PBH / Colombia / Start Forums▼ (active) Travelguide Cheap hostels Pictures

In Latin America, the most trenchant opponents of globalised finance look most likely to suffer at its hands

http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displayStory.cfm?source=hptext...

Heading the list of those most vulnerable are countries whose markets have been viewed for some time as badly behaved: Venezuela, Argentina and Ecuador. Venezuela, which has given up producing things that its consumers want, importing them instead on the back of its oil revenues, looks particularly exposed. The same oil revenue has allowed the number of public-sector jobs to more than double since President Hugo Chávez came to power in 1999, and is also underwriting a big new arms deal with Russia. Cutting public spending is an option, but not one which he would wish to contemplate before critical regional elections at the end of November. Even then it may not be easy to switch into austerity mode. Despite a recent increase in the arrests of “foreign imperialist plotters”, Mr Chávez would find it hard to explain away large numbers of people descending onto the streets.

If lower commodity prices lead to lower costs of staple foods, this would provide Argentinians with some relief against their country’s rampaging inflation. But for President Cristina Fernández’s government it would be a different story. It gets 10% of its revenue from export taxes. A fall in commodity prices would squeeze farmers (who already pay a 35% tax on exports) even more and might reignite their recent protests. Ms Fernández might be tempted to make up the shortfall by raiding pension funds. There is also a currency concern. The peso, which has won back trust after its crash in 2001, is backed by high soyabean prices. If these fall, it could lead to a fresh flight to dollars for those able to get them, and misery for everyone else.

For well-behaved countries, such as Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and Peru, things look better. Their governments have balanced their budgets and built up trade surpluses along with dollar reserves. In some places growth is still strong: the latest year-on-year figures show an 8.3% rise in Peru for July, and 6.1% rise in Brazil for the second quarter. Not everyone is convinced by this rosy picture. “Economists who talk about structural shifts on the eve of a cyclical downturn should all be taken outside and shot,” says Gray Newman of Morgan Stanley, a bank.

By tasco66 on Oct 4, 2008, 08:39 in Politics & the war.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Oct 4, 2008, 09:14:

and of course there is the you know what economy that could greatly help colombia in a slowdown.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

sanandressi says on Oct 4, 2008, 09:47:

As oil price drops Chavez gets weaker......Russian arms sales.....Give it to the people you socialist dictator phoney!

"This train will stop in Tucumcari"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

vladimiro says on Oct 4, 2008, 09:52:

Speaking of badly-behaved countries, check out this NYT article from 1999:

"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders....

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

miamimike says on Oct 4, 2008, 12:36:

For well-behaved countries, such as Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and Peru, things look better
=================================================================

Surprised Chile wasn't mentioned with these above 4. Chile has been stashing a lot of cash earned from their commodities away in a "Rainy day Fund 'for the day when their Commodity exports dip! I would say they are in the best shape financially of any south american countries.

Avatar Legend: Bush "If any of you Reporters are wondering, it was a Size 10"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

quantum says on Oct 4, 2008, 13:29:

Well behaved by whose standards? Evironmentalists, philosophers, Christian ministers or the same international bankers who are responsible for the bulk of the problems. As long as u get in line with the dictums of the Rotchchilds, the Rockerfellers, Morgan-Stanley, etc (I forget the rest of the shareholders of the Federal Reserve Bank) u will be taken care of right?Youll be able to borrow more phoney money and put your country further into their debt and will not be blackballed by the international press which to a very great extent they control. Like the Mafia, they make u an offer that u cant refuse, unless its at risk of your health and political standing and the public welfare. It pays to play ball with theze well dressed pirates. In fact you would have to be out of your mind or a revolutionary maverik not to cooperate with them. ................

0 funny, 1 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Oct 4, 2008, 13:48:

"Well behaved by whose standards? Evironmentalists, philosophers, Christian ministers or the same international bankers who are responsible for the bulk of the problems."

.
.AMEN! We are now a fascist economy. When the rich make profits they keep them. Losses are socialized.

3 funny, 1 helpful.

quantum says on Oct 4, 2008, 14:58:

Well put gringoloid! When the rich make profits they keep them. Losses are socialized! Thats how it works. Succint and to the point! That distilled piece of wisdom should make headlines........if there was a free press outside of the internet

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Mongo says on Oct 4, 2008, 16:49:

quantum: "Well put gringoloid! When the rich make profits they keep them. Losses are socialized! Thats how it works."

Losses are socialized?

Okay, explain this then:

The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shouldered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.

"Here in Colombia, it's about adding life to your years, not years to your life." Brian Andrews

0 funny, 0 helpful.

quantum says on Oct 4, 2008, 17:23:

I seriously doubt if u can trust thoze statistics but even if u could, how does that stack up against the approximate $1.5 trillion (according to many reliable sources) that the taxpayer will now have to cover? Why is it that after 8 yrs of republican neo-con administration I have trouble believing that Halliburton and Blackwater and the Carlyle Group are paying the lions share. Not to mention Citigroup and Morgan Stanley. How much $ did the CEO´s of all theze failed corporations get away with last year before D-day? I will be very much surprised if there is any Social Security waiting for me when the time comes. I can tell u, Im not depending on it. To my knowledge the rapidly desintegrating middle class has always picked up the bulk of the tax burden. The rich have always had plenty of loopholes which allow them to evade taxes.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mongo says on Oct 4, 2008, 17:28:

quantum: $1.5 trillion (according to many reliable sources) that the taxpayer will now have to cover?

That's true, and the rich will pay most of that $1.5 trillion, as I pointed out above.

quantum: "To my knowledge the rapidly desintegrating middle class has always picked up the bulk of the tax burden"

To your knowledge? Where are the facts to back that up?

"Here in Colombia, it's about adding life to your years, not years to your life." Brian Andrews

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ujay says on Oct 4, 2008, 17:40:

the rich dont pay tax,
all their money is off shore,
just like google is going to do now set up at sea ,
no tax.

and the rest are on the filddle,i think now its only the poor mexicans paying tax.

http://www.jukelightning.com

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Robert Jorge says on Oct 4, 2008, 17:52:

Nah, I pay taxes ujay - and I am definitely not rich.

He who farts in church, sits in his own pew.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ujay says on Oct 4, 2008, 18:01:

hey rob,i waited 2 years ,to get the green card ,when i got it ,it was white.

http://www.jukelightning.com

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Robert Jorge says on Oct 4, 2008, 18:17:

lol

He who farts in church, sits in his own pew.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tomtom33 (☼Travelguide writer) says on Oct 4, 2008, 18:43:

The taxpayers will not have to cover anywhere near $1.5 trillion. The "bailout" number was $700 billion. The underlying value of that $700 billion is significantly greater than zero.

And no corporation pays any tax. The customers of that corporation pay the tax.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Oct 4, 2008, 19:04:

there is a 'legal incidence' of a tax when the law states what individuals or companies, etc., must remit a tax to a state, federal, or local treasury.

there is an 'economic incidence' of a tax that specifies who actually pays the tax in the end.

most times a legal incidence is far different from the actual economic incidence.

taxes cause people to change their behavior and come up with counter measures to avoid or shift the tax.

maybe half of corporate income taxes for instance that are supposed to be legally incidenting corporations, ....are actually shifted to lower wages to the workers, higher prices for consumers, or maybe less shareholder return, or maybe all three. who knows who's really paying what, i just know there is a lot of shifting of the burden in some really creative ways.

retail tax is supposed to be a burden on retailers.......it's mostly a burden on consumers.

mongo, you may be right but I think you are jumping to conclusions when you say the rich 'pay' the bulk of federal income taxes without taking into account all of the tax avoidance behavior as well as tax shifting strategies.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Oct 4, 2008, 19:08:

in any event.......richard fuld, who makes $17000 an hour, and has made a half a billion dollars total since he started at Lehman Bros., is compensated pretty well for running a company into the ground. he's still employed there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/opinion/18kristof.html

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ujay says on Oct 4, 2008, 19:20:

Why you pay tax ,its not in your constrictions or bill of rights ,
And when they summons you to court why go ,that's not in there either.

Now I'm taking the 5th.

http://www.jukelightning.com

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ujay says on Oct 4, 2008, 19:48:

you have never like to pay tax,
the king put a tax on tea,that why you americans drink coffee

are you going to the party.

http://www.jukelightning.com

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Ken says on Oct 4, 2008, 22:48:

The rich get rich and the poor get poorer...

And today in The US we wear our underwear on the outside of our pants so that the government can confirm you change them.

And the national language is now officially.. swahili...

And we will reduce taxes on arrowheads for Navajo children under the age of 16.. if you vote for this bill..

Don't worry...the economy is OK it's only a "flesh wound"... come on... attack me with that banana...but please... reduce the taxes on the banana or I won't vote for the insidious bill...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

spy1983 says on Oct 4, 2008, 22:59:

Only whites in the US pay taxes. The producers. It is the truth, cry racism all you want.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Oct 4, 2008, 23:00:

"I seriously doubt if u can trust thoze statistics but even if u could, how does that stack up against the approximate $1.5 trillion (according to many reliable sources)

Quantum, could you perhaps name some, or all of these "many" & "reliable sources"?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

spy1983 says on Oct 4, 2008, 23:00:

And we are about to square off along those lines as well when the $hit hits the fan totally, just like prisions do. Get ready.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

spy1983 says on Oct 4, 2008, 23:01:

An Gringo you can write this down as another one of my predections that will come true in your lifetime. Sooner rather than later. And I will email you reminding you I was right again.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

quantum says on Oct 5, 2008, 12:04:

billyb and mongo, hey I didnt just make it up, I did read it more than once and I have been looking for it, but havent found it yet. It was probably on prisonplanet.com or conspiracyplanet.com or prudentbear.com or almartinraw.com. There are so many websites. In any case, its a mind boggling number and whether its 700 billion or 1.5 trillion, its still way too much of a tab to be stuck with. Basically I see big fish getting eaten by the biggest of fish and a further consolidation of power and finance. I will keep searching for the precise articles, but meantime u guyz can just google "true cost of govt bailout" and "who pays the bulk of the taxes in the U.S.A." Theres gotta be tons of stuff written on the subjects......

0 funny, 0 helpful.

BillBigD says on Oct 5, 2008, 12:58:

Quantum-I saw that stat also on CNBC this week. My take is this first $700B is just the beginning.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mongo says on Oct 5, 2008, 16:15:

quantum: "In any case, its a mind boggling number and whether its 700 billion or 1.5 trillion, its still way too much of a tab to be stuck with."

I agree wholeheartedly quantum.

BillBigD: "My take is this first $700B is just the beginning."

Yep, the government always looks at the most optimistic figure when estimating costs. They never take into account any real possibilities, so yes I agree that $700 billion is just the beginning.

"Here in Colombia, it's about adding life to your years, not years to your life." Brian Andrews

0 funny, 0 helpful.

La_Huella says on Oct 5, 2008, 16:23:

I have some doubts about the actual "value" of what taxpayers are being asked to buy for a mere $700 billion!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tomtom33 (☼Travelguide writer) says on Oct 5, 2008, 17:32:

I'll stick with my estimate, significantly greater than zero. And I have no idea what comes next.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mongo says on Oct 5, 2008, 17:40:

Hahaha! Infinity?

"Here in Colombia, it's about adding life to your years, not years to your life." Brian Andrews

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tomtom33 (☼Travelguide writer) says on Oct 5, 2008, 17:48:

I guess that is greater than zero.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mongo says on Oct 5, 2008, 18:02:

Yep, and by that I mean that it may never end. I hope that this bailout is not a precursor for all other business failures in the future. I hope its not a slippery slope that will lead the US to socialism.

That said, apparently it had to be done....according to those who know a lot more about it than I do, anyway. Only time will tell.

"Here in Colombia, it's about adding life to your years, not years to your life." Brian Andrews

0 funny, 0 helpful.

BillBigD says on Oct 6, 2008, 16:25:

You saw how much $ was announced that will be injected into the system today. Oh that does not count. They didn't asked the taxpayers or the congress. LOL

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Oct 9, 2008, 08:43:

if anyone wants to do some research into how the $700 billion number was derived at jp morgan chase one day......you can start here:

http://openingmind.blogspot.com/

the number was just pulled from a hat......the number is meaningless and was constructed to be meaningless.

you won't find anything in dupe/deluded corporate news sources, though.

0 funny, 0 helpful.