The Chicago Boys Darling (Chile) Has Taken A Left Turn (best, life)
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.
Why does it seem that every Latin American election comes down to a choice between a fascist and a marxist.
Looks like another south american country is going down the tubes. Chile was the for a long time one of the best run countries on the continent. A shame.
Looks like another south american country is going down the tubes. Chile was the for a long time one of the best run countries on the continent. A shame.
"Best Run" is up for debate. That has always been the issue when evaluating developing countries. Metrics that would appear to show the third world country in question is doing well rarely translate to improved living standards for the majority of the population.
Yes, following the example set by the "Chicago Boys", Chile implemented mainly financially conservative policies that appealed to the IMF/World Bank types. But for the average Joe on the ground? Things were never good during those times. There is a very clear lack of upward mobility in Chile. If you are not born into the right families, you are more than likely not going to be able to improve your lot in life. This is somewhat validated by the Gini coefficient of 52.1 which is indicative of high inequality. For comparison, Mexico has a coefficient of 48.3, Argentina 41.7 and Brazil which has always been the poster child for inequality come sin at 48.8.
So for all the strides made on the economic front, the majority of the population didnt see as much improvement in their living standards. This exploded out during the riots of a year or two ago over the increases in the prices of bus fares. And now it's no real big surprise that the people have now turned to the left since decades of right wing policies have not really done much for anyone one other than the 1 per centers in that country.
So that is the conundrum that third world countries today have not successfully solved; how to ensure that that gains made are translated down to the masses so that everyone shares in the growth as happened in Western Europe as well as the Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea. The "trickle down" theory has been a clear failure in Chile's case.
"Best Run" is up for debate. That has always been the issue when evaluating developing countries. Metrics that would appear to show the third world country in question is doing well rarely translate to improved living standards for the majority of the population.
I remember when I was a student at the University of Connecticut and was assigned to write a review on a part of The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. I still have that book which was originally published in 1776, the same ear of the independence of the United States.
The sections in question included the author mentioning that things such as politics and ideologies have a way of influencing people's perception that often isn't true. To make the point h used the Britain at that time. Basically he showed how reviewibg the economic data of Britain it becomes clear that it has gone through a general improvement in its standard of living. However, those continous improvements were small enough on the short term that things such as ideologies and politics were able to convince people that the situation was deteriorating when in fact they were improving. He also mentions that, how the average person was convinced that things in Britain were getting worse at a time when any objective comparison showed the complete opposite.
I highly doubt anyone today would put in question that standards of living in Britain are some of the world's highest. This has been acheived over a long time and of stability. It wouldn't had been acheived if at any point there would had been a dramatic change based on the general belief that things were getting worst when in fact they weren't.
As any foreigner becomes acquainted with Chille and meets many Chileans over the years, one thing is quite remarkale for its persistence. A no small part of Chileans actually believe that not only has standards of living of the average Chilean has deteriorated since the 1970's, but that the situation of the average Chilean and that of the average African is either the same or very similar!
This reminds me of a woman who also happens to be Chilean who was a strong believer in communism and particularly of Cuba. She strongly believed that the situation of the average Chilean was worse than that of the average Cuban, despite all objective data proved the opposite. She went as far as appearing in Chilean television basiclly supporting communism under that premise. Then she went to Cuba.
This was her who ironically appeared again onn Chilean television, but this time from the "paradise" in the Caribbean.
"Best Run" is up for debate. That has always been the issue when evaluating developing countries. Metrics that would appear to show the third world country in question is doing well rarely translate to improved living standards for the majority of the population.
Yes, following the example set by the "Chicago Boys", Chile implemented mainly financially conservative policies that appealed to the IMF/World Bank types. But for the average Joe on the ground? Things were never good during those times. There is a very clear lack of upward mobility in Chile. If you are not born into the right families, you are more than likely not going to be able to improve your lot in life. This is somewhat validated by the Gini coefficient of 52.1 which is indicative of high inequality. For comparison, Mexico has a coefficient of 48.3, Argentina 41.7 and Brazil which has always been the poster child for inequality come sin at 48.8.
So for all the strides made on the economic front, the majority of the population didnt see as much improvement in their living standards. This exploded out during the riots of a year or two ago over the increases in the prices of bus fares. And now it's no real big surprise that the people have now turned to the left since decades of right wing policies have not really done much for anyone one other than the 1 per centers in that country.
So that is the conundrum that third world countries today have not successfully solved; how to ensure that that gains made are translated down to the masses so that everyone shares in the growth as happened in Western Europe as well as the Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea. The "trickle down" theory has been a clear failure in Chile's case.
The gini coefficient only tells a small part of the story. I guess Chile has wider income bands than Argentina and Brazil. More importantly, the median Chilean household income is 20-40% higher than Argentines, Mexicans and Brazilians. I know i would rather be a median Chilean even while knowing there is more income inequality in Chile.
Chile has really been a beacon of success for a few decades now. So is this guy a fake woke soy type or is there any real Chavista stuff. IDK any Chileans.
Doesn't matter, both will destroy Chile if implemented.
The gini coefficient only tells a small part of the story. I guess Chile has wider income bands than Argentina and Brazil. More importantly, the median Chilean household income is 20-40% higher than Argentines, Mexicans and Brazilians. I know i would rather be a median Chilean even while knowing there is more income inequality in Chile.
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.
I remember when I was a student at the University of Connecticut and was assigned to write a review on a part of The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. I still have that book which was originally published in 1776, the same ear of the independence of the United States.
The sections in question included the author mentioning that things such as politics and ideologies have a way of influencing people's perception that often isn't true. To make the point h used the Britain at that time. Basically he showed how reviewibg the economic data of Britain it becomes clear that it has gone through a general improvement in its standard of living. However, those continous improvements were small enough on the short term that things such as ideologies and politics were able to convince people that the situation was deteriorating when in fact they were improving. He also mentions that, how the average person was convinced that things in Britain were getting worse at a time when any objective comparison showed the complete opposite.
I highly doubt anyone today would put in question that standards of living in Britain are some of the world's highest. This has been acheived over a long time and of stability. It wouldn't had been acheived if at any point there would had been a dramatic change based on the general belief that things were getting worst when in fact they weren't.
As any foreigner becomes acquainted with Chille and meets many Chileans over the years, one thing is quite remarkale for its persistence. A no small part of Chileans actually believe that not only has standards of living of the average Chilean has deteriorated since the 1970's, but that the situation of the average Chilean and that of the average African is either the same or very similar!
This reminds me of a woman who also happens to be Chilean who was a strong believer in communism and particularly of Cuba. She strongly believed that the situation of the average Chilean was worse than that of the average Cuban, despite all objective data proved the opposite. She went as far as appearing in Chilean television basiclly supporting communism under that premise. Then she went to Cuba.
This was her who ironically appeared again onn Chilean television, but this time from the "paradise" in the Caribbean.
What has happened in Chile has the potential to be a big mistake if Boric et al proves to be very radical in the policies hexwill implement.
It reminds me of the quote "The truth is the truth even when people think the opposite" or something like that.
What hasn't been clear to me is if she is going to visit Cuba again in the future or whether she is still a communist.
I wont disagree with you on the Cuba thing but I do find it a bit disingenous when people do this. To make a situation look good, just go and find the worst extreme to compare it to. Cuba has been under economic sanctions from the USA for decades, so is it something to brag about that Chile is in a better economic situation? That's a really low bar. For a long time now Chile has been held up as the success story for fiscally conservative right wing economic policy. Cuba shouldnt even be in the discussion when evaluating Chile. It would be akin to evaluating a 5 star restaurant by comparing it to the local McDonalds.
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.
