Federal Capital (Paco Urondo Agency, Buenos Aires Economico published 08/13/2010)
Argentina has surpassed most economic and financial crisis of the last eighty years without devastating effects on their economy. The consolidation of economic recovery, in an international context is still in crisis depends to a large amount of state intervention in the performance economic.
crisis
If we add that an important sector of national economy, agriculture, faced the worst drought of the last twenty years, management must then recognize the state to soften the effects of the crisis.
We analyze that while the focus of outbreak of the crisis, the United States, is showing signs of recovery, the crisis has now moved to Europe. The crisis in Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal in financial matters and its economic and social referrals have proved its most resonant in the first half of 2010. Consequently, other European countries, such as Germany and France are making adjustment policies in their economies that are likely to generate higher social and economic costs in the region, thereby deepening the situation.
In the current scenario, growth in Argentina is an average of 7% annual growth is based on the momentum of domestic consumption, especially of durable goods.
The scene then reaffirms redistributive policies such as universal child allowance (AUH), aimed at giving social coverage to six million children under age unprotected, the Plan "Argentina Works" (generating 100,000 new jobs genuine); Repro Plan (Subsidizing companies at risk, in order to avoid job losses and beneficial impact on large numbers of SMEs), the production subsidies (creating sustainability for the business sectors affected by the crisis scenario), as well as the incentive state to the formation of joint for the discussion of salaries for workers.
All these programs and seek political decisions underpin economic growth and social inclusion. You can set time line for governmental action on socio-economic: to provide protection to those outside of coverage, generate more genuine jobs, maintain jobs created so far (more than 4 million) and improve the participation of workers already covered. Returning to the scene
legislative progress in the social and economic matters that has led to the ruling by the state administration, are now brought into play within the legislature. The so-called Group A is considering the removal of delegated powers and change the retention scheme. This seeks to limit the power of the present Government from underfunded state and suppress the redistributive effects carried forward since 2003 and exposing the country to spread on the international financial crisis, generating a budget reduction to the allocation of economic resources designed according to the needs of the people. The goal for the opposition is to impose an economic recession that meets their electoral interests ahead to 2011.
While there is no concrete proposal, the intention is to alter the fundamental basis of the current economic model: the pattern of export tax. The mass of money which becomes in tax revenue to the state from withholding budgeted for this year 2010 is $ 41,500 million, of which about 50% from exports of soybeans, a figure which is around $ 20,000 million .
Defund the State in such amount can produce a break in economic growth and a strong effect retractable in the redistribution of income. Imagine that from the proceeds in respect of soybeans the national government partners with the provinces and municipalities through the Federal Fund for Solidarity to 30%, ie, a figure close to $ 6,000 million that are directly applied to community projects, paving, squares, walks and other infrastructure requirements in each of the different municipalities and provinces.
From this fact, some sectors, both agricultural entities and some considerations of legislators and political figures, are signs that soy retentions are not questioned. In this way, whichever of the national state would receive by way of deductions would be close to $ 6,000 million. Perhaps some may consider this figure as a smaller amount, but it is worth noting that a parliamentary decision like this could be affected 60% of social protection for 6 million children or reduce the allocation only 2 , 4 million children, marginalized, leaving 3.6 million others.
The justifications of the opposition and rural organizations say the volume now exceeds harvest by 54% by volume of the 2008/2009 harvest. Thus, in 2010 does not present a serious financial problem. However, the elimination of withholding limits state intervention against a backdrop of global economic crisis and limit its ability to respond to uncontrollable factors such as climatic factor.
national economic vulnerability would be much more serious than it was, for example, the period of drought in the 2008/2009 harvest. The government should cut subsidies to the agricultural sectors such as dairy and livestock production, the feedlots, soft loans to the agricultural sector, among others.
Now, what has been the subject of retention? Basically two: first, to raise to redistribute, and secondly, to decouple the international food prices to increase domestic consumption.
the megadevaluación From 2002 the agricultural sector was greatly benefited by the recovery in external competitiveness, which is why the volume exported by that industry had an exponential growth. The scheme of $ 1 = U.S. $ 1 was replaced by a monetary parity $ 3 = u $ s1. In short, the farmer from 2002 began to get more of pesos for the same amount of product exported prior to the devaluation and thus no deductions, the agricultural sector had tripled its profits. The agricultural deductions sought then distribute the income of the agricultural sector to industrial sector to recover the jobs lost during the previous decade and lead a strong social inclusion process.
The purpose of retaining means to redistribute income to limit the strong competitiveness of the agricultural sector and provide the basic conditions for increasing competitiveness of the industrial sector, which generates more jobs and brings about the growth of productive innovation. To reflect the competitiveness of the agricultural sector, we highlight the strong growth in international prices of food commodities, especially soybeans, which in 2008 reached U.S. $ s573 per tonne.
employer lockout times the product of resolution 125 had a different context, as during the 2008 international grain prices rose so exorbitant. In this way, farmers not only got more dollars for exported products, but also began to get more dollars for the same volume of product.
But the role of uncoupling international prices of primary products at a price that Argentines can pay for food is a substantial one: to maintain and increase domestic consumption and avoid shortages of such products.
The dual function of retention is to limit the windfall profits of the agricultural sector due to the devaluation and the competitiveness of the sector and encourage increased industrial involvement in the GDP, while ensuring the level of domestic consumption. This clearly could be achieved and industrial growth and participation is now a tangible reality in the national economy. Defending the table of the Argentines is a difficult task even today, given the strong existing economic concentration in food-producing sectors, as trainers are consolidated price, undermining the people's needs.
Argentina without withholding
A farming could bring the economy to a situation of vulnerability and economic dependence, both endogenous and exogenous reasons as climatic factors, thus putting at risk the sustainability of industry, national food security, jobs recovered real wages of Argentines and social progress achieved in the last seven years.
The author is a member of the Research Group of National Economy and Popular (GEENaP) www.geenap.com.ar
(Paco Agency Urondo) crisis
If we add that an important sector of national economy, agriculture, faced the worst drought of the last twenty years, management must then recognize the state to soften the effects of the crisis.
We analyze that while the focus of outbreak of the crisis, the United States, is showing signs of recovery, the crisis has now moved to Europe. The crisis in Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal in financial matters and its economic and social referrals have proved its most resonant in the first half of 2010. Consequently, other European countries, such as Germany and France are making adjustment policies in their economies that are likely to generate higher social and economic costs in the region, thereby deepening the situation.
In the current scenario, growth in Argentina is an average of 7% annual growth is based on the momentum of domestic consumption, especially of durable goods.
The scene then reaffirms redistributive policies such as universal child allowance (AUH), aimed at giving social coverage to six million children under age unprotected, the Plan "Argentina Works" (generating 100,000 new jobs genuine); Repro Plan (Subsidizing companies at risk, in order to avoid job losses and beneficial impact on large numbers of SMEs), the production subsidies (creating sustainability for the business sectors affected by the crisis scenario), as well as the incentive state to the formation of joint for the discussion of salaries for workers.
All these programs and seek political decisions underpin economic growth and social inclusion. You can set time line for governmental action on socio-economic: to provide protection to those outside of coverage, generate more genuine jobs, maintain jobs created so far (more than 4 million) and improve the participation of workers already covered. Returning to the scene
legislative progress in the social and economic matters that has led to the ruling by the state administration, are now brought into play within the legislature. The so-called Group A is considering the removal of delegated powers and change the retention scheme. This seeks to limit the power of the present Government from underfunded state and suppress the redistributive effects carried forward since 2003 and exposing the country to spread on the international financial crisis, generating a budget reduction to the allocation of economic resources designed according to the needs of the people. The goal for the opposition is to impose an economic recession that meets their electoral interests ahead to 2011.
While there is no concrete proposal, the intention is to alter the fundamental basis of the current economic model: the pattern of export tax. The mass of money which becomes in tax revenue to the state from withholding budgeted for this year 2010 is $ 41,500 million, of which about 50% from exports of soybeans, a figure which is around $ 20,000 million .
Defund the State in such amount can produce a break in economic growth and a strong effect retractable in the redistribution of income. Imagine that from the proceeds in respect of soybeans the national government partners with the provinces and municipalities through the Federal Fund for Solidarity to 30%, ie, a figure close to $ 6,000 million that are directly applied to community projects, paving, squares, walks and other infrastructure requirements in each of the different municipalities and provinces.
From this fact, some sectors, both agricultural entities and some considerations of legislators and political figures, are signs that soy retentions are not questioned. In this way, whichever of the national state would receive by way of deductions would be close to $ 6,000 million. Perhaps some may consider this figure as a smaller amount, but it is worth noting that a parliamentary decision like this could be affected 60% of social protection for 6 million children or reduce the allocation only 2 , 4 million children, marginalized, leaving 3.6 million others.
The justifications of the opposition and rural organizations say the volume now exceeds harvest by 54% by volume of the 2008/2009 harvest. Thus, in 2010 does not present a serious financial problem. However, the elimination of withholding limits state intervention against a backdrop of global economic crisis and limit its ability to respond to uncontrollable factors such as climatic factor.
national economic vulnerability would be much more serious than it was, for example, the period of drought in the 2008/2009 harvest. The government should cut subsidies to the agricultural sectors such as dairy and livestock production, the feedlots, soft loans to the agricultural sector, among others.
Now, what has been the subject of retention? Basically two: first, to raise to redistribute, and secondly, to decouple the international food prices to increase domestic consumption.
the megadevaluación From 2002 the agricultural sector was greatly benefited by the recovery in external competitiveness, which is why the volume exported by that industry had an exponential growth. The scheme of $ 1 = U.S. $ 1 was replaced by a monetary parity $ 3 = u $ s1. In short, the farmer from 2002 began to get more of pesos for the same amount of product exported prior to the devaluation and thus no deductions, the agricultural sector had tripled its profits. The agricultural deductions sought then distribute the income of the agricultural sector to industrial sector to recover the jobs lost during the previous decade and lead a strong social inclusion process.
The purpose of retaining means to redistribute income to limit the strong competitiveness of the agricultural sector and provide the basic conditions for increasing competitiveness of the industrial sector, which generates more jobs and brings about the growth of productive innovation. To reflect the competitiveness of the agricultural sector, we highlight the strong growth in international prices of food commodities, especially soybeans, which in 2008 reached U.S. $ s573 per tonne.
employer lockout times the product of resolution 125 had a different context, as during the 2008 international grain prices rose so exorbitant. In this way, farmers not only got more dollars for exported products, but also began to get more dollars for the same volume of product.
But the role of uncoupling international prices of primary products at a price that Argentines can pay for food is a substantial one: to maintain and increase domestic consumption and avoid shortages of such products.
The dual function of retention is to limit the windfall profits of the agricultural sector due to the devaluation and the competitiveness of the sector and encourage increased industrial involvement in the GDP, while ensuring the level of domestic consumption. This clearly could be achieved and industrial growth and participation is now a tangible reality in the national economy. Defending the table of the Argentines is a difficult task even today, given the strong existing economic concentration in food-producing sectors, as trainers are consolidated price, undermining the people's needs.
Argentina without withholding
A farming could bring the economy to a situation of vulnerability and economic dependence, both endogenous and exogenous reasons as climatic factors, thus putting at risk the sustainability of industry, national food security, jobs recovered real wages of Argentines and social progress achieved in the last seven years.
The author is a member of the Research Group of National Economy and Popular (GEENaP) www.geenap.com.ar
0 comments:
Post a Comment