Ekonomi Argentina

Argentina adalah sebuah negara yang kaya dengan sumber semula jadi, kadar literasi yang
tinggi, sektor pertanian yang maju sertaindustri yang pelbagai. Argentina kini dianggap sebagai
sebuah negara pendapat sederhana tinggi.
Malangnya, sejak akhir 1980-an negara ini telah menimbun hutang luaran yang
tinggi, inflasi sehingga 200% sebulan, dan pengeluaran yang merudum. Dalam mengatasi krisis
ekonomi tersebut, kerajaan telah mengambil langkah-langkah seperti 1. liberalisasi
perdagangan, 2. pembatalan kawal selia dan 3. pengswastaan. Pada 1991, kerajaan telah
melaksanakan reformasi kewangan yang radikal dengan menambatkan peso kepada Dolar
Amerika Syarikat dan menghadkan pertumbuhan kewangan 'to monetary reserve' secara
undang-undang.
Walaupun pada mulanya ia berjaya dengan penurunan kadar inflasi dan pertumbuhan GDP
yang semakin pulih, krisis ekonomi yang melanda Mexico, Asia, Rusia dan Brazil pada 1999
telah mengeruhkan keadaan ekonomi negaranya.
Keadaan ekonominya semakin meruncing pada 2001 dengan "widening of spreads" pada Bon
Argentina, pengeluaran secara besar-besaran daripada bank serta kejatuhan keyakinan
pengguna dan para pelabur. Usaha kerajaan untuk mencapai defisit sifar, menstabilisasikan
sistem perbankan, dan mengekalkan pertumbuhan ekonomi tidak mampu membendung
masalah ekonomi yang semakin meningkat itu. Pada 21 Disember, Presiden De La Rua telah
disingkirkan akibat rusuhan rakyat kelas pertengahan dan Kongres melantik Eduardo
Duhalde sebagai ketua negara sementara. Duhalde kemudiannya bertemu dengan
pegawai IMF untuk mendapat pinjaman tambahan $20 bilion. Tambatan peso
kepada dolar telah digugurkan pada Januari 2002, dan peso telah diapung dari dolar pada
Februari yang mengakibatkan majoriti rakyatnya kehilangan kesemua simpanan hidup mereka
sewaktu kejatuhan ekonomi 2001 (pada 2002 KDNK adalah negatif 11%, inflasi mencecah 41%
dan lebih 37% penduduknya hidup di bawah garis kemiskinan).
Pada 23 Disember, 2001, presiden sementara Adolfo Rodriguez Saa telah mengisytiharkan
suatu moratorium hutang atau debt moratorium di Argentina.

Menurut pakar agronomi Alberto Lapolla, yang telah banyak menulis tentang transformasi
Argentina daripada sebuah negara bijian kepada "republik soya," 450,000 rakyatnya mati

kebuluran di antara 1990 dan 2003. Berdasarkan kajian Institut d'tudes sur l'tat et la
participation (IDEP), beliau menambah bahawa setiap hari 55 kanak-kanak, 35 dewasa dan 15
warga tua di negara ini mati akibat penyakit yang berkaitan dengan kebuluran.
Namun demikian pada Januari 2004, keadaan ekonomi telah menunjukkan tanda-tanda
pemulihan disebabkan pertumbuhan dalaman yang memberangsangkan pada tahun2003.
Pembaikpulihan ekonomi negara dijangka berterusan untuk beberapa tahun yang akan datang
dengan kadar pertumbuhan dalaman yang konstan. Walaupun begitu, sewaktu perjumpaan
tahunan yang dihadiri ahli Tabung Kewangan Antarabangsa (IMF)/Bank Dunia, ketua-ketua
IMF, Kesatuan Eropah, Kumpulan Tujuh negara industri danInstitut Kewangan
Antarabangsa (IIF) yang diadakan pada 1-2 Oktober, Presiden Nstor Kirchner telah diberi
amaran untuk segera menstrukturkan semula hutang negara, menambah belanjawan
lebihannya untuk membayar lebih banyak hutangnya serta mengenakan reformasi struktur
untuk membuktikan kepada komuniti kewangan sedunia bahawa Argentina layak menerima
pinjaman serta pelaburan daripada mereka.

Economic crisis
Argentina fell into a deep recession in the second half of 1998, triggered and then compounded by a
series of adverse external shocks, which included low prices for agricultural commodities, [121] the
appreciation of the US dollar, to which the peso was pegged at par,[121] the 1998 Russian financial
crisis, the LTCM crisis and the devaluation of the Brazilian real in January 1999.[122] Argentina did not
enjoy a rapid recovery, and the sluggishness of GDP growth fuelled concerns about the sustainability
of public debt.[122]
In December 1999 Fernando de la Ra was inaugurated President, seeking assistance from the IMF
shortly thereafter.[123] In March 2000, the IMF agreed to a three-year $7.2 billion stand-by
arrangement with Argentina, conditioned on a strict fiscal adjustment and the assumption of 3.5%
GDP growth in 2000 (actual growth was 0.5%).[123] In late 2000, Argentina began to experience
severely diminished access to capital markets, as reflected in a sharp and sustained rise
in spreads on Argentine bonds over U.S. Treasuries.[122] In December, The de la Rua government
announced a $40 billion multilateral assistance package organized by IMF.[123] The uneven
implementation of fiscal adjustments and reforms, a worsening global macroeconomic environment,
and political instability led to the complete loss of market access and intensified capital flight by the
second quarter of 2001.[122] Argentine debt, held mostly in bonds, was massively sold short and the
government found itself unable to borrow or meet debt payments. [124]
In December 2001, a series of deposit runs began to have a severe impact on the health of the
banking system, leading the Argentine authorities to impose a partial deposit freeze.[122] With
Argentina no longer in compliance with the conditions of the expanded IMF-supported program, the
IMF decided to suspend disbursements.[122] At the end of December, in a climate of severe political
and social unrest, the country partially defaulted on its international obligations; in January 2002, it
formally abandoned the convertibility regime.[122]
The ensuing economic and political crisis was arguably the worst since the country's independence.
[71]

By the end of 2002, the economy had contracted by 20% since 1998. [122] Over the course of two

years, output fell by more than 15%, the Argentine peso lost three-quarters of its value, and
registered unemployment exceeded 25%.[71] Income poverty in Argentina grew from an already high
35.4% in October 2001 to a peak of 54.3% in October 2002.[125]
Critics of the policy of economic liberalization pursued during the Menem Presidency argued that
Argentina's economic woes were caused by neoliberalism, which had been actively promoted by the
U.S. government and the IMF under the Washington Consensus.[71] Others have stressed that the
main shortcoming of economic policy-making during the 1990s was that economic reform was not
pursued with enough determination.[71] A 2004 report by the IMF's Independent Evaluation
Office criticised the IMF's conduct prior to Argentina's economic collapse of 2001, saying the IMF

had supported the country's fixed exchange rate for too long, and was too lenient towards fiscal
deficits.[126][127]

Return to growth
In January 2002 Eduardo Duhalde was appointed president, becoming Argentina's fifth president in
two weeks.[129] Roberto Lavagna, who became Minister of the Economy in April 2002, was credited for
the ensuing recovery of the economy, having stabilised prices and the exchange rate in a moment
when Argentina was at risk of hyperinflation.[130] Since the default in 2001, growth has resumed, with
the Argentine economy growing by over 6% a year for seven of the eight years to 2011. [131] This was
achieved in part because of a commodity price boom, and also because the government managed
to keep the value of the currency low, boosting industrial exports. [131]

Kirchner administration
See also: Presidency of Nstor Kirchner
Nstor Kirchner became president in May 2003. In the mid-2000s, export of
unprocessed soybeans and of soybean oil and meal generated more than 20% of Argentina's export
revenue, triple the joint share of the traditional exports, beef and wheat. [128] Export taxes comprised
8% to 11% of the Kirchner government's total tax receipts, around two-thirds of which came from soy
exports.[132] Taxes on imports and exports increased government spending from 14% to 25% of GDP.
[131]

However, the import and export taxes have discouraged foreign investment, while high spending

has pushed inflation over 20%.[131]

An attempt by the Kirchner administration to impose price controls in 2005 failed as the items most
in demand went out of stock and the mandatory prices were in most cases not observed. [133] Various
sectors of the economy were re-nationalised, including the national postal service (2003), the San
Martn Railway line (2004), the water utility serving theProvince of Buenos Aires (2006)
[134]

and Aerolneas Argentinas (2009).[135]

In December 2005, Kirchner decided to liquidate the Argentine debt to the IMF in a single payment,
without refinancing, for a total of $9.8 billion.[136] The payment was partly financed by Venezuela, who
bought Argentine bonds for US$1.6 billion.[136] As of mid-2008 Venezuela hold an estimated US$6
billion in Argentine debt.[137] In 2006, Argentina re-entered international debt markets selling US$500
million of its Bonar V five-year dollar denominated bonds, with a yield of 8.36%, mostly to foreign
banks and Moody's boosted Argentina's debt rating to B from B-.[138]
In early 2007 the administration began interfering with inflation estimates. [139]

Fernandez administration
In December 2007 Fernndez de Kirchner became president. In 2008 the rural
sector mobilized against a resolution that would have increased the export tax rate on soybean
exports from 35% to 44.1%.[141] Ultimately, the new taxation regime was abandoned.[141] Official
Argentine statistics are believed to have significantly underreported inflation since 2007, and
independent economists publishing their own estimates of Argentine inflation have been threatened
with fines and prosecution.[142]
In October 2008 President Fernndez de Kirchner nationalised private pension funds for almost $30
billion, ostensibly to protect the pensions from falling stock prices around the world, although critics
said the government simply wanted to add the money to its budget.[143]Private pension funds, which
were first licensed in 1994, suffered large losses during the 19982002 crisis and by 2008, the state
subsidized 77% of the funds' beneficiaries.[144]
The late-2000s recession hit the country in 2009 with GDP growth slowing to 0.8%. [145] High GDP
growth resumed in 2010, and the economy expanded by 8.5%. [146] In April 2010, Economy
Minister Amado Boudou prepared a debt swap package for the holders of over US$18 billion in
bonds who did not participate in the 2005 Argentine debt restructuring.[147][148] In late 2010, the largest
new natural gasdeposits in 35 years were discovered in Neuqun Province.[149] The unemployment
rate in the third quarter of 2011 was 7.3%.[150]
In November 2011, the government laid a plan to cut utilities subsidies to higher income households.
[151]

By mid-2011, credit was outpacing GDP by a wide margin, raising concerns that the economy

was overheating.[152] Argentina began a period of fiscal austerity in 2012.[153][154] In April 2012, the
government announced plans to expropriate YPF, despite the opposition of energy experts.[155]
Rising inflation and capital flight caused a rapid depletion of the country's dollar reserves, prompting
the government to severely curtail access to dollars in June 2012. [156] The imposition of capital
controls, in turn, led to the emergence of a black market for dollars, known as the "dlar blue", at
higher rates than the official exchange rate.[157]
By May 2014, private forecasts estimated annual inflation at 39.9%, one of the highest rates in the
world.[158] In July 2014, a ruling from a New York court ordered the country to pay the remaining
holders of the bonds defaulted in 2001, which by then were mostly American distressed securities

funds, before it paid any of its exchange bondholders. The Argentine government refused, causing
the country to default on its debt again.[159]

Causes of progressive decline

The unique condition of Argentina, as a country which had achieved advanced development in the
early 20th century but experienced a reversal, has inspired a wealth of literature and analyses on the
causes of this progressive decline.[1] The Nobel prize-winning economistSimon Kuznets is said to
have remarked that there were four types of countries: the developed, the underdeveloped, Japan
and Argentina.[160]
According to Di Tella and Zymelman (1967), the main difference between Argentina and other settler
societies such as Australia and Canada was its failure to seek adequate alternatives to compensate
for the end of geographical expansion with the definitive closing of the frontier.[161] Solberg (1985)
noted the differences between the land distribution in Canada, which led to a rising number of small
farmers, and the small number of landowners each with large areas of land in Argentina. [161]
Duncan and Fogarty (1984) argued that the key difference lies in the contrast between the stable,
flexible government of Australia and the poor governance of Argentina. [161] According to Platt and Di
Tella (1985) the political tradition and immigration from different regions were the key factors,
while Daz Alejandro (1985) suggested that a restrictive immigration policy, similar to Australias,
would have increased productivity encouraged by the relative scarcity of labour.[161]
More recently, Taylor (1992) pointed that the relatively high dependency ratio and the
slow demographic transition in Argentina led to a reliance on foreign capital to offset the resulting low
savings rate.[161] From the 1930s onwards, the accumulation of capital was hampered by the relatively
high prices of (mostly imported) capital goods, which was caused by the industrial policy of import
substitution, in contrast with the export-led growth favoured by Canada.[161] Other distorting factors
behind the high relative prices of capital goods include the multiple exchange rates, the black market
for foreign currencies, the depreciation of the national currency and high customs tariffs. [161] This
resulted in a lower capital intensity, which led to lower rates of labour productivity.[161]
The ultimate cause of Argentinas historical backwardness appears to be its institutional framework.
[161]

In macroeconomic terms, Argentina was one of the most stable and conservative countries until

the Great Depression, after which it turned into one of the most unstable. [6]