The 1998–2002 Argentine great depression was an economic depression in Argentina, which began in the third quarter of 1998 and lasted until the second quarter of 2002.[1][2][3][4][5][6] It followed fifteen years of stagnation and a brief period of free-market reforms.[5] The depression, which began after the Russian and Brazilian financial crises,[1] caused widespread unemployment, riots, the fall of the government, a default on the country's foreign debt, the rise of alternative currencies and the end of the peso's fixed exchange rate to the US dollar.[1] The economy shrank by 28 per cent from 1998 to 2002.[2][6] In terms of income, over 50 per cent of Argentines lived below the official poverty line and 25 per cent were indigent (their basic needs were unmet); seven out of ten Argentine children were poor at the depth of the crisis in 2002.[1][6]
By the first half of 2003, GDP growth had returned, surprising economists and the business media,[7][8] and the economy grew by an average of 9% for five years.[9][10] Argentina's GDP exceeded pre-crisis levels by 2005, and Argentine debt restructuring that year resulted in resumed payments on most of its defaulted bonds; a second debt restructuring in 2010 brought the percentage of bonds out of default to 93%, though holdout lawsuits led by vulture funds remained ongoing.[11][12] Bondholders who participated in the restructuring have been paid punctually and have seen the value of their bonds rise.[13][14] Argentina repaid its International Monetary Fund loans in full in 2006,[15] but had a long dispute with the 7% of bond-holders left.[16] In April 2016 Argentina came out of the default when the new government decided to repay the country's debt, paying the full amount to the vulture/hedge funds.[17]
Argentina's many years of military dictatorship (alternating with weak, short-lived democratic governments) had already caused significant economic problems prior to the 2001 crisis, particularly during the self-styled National Reorganization Process in power from 1976 to 1983. A right-wing executive, José Alfredo Martínez de Hoz, was appointed Economy Minister at the outset of the dictatorship, and a neoliberal economic platform centered around anti-labour, monetarist policies of financial liberalization was introduced. Budget deficits jumped to 15% of GDP as the country went into debt for the state takeover of over $15 billion in private debts as well as unfinished projects, higher defense spending, and the Falklands War. By the end of the military government in 1983, the foreign debt had ballooned from $8 billion to $45 billion, interest charges alone exceeded trade surpluses, industrial production had fallen by 20%, real wages had lost 36% of their purchasing power, and unemployment, calculated at 18% (though official figures claimed 5%), was at its highest point since the 1929 Great Depression.[18]
Democracy was restored in 1983 with the election of President Raúl Alfonsín. The new government intended to stabilize the economy and in 1985 introduced austerity measures and a new currency, the Argentine austral, the first of its kind without peso in its name. Fresh loans were required to service the $5 billion in annual interest charges, however, and when commodity prices collapsed in 1986, the state became unable to service this debt.[19]
During the Alfonsin administration, unemployment did not substantially increase, but real wages fell by almost half to the lowest level in fifty years. Prices for state-run utilities, telephone service, and gas increased substantially.[20]
Confidence in the plan, however, collapsed in late 1987, and inflation, which had already averaged 10% per month (220% per year) from 1975 to 1988, spiraled out of control. Inflation reached 200% for the month in July 1989, peaking at 5000% for the year. Amid riots, Alfonsín resigned five months before the end of his term; Carlos Menem took office in July.[21]
1990s
After a second bout of hyperinflation, Domingo Cavallo was appointed Minister of the Economy in January 1991.[22][23] On 1 April, he fixed the value of the austral at 10,000 per US dollar.[24] Australs could be freely converted to dollars at banks. The Central Bank of Argentina had to keep its US dollar foreign-exchange reserves at the same level as the cash in circulation. The initial aim of such measures was to ensure the acceptance of domestic currency because after the 1989 and 1990 hyperinflation, Argentines had started to demand payment in US dollars. This regime was later modified by a law (Ley de Convertibilidad) that restored the Argentine peso as the national currency.[25]
The convertibility law reduced inflation sharply, preserving the value of the currency. That raised the quality of life for many citizens, who could again afford to travel abroad, buy imported goods or ask for credit in dollars at traditional interest rates. The fixed exchange rate reduced the cost of imports, which produced a flight of dollars from the country and a massive loss of industrial infrastructure and employment in industry.
Argentina, however, still had external public debt that it needed to roll over. Government spending remained too high, and corruption was rampant. Argentina's public debt grew enormously during the 1990s without showing that it could service the debt. The IMF kept lending money to Argentina and extending its payment schedules.
Reports indicate that tax evasion and money transfers to offshore banks played a role in capital outflows.
A congressional committee started investigations in 2001 over accusations that Central Bank Governor Pedro Pou, a prominent advocate of dollarization, and members of the board of directors had overlooked money laundering within Argentina's financial system.[26]Clearstream was accused of being instrumental in this process.
Other Latin American countries, including Mexico and Brazil (both important trade partners for Argentina) faced economic crises of their own, leading to mistrust of the regional economy. The influx of foreign currency provided by the privatization of state companies had ended. After 1999, Argentine exports were harmed by the devaluation of the Brazilian real against the dollar. A considerable international revaluation of the dollar directly weakened the peso relative to Argentina's trading partners: Brazil (30% of total trade flows) and the eurozone (23% of total trade flows).
After having grown by over 50% from 1990 to 1998, Argentina's GDP declined by 3% in 1999 and the country entered what became a three-year-long recession. President Fernando de la Rúa was elected in 1999 on a reform platform that nevertheless sought to maintain the peso's parity with the dollar. He inherited a country with high unemployment (15%), lingering recession, and continued high levels of borrowing.[27] In 1999, economic stability became economic stagnation (even deflation at times), and the economic measures taken did nothing to avert it. The government continued its predecessor's economic policies. Devaluing the peso by abandoning the exchange peg was considered political suicide and a recipe for economic disaster. By the end of the century, complementary currencies had emerged.
While the provinces of Argentina had always issued complementary currency in the form of bonds and drafts to manage shortages of cash, the scale of such borrowing reached unprecedented levels during this period. They became called "quasi-currencies", the strongest of them being Buenos Aires's Patacón. The national government issued its own quasi-currency, the LECOP.[28]
In a 2001 interview, journalist Peter Katel identified three factors that converged "the worst possible time" that made the Argentine economy unravel:
The fixed exchange rate between Argentine peso and the US dollar decided by Cavallo.
The large amounts of borrowing by Menem.
An increase in debt from reduced tax revenues.[29]
Currency
The 2002 crisis of the Argentine peso, however, shows that even a currency board arrangement cannot be completely safe from a possible collapse. When the peso was first linked to the U.S. Dollar at parity in February 1991 under the Convertibility Law, initial economic effects were quite positive: Argentina's chronic inflation was curtailed dramatically and foreign investment began to pour in, leading to an economic boom. Over time, however, the peso appreciated against the majority of currencies as the U.S. Dollar became increasingly stronger in the second half of the 1990s. A strong peso hurt exports from Argentina and caused a protracted economic downturn that eventually led to the abandonment of the peso-dollar parity in 2002. This change, in turn, caused severe economic and political distress in the country. The unemployment rate rose above 20 per cent and inflation reached a monthly rate of about 20 per cent in April 2002. In contrast, Hong Kong was able to successfully defend its currency board arrangement during the Asian financial crisis, a major stress test for the arrangement. Although there is no clear consensus on the causes of the Argentine crisis, there are at least three factors that are related to the collapse of the currency board system and ensuing economic crisis:
The lack of fiscal discipline
Labour market inflexibility
Contagion from the financial crises in Russia and Brazil.
While the currency crisis is over, the debt problem has not been completely resolved. The government of Argentina ceased all debt payments in December 2001 in the wake of persistent recession and rising social and political unrest. In 2004, the Argentine government made a 'final' offer amounting to a 75 per cent reduction in the net present value of the debt. Foreign bondholders rejected this offer and asked for an improved offer. In early 2005, bondholders finally agreed to the restructuring, under which they took a cut of about 70 per cent on the value of their bond holdings.[30]
Rates, riots, resignations and default
When a short boom in the early 1990s of portfolio investment from abroad ended in 1995, Argentina became reliant on the IMF to provide the country with low-interest access to credit and to guide its economic reforms. When the recession began in 1999, the national deficit widened to 2.5% of GDP, and its external debt surpassed 50% of GDP.[31] Seeing the levels as excessive, the IMF advised the government to balance its budget by implementing austerity measures to sustain investor confidence. The De la Rúa administration implemented $1.4 billion in cuts in its first weeks in office in late 1999. In June 2000, with unemployment at 14% and projections of 3.5% GDP for the year, austerity was furthered by $938 million in spending cuts and $2 billion in tax increases.[32]
GDP growth projections proved to be overly optimistic (instead of growing, real GDP shrank 0.8%), and lagging tax receipts prompted the government to freeze spending and cut retirement benefits again. In early November, Standard & Poor's placed Argentina on a credit watch, and a treasury bill auction required paying 16% interest (up from 9% in July, the second-highest rate of any country in South America at the time.[33]
Rising bond yields forced the country to turn to major international lenders, such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the US Treasury, which would lend to the government below market rates if it complied with conditions. Several more rounds of belt-tightening followed. José Luis Machinea resigned in March 2001.[34][35] He was replaced with Ricardo López Murphy,[36] who lasted less than three weeks in office before being replaced with Cavallo.[34]
Standard and Poor's cut the credit rating of the country's bonds to B− in July 2001.[37] Cavallo reacted by offering bondholders a swap: longer-term, higher-interest bonds would be exchanged for bonds due in 2010. The "megaswap" (megacanje), as Cavallo referred to it, was accepted by most bondholders, and it delayed up to $30 billion in payments that would have been due by 2005;[38] but it also added $38 billion in interest payments in the out years; of the $82 billion in bonds that eventually had to be restructured (triggering a wave of holdout lawsuits), 60% were issued during the 2001 megaswap.[39]
Cavallo also attempted to curb the budget crisis by instituting an unpopular across-the-board pay cut in July of up to 13% to all civil servants and an equivalent cut to government pension benefits, De la Rúa's seventh austerity round[40]—triggering nationwide strikes,[41] and from August, it paid salaries of the highest-paid employees in IOUs instead of money.[42] That further depressed the weakened economy, the unemployment rate rose to 16.4% in August 2001[43] up from a 14.7% a month earlier,[44] and it reached 20% by December.[45]
Public discontent with the economic conditions was expressed in the nationwide election. De la Rúa's alliance lost its majority in both chambers of Congress. Over 20% of voters chose to give blank or defaced ballots rather than indicate support of any candidate.[46]
The crisis intensified when, on 5 December 2001,[34] the IMF refused to release a US$1.3 billion tranche of its loan, citing the failure of the Argentine government to reach its budget deficit targets,[47] and it demanded budget cuts, 10% of the federal budget.[48] On 4 December, Argentine bond yields stood at 34% over U.S. treasury bonds, and, by 11 December, the spread jumped to 42%.[49][50]
By the end of November 2001, people began withdrawing large sums of dollars from their bank accounts, turning pesos into dollars, and sending them abroad, which caused a bank run. On 2 December, the government enacted measures, informally known as the corralito,[51][52] which allowed for only minor sums of cash to be withdrawn, initially $250 a week.[53]
The bank withdrawal freeze led to widespread protests, particularly in Buenos Aires. They engaged in protests known as cacerolazo[52][54][55][56] (banging pots and pans). Initially peaceful, these demonstrations later involved damage to property, including banks and foreign-owned companies, particularly those from the United States and Europe.[57][58][59]
Amid rioting, President Fernando de la Rua resigned on 21 December 2001.
Confrontations between the police and citizens became common, and fires were set on Buenos Aires avenues. De la Rúa declared a state of emergency,[60] but the situation worsened, precipitating the violent protests of 20 and 21 December 2001 in Plaza de Mayo, where clashes between demonstrators and the police ended up with several people dead and precipitated the fall of the government.[45][61][62] De la Rúa eventually fled the Casa Rosada in a helicopter on 21 December.[63]
Following the presidential succession procedures established in the Constitution of Argentina, the Senate chairman was next in the line of succession in the absence of the president and the vice-president.[64] Accordingly, Ramón Puerta took office as a caretaker head of state, and the Legislative Assembly (a joint session of both chambers of Congress) was convened.[65][66]
During the last week of 2001, the administration defaulted on the larger part of the public debt, US$132 billion, a seventh of all the money borrowed by the Third World.[8]
Politically, the most heated debate involved the date of the following elections. Proposals ranged from March 2002 to October 2003, the end of De la Rúa's term.[citation needed]
Rodríguez Saá's economic team came up with a scheme designed to preserve the convertibility regime, dubbed the "Third Currency" Plan. It consisted of creating a new, non-convertible currency, the Argentino, that would coexist with convertible pesos and US dollars. It would circulate as cash, or but not in checks, promissory notes, or other instruments, which could be denominated in pesos or dollars. It would be partially guaranteed with federally managed land to counterbalance inflationary tendencies.
Argentines having legal status would be used to redeem all complementary currency already in circulation; their acceptance as a means of payment was quite uneven. It was hoped that convertibility would restore public confidence, and the non-convertible nature of this currency would allow for a measure of fiscal flexibility (unthinkable with pesos) to ameliorate the crippling recession. Critics called the plan merely a "controlled devaluation" but its advocates countered that since controlling a devaluation is perhaps its thorniest issue, that criticism was a praise in disguise. The plan had enthusiastic supporters among mainstream economists (the most well-known being perhaps Martín Redrado, a former Banco Central de la República Argentina president) citing technical arguments. However, it was not implemented because the Rodríguez Saá government lacked the required political support.
Rodriguez Saá lost the support of his own Justicialist Party and resigned before the end of the year. The Legislative Assembly convened again, appointing Peronist Senator Eduardo Duhalde of Buenos Aires Province, who had been the runner-up in the 1999 race for the presidency.
Monthly inflation in Argentina during 2002 (the peak was 10.4%, in April).
In January 2002, after much deliberation, Duhalde abandoned the fixed exchange rate that had been in place for ten years. In a matter of days, the peso lost a large part of its value in the unregulated market. A provisional "official" exchange rate was set at 1.4 pesos per US dollar.
In addition to the corralito, the Ministry of Economy dictated the pesificación; all bank accounts denominated in dollars would be converted to pesos at an official rate. Deposits would be converted at 1.40 ARS per dollar and debt was converted on 1 to 1 basis.[68] The exchange rate spiked as depositors converted their peso deposits back into US dollars.[69] By October 2002, depositors who withdraw lost 50% of their value in dollars.[70] That angered most savings holders and attempts were made to declare it unconstitutional.[71]
After a few months, the exchange rate was mostly a floating exchange rate. The peso further depreciated, which prompted increased inflation. Argentina depended heavily on imports but then could not replace them locally.
Inflation and unemployment worsened during 2002. Then, exchange rate had reached nearly 4 pesos per dollar, and the accumulated inflation since the devaluation was about 80%, considerably less than predicted by most orthodox economists. The quality of life of the average Argentine was lowered proportionally. Many businesses closed or went bankrupt, many imported products became virtually inaccessible, and salaries were left as they were before the crisis.
Since the supply of pesos did not meet the demand for cash (even after the devaluation), complementary currencies kept circulating alongside them. Fears of hyperinflation as a consequence of devaluation quickly eroded their attractiveness. Their acceptability now ultimately depended on the state's irregular willingness to take them as payment of taxes and other charges.
While the regional currency was frequently accepted at the same value as the peso, Entre Ríos Province's Federal fared among the worst, discounted by an average 30% as even the provincial government that had issued them was reluctant to accept them. There were also frequent rumors that the first state would banish complementary currency overnight, leaving their holders with useless printed paper.
Immediate effects
Depositors protest the freezing of their accounts, mostly in dollars. They were converted to pesos at less than half their new value.
Aerolíneas Argentinas was one of the most affected Argentine companies, canceling all international flights for various days in 2002. The airline came close to bankruptcy but survived. [citation needed]
Several thousand homeless and jobless Argentines found work as cartoneros, cardboard collectors. An estimate in 2003 had 30,000 to 40,000 people scavenging the streets for cardboard to sell to recycling plants. Such desperate measures were common because of the unemployment rate, nearly 25%.[72]
Argentine agricultural products were rejected in some international markets for fear that they might have been damaged by the chaos. The US Department of Agriculture put restrictions on Argentine food and drug exports.[citation needed]
Recovery
Evolution of the Argentine GNP, 1999–2004.Foreign currency reserves of Argentina's central bank, in millions of US dollars.
Duhalde eventually stabilised the situation somewhat and called for elections. On 25 May 2003, Néstor Kirchner took office as the new president. Kirchner kept Duhalde's Minister of Economy, Roberto Lavagna. Lavagna, a respected economist with centrist views, showed a considerable aptitude at managing the crisis, with the help of heterodox measures.
The economic outlook was completely different from that of the 1990s. The devalued peso made Argentine exports cheap and competitive abroad and discouraged imports. In addition, the high price of soybeans in the international market produced massive amounts of foreign currency; China became a major buyer of Argentina's soy products.
The government encouraged import substitution and accessible credit for businesses, staged an aggressive plan to improve tax collection, and allocated large sums for social welfare but controlled expenditure in other fields.[73]
The peso slowly rose, reaching a 3-to-1 rate to the dollar. Agricultural exports grew and tourism returned. The huge trade surplus ultimately caused such an inflow of dollars that the government was forced to begin intervening to keep the peso from rising further, which would have adversely affected budget balances by limiting export tax revenues and discouraged further reindustrialisation. The central bank started rebuilding its dollar reserves.
By December 2005, foreign currency reserves had reached $28 billion (they were later reduced by the payment of the full debt to the IMF in January2006(2006-01)). The downside of this reserve accumulation strategy is that US dollars had to be bought with freshly issued pesos, which risked inflation. The Central Bank sterilized its purchases by buying Treasury letters. In this way the exchange rate stabilised to about 3:1.
President Kirchner and Economy Minister Lavagna discuss policy, August 2004.
The currency exchange issue was complicated by two opposing factors: a sharp increase in imports since 2004, which raised the demand for dollars, and the return of foreign investment, which brought fresh currency from abroad, after the successful restructuring of about three-quarters of the external debt. The government set up controls and restrictions aimed at keeping short-term speculative investment from destabilising financial markets. The country faced a potential debt crisis in late July 2014, when a New York judge ordered Argentina to pay hedge funds the full interest on bonds it had swapped at a discount rate during 2002. If the judgement proceeded, Argentina argued, the country would become insolvent and have a second debt default.[74]
Argentina's recovery suffered a minor setback in 2004, when rising industrial demand caused a short-lived energy crisis. Argentina continued to grow strongly, however, and GDP jumped 8.8% in 2003, 9.0% in 2004, 9.2% in 2005, 8.5% in 2006 and 8.7% in 2007.[73] Though wages averaged a 17% annual increase from 2002 to 2008, and rising 25% in the year to May 2008,[75] inflation ate away at the increases: 12.5% in 2005; 10% in 2006; nearly 15% in 2007, and over 20% during 2008.[citation needed] The government was accused of manipulating inflation statistics, and The Economist began to turn to private sources instead.[76] The surveying volume prompted the government to increase export tariffs and to pressure retailers into one price freeze after another in a bid to stabilize prices but with little effect.
While unemployment has been considerably reduced (it has hovered around 7% since 2011), Argentina has so far failed to reach an equitable distribution of income. Nevertheless, economic recovery after 2002 was accompanied by significant improvements in income distribution: in 2002, the richest 10% absorbed 40% of all income, compared to 1.1% for the poorest 10% (36 times);[77] but by 2013, the former received 27.6% of income, and the latter, 2% (14 times).[78] That level of inequality compares favorably to levels in most of Latin America and, in recent years, the United States as well.[77]
Living standards recovered significantly after growth resumed in 2003. Even using private inflation estimates, real wages rose by around 72% from their low point, in 2003, to 2013.[79] Argentina's domestic new auto market recovered especially quickly from a low of 83,000 in 2002 (a fifth the levels of the late 1990s) to a record 964,000 in 2013.[80]
Cooperatives
During the economic collapse, many business owners and foreign investors sent their money overseas. As a result, many small and medium enterprises closed for lack of capital. The majority of their workers, faced with a sudden loss of employment and no source of income, decided to reopen the closed facilities on their own as self-managed cooperatives.[81][82]
Worker cooperatives include the factory Zanon (FaSinPat), the four-star Hotel Bauen, the suit factory Brukman, and the printing press Chilavert. In some cases, former owners sent police to remove workers from the workplaces; that was sometimes successful but in other cases, workers defended occupied workplaces against the state, the police, and the bosses.[81]
A survey by an Buenos Aires newspaper found that around a third of the population had participated in general assemblies. The assemblies used to take place in street corners and public spaces, and they generally discussed ways of helping each other in the face of eviction, or organizing around issues such as health care, collective food buying, or food distribution programs. Some created new structures of health care and schooling. Neighborhood assemblies met once a week in a large assembly to discuss issues that affected the larger community.[83] In 2004, The Take, a documentary, was released on the assemblies.
Effects on wealth distribution
Although GDP grew consistently and quickly after 2003, it did not reach the levels of 1998, the last year before the crisis, until late 2004. Other macroeconomic indicators followed suit. A study by Equis, an independent counseling organization, found out that two measures of economic inequality, the Gini coefficient and the wealth gap between the 10% poorest and the 10% richest among the population, grew continuously from 2001 to March 2005.
Poverty in Argentina
Date of measurement
Extreme poverty
Under poverty line
May 2001
11.6%
35.9%
October 2001
13.6%
38.3%
May 2002
24.8%
53.0%
October 2002
27.5%
57.5%
May 2003
26.3%
54.7%
2nd sem 2003
20.5%
47.8%
1st sem 2004
17.0%
44.3%
2nd sem 2004
15.0%
40.2%
1st sem 2005
13.6%
38.5%
2nd sem 2005
12.2%
33.8%
1st sem 2006
11.2%
31.4%
2nd sem 2006
8.7%
26.4%
2nd sem 2007
5.9%
20.6%
1st sem 2008
5.1%
17.8%
2nd sem 2008
4.4%
15.3%
The adjacent table shows statistics of poverty in Argentina, in per cent of the population. The first column shows the date of the measurement (note that the method and time changed in 2003; poverty is now measured each semester). Extreme poverty is here defined as not having enough money to eat properly. The poverty line is set higher: it is the minimum income needed for basic needs including food, clothing, shelter, and studies.
Similar statistics are available from the World Bank.[84]
When the default was declared in 2002, foreign investment stopped, and capital flow ceased almost completely and immediately. The government faced severe challenges in trying to refinance its debt.
The government reached an agreement in 2005 by which 76% of the defaulted bonds were exchanged for other bonds at a nominal value of 25 to 35% of the original and at longer terms. A second debt restructuring in 2010 brought the percentage of bonds out of default to 93%, but some creditors have still not been paid.[11][12] Foreign currency denominated debt thus fell as a percentage of GDP from 150% in 2003 to 8.3% in 2013.[14]
Criticism of IMF
The IMF accepted no discounts in its part of the Argentine debt. Some payments were refinanced or postponed on agreement. However, IMF authorities at times expressed harsh criticism of the discounts and actively lobbied for the private creditors.
In a speech before the United Nations General Assembly on 21 September 2004, Kirchner said, "An urgent, tough, and structural redesign of the International Monetary Fund is needed, to prevent crises and help in [providing] solutions." Implicitly referencing the fact that the intent of the original Bretton Woods system was to encourage economic development, Kirchner warned that the IMF today must "change that direction, which took it from being a lender for development to a creditor demanding privileges."
During the weekend of 1–2 October 2004, at the annual meeting of the IMF/World Bank, leaders of the IMF, the European Union, the Group of Seven industrialised nations, and the Institute of International Finance (IIF), warned Kirchner that Argentina had to come to an immediate debt-restructuring agreement with creditors, increasing its primary budget surplus to slow debt increases and imposing structural reforms to prove to the world financial community that it deserved loans and investment.
In 2005, after turning its primary surplus into an actual surplus, Argentina began paying the IMF on schedule, with the intention of regaining financial independence. On 15 December 2005, following a similar action by Brazil, Kirchner suddenly announced that Argentina would pay the whole debt to the IMF. The debt payments, totaling US$9.810 billion, were previously scheduled as instalments until 2008. Argentina paid it with the central bank's foreign currency reserves. The payment was made on 6 January 2006.[85]
In a June 2006 report, a group of independent experts hired by the IMF to revise the work of its Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) stated that the assessment of the Argentine case suffered from manipulation and lack of collaboration on the part of the IMF; the IEO is claimed to have unduly softened its conclusions to avoid criticizing the IMF's board of directors.[86]
In economics, hyperinflation is a very high and typically accelerating inflation. It quickly erodes the real value of the local currency, as the prices of all goods increase. This causes people to minimize their holdings in that currency as they usually switch to more stable foreign currencies. Effective capital controls and currency substitution ("dollarization") are the orthodox solutions to ending short-term hyperinflation; however there are significant social and economic costs to these policies. Ineffective implementations of these solutions often exacerbate the situation. Many governments choose to attempt to solve structural issues without resorting to those solutions, with the goal of bringing inflation down slowly while minimizing social costs of further economic shocks.
The economy of Venezuela is based primarily on petroleum, as the country holds the largest crude oil supply in the world. Venezuela was historically among the wealthiest economies in South America, particularly from the 1950s to 1980s. During the 21st century, under the leadership of socialist populist Hugo Chávez it saw great increase in GDP, but under his successor Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan economy has collapsed, prompting millions of citizens to flee Venezuela. GDP has fallen by 80 percent in less than a decade. The economy is characterized by corruption, food shortages, unemployment, mismanagement of the oil sector, and since 2014, hyperinflation. As of 2024, inflation has stabilized at 59.61%.
The economic history of Argentina is one of the most studied, owing to the "Argentine paradox". As a country, it had achieved advanced development in the early 20th century but experienced a reversal relative to other developed economies, which inspired an enormous wealth of literature and diverse analysis on the causes of this relative decline. Since independence from Spain in 1816, the country has defaulted on its debt nine times. Inflation has often risen to the double digits, even as high as 5,000%, resulting in several large currency devaluations.
Domingo Felipe Cavallo is an Argentine economist and politician. Between 1991 and 1996, he was the Minister of Economy during Carlos Menem's presidency. He is known for implementing the convertibility plan, which established a pseudo-currency board with the United States dollar and allowed the dollar to be used for legal contracts. This brought the inflation rate down from over 1,300% in 1990 to less than 20% in 1992 and nearly to zero during the rest of the 1990s. He implemented pro-market reforms which included privatizations of state enterprises. Productivity per hour worked during his five-years as minister of Menem increased by more than 100%. In 2001, he was the economy minister for nine months during the 1998–2002 Argentine great depression. During a bank run, he implemented a restriction on cash withdrawing, known as corralito. This was followed by the December 2001 riots in Argentina and the fall of Fernando de la Rúa as president.
The 1997 Asian financial crisis was a period of financial crisis that gripped much of East and Southeast Asia during the late 1990s. The crisis began in Thailand in July 1997 before spreading to several other countries with a ripple effect, raising fears of a worldwide economic meltdown due to financial contagion. However, the recovery in 1998–1999 was rapid, and worries of a meltdown quickly subsided.
The Mexican peso crisis was a currency crisis sparked by the Mexican government's sudden devaluation of the peso against the U.S. dollar in December 1994, which became one of the first international financial crises ignited by capital flight.
The Convertibility plan was a plan by the Argentine Currency Board that pegged the Argentine peso to the U.S. dollar between 1991 and 2002 in an attempt to eliminate hyperinflation and stimulate economic growth. While it initially met with considerable success, the board's actions ultimately failed. The peso was only pegged to the dollar until 2002.
Economic collapse, also called economic meltdown, is any of a broad range of poor economic conditions, ranging from a severe, prolonged depression with high bankruptcy rates and high unemployment, to a breakdown in normal commerce caused by hyperinflation, or even an economically caused sharp rise in the death rate and perhaps even a decline in population. Often economic collapse is accompanied by social chaos, civil unrest and a breakdown of law and order.
Chronic inflation is an economic phenomenon occurring when a country experiences high inflation for a prolonged period due to continual increases in the money supply among other things. In countries with chronic inflation, inflation expectations become 'built-in', and it becomes extremely difficult to reduce the inflation rate because the process of reducing inflation by, for example, slowing down the growth rate of the money supply, will often lead to high unemployment until inflationary expectations have adjusted to the new situation.
The Argentine debt restructuring is a process of debt restructuring by Argentina that began on January 14, 2005, and allowed it to resume payment on 76% of the US$82 billion in sovereign bonds that defaulted in 2001 at the depth of the worst economic crisis in the nation's history. A second debt restructuring in 2010 brought the percentage of bonds under some form of repayment to 93%, though ongoing disputes with holdouts remained. Bondholders who participated in the restructuring settled for repayments of around 30% of face value and deferred payment terms, as well as warrants that paid investors based on annual economic growth as part of the same offer, and began to be paid punctually; the value of their nearly worthless bonds also began to rise. The remaining 7% of bondholders were later repaid 25% less than they were demanding, after centre-right and US-aligned leader Mauricio Macri came to power in 2015.
The Central Bank of the Argentine Republic is the central bank of Argentina, being an autarchic entity.
The Latin American debt crisis was a financial crisis that originated in the early 1980s, often known as La Década Perdida, when Latin American countries reached a point where their foreign debt exceeded their earning power, and they could not repay it.
The Russian financial crisis began in Russia on 17 August 1998. It resulted in the Russian government and the Russian Central Bank devaluing the ruble and defaulting on its debt. The crisis had severe impacts on the economies of many neighboring countries.
The economy of Argentina is the second-largest national economy in South America, behind Brazil. Argentina is a developing country with a highly literate population, an export-oriented agricultural sector, and a diversified industrial base.
Debt crisis is a situation in which a government loses the ability of paying back its governmental debt. When the expenditures of a government are more than its tax revenues for a prolonged period, the government may enter into a debt crisis. Various forms of governments finance their expenditures primarily by raising money through taxation. When tax revenues are insufficient, the government can make up the difference by issuing debt.
The 2018–present Argentine monetary crisis is an ongoing severe devaluation of the Argentine peso, caused by high inflation and steep fall in the perceived value of the currency at the local level as it continually lost purchasing power, along with other domestic and international factors. As a result, the presidency of Mauricio Macri requested a loan from the International Monetary Fund.
Mexico joined the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 1945. As of 2022, Mexico has had 18 numbers of arraignment with the IMF.
The Venezuelan economic crisis is the deterioration that began to be noticed in the main macroeconomic indicators from the year 2012, and whose consequences continue, not only economically but also politically and socially. The April 2019 International Monetary Fund (IMF) World Economic Outlook described Venezuela as being in a "wartime economy". For the fifth consecutive year, Bloomberg rated Venezuela first on its misery index in 2019.
Argentina joined the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on September 20, 1956 and has since participated in 21 IMF Arrangements. The first Stand-By Arrangement (SBA) began on December 2, 1958, and the most recent Stand-By Arrangement began on June 20, 2018, and expired on June 19, 2021. The most recent arrangement approved Argentina to borrow SDR 40,714.00 million, of which Argentina has borrowed SDR 31,913.71 million as of December 10, 2019. Over the past 63 years, Argentina has frequently used the resources of the IMF and holds the record for the largest loan distributed, reaching nearly $57 billion in 2018. However, in 2006 under the leadership of Néstor Kirchner, Argentina was able to pay off its debts, thus escaping IMF program conditionality. In 2016 under the leadership of Mauricio Macri relations between the IMF and Argentina were reestablished due to the continuous decline of the country's GDP, leading to the 2018 arrangement.
The BONEX Plan was a forced conversion of bank time deposits to Treasury bonds performed by the Argentine government in January 1990.
References
1 2 3 4 Cibils, Alan B.; Weisbrot, Mark; Kar, Debayani (3 September 2002). "Argentina Since Default: The IMF and the Depression". Center for Economic and Policy Research. Retrieved 23 September 2013. But this approach has failed for more than four years, as the economy remains mired in a depression, with a loss of more than 20 percent of GDP since the last business cycle peak in 1998. (...) Furthermore, the crisis was not caused by fiscal profligacy: the worsening of the central government's fiscal balance from 1993 to 2002 was not a result of increased government spending (other than interest payments). Rather, there was a decline in government revenue due to the recession, which began in the third quarter of 1998. More importantly, Argentina got stuck in a debt spiral in which higher interest rates increased the debt and the country's risk premium, which led to ever higher interest rates and debt service until its default in December 2001. The interest rate shocks came from outside, starting with the US Federal Reserve's decision to raise short-term rates in February 1994, and on through the Mexican, Asian, Russian, and Brazilian financial crises (1995–1999). (...)GDP has declined at a record 16.3 percent annual rate in the first quarter of 2002. Unemployment stands at 21.5 percent of the labor force, and real monthly wages have declined by 18 percent over the course of the year. Official poverty and indigence rates have reached record levels: 53% of Argentines now live below the official poverty line, while 25% are indigent (basic needs unmet). Since October 2001, 5.2 million Argentines have fallen below the poverty line, while seven out of ten Argentine children are poor today. (...)While this is the worst economic crisis in Argentine history, there are a number of reasons to view the economy as poised for a rapid recovery, and one that can take place without external financing. Most importantly, Argentina is running a large current account and trade surplus. Primarily a result of the devaluation, the export sector has vastly expanded as a share of the economy (see below), and is considerably more competitive internationally. (...)The second major private outflow, which coincides with the Asian, Russian, and Brazilian crises, sent the economy into a recession from which it has never recovered.
1 2 Saxton, Jim (June 2003). "Argentina's Economic Crisis: Causes and Cures". Joint Economic Committee. Washington, D.C.: United States Congress. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 23 September 2013. In 1998, Argentina entered what turned out to be a four-year depression, during which its economy shrank 28 percent.
1 2 Kehoe, Timothy J. "What Can We Learn from the 1998–2002 Depression in Argentina?"(PDF). Minneapolis: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. pp.1, 5. Retrieved 23 September 2013. Abstract in 1998–2002, Argentina experienced what the government described as a "great depression" (...) Although it started more slowly than the U.S. Great Depression, the 1975–90 great depression in Argentina lasted longer and resulted in a larger deviation in output from potential as measured by the 2 percent growth path. Figure 2 shows that between 1974 and 1990, real output per working-age person fell by almost 44 percent compared to the 2 percent growth path, with a decline of almost 25 percent in the first decade. Notice that this economic performance was horrible even ignoring the trend—real output per working-age person fell 23 percent, making the period 1975–90 in Argentina a great depression by any reasonable definition. Over the period 1990–98, except for a brief downturn in 1995 associated with the Tequila Crisis, Argentina boomed, with cumulative growth almost 17 percent more than the 2 percent growth path (37 percent ignoring the trend). Starting in 1998, however, Argentina entered yet another great depression, with real output per working-age person falling by more than 29 percent by 2002, compared to the 2 percent growth path (23 percent ignoring the trend). As noted by the Argentine government in the earlier quotation, the decline was particularly severe in 2001 and 2002.
1 2 3 Pascoe, Thomas (2 October 2012). "Britain is following Argentina on the road to ruin". The Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on 4 October 2012. In 1998, Argentina entered what was to become a savage depression. Like Britain, it had previously been a poster boy for free-market capitalism. (…) As in Britain, the crisis of 1998–2002 was predominantly one of debt. It began once credit markets froze – in Argentina's case this followed currency crises in Russia and Brazil which spooked the market. Argentina's crisis ought to have been a shallow one. Instead, a series of spectacular misjudgments ensured that its economy shrank 28pc, the peso fell to a third of its pre-crash value against the dollar, inflation hit 41%, unemployment reached one quarter of the workforce, real wages fell 24pc, and over half of the population fell below the poverty line.
↑ Weisbrot, Mark; Sandoval, Luis (October 2007). "Argentina's Economic Recovery". CEPR. Archived from the original on 7 June 2022. Retrieved 2 September 2012. Argentina's current economic expansion is now more than five and a half years old, and has far exceeded the expectations of most economists and the business media. Despite a record sovereign debt default of $100 billion in December 2001 and a financial collapse, the economy began growing just three months after the default and has enjoyed uninterrupted growth since then.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
↑ Raszewski, Eliana; Helft, Daniel (27 December 2006). "Pegasus, Merrill Lynch Create Argentina Property Fund". Buenos Aires. Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 23 September 2013. Residential property prices in Argentina have gained an average of 60 percent since 2002, lifted by four straight years of economic growth of more than 8.5 percent, said Armando Pepe, founder of the country's Real Estate Chamber. The central bank predicts growth next year of 7.5 percent. Argentina's economy shrunk by 11 percent in 2002, its worst recession ever, after the country defaulted on $95 billion of bonds in late 2001.
↑ Pasternak, Carla (4 November 2010). "Argentina: Reviving Economy With Rare Combination of Yields and Growth". Seeking Alpha. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 23 September 2013. The nation produced five straight years of +9% GDP growth through 2007, and even managed to eke out gains during the global recession.
↑ "Workers Struggles: The Americas". World Socialist Web Site. 21 August 2001. Archived from the original on 15 March 2012. Retrieved 29 November 2011. Argentina's unemployed number 2.3 million, 16.4 percent of the workforce.
↑ "Don't cry for me…". The Economist. 13 July 2001. Archived from the original on 20 October 2013. After three years of recession, Argentina's unemployment rate is now 14.7%.
"Guillermo Nielsen exclusive: Inside Argentina’s financial crisis" An insider's account, by Guillermo Nielsen, until recently the Secretary of Finance in Argentina, about his tenure there and specifically about the fraught negotiations the country had regarding its debt with the IMF, investment banks and bondholders. It goes into detail about the negotiations, the people involved. Euromoney March 2006.
Bortot, F. (2003). "Frozen Savings and Depressed Development in Argentina". Savings and Development, Vol. XXVII, n. 2. ISSN0393-4551.
Mussa, Michael (2002). Argentina and the Fund: from triumph to tragedy. Peterson Institute.
Jutta Maute: Hyperinflation, Currency Board, and Bust: The Case of Argentina, (Hohenheimer Volkswirtschaftliche Schriften) (Paperback), Peter Lang Publishing. (2006), ISBN978-0820487083
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
