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.
I believe it was equally as wealthy as Buenos Aires at the time.
I know certain posters here have a fairly negative opinion of Australia. But having been to Argentina, I think we have fared an awful lot better than they. We actually sat in a cafe in BA and commented how similar some things were to Melbourne. But so many things there are now a lot worse, unfortunately for them.
Yes, one of the great questions for Latin American historians is why Argentina which was so wealthy, so prosperous then turned the corner early in the 20th century and has experienced relative decline.
Yes, one of the great questions for Latin American historians is why Argentina which was so wealthy, so prosperous then turned the corner early in the 20th century and has experienced relative decline.
The Great Depression is probably the singularly most important event to explain Argentina's demise. The strangest part is that at the time it had a pretty mild effect on Argentina; unemployment stayed comparatively low etc. They became so insular and unstable, determined to be self sufficient which diverted productive resources away from agriculture where they had a massive comparative advantage – lots of cheap land (as most of the New World did). I guess you could argue that the instability was always there it just needed a seismic shock for it to show itself. It's such a fascinating part of economic history though, it should be compulsory learning.
Well, yes, that is what historians are so baffled by. Why the social and economic decline when other countries emerged in far better shape. A strong strain of authoritarianism in hispanic cultural history and rule? or?
Hate to turn this into an Argentina thread. Australia has only strengthened and prospered since Depression.
Well, yes, that is what historians are so baffled by. Why the social and economic decline when other countries emerged in far better shape. A strong strain of authoritarianism in hispanic cultural history and rule? or?
Hate to turn this into an Argentina thread. Australia has only strengthened and prospered since Depression.
And Australia had a very bad depression. But went into WW2 at the beginning, at the same time as the UK, which I suppose did help the economy. We whinge about our politicians but compared to those of many countries, I think we have been fortunate.
I found some figures of the per capita GDP of countries in 1900. The highest was New Zealand, followed by Australia and the US. Argentina was 14 th. These days the tax havens top the lists but Argentina has dropped far more than Australia or NZ.
And Australia had a very bad depression. But went into WW2 at the beginning, at the same time as the UK, which I suppose did help the economy. We whinge about our politicians but compared to those of many countries, I think we have been fortunate.
I found some figures of the per capita GDP of countries in 1900. The highest was New Zealand, followed by Australia and the US. Argentina was 14 th. These days the tax havens top the lists but Argentina has dropped far more than Australia or NZ.
Yes very true but my question being to the importance or even accuracy of GDP as a measurement of any real consequence.
For example G20 countries in particular have become more unequal since 1980. It is the top 1% of earners that have benefited from increases in the main.
Surely a better measurement would be GPI? (Genuine Progress Indicator) which adjusts personal consumption by income distribution and adding non market services like volunteer and household which has not improved since 1978.
Yes very true but my question being to the importance or even accuracy of GDP as a measurement of any real consequence.
For example G20 countries in particular have become more unequal since 1980. It is the top 1% of earners that have benefited from increases in the main.
Surely a better measurement would be GPI? (Genuine Progress Indicator) which adjusts personal consumption by income distribution and adding non market services like volunteer and household which has not improved since 1978.
Probably true, but finding that sort of data for 1900 is not easy.
Well, yes, that is what historians are so baffled by. Why the social and economic decline when other countries emerged in far better shape. A strong strain of authoritarianism in hispanic cultural history and rule? or?
Hate to turn this into an Argentina thread. Australia has only strengthened and prospered since Depression.
Although over recent decades it was Australia riding on the massive boom of the Chinese economy that mostly carried it through. Inequality has been growing and large population increase by means of overseas migration has largely kept GDP and house prices high. Stagnant wages and ever increasing costs have witnessed declining living standards. Obviously partly cushioned by cheaper debt but in turn increasing debt bubble. This has resulted in Australia having one of the highest personal debt burdens in the world.
Well, yes, that is what historians are so baffled by. Why the social and economic decline when other countries emerged in far better shape. A strong strain of authoritarianism in hispanic cultural history and rule? or?
Hate to turn this into an Argentina thread. Australia has only strengthened and prospered since Depression.
Australia was heading down the same road as Argentina in the 1960s and 1970s. Protected industries and a dependence on resource exports that couldn't pay for our imports. Although, given the stability of parliamentary democracies it was unlikely we would have sunk to the depths of Argentina.
I found some figures of the per capita GDP of countries in 1900. The highest was New Zealand, followed by Australia and the US. Argentina was 14 th. These days the tax havens top the lists but Argentina has dropped far more than Australia or NZ.
Although over recent decades it was Australia riding on the massive boom of the Chinese economy that mostly carried it through. Inequality has been growing and large population increase by means of overseas migration has largely kept GDP and house prices high. Stagnant wages and ever increasing costs have witnessed declining living standards. Obviously partly cushioned by cheaper debt but in turn increasing debt bubble. This has resulted in Australia having one of the highest personal debt burdens in the world.
What do you see for Australia in the future as a consequence?
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.
