Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don’t belive you guys that this left wing president is the end of Chile or that he is kind of Maduro, Chavez, Castros. Michele Bachelet and all presidents from Concertación were left wing too. Chile’s democracy is much more developed, left wing in Chile is much more alike the European social democrats or the PT (work party – Lula) in Brazil.
In my opinion Chile is still in the right way and some left wing politcs are really necessary, they need correct some issues to lower the inequality. For example even elementary school and high school there are not any way fully free in Chile, so the work class people struggle a lot there and are all in debt. Private pension system is another problem over there. Not even USA is ultraliberal like that.
When NY Times and other say that half Chilean earn around $550 nominal they forget to say that Chilean GDP per capita is around 14,000.00 nominal (and 24,000.00 PPP). Chile is on the level of the average eastern european countries in GDP percapita, so wages there are ok for its economy size. Chile needs at least double its GDP percapita to get first world income level.
Chile is Latin America’s golden boy for its clean governance, transparency and investor-friendly environment. Its economy has grown significantly thanks to a solid macroeconomic framework and on the back of a copper boom, allowing it to reduce the number of people living at the poverty level of $5.5 per day to 6.4% in 2017 from 30% in 2000, according to the World Bank.
However, Chile remains the most unequal country in the largely-developed Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with an income gap 65% wider than the OECD average.
Half of Chilean workers earn $550 a month or less, according to the National Statistics Institute. A 2018 government study showed that the income of the richest was 13.6 times greater than those of the poorest.
Chileans live in a society of extraordinary economic disparities. The distribution of income before taxes is highly unequal throughout the developed world...the government does less than nearly any other developed nation to reduce economic inequality through taxes and transfers. As a result, Chile has the highest level of post-tax income inequality among O.E.C.D. members.
Santiago’s prosperity is undeniable. Viewed from the top of the tallest building in South America, which stands in the middle of a financial district called “Sanhattan,” neighborhoods with luxury apartments, private hospitals and private schools stretch as far as the eye can see.
But Santiago’s poverty also is striking: crumbling public hospitals, overcrowded schools, shantytowns that sit on the outskirts of the metropolis.
Completely ignores what I wrote. The median Chilean is far better off than the median Mexican or Brazilian post taxes. 20 to 40% more income is big and that is adjusted for PPP. Income disparity alone is not a problem when the bottom is doing better than most.
When NY Times and other say that half Chilean earn around $550 nominal they forget to say that Chilean GDP per capita is around 14,000.00 nominal (and 24,000.00 PPP). Chile is on the level of the average eastern european countries in GDP percapita, so wages there are ok for its economy size. Chile needs at least double its GDP percapita to get first world income level.
Nothing more disengenous than citing earnings in a foreign currency and not adjusting for purchasing power. $550 is meaningless. The median household income post taxes in Chile is $27k. 20 to 40% more than Mexico, Argentina and Brazil.
Completely ignores what I wrote. The median Chilean is far better off than the median Mexican or Brazilian post taxes. 20 to 40% more income is big and that is adjusted for PPP. Income disparity alone is not a problem when the bottom is doing better than most.
well judging by the protests and riots that went on, I think "the bottom" disagrees with you.
So do you think that Chile would be any better if the US decided to put an embargo on the country?
I actually doubt it would matter much, if at all. Europe, China, India, Japan, South Korea, central and south America could easily buy whatever Chile' exports of copper and fruits and fish and I know they would love to export more to Chile than they do now.
Completely ignores what I wrote. The median Chilean is far better off than the median Mexican or Brazilian post taxes. 20 to 40% more income is big and that is adjusted for PPP. Income disparity alone is not a problem when the bottom is doing better than most.
Kind of irrelevant bringing up how people in other countries are doing. Based on that logic, then no one should ever complain about anything because you can always search the globe to find someone who is worse off. Chileans will want to know how they are doing relative to people within the same country, not some other country that they dont live in. And in Chile, the richest 20% had 61% of the nation's GDP. Source below:
So that is why the country overall appears to be doing well. The rich are certainly doing great, but the vast majority of Chileans have been shut out of the national prosperity.
It's very difficult to maintain a society in which only a small group get all the wealth. Every where that this has been the case eventually ended badly for the rich: you can go back to Marie Antoinette of France, the Romanovs of Russia, the Shah of Iran, even Batista of Cuba. All these kept most of the wealth for themselves and their cronies while the majority of the population starved or came close to starvation. Eventually the people had enough and the results were pretty ugly.
The big reason why the United States prospered for so long was the fact that the increase in wealth was fairly well spread out for a long time. It wasnt until the last 40 years or so that we are now seeing the concentration of wealth at the top and the middle class starting to shrink.
Hopefully the present day leaders of Chile do read history and will take the steps to prevent Chile going the same way. No one is suggesting communism or socialism. But you have to be able to ensure that the majority of the people have a way to contribute to and eventually share in the wealth of the nation. There is no other way.
I agree with your points. I always wondered what would happen if all economic restrictions, the act of military aggression, or C.I.A. sabotage was lifted by the U.S. against Cuba. I suspect it would likely turn into a situation like Vietnam. Basically the authoritative government would remain, but the ruling party would make reforms gradually improving economic conditions.
As a right now Cuba has to remain as a "go against us if you dare" example to keep the other Latin American countries in line. Sad situation.
As for Chile, seems many of these "Left Wing" politicians have actually been fairly moderate. Give the people a watered down social program or 2 while not trying to upset business people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
