Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Why Canada succeeded & Argentina failed?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630 		  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Why Canada succeeded & Argentina failed?
    Posted: 14-Oct-2006 at 10:33
Pinguin, it wasn't my objective at all to debase Argentina when I started this thread. It merely tries to seek an explanation for the inability of Argentina to realize its full potentials, especially given the fact that it started off with so much promise. The comparison with Canada is one of "convenience" because both countries indeed share some similarities.
 
This comparison is more an academic one (hence Solberg's study was used in the initial post). Similar comparisions between Canada and Argentina have also been done by other scholars.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 00:40
Originally posted by flyingzone

Pinguin, it wasn't my objective at all to debase Argentina when I started this thread. It merely tries to seek an explanation for the inability of Argentina to realize its full potentials, especially given the fact that it started off with so much promise. The comparison with Canada is one of "convenience" because both countries indeed share some similarities.
 
This comparison is more an academic one (hence Solberg's study was used in the initial post). Similar comparisions between Canada and Argentina have also been done by other scholars.
 
Well, the problem with American scholars that study Latin America is they hardly graps the realities of the topics. The principles they apply to theirs studies are usually quite wrong from the basic.
 
For instance, Argentina it was not a superpower in the pass, like certain numbers or statistics make some to believe. Yes, they have a boom or bonanza for certain years, mainly because wars and foreign demand of basic goods, like meat for example, flood the country with foreign money.
It is like the rubber or oil booming certain countries have. The technology changes or the demand goes down, and the countries sink with that.
 
The case of Canada is easy to explain. Canada, in economical terms, is just an extension of the United States, so enjoys all the benefits of economies of scale and access to global markets.
 
In the case of Argentina, the superficial prosperity of the beginning of the twentieth century in places like Buenos Aires hided the deep underdevelopment and poverty that affected peoples of the countryside. When the prosperity flied away, Argentina find itself fighting with many of those problems for the first time.
 
Now, if one is fair, Argentina has not done such bad job after all. Although it has have a lots of problems in recent times, the country is still progressing, and is not so far behind of places like Southern Europe like some people believe. Argentina still has a long way to go though, but it is hardly in the shape of the third world.
 
I am Chilean, of a country that was always poor like a rat but that today is enjoying certain prosperity. I lived in Canada, and I know Argentina since they are our neighbours. And I can tell you, sincerily, that even with all the progress our country has had during almost three decades, we still don't catch up Argentina. If things get stable in Argentina for a way, I am certain the country will grow up by inertia, because it has a lot more than the value the outside world assign to it.
 
Besides, if things continue like they are going today, you will hear quite a lot more about Southern South America in the near future. Brazil, Argentina and Chile are progressing, with problems but always progressing. And now these countries are allies in the manufacturing of several things, like planes.
 
Yes, Canada could be a rich country, but they are in trouble compiting South America in airplane manufacting, for example, particularly Bombardier can't compite with Embraer. This is an airplane manufactured by Embraer.
 
 
So, the idea that Latin America has deep into trouble is not right. Our struggle is to compite with the developed nations, so we can made there a place for ourselves.
 
 
Pinguin
 
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 01:19
Canada isn't an economic extension of the United States.
Economically, the US need Canada more than Canada needs the US.
 


Edited by Hellios - 15-Oct-2006 at 01:21
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 08:22
Yeh Hellios, tell me about it.
 
Canada is an independent country, and thinks very different than the U.S.
(I lived in there for a while a decade ago) However, from the commercial point of view, Canada is absolutely dependent on its neighbour, which is good for Canada because it get a scale economy it wouldn't have with its own population alone.
 
Now, Canada has another advantage over Argentina which is the distance to the main global markets. See how far from Canada the U.S., Europe and Japan are. Now compare the same with respect to Argentina.
 
Pinguin
 


Edited by pinguin - 15-Oct-2006 at 08:23
Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630 		  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 10:11

Pinguin, while a healthy skepticism of any "non-indigenous" scholar's "expertise" on any country is a good thing, one should also not completely dismiss the scholarly effort made by those people. Have you personally read Solberg's work? If not, I think you should really reserve your skepticism until you have done so. Unlike some scholars, I do not see Solberg having any "hidden agenda" in his research. By the way, if you had read my posts, you should have noticed that we're actually concentrating on a time frame much earlier than what you are talking about here. We are not talking about the current economic achievement of Argentina, something that you keep on bringing up. We are focusing on how Argentina failed to live up to its potential and had to face one economic crisis after another in the early 20th century. These are all objective facts, and no American scholar makes this up.

I think somehow you are adopting another extreme perspective in viewing non-Latin American scholarship on Latin America - over-defensiveness. Again, the comparison with Canada made by Solberg was simply one of convenience. It wasn't his objective at all to say how "great" Canada is and how "miserable" Argentina is. His focus was on the agrarian policies of those two countries and their impact on their socioeconomic development. I think this is also something that many Latin American scholars have tried to research on.

The reason why I started this thread is to bring in some real scholarship into AE instead of relying on commonsensical reasoning (not unlike the one that you brought up - geographical distance to the global market, etc., something that most lay persons would have in mind). Solberg devoted many years in his academic career trying to find an answer to the question he raised. I think his ideas deserve more than just a few dismissive comments by someone who probably hasn't even read his work.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 12:44
Originally posted by flyingzone

Pinguin, while a healthy skepticism of any "non-indigenous" scholar's "expertise" on any country is a good thing, one should also not completely dismiss the scholarly effort made by those people. Have you personally read Solberg's work? If not, I think you should really reserve your skepticism until you have done so. Unlike some scholars, I do not see Solberg having any "hidden agenda" in his research. By the way, if you had read my posts, you should have noticed that we're actually concentrating on a time frame much earlier than what you are talking about here. We are not talking about the current economic achievement of Argentina, something that you keep on bringing up. We are focusing on how Argentina failed to live up to its potential and had to face one economic crisis after another in the early 20th century. These are all objective facts, and no American scholar makes this up.

 
OK. The only think I could point out to that respect is the following: Argentina was never a developed country to start with. It has a period of luck fueled by the saling of natural resources, but it was not ground in solid development. By saling wheat and meat Argentina couldn't compite in the long term with the U.S. and Canada large scale mecanization and the abundance of lands.
 
Chile also has a economical boom in those times based in the sale of salpetre, which flood the country with temporary riches that were enjoyed by the upper classes, but that evaporated with the discovery of synthetic salpetre. Peru has a boom on guano and previously on silver, and it still a poor country. Brazil has a boom on coffe and rubber, and still is struggling to growth up. Today's oil producing countries worldwide could find they are quite poor if there is a technological change to hydrogen, for example.
 
The only thing I would like to point out is precisely that: the Argentina boom of the early 20th century is skin deep. It was not based in local development at all but in a strike of luck.
 
 
I think somehow you are adopting another extreme perspective in viewing non-Latin American scholarship on Latin America - over-defensiveness. Again, the comparison with Canada made by Solberg was simply one of convenience. It wasn't his objective at all to say how "great" Canada is and how "miserable" Argentina is. His focus was on the agrarian policies of those two countries and their impact on their socioeconomic development. I think this is also something that many Latin American scholars have tried to research on.
 
Not really. Actually what really makes me feel bad is the following: nobody cares for Latin America in the developed world. You can find thousand of reports on wonderful China, the problems of Africa or the richness of the Muslim world, but you hardly find a single report about Latin America. And when someone does something the first think they film is.... the worst favella they could find !! People in the developed world does not even known Latin America is the most urban region in the world, and that is also one that still preserves most of its nature. They also ignore that, without counting income per capita, the levels of education and health are not very far behind the developed world. 
 
The image of Latin America is being manipulated for political reasons by many. First, the communists wanted desesperately Latin America joined the ranks of the third world. Some even preach the ethernal friendship of Latin America with Africa and the poorest part of Asia. Well, things are not that way. Latin America is far more educated and developed that most of those regions. Second, the "West" enjoy to show Latin America as the example of failure, and a point of reference to show how better the anglosaxon culture is. Do a search in the web and you NEVER find a single article that speaks in a mature tone about the region, less in a possitive mood. The only things that matter are clowns like Chavez, or the drugs dealers or the next natural disaster. Reporters only search for poverty. That's why many people sometimes don't believe they are in Latin America when they visit zones outside Macchu Picchu or the Maya trail.  We are feed up to be considered an example of methodical failure. That's simply not truth.
 
So, how I could be fair in judging the visions of the outsiders?
 
 
The reason why I started this thread is to bring in some real scholarship into AE instead of relying on commonsensical reasoning (not unlike the one that you brought up - geographical distance to the global market, etc., something that most lay persons would have in mind). Solberg devoted many years in his academic career trying to find an answer to the question he raised. I think his ideas deserve more than just a few dismissive comments by someone who probably hasn't even read his work.
 
Yes, Solberg could be very right in his theories. I don't dissagre on that.
My only advice is to be careful in looking into the illusion that Argentina's ancient "development" was well founded. Actually, those measures were done in times Europe was practically wipe out of the map, and Argentina did not suffer any war or any disaster whatsoever.
 
What I don't like is to compare Canada with Argentina, because the situations are not the same, and in the past they were also very different.
 
Omar Vega (alias Pinguin)
 
 
 
Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630 		  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 13:08
Originally posted by pinguin

 
 
Not really. Actually what really makes me feel bad is the following: nobody cares for Latin America in the developed world. You can find thousand of reports on wonderful China, the problems of Africa or the richness of the Muslim world, but you hardly find a single report about Latin America. And when someone does something the first think they film is.... the worst favella they could find !! People in the developed world does not even known Latin America is the most urban region in the world, and that is also one that still preserves most of its nature. They also ignore that, without counting income per capita, the levels of education and health are not very far behind the developed world. 
 
 
 
I cannnot agree with that. The social and economic development of Latin America is an extremely hot topic in the academic circle. When I was in graduate school in the United States, even though I was not particularly interested in this region academically, I was exposed to a lot of first-class research by both American and Latin American scholars - Jorge Dominguez, Guillermo. O'Donnell, Arturo Valenzuela, Fernando Cardoso, Enzo Faletto just to name a few.
 
But of course if you are talking about the general public in the Western world, you are definitely right. However, misconceptions about the developing world are not just confined to Latin America. They are basically the norm rather than the exception whether you are talking about Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, and even Asia.
Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630 		  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 13:12
Originally posted by pinguin

  
What I don't like is to compare Canada with Argentina, because the situations are not the same, and in the past they were also very different.
 
 
No comparison is ever perfect. Comparison is only a tool in unravelling variables that may not be as easily discernible when doing an intensive case study. If social scientists are waiting for the two perfect cases to do a comparative study, then they might as well forget about it. Coming up with two exactly identical cases to do a comparison actually defeats the purpose of comparative studies itself.


Edited by flyingzone - 15-Oct-2006 at 13:13
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 13:17
Originally posted by flyingzone

.
No comparison is ever perfect. Comparison is only a tool in unravelling variables that may not be as easily discernible when doing an intensive case study. If social scientists are waiting for the two perfect cases to do a comparative study, then they might as well forget about it. Coming up with two exactly identical cases to do a comparison actually defeats the purpose of comparative studies itself.
 
I agree on that. Now, please agree on me in the following. With this soccer team I really doubt Argentineans are losers LOL
 
 
Best Regards,
 
Pinguin
 
 
Back to Top
Dan Carkner View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 07-Nov-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 490 		  Quote Dan Carkner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Nov-2006 at 11:49
I'm going to agree that language is one of the main factors.  English speakers are far more likely to see other English speakers as someone "We can do business" with..  In international economic relations, it's less about what you can do with what you have, and more about what people will let you do with it.
Back to Top
think View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 435 		  Quote think Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 07:51
but you hardly find a single report about Latin America. And when someone does something the first think they film is.... the worst favella they could find


Not really. I always thought Argentina, Brazil (Euro) an Venuezala were all wealthyish countries.

Yeh ive watched a thing on the Favelas in Rio.

But the stereotype is the poorer parts of Latin America are populated by natives an blacks.
Not the whole of Latin America in general.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 08:17
Originally posted by think

...
But the stereotype is the poorer parts of Latin America are populated by natives an blacks.
Not the whole of Latin America in general.

 
Yes. You say it right: the stereotype.
 
Most of the outside world doesn't have a clue about Latin America. Some things people usually don't know are:
 
(1) There are not racial barriers.
(2) Latin America is the place where more white people live in poverty !
(3) Blacks are a minority in Brazil.
(4) Most Indians live the life of the "Europeans".
(5) Latin America is the richest "Third World" region.
(6) Latin America has human developing standard close to the ones of the developing countries.
(7) The most urban region of the world is Latin America.
 
The stereotypes are common because of the following: the most attractive parts of Latin America are usually the poorer! People believes that Bahia is Brazil, and that the Peruvian Indian peasant is the common South American subject. But that is as ridiculous as thinking that all Mexicans wear huge sombreros all the day long.
 
These are the poors of Argentina, for example. As you can see, many don't look Black or Indian
 
 
 
 
And these are from Brazil
 
 
Pinguin
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 08:27
And I forgot. Some people will assume Argentina is a failure and Canada is better because it does not have poverty. That's not true. Poverty exist in Canada and affects lots of people. I saw it directly. The most affected are Native Americans but many whites live in poverty, too.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pinguin
 
 
Back to Top
Peter III View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 159 		  Quote Peter III Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 17:29
One important reason is geography.
 
Europe and North America are situated just a sea away, and with the completion of the Panama Canal, western countries could completely bypass the country. With the completion of the Panama Canal, Buenos Aires lost importance as a major shipping hub in the Atlantic. Canada also already had strong trade relations with the UK because of its old colonial ties. Canada also had, naturally, strong economic ties with the U.S., which was a growing superpower in itself. This, along with low corruption, lead to the formation of a very economically stable nation.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 17:51

I had the idea that in here:

(1) People don't realize Argentina is not as poor as people imagine.
 
(2) Canada is not as rich as people imagine either.
 
 
Yes, Canada is richer than Argentina, but the difference is not as huge as the one of a poor African country and Singapoor, at all.
 
Pinguin
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:05

Where do you get those stats? Big smile

Now compare Mali with Singapoor, please Wink

 
Pinguin
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:08
These?
 
 
Or the others?
 
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:14
The others are in here: http://www.worldbank.org/
 
Click on Data & Research, then data can be cross-referenced. Wink
 
LOL Wink 
 
 


Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 19:15
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:29
So what,
 
You are comparing a country like Argentina that is classified as Upper-Middle-Income economy with a country like Canada with is considered High Income economy.
 
So, the difference is not as marked as you people pretends. Ermm
 
I bet these ladies does not look "underdeveloped" at all LOL
 
 
 
Pinguin
 


Edited by pinguin - 12-Nov-2006 at 19:31
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:48
They're fake blondes pretending to be athletes. LOL Wink
 
Now,...
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.