 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Master Zen
|
 |
of naughty
Jan 2003
time: 23:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Oerdin
I believe it has to do with lack of resources. A high birth rate combined with historically lack luster economic growth combined to place a large demand for government services (education, health care, etc) but limited the government's ability to meet those demands. I am happy to report that since NAFTA was signed the Mexican economy has picked up remarkabely.
|
Not really. Our economy has hardly "picked up" contrary to what the macroeconomic data suggest. Poverty has not decreased and income inequality has worsened. The real purchasing power of the minimum wage has still not reached the 1982 level, the year of the debt crisis. What's worse is that ever since 1982, the budget has been totally unable to assign an adecuate amount of funds to social services.
The first reason was the foreign debt contracted during 1973-1982. This was the main reason for the debt crisis of 1982. During this period, foreign debt increased from less than 10 billion to over 80 billion. Then it doubled again in the 80's until it was partly relieved by the Brady plan debt restructuring in 89-90.
Right now, debt is at its lowest level since 1982 with regards to its percentage relative to GDP. However, the problem isn't the debt itself, it's the debt service (i.e. the interets). Sadly, despite the lower relative burden compared to say, a decade or two decades ago, Mexico still spends more on debt each year than on education, health or defense. Debt is the largest budget item year after year.
Nevertheless, if foreign debt has been somewhat aleviated, public internal debt has worsened in the last decade particularly after the notorious FOBAPROA bank bailout in which unsustainable bank credits were converted into public debt. Never in the history of this country has the taxpayer been forced to cover such an unjust burden much of which was unproductive investment by greedy bankers. So now us taxpayers must pay the yatchs and mansions that the poor bankers could not afford to pay off after the banks collapsed in 95.
Third and perhaps worse reason is the ineifficient tax regime. Mexico's tax income is barely 12% of GDP compared to 30% in most other countries, even 3rd world countries. The reasons? An overly beaurocratic tax code, terrible enforcement capability (god I seriously wish we had a ruthless IRS agency down here), a huge amount of the working population engaged in informal non-tax-paying activities etc. Until there's a deep tax code reform, Mexico will have a lot of trouble to keep its budget in line with its poverty and social spending objectives.
So despite all the idiotic IMF and World Bank talk about "the Mexican recovery, the Mexican miracle, the amazingly open free trade loving economy", the truth is, the economy is in shambles and the direct proof is that immigration is NOT decreasing, something that is inconsistent with the claim that the economy is getting better. No better judge than the guys crossing the Rio Grande (in essense the rural poor to which the benefits of globalization have never reached) to tell you that its not improving which is why they choose to risk even their lives to go to the other side. Whats worse is that the birth rate, quite low nowadays will suffer a huge backlash by 2025 when the "baby boom" (which for us happened in the 60's and 70's) suddenly goes into retirement.
I give this country one more government before all is lost. The economy will be quite simply unsustainable after 2025 unless there are deep structrural and political reforms NOW that will mitigate the coming crisis.
-MZ
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whoha
And yes, TB was wiped out in this country, it stands to reason that it came from elsewhere. All legal immigrants are required to prove that they are free of communicable diseases to gain entry to the US, so that kinda leaves us with one group. |
From the US government:
quote:
Why is TB a problem today?
Starting in the 1940s, scientists discovered the first of several medicines now used to treat TB. As a result, TB slowly began to decrease in the United States. But in the 1970s and early 1980s, the country let its guard down and TB control efforts were neglected. As a result, between 1985 and 1992, the number of TB cases increased. However, with increased funding and attention to the TB problem, we have had a steady decline in the number of persons with TB since 1992. But TB is still a problem; more than 14,000 cases were reported in 2003 in the United States.
This booklet answers common questions about TB. Please ask your doctor or nurse if you have other questions about latent TB infection or TB disease. |
And why is control the issue? Cause as the government says:
quote:
However, not everyone infected with TB bacteria becomes sick. People who are not sick have what is called latent TB infection. People who have latent TB infection do not feel sick, do not have any symptoms, and cannot spread TB to others. But, some people with latent TB infection go on to get TB disease.
People with active TB disease can be treated and cured if they seek medical help. Even better, people with latent TB infection can take medicine so that they will not develop active TB disease. |
http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/tb/faqs/q...tion.htm#Intro2
Also:
quote:
5. "Why did does it seem that there is more TB going around recently?"
It probably seems that more TB is going around recently because there have been a lot of stories in the newspapers and on T.V. about TB in the past few years. It is true that TB was increasing in the early 1990's. This was probably because there were less specialized TB clinics than there used to be. Another reason was that there were more persons with HIV infection. People who are HIV positive are more likely to get TB. Since 1992 TB has been decreasing nationwide. However, there is still more TB around then there should be. With the proper medicines all TB could eliminated from this country. |
from http://www.tuberculosis.net/
Yup, so even thought TB can lay dormant, and even though the growth of AIDS meant a large new population of people who were more liekly unfortunatelly to get sick from latent TB given their weakened immuse systems, it most certainly has to be the illegal immigrants.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Oerdin
|
 |
of Internet Music.
Sep 2001
time: 21:20
|
|
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXT...:338397,00.html
Mexico is in dead doing better since NAFTA was signed. Unemployment is down, tax reciepts are up, Per Capita GDP is up, balance of trade is much better, and the poverty rate has indeed declined modestly. Mexico still suffers from a 50% poverty rate but that's better then the 60% per NAFTA.
Income inequality has always been a red herring since the people getting rich are creating new wealth not taking old money from other people. The world bank has called it right on Mexico and although the cut in government services is painful we must not forget that the over spending on social programs was the cause of two major debt crisis. Mexico doesn't have the deep pockets like the US or Europe has so it can't afford to be as profilgate as they are.
Edit: The World Bank doesn't allow click through links that link won't work. Instead just cut and paste the link into your browser and it will work.
Last edited by Oerdin on 21-05-2005 at 10:24
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Oerdin
|
|
of Internet Music.
Sep 2001
time: 21:20
|
|
Here's the World Bank's take on NAFTA. OVer all the average Mexican worker is making 4.5% more today because of NAFTA and inflation is lower then Mexico traditionally experienced. Free trade isn't a cure all but it helps. For Mexico to eventually converge with income and living standards in the US and Canada it will have to incrase investment in infastructure and education.
It will be hard to come up with the money but cutting the military would be an excellent place to start. That won't make the nationalists happy but the reality is no one is going to invade Mexico and the money can be better spent on building roads and schools.
quote:
Lessons from NAFTA
A recent World Bank study about the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) finds that NAFTA has spurred economic development in Mexico, but is not enough to achieve economic convergence with Canada and the United States even in the long run without investment in innovation, infrastructure and adequate institutions.
The report estimates that without NAFTA, global exports would have been roughly 25 percent lower; Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), which was exceptionally high in 1994-95, around 40 percent less, and Mexico’s $5,920 per capita income in 2002 would have been 4-5 percent lower.
Overall, the study concludes that Mexico’s deficiencies in education and research and development (R&D) limit the power of NAFTA to enable the country to reach the level of technological progress of the United States or even of countries such as Korea. Therefore, the experts recommend reforms that would promote macroeconomic stability, improve institutions and investment climate, and build educational and innovation systems that foster technological and productivity growth. |
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/LAC/LA...65?Opendocument
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-05-2005 00:21
|
|