Stronger Argentine Economy throughout 20th century

How do you maintain a strong Argentine economy throughout majority of the 20th century?
Avoid the Rodrigazo and the 1982 Latin American debt crisis, which means avoiding the 1973 oil crisis or the Yom Kippur War. Later on, we'd need Argentina to successfully negotiate its entrance to globalization, which probably can't be done without harm, as too many large Argentine corporations weren't prepared, at all, to compete in the world stage.
 
Avoid the Rodrigazo and the 1982 Latin American debt crisis, which means avoiding the 1973 oil crisis or the Yom Kippur War. Later on, we'd need Argentina to successfully negotiate its entrance to globalization, which probably can't be done without harm, as too many large Argentine corporations weren't prepared, at all, to compete in the world stage.

In a scenario where the coup of 1955 scenario is butterflied, how far can Peron go?
 
In a scenario where the coup of 1955 scenario is butterflied, how far can Peron go?
Theoretically, he could have been reelected ad-infinitum, but I just don't think his opponents will let that happen. Maybe, if he keeps the Catholic Church from joining his opponents (or even better, at his side), then the Church can prevent a future coup? In that case, we have him president until 1974, give or take a few years. By that time, Argentina wouldn't have such a big issue with left wing guerrillas, because there won't be any Peronist guerrillas and the hierarchy of the Armed Forces, by then, would have been handpicked by Peron, and trained by him for thirty years. He didn't leave any worthy successor in OTL, so his death would leave a mess.
 
Any earlier POD's? For example prevent the 1930 coup. How does that occur and what would that do?
The 1930 coup was a close thing. Change around a few officers, or make someone oppose using the military academy cadets (ie, plenty of sons of officers and other wealthy people) and the coup fails.
But it's not going to change the economic performance of Argentina.
 
Why? Wouldn’t preventing coup help?

Well I guess the gov before wasn’t great for economic growth in the long term.
Here's Argentina GDP per capita, in 2011 constant dollars
54ABJkn.png

Yellow is the old conservative party before real elections, red is the UCR and it's allies, green are military coups and cyan it's peronism. There is no correlation between military coups and economic hardship: Uriburu's dictatorship was marked by the 1929 crisis (it wouldn't have happened without it), followed by a recovery during a coalition between the UCR and the conservatives which happened due political fraud - but there was a bit of a consensus about the economic policies at that time, so any other UCR government would have enacted similar policies. Then we have the 1943 coup, which saw a bit economic growth which ended with the end of WW2. It's followed by Peron's two first terms. Ever since the economy starts to recover by the middle of his terms, what follows is period of economic growth which doesn't stop its overall trend through the political instability of the period. And the trend ends by 1975, which also starts a period of stability (the last dictatorship was ruthless and criminal, but also stable) which, with the 2001 exception, lasts to today.

Anyway to avoid Peron?
Make the conservative Congress during Roca's second term approve Roca's labor reforms and make sure the following governments respect them.
 
Why is that exactly?

In the 1880's Argentina went heavily into debt. There was a financial crisis that led to the collapse of the banking sector. The foundations for a return to stability and growth started in 1892 with reform of the banking sector and convertibility was restored in 1899. Rapid growth rates soon returned and industry grew by 9.6% in the 1903-1913 period. By 1906, Argentina had cleared the last remnants of the 1890 default and a year later the country re-entered the international bond markets. At the end of 1913, Argentina had a gold stock of £59 million, or 3.7% of the world's monetary gold, while representing 1.2% of the world's economic output.

By 1914, about 15% the Argentine labour force was involved in manufacturing, compared to 20% involved in commercial activities. In 1913, the country's income per head was on a par with that of France and Germany, and far ahead of Italy's or Spain's.

Argentina relied on open markets for agricultural products but the local banking reforms meant that industry was fostered and established following the lean times during economic recovery. As well as killing millions of people, WW1 was a global economic train wreck that lead to a second round as WW2.
 
In order to have better Argentine economy, the better POD would have been to avoid 1930 coup and allow democracy to further consolidate for another 30 years where by 1960s or 1970s, its economy would have been institutionally (economically and politically) strong enough to withstand with adverse economic and political effects of Great Depression, World War II, Arab oil embargo in 1973, and Iranian oil crisis in 1979.

With stable Argentina economic and political institutions from 1930 and beyond, its GDP (PPP) per capita would have been as double as today ($20,500), where it would have $41,000 similar to France, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom in OTL.
 
In order to have better Argentine economy, the better POD would have been to avoid 1930 coup and allow democracy to further consolidate for another 30 years where by 1960s or 1970s, its economy would have been institutionally (economically and politically) strong enough to withstand with adverse economic and political effects of Great Depression, World War II, Arab oil embargo in 1973, and Iranian oil crisis in 1979.

With stable Argentina economic and political institutions from 1930 and beyond, its GDP (PPP) per capita would have been as double as today ($20,500), where it would have $41,000 similar to France, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom in OTL.
If the military coups were the economic issue, why was the economy growing during WW2 during the Ramirez/Farrell dictatorship and again during the Onganía/Lanusse dictatorship?
 
If the military coups were the economic issue, why was the economy growing during WW2 during the Ramirez/Farrell dictatorship and again during the Onganía/Lanusse dictatorship?

And why Argentina's economic growth lagged behind Australia, Canada, and the United States after WWII and beyond?

It is pretty obvious that import substitution industrialization like penalizing the agriculture sector by Juan Peron was the culprit of the laggardness of Argentina's economic growth. Import substitution industrialization only worked when global trade networks were interrupted by WWII and when global trade revived after WWII, Argentina should have restored to agro-export model like what Australia and New Zealand had done after WWII. Juan Peron's intransigence with the new hegemon after WWII, the United States never helped Argentina's economy further, as the US asked Marshall Plan receipts including UK not to buy Argentina's agri products.
 
And why Argentina's economic growth lagged behind Australia, Canada, and the United States after WWII and beyond?

It is pretty obvious that import substitution industrialization like penalizing the agriculture sector by Juan Peron was the culprit of the laggardness of Argentina's economic growth. Import substitution industrialization only worked when global trade networks were interrupted by WWII and when global trade revived after WWII, Argentina should have restored to agro-export model like what Australia and New Zealand had done after WWII. Juan Peron's intransigence with the new hegemon after WWII, the United States never helped Argentina's economy further, as the US asked Marshall Plan receipts including UK not to buy Argentina's agri products.
Au contraire. If you look at the gpd per capita graph I showed above, Argentina more than doubled its gdp per capita during the ISI phase (1930ish-1975) and begun its fall once the government attacked the domestic market and industry.

Even more, you can't keep an agroexport model which kind of worked a hundred years ago with the different weather patterns of the 21st century. It's focusing in precisely what every text about Latin America criticizes: overrealiance in commodities: check the graph above. The gpd per capita of 1913 was reached again until about 10 years laters. Even worse, when dealing with the agrarian sector, not only we can't control the international price, we can't even control production volumes because those depend on the weather and the weather it's not the same as it was a hundred years ago.
 
Top