Prosperous Argentina

Ok, i change to the keybord so i could do this.
The option is to have a big tax when moving capital off the country, so the people with money give a fuck on what is happening on the country and stop to seeing it as only another cash cow, you know what is normal in Europe, and Japan with his millonaries.

Why i say this you ask?
As example It´s really improbable that Krupp industries decide to simple close shop and change country if something bad happen with Germany, and a lot of bad things happened with Germány in the early-mid 20 century, a lot more than in the same timeframe in Argentina.
In Comparacion in Argentina, and latín América as rule, if Something bad happend the first thing you see happen is a lot of the capital, foreign and/or national, and elites take on the run close shop and fuck off the country, most of this is actitud is a aftertaste of the Colonial Spanish rule, you know "Don´t go to america to live you go to make yourself rich a and return to the Homeland to actually live.
The real tragedy of this solution is that the same elite that tend to take fly with the problems is he same elite that must make the changes, alas something really dificult to happen

All in all i Say the problem with Argentine and Latin America in General is certain sense of Disaffection and disinterest of what happend with the country by the rulings and economic elites is what fuck the country. A certain sense of be more part of Europe than the "natives" that live in the country, we could make a case that Argentine, uruguay and Chile have easier time doing this than other latin american countries,more Chile than others, because untils relative recently arriving here was a premeditated effort and not only something thats just happen.
Uruguay hace his own tendencies that explain his relative development in the continental histoie

if something are strange or cofuse please tell me because i´m not complety sure if i explain well my point
 
Last edited:
Check this overlapped map

ff14lac.jpg

Now imagine Germany, as an economic powerhouse, if it's coal mines were at the Bay of Biscay and it's iron mines in Belarus instead of all lumped together in the Franco-German border. Now add bauxite deposits in France, the major market in the country located in Serbia, the only navigable river systems go from Crimea to Serbia, a few joining up from Hungary and another one traversing the Franco-German-Swiss border - but the last one goes around barely inhabitated lands instead of densely populated cities.

I think you guys were talking about a "resource rich" country, right? Hint: in that map, the resource reach nations aren't the ones with a red shade.

This is a long read in Spanish
http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2014/02/argentina-the-myth-of-a-century-of-decline/
And since it's mostly economics, I'm not sure how well a general automatic translator like google's would translate it, but look at this GDP per capita (PPP adjusted) graph.
arg1.png

There is also this series http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2009/08/usa-argentina-and-alan-beattie-wrong-starting-point/ by the same author

So, how would I go about this? The best, pre-1900 POD would be the avoid the civil war, or stop it as soon as possible. I think the best way to unite the country, at least in so far as the country remaining united, is to nix the Unitarian uprising which followed the war against Brazil in the 1820s. Dorrego remains governor of Buenos Aires and, more importantly, alive and, based on his experiences in the USA, manages to make all important warlords agree on the establishment of a federal republic by the late 1820s or early 1830s. Bonus points if, as Argentina pushes its borders south, the lands are distributed to small farmers instead of large landowners so a rural middle class develops.

Post-1900, my POD would be to make Peron understand, prior to his return in the 1970s that, since he's choosing to die in power, he needs a competent VP to replace him when he finally dies. I don't know who could be his pick. But let's assume Peron's VP in 1973 is someone competent instead of his third wife. That VP avoids the Rodrigazo, the structural break in the above graphic and the 1976 military coup. Ideally, he should also foresee the Latin American debt crisis and the 1982 default.

Maybe growth would still slow down in the 1980s and the 1990s, with the emergence of the Washington Consensus and the drop in agricultural prices will probably see an unsuccessful attempt to move from an ISI based inefficient industry towards a service model. But better economic performance between 1975-1990 should avoid the convertibility and already leave Argentina in a stronger economic position, so both a successful move towards a service based economy and increased industrial productivity could be achieved through the 2000s (bonus points if the rail system isn't destroyed in the 1990s) and, on top, throw in a commodity price surge due the rise of China: we get a prosperous Argentina by the end of this decade.
 
Ok, i change to the keybord so i could do this.
The option is to have a big tax when moving capital off the country, so the people with money give a fuck on what is happening on the country and stop to seeing it as only another cash cow, you know what is normal in Europe, and Japan with his millonaries.

Why i say this you ask?
As example It´s really improbable that Krupp industries decide to simple close shop and change country if something bad happen with Germany, and a lot of bad things happened with Germány in the early-mid 20 century, a lot more than in the same timeframe in Argentina.
In Comparacion in Argentina, and latín América as rule, if Something bad happend the first thing you see happen is a lot of the capital, foreign and/or national, and elites take on the run close shop and fuck off the country, most of this is actitud is a aftertaste of the Colonial Spanish rule, you know "Don´t go to america to live you go to make yourself rich a and return to the Homeland to actually live.
The real tragedy of this solution is that the same elite that tend to take fly with the problems is he same elite that must make the changes, alas something really dificult to happen

All in all i Say the problem with Argentine and Latin America in General is certain sense of Disaffection and disinterest of what happend with the country by the rulings and economic elites is what fuck the country. A certain sense of be more part of Europe than the "natives" that live in the country, we could make a case that Argentine, uruguay and Chile have easier time doing this than other latin american countries,more Chile than others, because untils relative recently arriving here was a premeditated effort and not only something thats just happen.
Uruguay hace his own tendencies that explain his relative development in the continental histoie

if something are strange or cofuse please tell me because i´m not enteri sure if i explain well my point
It explains well, and it's not wrong. But it's not just cultural or subjective. If your country has a tradition to fuck you over when things go wrong, you're going to make sure you can not be fucked over when things (inevitably, as recessions will always happen at some point in the future) go wrong. So you keep your money abroad and, if it makes business sense to pack up and leave, well, welcome to globalization.
 
I still stand by my position that preventing the "Decada infame" is the best thing you can (realistically) do. Everything else requires ASB.


Ok, i change to the keybord so i could do this.
The option is to have a big tax when moving capital off the country, so the people with money give a fuck on what is happening on the country and stop to seeing it as only another cash cow, you know what is normal in Europe, and Japan with his millonaries.

Why i say this you ask?
As example It´s really improbable that Krupp industries decide to simple close shop and change country if something bad happen with Germany, and a lot of bad things happened with Germány in the early-mid 20 century, a lot more than in the same timeframe in Argentina.
In Comparacion in Argentina, and latín América as rule, if Something bad happend the first thing you see happen is a lot of the capital, foreign and/or national, and elites take on the run close shop and fuck off the country, most of this is actitud is a aftertaste of the Colonial Spanish rule, you know "Don´t go to america to live you go to make yourself rich a and return to the Homeland to actually live.
The real tragedy of this solution is that the same elite that tend to take fly with the problems is he same elite that must make the changes, alas something really dificult to happen
That's an awful example, most of those corporatiosn are local ones so of course they don't jump the boat and abandon their country, specially dutin the early 20th century when I'm not even sure doing something like that was possible (globalization wasn't a thing yet).

Argentina (and most of South America for that matter) don't have any industries to talk of and what they do have is resource xport, which are dominated by a few ultra rich guys that don't give a fying fuck because they wre never going to be poor no matter what, that combiend with the British Empire, then the US and the local mega rich lobbying to make sure industry isn't a thing kind of fucked us over.

I mean, seriously, the first steel plant was made by the frikin military! You can't be an industrial country without even that.


Now imagine Germany, as an economic powerhouse, if it's coal mines were at the Bay of Biscay and it's iron mines in Belarus instead of all lumped together in the Franco-German border. Now add bauxite deposits in France, the major market in the country located in Serbia, the only navigable river systems go from Crimea to Serbia, a few joining up from Hungary and another one traversing the Franco-German-Swiss border - but the last one goes around barely inhabitated lands instead of densely populated cities.

I think you guys were talking about a "resource rich" country, right? Hint: in that map, the resource reach nations aren't the ones with a red shade.
Yeah, some peopel misunderstand that while a rich country, it's a rich country if you are already a 21th century industrial state and not... whatever we are.
 
I still stand by my position that preventing the "Decada infame" is the best thing you can (realistically) do. Everything else requires ASB.

That's an awful example, most of those corporatiosn are local ones so of course they don't jump the boat and abandon their country, specially dutin the early 20th century when I'm not even sure doing something like that was possible (globalization wasn't a thing yet).
Ok I giive you another Example, Cocacola Company,setting shop in weimar republic and maintaining shop in Germany during the nazi regime, expanding productionand create a new drink(Fanta) during that same period. Could you say the actions of the company will be the same if something like this happened in Argentine? I can say thaht the most probable actions is close shop and get out, see what is happening in Venezuela, Cocacola close shop an get the fuck out of the country.
 
Ok I giive you another Example, Cocacola Company,setting shop in weimar republic and maintaining shop in Germany during the nazi regime, expanding productionand create a new drink(Fanta) during that same period. Could you say the actions of the company will be the same if something like this happened in Argentine? I can say thaht the most probable actions is close shop and get out, see what is happening in Venezuela, Cocacola close shop an get the fuck out of the country.
Actually Coca-Cola pulled out of Germany but they had to leaft their production plants so then was Fanta born.

Also, while taht's the case for Argentina now, it wasn't durin the early 20th century
 
Last edited:
Ok I giive you another Example, Cocacola Company,setting shop in weimar republic and maintaining shop in Germany during the nazi regime, expanding productionand create a new drink(Fanta) during that same period. Could you say the actions of the company will be the same if something like this happened in Argentine? I can say thaht the most probable actions is close shop and get out, see what is happening in Venezuela, Cocacola close shop an get the fuck out of the country.
Picture this: Juan Perez e Hijos LLC, a medium sized family-owned pharmaceutical company is struggling in Argentina in 2000. His competitors in Brazil are exporting to the Argentine market at a price below his costs, to the point that Juan Perez e Hijos is operating at loss in order to remain operational. Juan Perez e Hijos can move it's production to Brazil and remain competitive, or remain in Argentina or go bankrupt. What does capitalism say they should do?

And suppose the eponymous Juan Perez, while being able to keep his savings offshore (globalization at work) decides to keep his savings in Argentine banks, a bank run happens, his savings are pretty much frozen and later forcibly exchanged for a bond. As a reference, his savings were in US dollars, in a USD account in an Argentine bank and were forcibly converted to pesos at a 1.4 to 1 rate even though the USD was already being sold at a 2 to 1 rate, then changed for an inflation adjusted bond and years later, the next administration cheats on official inflation rates so his bonds (if he kept them) are paid less than what it should. Why would Juan Perez, or his sons, trust his savings to the Argentine bank system again, at least in the form of long term deposits?
 
Picture this: Juan Perez e Hijos LLC, a medium sized family-owned pharmaceutical company is struggling in Argentina in 2000. His competitors in Brazil are exporting to the Argentine market at a price below his costs, to the point that Juan Perez e Hijos is operating at loss in order to remain operational. Juan Perez e Hijos can move it's production to Brazil and remain competitive, or remain in Argentina or go bankrupt. What does capitalism say they should do?
That's why the whole "MUH FREE MARKET" fails in reality, you can't depend on the goverment to wipe your ass for you and give you food in the mouth as if you were a baby like the leftists want but letting Our God Capitalism™ handle everything is stupid too.

That's why industrial countries protect their own economies but don't strangle them.
 
Actually COca Cola pulled out of Germany but they had to leaft their production plants so then was Fanta born.

The Company get out of the country in 1940, with the kast oficial comunication in 1942 when EE.UU. enter the war, the company maintain his opertations during weimar republic and the rise of the nazi regimen,

Also, while taht's the case for Argentina now, it wasn't durin the early 20th century
So what happened with the foreing invest in the country during the early 20 century?
 
The Company get out of the country in 1940, with the kast oficial comunication in 1942 when EE.UU. enter the war, the company maintain his opertations during weimar republic and the rise of the nazi regimen,
And? there was no war in the meantime and economically the nation was sound. There was no motive to leave.

So what happened with the foreing invest in the country during the early 20 century?
They stay and make money? Like they did before ww2 rolled around?
 
Picture this: Juan Perez e Hijos LLC, a medium sized family-owned pharmaceutical company is struggling in Argentina in 2000. His competitors in Brazil are exporting to the Argentine market at a price below his costs, to the point that Juan Perez e Hijos is operating at loss in order to remain operational. Juan Perez e Hijos can move it's production to Brazil and remain competitive, or remain in Argentina or go bankrupt. What does capitalism say they should do?
I´m with you in this but I was speaking on the early-mid 20 century with diferent context, political and economical,
 
And? there was no war in the meantime and economically the nation was sound. There was no motive to leave.
They stay and make money? Like they did before ww2 rolled around?
We are apeaking on Germany in 1920-1939 economically sound it's not what i call that period in the German history
 
We are apeaking on Germany in 1920-1939 economically sound it's not what i call that period in the German history
That's true but I need to see a few graphics with the sells from Coca Cola at the time, if they didn't sell well then they would have gone bankrupt and closed their plants there
 
I like to use germany as example becauses is The most fucked up country, in The 20 century that become a world power, with a clear mindset from most level of his people, this is our country and de are going to rebuild, there is a reason that after the WWII there is little emigration from The country or europe in general

Poland is a option but i dont really know his history( currently better GDP total and per capita, than argentine)
 
I like to use germany as example becauses is The most fucked up country, in The 20 century that become a world power, with a clear mindset from most level of his people, this is our country and de are going to rebuild, there is a reason that after the WWII there is little emigration from The country or europe in general
Germany and Argentina are different in so many ways that trying to comapre them is not only useless but stupid
 
I recall either reading an article or watching a documentary some years back that one of the biggest problems that Argentina as well as many other totalitarian regimes had in common, even if & when they had the potential resource(s) ie., grain, cattle, coal, cotton, barley, water, etc., was one thing in common... a lack of respect of private property rights. When a government does not respect property rights, particularly for entrepreneurs, farmers, or Capitalists, the economic well being of that nation/state eventually stagnates and soon leads to economic collapse. Argentina was one such country where due to corruption from the top down, big rich-poor divide, and appreciation of land owning cattle barons both handicapped & prevented Argentina as well as other countries from becoming more prosperous.

Joho :)
 
Top