Latin America Economy Analysis

Some background facts about Mexico: The place of advanced Amerindian civilizations, Mexico came under Spanish rule for three centuries before achieving independence early in the 19th century. A devaluation of the peso in late 1994 threw Mexico into economic turmoil, triggering the worst recession in over half a century. The nation continues to make an impressive recovery. Ongoing economic and social concerns include low real wages, underemployment for a large segment of the population, inequitable income

Throughout the 1800s Latin America was trying to catch up with the rest of the Western world, progressing with increased exports, manufacturing, and industrialization. These advances did not stop the internal problems of most Latin nations. With these changes, as in the rest of the world, there was a growth in urban populations and in the middle class, adding another layer in the social structure; which in turn is just another group that will vie for power, and benefits from the government (180-90). This period is characterized with a large amount of wealth being concentrated in the hands of a few, which on paper shows great economic progress in the form of a GDP number, but there was still great wealth disparity. The switch, in Latin America, from conservatives in the early part of the 1800s, to liberals for the latter half, eventually turned to authoritarian governance; the democratic goals liberals set out to achieve were trashed for power and economic benefits, in keeping with previous generations (191).

Between the 1940’s and the 1970’s, Mexico’s economy had been flourishing. Their inflation was at a good range and their debt was low. With the discovery of petroleum, Mexico

The Americas, now known as Latin America, has gone through many changes in its history, from being conquered by Spain and Portugal, to the people fighting for its independence and finally, making a living as newly independent countries. From the years 1850 to the end of the 19th century, each region had influences, specifically those that dealt with the after effects colonial rule had on the land. Nations that made up Latin America began modifying different portions in their government in attempts to benefit the majority of the people. More or so, they accomplished this goal, each with their own challenges. Evidently, changes within the social, political and economic systems were focused on external factors.

Latin American revolutions tend to follow similar patterns as we have seen throughout the readings in Mexico, Cuba and Nicaragua. There are always many aspects to a revolution, but the common theme of wealth distribution played a crucial factor in every revolution we discussed this semester. Whether it be corruption or manipulation of wealth, the elites will do whatever it takes to maintain that status of being the “elites” and keep putting down the working and lower classes to maintain that hierarchy. In Mexico, as Charlip and Burns explains it, ““Land, a principal source of wealth, remained in the hands of a few. Foreigners owned between 14 and 20 percent of it. Ninety-five percent of the rural population owned none (Pg. 174).” Mexico ultimately was able to rid the

Before the 60’s Mexico has experience a growth in their economy that was called the “Mexican miracle” because of the growth from 3% to 4% in just few time. However, after this period of growth, what followed was decades of debt. “In the late 1960s, Latin America

This statement is completely false. Both revolutions sprung from the same desires: independence. The colonists wanted to be free from England, while the Latin American countries wanted to separate from Spain.

Amid chaotic and drastic changes within Latin America, there is one country whose economy’s improvement has outshone the rest. According to a recent interview by CNN to the current vice president at Council of the Americas, it was possible to know that “Peru is currently Latin America’s fastest growing country”. Additionally, drastic reforms and innovative policies have fostered an environment that favours economic development. Although there is a lot left to do regarding public investment, the country has experienced drastic growth and several changes during the past years. Currently, the new president and the newest reforms have influenced the government and now the country is focusing on exporting processed goods instead of raw materials.

Decades later, another series of events led to a new wave of feminists. In the 1970’s, Mexico became one of the world’s largest oil suppliers to the world market. International bankers made loans to Mexico, who promptly accepted them, but sooner than later the interest rates and debt rose to an uncontrollable point. Intending to boost the country's economy, the Lopez Portillo administration spent vast amounts of public spending on electricity generation, construction, the mining industry, and manufacturing. However, the country’s debt rose due to the US and other countries taking advantage of their large amounts of oil. The world oil market collapsed, and with it, the Mexican economy. In addition, an earthquake in 1985 killed almost

Question: What preexisting or absent institutions have led Latin American nations to see a divergence in the types of leftist governments in power?

There are two critical ways in which this model must be examined, theoretically as well as its concrete outcomes and policy implications within Latin American states. By looking at

During the 20th century Latin America went through a change after the U.S made the clam to directly defend Latin America. This caused a sudden trade switch from the Europe nation to the U.S. With this trade switch we start to see a big gap between the lower and upper class. With this gap the poor gets poorer and the rich become Carlos Slim. Carlos Slim was the world’s richest person form 2010-2013 and is a perfect example on how the upper class becomes billionaires. The wealth Disparity can also be seen in area like Sao Paulo, Brazil with their slums. With this wage gap crime started to flourish in Latin amerce along with corruption. Some of the best example of crime and corruption are the Colombian drug cartels with their wide spread murder and bribery tactics.

Endemic poverty and political instability are two factors that profoundly influence Latin America. The causes are individual for each country and or region. The use of the term endemic emphasises the individualistic and enduring nature of these causes. Therefore, when comparing the causes of endemic poverty and political instability in Mexico and Guyana there will be substantial differences. They are nevertheless, in a similar region of the world, therefore, similarities are also probable. Contrasts emerge due to proximity to the US and similarities are evident in the marginalisation of rural citizens. Both countries have suffered from poor governance and brutality of poverty.

They explain that during the last half of the nineteenth century, an outward-oriented period of growth started in Latin America, based on the export of raw materials to emerging industrial nations. Unlike the ruling classes in other parts of the world, the so-called oligarchic order in Latin America concentrated the resulting large surplus in the hands of small traditional elites who imitated the consumption patterns of European upper classes, rather than seeking to enhance their countries' education, technology and production infrastructure (Arocena and Senker 2003). In the late 1950s and early 1960s, industrialization failed to reach a point at which it was self-sustaining. While there were plants and factories in Latin America that could produce consumer goods, only a comparatively small wealthy segment of the population could afford to purchase these consumer goods as opposed to the large segment of the United States and West Europe populations. This restricted expansion of the internal market for manufactured consumer durables, and the expansion of manufacturing employment. Accordingly this did little or nothing to reduce inequality. Industrialization produced by inward investment and by internal consumption of expensive products could only be sustained in Latin America in a period when external funding was easy to obtain. This came to an end with the debt crisis of the 1980s. Latin

Liberalization is a term that has dominated the minds, and governments of Latin America from the advent of the region-encompassing debt-crisis of the 1980s. Many reforms, with the idea of opening up the market and reducing barriers to trade in order to increase growth, control inflation, and reduce social unrest, have taken hold in the region in notable countries such as Mexico. In, “Programs on Poverty and Inequality: Chile, Mexico, and Peru,” John Sheahan explores the reasons as to why liberalization programs have seemingly worked in some countries, and have had lackluster effects in others. Chile, for example, is often cited as the shining beacon of economic example in Latin America, and is also grouped in with the East Asian economies that developed to the level of Western Europe from the 1980s onwards. Conversely, Mexico has had disappointing growth that has never recovered to pre-1980s levels, along with social unrest and failures in governance. This paper will explore the questions: Why does poverty persist so much in some countries in the region e.g. Mexico, and Peru to a lesser extent, and why does it seem effectively controlled in other parts, such as in Chile? Sheahan argues that direct social programs are increasing in popularity as effective forms of controlling the negative effects of liberalization reforms, but that they