That old adage that the definition of crazy is to continue to do the same thing and expect different results certainly applies to the Peruvian government and the international agencies advising it.
There are two predominant stories that people may be aware of regarding Peru; one that the economy has been growing for several years, and two, President Alejandro Toledo has been setting records for his unpopularity.
At first glance they seem contradictory but with a little further inquiry the situation makes perfect sense. Remember Argentina in the mid to late 90's?
...As Peru's economy is set to record its fifth consecutive year of strong growth in 2006 -- a feat almost unheard of in the country's cyclical boom and bust history -- ordinary Peruvians say they are seeing little or no benefit, making the economy a central issue in the upcoming April 9 presidential elections.
That view is echoed around Peru despite encouraging signs such as new shopping centers and restaurants in Lima as well as robust commerce in towns near the country's gold and copper mines. Yet job growth has proven elusive in an economy that expanded 6.7 percent last year.
Much to the chagrin of business leaders, presidential front-runner Ollanta Humala says the only way to bring the benefits of this growth to ordinary Peruvians is to increase state control over the economy.
He has received strong support from the poor as a protest vote for the country's traditional economic policies.
"The idea that there is a trickle-down effect to the poor from economic growth is just an invention by Mister President (Alejandro Toledo)," said Omar Quezada, president of the Ayacucho region in central Peru, where 35 percent of the population is illiterate.
"We haven't seen a large public works project in this region in the past five years," he added.
Toledo, who took office in 2001 promising jobs and a better life for the poor, has argued that it is only a matter of time before the benefits of economic growth are widespread.
But economists say that despite average gross domestic product growth of 4.5 percent over the past 15 years, the work force is growing at 3 percent a year, meaning new graduates are barely being absorbed into the job market.
"Peru's poverty levels have barely fallen, the new jobs on offer are low-skilled and all we've really achieved is stability," said Elmer Cuba, chief economist at Lima-based consultant Macroconsult. "People are exasperated."...
And much of the government's budget is spent on - you guessed it - debt servicing.
So when the economy sputters? That is when the poor really feel the effects of the trickle down economy; (to paraphrase Bill Maher) they get pissed on.
Now with Peru potentially veering left with Humala and Obrador looking good in Mexico, we progressives have only one person to thank. As Nick Miroff says at Mother Jones:
Has Latin America ever had such a unifying figure?
At political rallies, his visage is held aloft as a beacon to regional independence and self-determination. He's helped forge new trade partnerships to spur economic growth and alleviate poverty. And his leadership has fanned a gale-force electoral trend that's sweeping the hemisphere to topple one pro-Washington government after the next.
Who is this grand inductor of Latin American leftism? Venezuelan fireball Hugo Chavez? Blue-collar Brazilian Lula Ignacio da Silva? Bolivia's coca-farmer-cum-president, Evo Morales?
¡Epa! It's George W. Bush, the accidental revolutionary.
Who da thunk it?
Comments