I've been considering Argentina lately - in many ways it was the southern hemisphere's equivalent to the United States, wasn't it? Lots of immigration from Europe, temperate climate, large territory, gauchos instead of cowboys...
So why is Argentina's economy in such bad shape today? Was it simply that string of bad leaders this century? Or all those escaped Nazis who lived there? Or do the problems begin earlier, when independence from Spain was declared? Was the wrong kind of groundwork laid for a successful democracy, or what?
Thoughts, por favor.

Brazil is the real equivalent to the US in the southern hemisphere, in terms of power and influence and population... i know i'll infuriate argentinos by saying that
anyway, i know little about Argentina, but i was under the impression that it was the result of unrealistic domestic policies that ruined the economy, that took place in the recent history of Argentina....
in the past Argentina was extremely rich, just like a first world country

The comparisson with the US is quite flawed...

Argentinians based almost their entire economy on the exportation of meat and agricultural products, while the US soon begun to industrialise itself.

That said, they had for quite some time alot of success in their economic practices. Living standards were on pair with Europe.

But all economies that rely on few products are always at risk. When meat prices dropped, or when a war or a crisis made them unable to export the meat, they suffered huge crises.

As for what brought them down, it was state spending. More specifically, spendings made by the governments of the provinces. We call that here in Brazil the "argentinian province party". It was fical madness. And the federal government did nothing, in order to keep popularity. So eventually the bubble exploded, and now they are screwed-up.

The Economist had a nice survey of Argentina a few months ago that talked about this. I found it interesting that in before WW1, living standards were better than those in Italy and on par with those in France (or something like that). Also Luiz, I agree that economies that rely on export of few products (whether it be agricultural produce or oil or diamonds) are always at risk and more troubling, are more prone to corruption.

I thought Argentina was going along pretty fine. But what surprises me is that there is so much land there but not many people.

One study pointed out that Argentina supported too many lawyer educationas as opposed to engineering educations. Too many lawyers is a recipe for disaster, as these are expensive, thrive on conflict/generate conflict and in general hollowing out the economy. Lawyer/Engineer/Entrepeneur ratios are frequently used in such studies.

Lawyers, military and corrupt landowners destroyed the Argentinian system.

One study pointed out that Argentina supported too many lawyer educationas as opposed to engineering educations. Too many lawyers is a recipe for disaster, as these are expensive, thrive on conflict/generate conflict and in general hollowing out the economy. Lawyer/Engineer/Entrepeneur ratios are frequently used in such studies.


I agree in principle - but then, how did the US thrive? I've often read that the US has a particularly high lawyer percentage - an often quoted statistic ist that the US has more lawyers than the rest of the world together!

Dragonlord, do not be so US centric. One study included in the EU Maastrict Treaty pointed out that there was a density of Engieers in the Eu of 3 to 100, in the USA 5 to 100 and Japan 9 to 100.. Lawyer ratio is 1 citizen to 250 or so in the US, 1-1000 in Germany and 1-10 000 in Japan. There are more variables to the equation that just lawyers and engineers, but there is no doubt that lawyers negatively influence production and distribution if they are too many. However, the USA has some aspects
that differentiate the knowledge breakdown, with more specialized scientists with strong funding, with a military-industrial complex and a versatile culture of garage inventors. Lawyers are lethal in the mid industrial phase, going from ag-business to modern industry, but has less to say where we look for numerous service job.

Another aspect is the nature of legal education, where in the USA a law school takes 2 years, the European model requires 5-6 years. Plus you have business development degrees as MBA, more than a million of both lawyers and MBAs in the USA, with Clinton and Bush as representavives for each of them. The solution is to deprave the lawyers for power, money and privileges and make them a normal professional group.

wonder why the Falklands war was not brought up. It worked out for both nations. Britain kept the falklands, and the defeat helped the argentians throw off there dictatorship

Argentina failed to honour her debts resulting in a huge loan default, the result is that the investors fled and the value of the currency nose-dived. The reasons can be attributed towards taking the Argentines towards a default include: exports being of less value due to devaluation of Brazillian currency, whilst the Peso was linked to a strong dollar making Argentine goods more expensive abroad. The Argentines were willing to pay for so much on the never, never, so services her debt was a big problem.

Had Argentina cut free from the dollar, not been so willing to borrow to pay for services the people could afford and have been more willing to cut spending they may not have got into such a mess. But, politically, the Argentine population aren't very tolerant and understanding of the difficulties governments have to cope with. Result, disaster, poverty, corruption and a massive hole to climb out of.