Comments on: Misperceptions of Mexico http://nextgenjournal.com/2009/09/misperceptions-of-mexico/ The Opinion Site for "The Next Generation" Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:59:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: GM http://nextgenjournal.com/2009/09/misperceptions-of-mexico/comment-page-1/#comment-166 GM Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:40:35 +0000 http://nextgenjournal.com/?p=1560#comment-166 It was 1982, and mostly López Portillo's administration's actions and populist nonsense (Although there was a legacy of mismanagement that you can argue was started by Echeverria). And the rescue of 1994 you can thank Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, along with the American financial system being very afraid of a Mexican default (they remembered what happened in 1982. Although we must respect Pedro Aspe, he made a horrible mistake by honoring the overvalued exchange rate and not winding it down as most mainstream economists advised. Also, NAFTA (TLCAN) in reality was not what made overly dependent. Although it is a big factor, the reality is that before NAFTA the barriers to trade were already low enough for Mexico to have a competitive advantage in its exports over much of the world (See Paul Krugman, "Pop Internationalist"). Moreover, the US is not a direct problem, but rather an opportunity for Mexico to mask its productivity deficiencies that a country of its income status is very much lagging behind.<br><br>Although Mexico has many positive qualities, you are being too optimistic. This kind of optimism allows Mexico to have the sort of complacency that we currently see. With no accountability from Mexicans themselves (and I am not saying you, just Mexico in general. It is a phenomenon that is much too common and for me it is unacceptable), the country will never address its fundamental issues. It was 1982, and mostly López Portillo's administration's actions and populist nonsense (Although there was a legacy of mismanagement that you can argue was started by Echeverria). And the rescue of 1994 you can thank Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, along with the American financial system being very afraid of a Mexican default (they remembered what happened in 1982. Although we must respect Pedro Aspe, he made a horrible mistake by honoring the overvalued exchange rate and not winding it down as most mainstream economists advised. Also, NAFTA (TLCAN) in reality was not what made overly dependent. Although it is a big factor, the reality is that before NAFTA the barriers to trade were already low enough for Mexico to have a competitive advantage in its exports over much of the world (See Paul Krugman, “Pop Internationalist”). Moreover, the US is not a direct problem, but rather an opportunity for Mexico to mask its productivity deficiencies that a country of its income status is very much lagging behind.

Although Mexico has many positive qualities, you are being too optimistic. This kind of optimism allows Mexico to have the sort of complacency that we currently see. With no accountability from Mexicans themselves (and I am not saying you, just Mexico in general. It is a phenomenon that is much too common and for me it is unacceptable), the country will never address its fundamental issues.

]]> By: GM http://nextgenjournal.com/2009/09/misperceptions-of-mexico/comment-page-1/#comment-153 GM Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:40:35 +0000 http://nextgenjournal.com/?p=1560#comment-153 It was 1982, and mostly López Portillo's administration's actions and populist nonsense (Although there was a legacy of mismanagement that you can argue was started by Echeverria). And the rescue of 1994 you can thank Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, along with the American financial system being very afraid of a Mexican default (they remembered what happened in 1982. Although we must respect Pedro Aspe, he made a horrible mistake by honoring the overvalued exchange rate and not winding it down as most mainstream economists advised. Also, NAFTA (TLCAN) in reality was not what made overly dependent. Although it is a big factor, the reality is that before NAFTA the barriers to trade were already low enough for Mexico to have a competitive advantage in its exports over much of the world (See Paul Krugman, "Pop Internationalist"). Moreover, the US is not a direct problem, but rather an opportunity for Mexico to mask its productivity deficiencies that a country of its income status is very much lagging behind.<br><br>Although Mexico has many positive qualities, you are being too optimistic. This kind of optimism allows Mexico to have the sort of complacency that we currently see. With no accountability from Mexicans themselves (and I am not saying you, just Mexico in general. It is a phenomenon that is much too common and for me it is unacceptable), the country will never address its fundamental issues. It was 1982, and mostly López Portillo's administration's actions and populist nonsense (Although there was a legacy of mismanagement that you can argue was started by Echeverria). And the rescue of 1994 you can thank Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, along with the American financial system being very afraid of a Mexican default (they remembered what happened in 1982. Although we must respect Pedro Aspe, he made a horrible mistake by honoring the overvalued exchange rate and not winding it down as most mainstream economists advised. Also, NAFTA (TLCAN) in reality was not what made overly dependent. Although it is a big factor, the reality is that before NAFTA the barriers to trade were already low enough for Mexico to have a competitive advantage in its exports over much of the world (See Paul Krugman, “Pop Internationalist”). Moreover, the US is not a direct problem, but rather an opportunity for Mexico to mask its productivity deficiencies that a country of its income status is very much lagging behind.

Although Mexico has many positive qualities, you are being too optimistic. This kind of optimism allows Mexico to have the sort of complacency that we currently see. With no accountability from Mexicans themselves (and I am not saying you, just Mexico in general. It is a phenomenon that is much too common and for me it is unacceptable), the country will never address its fundamental issues.

]]>