Talk:1998–2002 Argentine great depression

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name of the article[edit]

This has to be desambiguated, or do you think this is/will be the only economic crisis worth mentioning? Ejrrjs | What? 23:46, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This has been here for a while, but it still holds. I'd like other people to know what to rename the article to. I'd prefer adding a parenthetical date to the name, but which date? 2001? The last week of 2001 was the peak, but not the beginning or the end of the crisis. The 2000s? It began at least in 1999, possibly before. What will it be?
Also, there are now enough articles to deserve a Category:Argentine economic crisis. The name, of course, suffers from the same problem as stated above, so that has to be solved first. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 21:21, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The crisis took place between the 1990s and the 2000s. Would it be wrong to call it Argentine Economic Crisis of the 1990s? Argentine Economic Crisis of 1989-2004? Argentine Economic Crisis of the 1990s and 2000s? Argentine Economic Crisis that started in the 1990s during Carlos Menem presidency and who knows when will finish? My 2 cents-Mariano 06:15, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The simplest answer is always the better one: Argentine Economic Crisis, 1999-2002, because the recession started in 1999 and by 2002 the economy started to growth again. Jfa - <<talk to the hand>> 17:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I like that, though I'd prefer Argentine economic crisis (1999-2002). In any case, I'd leave a redirect from the original name, until someone decides to write about other crises (and/or some other crisis hits in the future). I'll wait some more and see if anybody has a better idea, but I think this is it. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 18:12, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would also go with (parenthesis). Mariano(t/c) 06:43, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think it could be referred to as just a single time period crisis. This crisis was the result of about 30 years of de-industrialization under the juntas after Perón, Alfonsin and Menem. However, I think a good name might be 'The Economic Crisis in De la Rua's Government'. A bit long, but it kind of sums it up. --Comrade Neko 17:37, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, doesn't that contradict what you said first? (I see that might be why you started it with "however"). I'd rather avoid naming names. Some thoughts: by the very nature of an encyclopedia, and science, and human nature itself, we need to split things up and label them, which are not clearly split in reality. Let's choose a representative point in time and make the split there. 1999 is a good date because that's when the crisis first appeared in the economists' radars; 2002 is another good date because that was the real peak of the crisis (when everything that had been taken for granted in the previous decade crumbled in a matter of weeks). 1999-2002 seems OK to me. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 19:33, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having second thoughts about this. [1] Unless somebody is about to write an article on another crisis, I suggest leaving it like this. If the need arises later, I promise I'll do all the boring job myself. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 14:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are automated bots that can solve that problem without human intervention. I'm not familiar with them though, but even if the redirection stays, until there's a new crisiss' article it won be a problem, and the new references to the 1999 crisis would be direct and not redirected. In short: The number of references to an article is not (so) important in the decision of moving it. Mariano(t/c) 07:14, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I'm going on with the move then. You get one of those bots. :) --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a good consus on the name, but just as another option in case there are still doubts about putting fixed dates to it, I've heard it referred to as the es:Wikipedia: Crisis de convertabilidad a fair amount here in Argentina. Referring to it as the Crisis of Convertability in one form would be another option. Elnocturno 02:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not much of a contributor, but this article desperatly needs more source citations. I find it very hard to turst much of the information presented, especially in the sections explaining the causes of the crisis.134.71.149.229 (talk) 06:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about exports[edit]

(kept for reference, now solved)

Please see the discussion about the effect of convertibility on exports at December 2001 riots (Argentina). Maybe it should be moved here... The issue is:

What role played the low fixed exchange rate in the evolution of exports, imports and the trade balance? By implication, what about de-industrialization?

This page says at present that the 1:1 peso-dollar rate made imports cheap and exports uncompetitive. This has been contested. Reputable sources and analyses are needed in order to explain the matter in a less generalizing and possibly inaccurate way.

--Pablo D. Flores 15:38, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cacerolazo not new?[edit]

Quote from the article: "They created a new form of protest, known as cacerolazo (banging pots and pans)."

I don't think that this was new, although the word used to describe it may have been. This is from having read Alistair Horne's book on the subject of Salvador Allende's period in power in Chile in the early 1970s:

Horn, A. Small Earthquake in Chile, Papermac, 1990. ISBN 0-333-51756-3. p337: "During Castro's visit in the end of 1971, thousands of middle-class women demonstrated angrily in Santiago, beating empty saucepans as a protest against the foot [sic] shortages (plate 40)"

Plate 40 shows exactly that, with the caption "The women of Chile disagree: The 'saucepan riots' of December 1971"

LancsNeil 16:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'm going to change that sentence right now. Brian Z 22:19, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contribution of Social Currencies[edit]

No where do I see mentioned the implementation of Argentina's "Green Dollars" and other social currency systems that initally allowed farmers to settle IOUs with their product and have since expanded in availability to all citizens. I came to this site in search of unbiased information about Argentina's political and economic history, specifically how and if social currency systems have helped to alleviate the country's financial burden. I am disappointed not to find even a brief explanation. I have read various articles pertaining to the use of "Argentinos," for instance, but have yet to find any clear explanation sobre their adoption/acceptance/effect nationally. Can anyone help? Thanks!

Debt restructuring[edit]

More details on the exchange of the defaulted bonds and their reduced values would be useful. Did the debt lenders effectively write off the debts, and if so which lenders did this?

Criticism of the IMF[edit]

I am not an economist, so perhaps it is me, but I find it hard to work out from this section what the criticisms of the IMF have been. I understand there have been heavy criticisms levelled against the IMF and I was hoping to read what they were and what the counter-arguments were. All I read here is that an IMF committee allegedly had some un-specified criticisms that they decided to tone down - and they also made vague statement about "informative manipulation" (what? by whom).

I would like to see more hard detail on this. Sam 14:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The reference is to the policy paper at http://www.imf.org/external/pp/longres.aspx?id=563 (see References section). The IMF has an independent office to evaluate past actions (the IEO). The IEO said a few bad things about the IMF's treatment of the Argentine case. Then the IMF itself hired experts to evaluate the IEO, and these experts concluded that the IEO was not that independent after all. You're right that the section needs to be reworded, though. I'll try to find more references. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 18:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

reference links- film.[edit]

Hi there, I am not sure how to do this-I have tried to make the edits... 

but currently the link to "eye of the storm" film is incorrect.- "Eye of the Storm" was a prequel that was shown widely- but its domain now rerouts to "www.ithefilm.com" which is the feature film about the same subjects.

For a direct link for the Eye of the Storm I would go here: http://ithefilm.com/watch_trailers

In addition along with "The Take"- I would suggest including the film entitled "i" which is the feature version of Eye of the Storm.

The web address for this film is www.ithefilm.com its subtitle is "Indymedia, Argentina, and the Questions of Communication"

Effect of Wealth Distribution[edit]

That 450,000 figure is outrageous. It is completely false and unsubstantiated by any official data or studies, except by the 'research' of one lonely agronomist (which should be added, surely has a political agenda). I'm a quite frankly tired of reading these kinds of claims as encyclopedic FACTS. I highly doubt 450,000 people have died in Haiti of hunger in that same period. It is also good to point out that in no other Latin American country article does it talk about such a number of people dying of hunger, and most of those countries are significantly more impovirished. I was quite tempted to just delete that entire entry, but I will wait for opinions on this.

Let's make it clear: saying someone dies of hunger, means they died DIRECTLY from maltutrition, and not from complications from lack of proper nutrition (which could be what it is attempted to be conveyed by such figure), but even so it appears a gross exageration and lacking in multiple sources to corroborate, which I think would be required for such a significant statement to be made. Since when is one study by one man or a 'thinktank' (which by their very nature have an ideological agenda), used as encyclopedic data? I believe it should be discarded. The dugout 17:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Effect of Wealth Distribution Table[edit]

Data should at least go back to 1990, in order to show the evolution of the indexes into the crisis, and not only the recovery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.177.194.204 (talk) 19:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

on unemployment figures[edit]

"By the end of the military government the country's industries were severely affected and unemployment, calculated at 18% (though official figures claimed 5%), was at its highest point since the depression." The figure 18% needs support. As far as I know that figure is quite excessive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andruchoandrucho (talk • contribs) 20:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chile Mention[edit]

I just removed a mention to chile tourism balance. To start with, there is no source, and to follow, Chile is a largely irrelevant player in argentine politics and economics. It seems like Chilean users are constantly adding mentions to their country in Argentine articles where there is no need nor relevace. Please protect the articles from this slight form of vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.19.151.146 (talk) 15:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1999-2001 events[edit]

The article had very little information about the events between the beginning of the recession in 1998 and the unrest of December 2001. I am not Argentinean and I have not experienced any of those events first hand, but I tried to expand it as best I could, using information from Western newspapers that I could find using news.google.com.

There are a few things that need to be addressed.

  • The statement that the IMF was the primary driver behind the early austerity efforts is poorly sourced. It seems to be quite evident that it was the case (look at all the talk about fiscal consolidation in the memorandum of economic policies), but I couldn't find any good quotes supporting this. I found one site that claimed that, before the 1999 election, IMF promised Argentina a $10 billion loan which was conditional on implementing austerity programs. But that source was somewhat questionable (Socialist web site) and I couldn't find any independent confirmations of that statement either.
  • There are a few articles claiming that the Argentine government was trying to implement a public works / fiscal stimulus program in December 2000. I couldn't find any subsequent references to that program. Was it implemented or was it killed by the IMF?
  • The IMF points the blame partly towards attempts of the Argentine government to mess with its currency in early 2001 by considering a switch from the dollar peg to the mixed dollar/euro peg. That needs to be sourced and expanded. --Itinerant1 (talk) 11:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two more notes.

There is an IMF report available online, analyzing, among other things, Argentinean performance up to 2001. It can be expected to be biased, but there are some useful numbers in it.

On the subject "when did the crisis really begin", it shows three dates of sharp and significant drops in bank deposits: March 19, 2001; July 5, 2001; October 26, 2001. These dates must be reflected in the article. The first is apparently the date when Domingo Cavallo took the office. The second and the third event may need to be clarified.

It would be nice to have charts of government tax collections and public spending, excluding interest on debt, quarter-by-quarter, late 1998 through late 2001. There are lots of numbers in the IMF article, but they only seem to make things more complicated than they should be.--Itinerant1 (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will try to find the references you request on local newspapers. There are plenty of articles on the matter. BTW, thanks for your contributions.--Jetstreamer (talk) 14:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead paragraph[edit]

The lead paragraph ought to present the major hypotheses as to the cause of the crisis with the benefit of hindsight, supported by the voluminous academic work since the events, not the opinion journalist (whatever his qualities may be, as a journalist) gleaned in a 2001 interview:

In a 2001 interview, journalist Peter Katel identified three very serious crises that converged at "the worst possible time" in his explanation for why the Argentinian economy unraveled in the manner that it did, at the time that it did — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lip gloss for2 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The origins section assumes, incorrectly, that the issuance of new sovereign debt is necessary for the introduction of a new currency. A pure fiat currency can be introduced with no value except as credit for taxes and other obligations to the government; such currencies can therefore obviate the issuance of sovereign debt, as Lincoln did with United States Notes, or Greenbacks, during the Civil War. By issuing sovereign debt to secure reserves as a basis for the austral, in a misguided attempt at fiscal soundness, the Argentine government doomed itself to debts it could never repay, the debts exceeding the supply of australs by the interest on the debt. Inevitably, the government would be forced to issue additional currency without the backing of new reserves and, as this predicament became obvious and interminable, the expectation of further such issues led to hyperinflation. Therefore, the issuance of sovereign debt, far from being necessary, was the avoidable and sole cause of the monetary aspect of this crisis.InpoliticTruth (talk) 02:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Links[edit]

This is probably legacy(Lihaas (talk) 18:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)).[reply]

Citation not specific[edit]

I have tagged the reference in the paragraph in the Recovery section which begins, "Argentina's recovery suffered a minor setback in 2004 when rising industrial demand caused a short-lived energy crisis" as being {{dubious}}. This link is to the main page of the Ministry of Economy and Public Finance (Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas Públicas), a Spanish-language government website; there is no link to a specific article, press release, or other document to verify the claims. My Spanish is too poor to navigate the site and find the appropriate citation.—D'Ranged 1 VTalk 08:21, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maintenance templates at top[edit]

I've removed the {{refimprove}} tag from the top as inline tagging seems to be more useful. Regarding the other template left, i.e. {{incomplete}}, there are no explanations for it to be there. I think this one should also be removed. I will proceed with the removal in a week or so unless good reasons are provided for keeping it.--Jetstreamer Talk 15:12, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on 1998–2002 Argentine great depression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 1998–2002 Argentine great depression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:58, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1998–2002_Argentine_great_depression&oldid=1196324806"