might require the UK to hand over, to build goodwill.
 
I did a quick bit of research via Wikipedia. The list is GDP per capita using purchasing power parity, so there is scope to play with the statistics and get a different result.

Anyway, on the Wikipedia list (2017), Argentina is fifth among Latin American countries in GDP per capita using GDP. Three of the other four and small English speaking Caribbean islands that probably should not be considered part of Latin America, and where the economies are so small the figures are probably hugely distorted anyway. The other is Chile, just a little head of Argentina.

Using just GDP (purchasing power parity), Argentina is third, behind Brazil and Mexico. Both Brazil and Mexico have much bigger populations, more and larger cities, and are more resource rich.

I happen to agree with everything pattersonautobody wrote above, so I will just elaborate a little on what he wrote.

Want to really boost the economy of Argentina? Don't make Argentina part of Latin America. Because the country's economic performance is actually quite good by Latin American standards.

The main characteristics of Argentine economy and society, such as largely an export based, resource based economy, power and wealth concentrated in the hands of the owners of said resources, heavy involvement of the army in the economy and politics, lack of investment in education, large numbers of immigrants, protectionism, a generally middling quality of government, populists who are both leftist and nationalists challenging the economic elite, and some efforts -which have some success- to boost industry on the part of the government, are pretty characteristic of all Latin American countries. Argentina is less Indian/ Black if you care about that sort of thing.

And really protectionism and import substitution are the least of their problems. These are in fact features they share in common with the East Asian tigers. Where the tigers did a better job was in breaking/ controlling their own elites. They tended to do land reform, for example, attempts to do so are what gets leftists killed in Latin America.
 
The geography of Argentina is really not that different from that of Canada, about the same population, similar demographics, Argentina has tropical areas but is still mostly temperate, one really big city (OK two in Canada) and lots of good agricultural land/ natural resources though Canada has the edge here.

It really comes down to having the place developed by the 19th century British instead of the 18th century Spanish, and being next to the United States instead of being next to Brazil.
 
Actually I vaguely remember an AltHist where Argentina prospered enormously after a natural disaster destroyed London (and the creditor banks) early in the twentieth century. They ended up buying the Falklands and mining manganese nodules.
 
Yes, to respond to Catsmate, there is an easy way you can do this.

Thermonuclear war between the US and the USSR (and China)!

The entire Northern hemisphere becomes an un-inhabital wasteland!

Argentina is one of the five greatest economic powers in the world!

Granted, Argentina would be much poorer in this scenario, but if all you care about is the pecking order this is the way to do it.
 
Both the United States and Germany became economic juggernauts through tariffs in their early period. I don't think tariffs are Argentina's problem. What they need is to create conditions conducive innovation and industrialization. They need to invest in infrastructure and education with an emphasis on technical fields. Perhaps they can start by establishing government factories to manufacture farm equipment and use tariffs to incentivize landowners to buy from Argentines instead of Europeans. By the 1900's, Argentina was about as developed as Canada and Australia, but with a larger economy and a larger population. Argentina was heavily dependent on British investments during it's Belle Epoque and during and after World War 1, Britain wasn't in a position to invest large amounts of money in their country.
 
Last edited:
Yes, to respond to Catsmate, there is an easy way you can do this.

Thermonuclear war between the US and the USSR (and China)!

The entire Northern hemisphere becomes an un-inhabital wasteland!

Argentina is one of the five greatest economic powers in the world!

Granted, Argentina would be much poorer in this scenario, but if all you care about is the pecking order this is the way to do it.
That was the scenario in Mace's Demon 4 IIRR.

The one I mentioned previously was from Marcus Rowland's excellent Forgotten Futures 5.1.


Another economic blow came with the realisation that all records of many debts were lost, not just in Britain but throughout the world. The effects on the Argentine were an extreme example; most of the country's economic and industrial infrastructure was owned by London-based banks, with records filed in London for safety. In the legal chaos that followed the eruption it was virtually impossible to prove their ownership, and most were tied up in prolonged court cases and eventually nationalised by the Argentine government. Today the Argentine is by far the wealthiest and most influential nation of the South American Confederation, largely as a result of the boost this early windfall gave to its economy, and the political leverage of this wealth was evident in the 1967 purchase of the Malvinas, the former Falkland Islands, and their use as a base for the Argentine's current deep sea manganese mining programme.
 
You would need to the "Década Infame" and make it so that democracy stays stable and the governments put effort into public education and industrial development (at least for lighter industries) and then you can have a country just like Canada (as long as no really big fuck ups happen ).
I mean, even today with all it's problems Argentina Is still an important and fairly good to live on county.
 

samcster94

Banned
You would need to the "Década Infame" and make it so that democracy stays stable and the governments put effort into public education and industrial development (at least for lighter industries) and then you can have a country just like Canada (as long as no really big fuck ups happen ).
I mean, even today with all it's problems Argentina Is still an important and fairly good to live on county.
True, especially compared to Venezuela(which had moderate prosperity once but is now a disaster)
 
Top