The Argentine Post has an interesting interview with an agricultural producer today. It's interesting reading. http://www.theargentinepost.com/This strike is not easy for me to understand. As a small/medium producer (my plans for one of those 4x4s that Cristina mentioned in her speech are now gone), I support it and its goals but it doesn't make sense to me on many levels.
Don't get me wrong: I am familiar with strikes, with truckdrivers, and with governments, but this strike should have failed by now.
Currently, I can only come to one conclusion...
...the government wants this strike.
The timing of the export tax hike announcement and the follow-up address to the nation on Thursday, made it look to me that the government wanted to actually provoke a strike.
Based on past performance, the Kirchners seem to me skilled politicians. They must know that almost all strikes have doom in their DNA... a rural strike has so much going against it that it should die on the vine almost immediately.
Urban strikers can miss a few meals and huddle together for support.
Rural strikers are so much more decentralized and isolated.
They don't face the prospect of a missed meal... but rather, a missed season, a missed year. If crops are not harvested on time, they rot in the fields.
If this strike continues a few more weeks... it will be the equivalent of a factory worker "going-out" for a year or more.
The small and medium producers can't afford this. The strikers' traditional adversaries, the grand estates of the oligarchas (or what is left of them) must be giggling themselves silly. All of their money could not have bought this.
I have yet to understand the government strategy that strengthens the resolve of the strikers with every move.
This is especially inexplicable to me in light of fact that the "oligarchy" is the natural adversary of the Kirchners, as well. That group would love to see the Kirchner administration fall. But these immense landowners are not the genesis of this strike and could never have gotten the small and medium sized operators to do their bidding.
Yet this strike plays into the hand of big-agro so perfectly that some very well-dressed ruralistas began helping to staff the informational pickets that we encountered on the road Saturday during our 200 mile voyage back from the very center of the province.
If I'm right about the government wanting this strike, the K's must be feeling ready for a battle with the big producers in order to sufficiently demonize them and remove their power to oppose them in the next elections.
Maybe I'm too close to the strikers, maybe I'm not smart enough, or maybe I'm too foreign (as has been suggested in the comments)
Help me figger this out, if you want.
14 comments:
Hi Mike,
I´m still struggling to get into civilized dialogue without name-calling, the last few days have been very stressing for me due to the amount of drivel repeated by the media.
Let´s see if I can get back to my senses: "But these immense landowners are not the genesis of this strike and could never have gotten the small and medium sized operators to do their bidding.".
You forget one actor: the power of the media. The rural sector jumped from having NO regular TV programme dedicated to them last decade, to having CANAL RURAL (Cable TV), and several TV programmes on Sunday morning on over-the-air TV (led by Channel 2, and Channel 9, both friends of the oligarchy that you mention).
For the past few years, I watched those programs with amusement, as they always talked about the stuggle of the farmers, and compared it to the government waste, the "paid piqueteros who don´t want to work" etc.
It was clearly reality seen with a political-economic dogma behind it. Those guys do NOT support ANY social plans and unemployment beenfits. They forget to mention that those guys make $150 pesos a month, hardly a figure to live comfortably or even EAT. It´s basic life support, but I maintain that it should continue. They don´t seem to think so.
All this anti-tax, anti-government indoctrination SUBTLY embedded into news comentary was also helped via print magazines like El Federal, also started by Daniel Hadad whom led TV Channel 9).
I realize now that they were "fueling discontent" for a moment like this.
I humbly suggest you read this story. These poor guys do zapallitos (translation? - I'm not good at food stuff names in English), and they lost all their produce due to this "strike". yet they embrace it happily as a matter of "pride". Yet the tax exports do not affect them a single bit!. Can you find the logic behind this reasoning??.
I don't. We call these kind of people "idiotas utiles" (useful idiots?)... who're only taking part in a grand plan by the soybean producers.
/////////////////////////////
"No sembraron soja, pero creen que "hay que apoyar el paro". En su finca hay sembrados de zapallito (que tendrán que tirar), tomate, melón y cebolla. Y tienen entre 250 y 300 vacas. Ayer, llegaron al corte de ruta en Fernández en su destartalada F-100 modelo 1993, para apoyar la protesta."
/////////////////////////////
http://www.clarin.com/diario/2008/03/30/elpais/p-01403.htm
If they had any sense of dignity and self-interest, they should be boycotting this measure.
FC
PS: Any concessions that the government makes will surely NOT help them either!. Go figure!.
Here's some more news on the effect of this little "revolt experiment" on the Argentine economy:
/////////////////////////////
How much did the strike and blockades cost the country? $2,350 Millions (2.3B) in 16 days
http://www.infobae.com/contenidos/371988-101092-0-Lo-que-le-cuesta-al-pa%C3%ADs-el-paro-agropecuario
Lots of produce arrives rotten at the Central Market
http://www.inforegion.com.ar/vernota.php?titulo=Mucha-mercader%C3%ADa-entr%C3%B3-podrida-al-Mercado-Central&tipo=N&idPub=67081&id=150810&dis=1&sec=2
Central Market and distributors will take Rural Associations to court seeking damages for the the millons in loses
http://www.infobae.com/contenidos/372087-100799-0-El-Mercado-Central-enjuiciar%E1-ruralistas-si-no-levantan-el-paro
/////////////////////////////
I still maintain my conspiracy theory that this was planned to plunge CFK's popularity levels. Is it a coincidence that Michelle Bachelet in Chile is also facing violence, riots, and a general climate of chaos?
Would the infamous three-letter angency be involved in fueling revolts and chaos in the region where left-leaning leaders are in power?. I know it's a tinfoil hat conspiracy, but I DO KNOW as a fact that it happened before. Heck, they even PAID the truckers association to stage the strike and help bring down Allende.
FC
I'm sorry Nerd Gaucho, but I believe you got it totally wrong...
Farmers are not morons, and they know very well what's going on. They have been fooled many times and they reach the point of saying "Enough!".
Right now, Argentina is the land of subsidies, price controls, threats and government's gangsterism.
When an economy is heavily controlled and manipulated (to the extent of made up statistics) everything goes out of control (just like in the one-to-one era, but this is the three-to-one).
When a government pays subsidies, it takes control of the producers rentability. If you behave, you get your subsidy, if not, you're out of the game.
Getting a subsidy (or a subsidized good such as gas oil) is extremelly difficult, and most of the times farmers must buy these goods at black market prices in order to produce.
Also, bureaucracy makes it all very hard. This government has the tendency to create commissions, offices or new state dependencies to deal with every problem that comes up. The result: legions of new functionaries (friends of the government who get paid high salaries in exchange of nothing) and the specific problems they intend to solve, unsolved.
As for the "planes trabajar", please, give me a break!
Who do you think receive these plans? Only those who obey the orders of the corrupt intendants of the suburbs. Those who get a few pesos after participating in political shows (such as that of Parque Norte or Plaza de Mayo).
It used to be "el pancho y la coca", now they are "planes trabajar". Who manage those plans, our friend D'Elia (who has a budget of 14 million pesos).
All the problems Argentina had throughout its history, have been worsen by this corrupt mob in charge of the government.
Clientelism (or patronage in english), lies, gansgsterism, rampant corruption, more lies, fake statistics, co opted politicians and journalists, co opted media, social hate and division, human rights hypocrisy, etc, etc...
Of all the taxes we are paying (and believe me, I pay a lot), nothing comes back. We all have to pay for private security, the streets and pavements and broken like in a shelled city, infrastructure falls down everyday, and all the corruption cases are ignored by our justice (la bolsa de Melisa, el maletin de Antonini, los millones de Santa Cruz, etc, etc...).
Nothing good came up from this government. If we are (or were) more or less happy until now, it was just because the external situation is extremely favorable to our economy (because of high commodities prices).
But even with this extremely good situation, this mob managed to screw it up (badly!).
Please, please, don't get me started...
(Sorry for my bad english...)
Luis
Whoever plays the "dumb foreigner" card is showing his hand as the "dumb local", especially if he shows it in the face of clear, logical arguments that come from those dumb foreigners.
I did not think that the K's were dumb, even in the face of their dumb mistakes. So like the Yanq, I am also confused a bit.
If they really wanted to divert land production away from soy to corn for example, wouldn't it be a great time to do it right after harvest and then they could have lowered the export taxes on corn as an added incentive?
I am no farmer. I don't have to stretch my imagination to realize that all farm activity is planned a year ahead. Wouldn't the President of a major agricultural country know this? The time for incentives and influencing crops are after harvest time not right when they are about to harvest.
Also, if you want to influence your own people, as an elected leader, I would imagine that going out and calling them names would not be the best way about doing this.
There are way too many dubious actions on the part of the administration to support their "protection theory". I don't feel protected. My wallet does not feel protected. Who feels protected from all of this nonsense?
Also, I am about to start feeling the pinch pretty soon as a small business owner in Buenos Aires. I consume flour, eggs, chocolate, sugar, etc. Pretty soon I am going to run out of ingredients. I will have an 800sq meter factory and 25 employees with nothing to do.
Who do I blame?
Frank,
You're right, the Ks are evil and want the worst for the country. An industrial and diversified country, for starters, and low prices for agriculture products in the local marketplace isolated from high external prices.
It's a balancing act. If you eliminate the export taxes, you'll pay 3x, 4x more the ingredients for your cookies, because everyone will export their products, the local market be damned.
I don't think the whole country should be subject to the interests of El Campo, as 80% of the population lives in big cities.
Frank, if you run out of ingredients, you should thank the clever fellows at CRA, FAA, Coninagro and Sociedad Rural.
The food producers and distributors are already going to thank them in the courts, seeking damages for this nice "social experiment" of cutting roads.
Mercado Central and distributors will seek damages in court from the agriculture associations who staged this "strike"
http://www.infobae.com/contenidos/372087-100799-0-El-Mercado-Central-enjuiciar%E1-ruralistas-si-no-levantan-el-paro
FC
PS: The president has offered the little bastards assistance and tax breaks to the small farmers, this will expose the true nature of the "struggle" which is REVENUE LEVELS and a political one.
Another commie bastard!.
Deloitte CEO thinks retenciones are OK, criticizes strike
http://www.infobae.com/contenidos/372093-100799-0-El-CEO-Deloitte-defiende-las-retenciones
Where's Ron Paul when you need him? ;-P
FC
Fernando,
a country that has moyano and D'Elia noes NOT NEED the help of the "three letter agency" = CIA to be destabilised...
Yanki Mike,
yes, the Kirchners WANT this mess and more of it. I felt very worried this week:
"El escenario se complica aún más porque Kirchner y su esposa Cristina se muestran intransigentes con los pedidos del campo. En la intimidad aseguran que no darán marcha atrás con el aumento a las retenciones. Incluso, el plan del Gobierno es tensar la situación lo máximo posible hasta que comience a sentirse el desabastecimiento alimentario en las principales ciudadades del país. “Vamos a ver si cuando llegue ese momento la clase media sigue apoyando al campo”, se entusiasmaron en la Casa Rosada, donde celebraron que hoy Cristina vuelve a hablar del tema, a pesar de que su último discurso generó un cacerolazo."
This is an extract from the newspaper Critica de la Argentina (27/marzo).
This is the full link.
http://www.criticadigital.com.ar/impresa/index.php?secc=nota&nid=1662
I also still do not know why NOW, no other reason than that of the rise of the prices again now and the harvesitng, but you know this part better then me I guess...
Saludos!
The K's are dumb indeed, incredibly dumb, greedy, corrupt and extremely ignorant of basic economic principles.
There's absolutely no example in history of a country that succeeded with this level of intervention in its economy.
The first and most basic law of economy is the offer-demand law. It means, basically, that the more abundant a good, the lower its value. On the other hand, the more scarce a good, the higher its price.
Seeing that the once all mighty agricultural powerhouse of South America (once named the granary of the world) has been recently surpassed by Brazil (and even Uruguay!!) in meat exports, makes me wonder if something's not right here...
A few years ago, a brazilian worker couldn't even imagine in eating meat regularly, but nowadays this is not unusual. Why? Because due to a logical and prudent strategy, carried out along the last twenty years, they tripled their production, and now there's enough meat for both, the inner and the external markets (those foreign markets that used to belong to Argentina). Even Uruguay exports more than Argentina, and it is a small country with barely four million inhabitants.
Right now the world is giving us the chance of our lives, a chance that could change this country for ever, taking it out of its missery with a proper strategy, good administration and honesty.
Enter the K's, and all of this goes to hell.
They seem to be more worried about how to distribute peanuts intead of thinking about how to incentive farmers to triple their production.
Don't you think we can do it? Of course we can! Argentina should be feeding the world!
The problem is that we are being governed by a bunch a stupid, corrupt imbeciles who know nothing about how the world works.
And there are many other imbeciles who buy the theory that all our problems are due to the Evil Empire of the North. Oh! we, poor innocent indians...
None of the most successful countries in the world has ever done anything like this. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc, etc... if they could do it, why can't we?
How is it possible that an incredibly large proportion of our politicians look at Cuba or Venezuela as models for us?? How can someone be so incredibly stupid?
Watch out: the K's have shown us what they're capable of. If the people is not with them, they will be against the people. Any means would be valid: extorsion, threats, street violence (with D'Elia and friends) and of course, playing the card of "human rights" against the "puta oligarquía".
God save us of a chavist argentina. I don't think we can survive another dissaster.
Luis
Luis, with all due respect, I don´t buy your sh*t.
I don´t work for the government, I did vote for it, as did most of my family. And later today we´ll be there in Plaza de Mayo supporting it against this attempted coup´d etat by a minority. YES, el campo is a minority.
Even people from the SR admited in private that "this strike, as it is today, is baseless".
The figures prove it. Do you think CEPAL is a marxist economists body? well, it isn´t
See here:
http://weblogs.clarin.com/i-desarrollo/archives/2008/03/primero-mirar-los-numeros-van-por-todo.html
You can cry all you want about the "interventionist measures" but you forget to say something: these measures apply to BASIC FOODS, and PUBLIC SERVICES , in a context where FOOD PRICES ARE GOING UP EVERYWHERE.
USA: Less corn could mean higher food prices
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=:ePkh8BM9E0KzgxVohwErxGwgO9WAUYgBxRIjgc9O0TcXsLyuqzNT9rz3UmwdAEtcDug/0-0&fp=47f1ee25b43a05ee&ei=M8zxR_2pEpTcywSyz5zXBA&url=http%3A//ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iDFuqqSH3VkkbxJml19Q8ajK3zaAD8VONHSG0&cid=1147076873&usg=AFrqEzeBQCCV62Vtzh9x2027v8FlY5YgkA
INDIA LIMITS RICE EXPORTS TO BOOST LOCAL STOCKS, LOWER PRICES
http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-03-31-voa17.cfm
Is Voice of the Americas a communist organ? Don't think so.
Another one:
/////////////////////
"But then what should a country like India do to protect its poor? The answer lies in using fiscal and income policies. From that point of view, Indian policy makers have done a rather commendable job. Look at facts: while the global food price index went up by around 25 per cent in 2007 (April to December), the Indian food price index went up by only 5.1 per cent over the same period (see Economic Survey, 2007-08, p. 82, Table 4.20).
This is a great success of Indian policy-makers, who did not pass on the high inflation in global crude prices, or fertiliser prices or food prices to Indian consumers. They were largely absorbed in fiscal adjustments of taxes and subsidies. Given the high growth in tax revenue from a booming economy, Indian policy-makers had this cushion to absorb it."
/////////////////////
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/04/01/stories/2008040150150801.htm
INDONESIA might double Palm Oil export tax
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=:ePkh8BM9E0KzgxVohwErxGwgO9WAUYgBxRIjgc9O0TcXsLyuqzNT9rz3UmwdAEtcDug/3-0&fp=47f1d2cbefb16ec0&ei=IsrxR7GVEpWoygTVrvGJDA&url=http%3A//www.energycurrent.com/index.php%3Fid%3D3%26storyid%3D9593&cid=0&usg=AFrqEzdGEC6Bfe-MXh_h5tzA0CWrOdcTEw
YES, countries that impose these measures are often Third World countries, and there's a reaon for that... they have much more poor people to protect against price hikes than the developed world.
East Asia economies pressed by Inflation.
It would be all so easy for the government to lift all export taxes, and at the same time (as the fiscal incomes would fall), cut subsidizing the gas-oil and other prices. The customer be damned. It'd be a nice experiment. I'd rather not be in the country when that happens and the shit hits the fan.
But do you want first-world examples?:
(let me quote Deutsche Welle, unless you think that´s a commie media)
El éxito en las exportaciones alemanas trajo consigo un efecto inesperado: los productores de lácteos encarecen sus productos en el país de origen.
'El queso costará hasta 15 por ciento más caro, mientras que el precio del requesón se incrementará hasta un 53 por ciento.'"
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2755885,00.html
Spain:
In short, Luis, you´re proposing we apply the "laissez faire" economics approach proposed by Lopez Murphy.
I have bad news for you: HE LOST by getting less than 3 per cent of the vote. Though luck. Go cry in your bed.
Now since this is a democracy, let me and the rest continue our life without threatening armed pickets
Ruralists attack railroads
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www.infobae.com/contenidos/371049-100897-0-Denuncian-ruralistas-atentar-contra-las-formaciones-trenes
SANTIAGO DEL ESTERO / Piqueteros ruralistas BALEAN UN MICRO
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www.26noticias.com.ar/santiago-del-estero-piqueteros-ruralistas-balearon-un-micro-62606.html
La Pampa: driver attacked at a road blockade by farmers
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www.derf.com.ar/despachos.asp?cod_des=190015&ID_Seccion=42
Brutal assault on driver in San Francisco, Cordoba
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www2.lavoz.com.ar/08/03/22/secciones/economia/nota.asp?nota_id=173910
"If you try to avoid a picket, you're filled with lead"
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www.infobae.com/contenidos/371009-100799-0-Si-intent%25C3%25A1s-evitar-el-corte-te-llenan-plomo
He died after being delayed at a producers' road blockade
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www2.lavoz.com.ar/08/03/26/secciones/economia/nota.asp?nota_id=174941
...or pan-banging idiots that think they can change a government overnight just because they don´t like it.
Do you see Americans pan-banging in the streets because "they can´t take it anymore" of George W´s policies? No, they wait and try to win over those policies in the ballot box.
FC
PS: If you say "I hate the Kirchners, I really do, because of their background, because of their economic views" etc. I'd respect that. But don't deny that they're following an economic model. One that you might not like, that's for sure, but there's one. I don't want an agricultural argentina like in the late 19th century.
If "el campo" processed its grains into value-added products, it could export those products tax-free. Why not stop the bitching and do something about it?. We're talking about making pasta for chrissakes, not sending a rocket to the moon.
Fernando,
I do respect your views, even though we do not agree. I just don't buy this governments position as that of trying to influence the farmers away from soy and to protect other crops. This is not something you would do if that was your intention.
It doesn't matter how many links you respond with just explain to me how taxing a winning crop at harvest time is going to do anyone any good except for the government's coffers. If you want to influence a crop you make your taxes known at planning time.
This move by the government makes no sense when you hold it up to their reasons behind making it.
Picture this new tax announcement made after the harvest: you might get some farmers complaining, but faced by a fair move by their government giving them ample warning, they most likely will decide to plant something else unless they can get the numbers to work.
All I see here is a government going after a small segment of society like it was a personal vendetta.
I have been on the receiving end of stupid policy implementations like this one so that is why I can relate to these farmers.
Hey Gaucho! It's a pitty you don't like my sh*t. It's up to you if you like K's better.
Anyway, let me tell you that you assume too much about me.
1)I am not a neo-liberal (or neo-con).
2)I am not against retentions (if they are applied sparingly to fix a coyuntural problem and in a right meassure, not as a permanent confiscatory policy).
3)My aversion to the K's is mostly due to moral reasons, because no matter the ideology, a corrupt is a corrupt, and corrupt politicians ALWAYS screw us.
4)Like Ortega y Gasset, I believe that being a leftist, as well as being a liberal, is just another way of being an idiot.
5) I don't like Carrió and I never voted Lopez Murphy (if it was for me, I would have voted Hermes Binner, which is a socialist but not a fanatic, a good administrator with intelligent proposals and a decent person. Unfortunately he wasn't a candidate).
What I am is a person who cares about true democracy, freedom of speech, transparency, good administration, planification and respect. I don't see any of this from our government.
I see instead, rampant corruption, arrogance, maffia-like coercions, lies, fake statistics, street violence against democratic demonstrations (read D'Elia and friends), discretional use of public funds for private bussiness, briberies to opposition legislators (read Boroccoto and friends, all paid with our money) and many, many things more.
By the way, did you believe Cristina when she said the Antonini case was a "garbage operation" from the Empire? Well, if you believe the CIA is behind all latin american problems today, you must have eaten this sh*t too..
Please, give me a break!
This is nothing new, we've seen this before, and we all know how it ends.
I don't like dictatorships of any kind, (extreme right or extreme left, it all sucks).
This government likes extreme left very much.
How about human rights?
Two former members of "Todos por la Patria" (those who attacked La Tablada) are in charge of the human rights secretary. I remind you that they attacked during a democratic government and two conscript soldiers were massacred in cold blood.
Hebe de Bonafini, the darling of the K's, is happy of the 3000 lives lost in September 11, and she said they deserved it. She's the "owner" of the human rights in our country...
She also likes Al Qaeda, ETA, FARC and all the other terrorist organizations in the world today. How can she speak about human rights? How can the government speak of human rights??
If this government is so democratic, progressist and humanist, why don't they condemn the detention of opositors in Cuba?
Don't they have human rights? Or human rights are only for extreme left militants?
Anyway, you are free to eat their sh*t if you want.
Just don't say I didn't warn you...
Luis
I don´t approve everything this government does. However, economic policy (and Losteau´s views) is something I DO approve.
Every past administration has had its own fair share of corruption scandals. Because, gee, it takes two for tango (some never spoke of the pristine private sector which pays those bribes), and because we´re full of argentine people (myself included).
Maybe Binner is a moral, skilled politician surrounded by angels. We´ll see. I´d support him if he had more traction than in a single province.
Your comments wrt Bonafini shows your true colors, even if you say you´d vote for binner. You can say many things about that woman, but being a killer is something she´s not. I´d like to see you endure.
And about Chavez, yes, I do approve some of his moves, and condemn others. Rafael Correa is a much more palatable politico to me.
We´re all human in the end.
Going back to subject: put to choose between the backwards agriculture associations that are keen to set the country on fire to defend their harvest income and a president´s right to set whichever economic policy he/she wants (specially when he/she´s been a few months in power) I choose the later.
And that´s all I´m going to say for now.
FC
PS: I come from a non-peronist family. I always voted UCR before K.
PS: I do more than ¨paste links¨ those links are for you to READ, and prove my point wrt fiscal policy and external vs internal prices.
PS#2: It´s silly to claim there´s "budgetary reasons" to do the tax hike now. Retenciones account for less than 10% of fiscal income, last I heard.
I repeat: it´s an economic policy deceision.
FC
"Your comments wrt Bonafini shows your true colors, even if you say you´d vote for binner. You can say many things about that woman, but being a killer is something she´s not. I´d like to see you endure."
Did I say anything wrong about her?
Isn't it true all I just said?
I have heard all these things from her mouth on television and on written media.
I didn't say she is a "killer". I meant she supports killers, assassins and terrorists. You can agree or not with me on this, but all what I said is true and accurate.
She is a woman full of hate and she has nothing to do with human rights.
"And about Chavez, yes, I do approve some of his moves, and condemn others. Rafael Correa is a much more palatable politico to me."
Well, you showed your true colors here! That's fine. We are supposed to live in a democracy, and even though I disagree with you, I would die defending your right to express yourself freely (Voltaire).
I only hope your friends don't reach power, otherwise, my freedom of speech would surely be suppressed..
"PS: I come from a non-peronist family. I always voted UCR before K."
Oh boy! Aren't you tired of being sodomized?
Luis
Post a Comment