Las vivencias de un Palmareño

Esta entrada todavía no está termianda... pero aquí los dejo con un video de Palmares.

Contador de visitas: 4.800

¡¡Hemos llegado a las 4.800 visitas!!

Todo se lo debemos a ustedes, que conocen nuestros artículos y confían en que nuestros "posts" solo transmiten ideas novedosas y de calidad, que se publican en los principales medios de comunicación escritos y que son de gran ayuda para Costa Rica y el mundo.

Muchas gracias por preferir EyP. ¡Sigan visitandonos y no olviden dejar sus comentarios!

EyP

PIB vrs BIB.

Claudio A. Mora García
Estudiante de Economía, UCR
Escritor asociado de EyP.

Publicado en La Nación.

El PIB es uno de los indicadores más utilizados en macroeconomía para referirse al nivel de producto generado al interior (por eso es “producto interno”, bruto) de un país, y es aproximado mediante una suma de consumos realizados de distintas maneras.

De esta forma, medimos la producción (o al menos intentamos aproximarla) mediante la suma de lo consumido internamente por el gobierno y los agentes privados. Además, el consumo externo que se hace cuando la producción interna no alcanza para cubrir la demanda interna por artículos se debe restar a la producción. Porque se debe traer producción del extranjero a Costa Rica por medio de importaciones (M) que no fueron generadas internamente. Igual sucede cuando la producción de otros países no alcanza para cubrir su demanda respectiva: Costa Rica puede tener el supuesto beneficio de hacer exportaciones hacia otros países, aumentando su producción. Las exportaciones (X) serían, entonces, producción que no se consumió internamente, sino que disfrutaron otros países.

En resumen, el PIB es la suma del consumo del gobierno (o gasto del gobierno, G), el consumo de las familias (C), la inversión realizada por las empresas (I), y las exportaciones netas (que sería la producción interna que no se consumió internamente, exportaciones, menos el consumo externo, importaciones; X-M).

Hasta aquí, nada nuevo. Pero más de uno se va a caer de la silla cuando les diga que el PIB podría transformarse para aproximar el bienestar de un país antes que producción, y las consecuencias que esto traería son algo inquietantes.

Antes debemos notar que el PIB está conformado por dos grupos de variables: una que incorpora los consumos (C, G, I, M) y otra que incorpora directamente la producción por medio de las exportaciones. De esta forma se podría sumar lo que reporta alguna clase de bienestar (los consumos) y restar lo que más bien nos reporta tanto sacrificio y que a nadie le gusta: estar trabajando, las exportaciones. Nuestro indicador sería el Bienestar Interno Bruto (BIB = C+G+I+M-X).

Así es. ¡Restar las exportaciones!

Y es que ya es hora de darnos cuenta cómo es que son las importaciones la parte positiva del comercio y cómo las exportaciones la parte negativa. Imaginémonos por un momento un mundo de fantasía en el que para ir al supermercado no tuviéramos que trabajar, sino que mágicamente el dinero apareciera en nuestros bolsillos. ¿No sería esto fantástico, comprar sin tener que trabajar?

La idea con el comercio es aproximar a la realidad este mundo iluso. De forma que un aumento en las importaciones (con todo lo demás constante) no es más que un aumento en el bienestar porque hemos comprado más bienes; y un aumento en las exportaciones es tener que trabajar más.

Lo que el gobierno debiera estar buscando no es solamente nuevos mercados para aumentar nuestras exportaciones (y muchas veces una baja en las importaciones, para que el PIB aumente) sino nuevos mercados que paguen mejor las exportaciones que ya estamos haciendo y mercados con los menores precios de importación. De esta forma tanto nuestro indicar de BIB como de PIB estarían aumentando, y no caeríamos en la falacia de pensar que un simple “aumento” en las exportaciones es positivo. De igual forma que no es solo crear puestos de trabajo, sino que buscar aquellas industrias que paguen el mayor salario posible.

Hasta ahora lo que se ha venido haciendo es intentar aumentar el indicador de producción, incentivando las exportaciones. Cuando estuvo la discusión del TLC gran parte del discurso utilizado fue enfocado a un aumento de las exportaciones; y no fue hasta casi el final cuando los beneficios para el pobre consumidor salieron a relucir. Inclusive ahora que se pretende firmar con la UE y con China la discusión está tomando una índole exportadora antes que importadora.

América Latina parece sufrir del mismo problema cuando los mandatarios aluden orgullosamente al mejoramiento creciente de sus balanzas comerciales. Las estadísticas hablan: el crecimiento positivo de las exportaciones netas en América Latina parece no tener freno.

Y son, más bien, las importaciones las que pueden ayudar a aumentar el valor de nuestro indicador BIB. ¡No las exportaciones!

Este es un claro ejemplo de cómo muchas veces las políticas para incentivar un mayor bienestar están en contra de aquellas para incentivar una mayor producción.

EyP

Chávez el Terrorista!

Con asombro y estupor no pude dar crédito a lo que estaba viendo y escuchando. Hugo Chávez presidente de Venezuela, en su eterna diatriba contra la coherencia y el sano juicio, asestando quizás el golpe más duro contra todo principio de humanismo, abofeteando sus mismas creencias y lo que tanto predica de unión y paz en las américas.

Esta vez, ante el mundo justifica lo que las FARC, el grupo terrorista más sangriento de nuestro continente, hacen en Colombia, dándonos a entender que tienen un proyecto político, un proyecto bolivariano, como él mismo lo llama, y por eso se argumenta lo que hacen; no menciona Chávez que ese proyecto bolivariano ha costado la vida de muchos seres humanos, el desplazamiento de otros tantos, la globalización de la narcomafías y todos los flagelos que de ellas se derivan, sin mencionar todo el dolor y el sufrimiento que ha traído a nuestros hermanos colombianos.

Esta vez Chávez ha terminado de cruzar el umbral de la locura, más que un acto de incitación ante los Estados Unidos y Colombia, Chávez ha declarado la guerra a todos aquellos países que creen en las reglas de la democracia y la discusión pacífica y libre de las ideas. En las democracias dichosamente no hacen falta los rifles, las minas antipersonales, los secuestros, la extorsión y los horrores de la guerra, mismos elementos que Chávez considera necesarios para llevar adelante sus ideas y proyectos.

Todo esto se dio en el marco de la liberación de dos rehenes de las FARC ante la mediación de Chávez, pero a pesar de la alegría de los familiares, lo que hizo con la mano se encargó de borrarlo con el codo al dar estas declaraciones, y lo más sorprendente de todo fue ver como todo su séquito de esbirros y secuaces en el parlamento de pie ovacionaban la peor de las atrocidades de este presidente.

Hay otras causas que tal vez bien podría defender Chávez, como el proyecto que Oswaldo Payá tiene para democratizar Cuba, a diferencia de que él no tiene mas que por armas sus ideas y palabras; o la liberación del Tibet de manos de la China comunista, país que fue tomado a pesar de no tener por armas más que los rezos de sus monjes; ambos países opresores con los que Chávez simpatiza pero que su sesgada e inquisidora visión de mundo no lo deja ver las necesidades y luchas pacíficas en pro de la democracia que en los mismos se libran.

Mientras sigan habiendo personas como Chávez, seguirán habiendo guerrillas en nuestro continente, ya hubo alguien que inició de la misma manera, pero que enhorabuena fue detenido en la sierra boliviana hace más de cuatro décadas…

Jorge Luis Araya Chaves
Estudiante de Economía, UCR.

Jeff Dunham

Un poco de humor nunca cae mal.

EyP

Same as it ever was

Economics focus.
Jan 10th 2008.
From The Economist print edition.

What do earlier banking crisis reveal about America's travails today?

Illustration by Jac A DASH of otherworldliness is part of the charm of academic conferences. But this year's annual meeting of the American Economic Association (AEA) in New Orleans afforded little shelter. Reality gatecrashed the very first morning of the three-day meeting, the world's largest convention of dismal scientists, with the release of a report on January 4th showing that America's unemployment rate had spiked from 4.7% to 5% in December. The bad news made a presentation by Kenneth Rogoff, a professor at Harvard University, on the final day all the more timely. His paper*, written with Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland and part of a larger historical study, sets out some parallels between America's subprime mess and 18 previous banking crises in the rich world. For an audience recovering from a Saturday night on Bourbon Street, the conclusions were aptly sobering.

The authors show that, although details may vary, banking crises follow the same broad script. Each blow-up is preceded by rising home and equity prices; an acceleration in capital inflows driven by optimistic foreign investors; a rapid build-up of debt; and—immediately before the storm hits—an inverted V-shaped path for the economy, with growth first picking up and then faltering. The years just before the start of the subprime meltdown fit the Reinhart-Rogoff template remarkably well. Indeed on most criteria, the portents of trouble were more marked than in past crises. House prices rose more sharply in real terms. Equity-market gains were more persistent. Capital inflows picked up too, though they were already running at an alarmingly high level. America's current-account deficit was much larger, relative to GDP, than in a typical crisis candidate.

Given such ominous indications, what of the aftermath? Mr Rogoff was careful to say that the malign effects of the subprime mess might not be as great as those of previous crises. A great deal of uncertainty remains, not least about the scale of lending losses. Yet the precedents are worrying. In the 18 earlier crises, the average drop in output growth was two percentage points and it took two years for growth to return to normal. For the five worst crises, growth rates tumbled by five percentage points from their peak and recovery took more than three years. If America avoids a material slowdown, say the authors, “it should either be considered very lucky or even more ‘special' than most optimistic theories suggest.”

Financial-market lore has it that uttering “this time is different” is the easiest way to get laughed off a trading floor. When recession beckons, the statement invites still more ridicule. At the AEA conference, it fell to Alan Taylor of the University of California to make the case (in the spirit of debate as much as from heartfelt advocacy) that things might not turn out quite as badly as the Reinhart-Rogoff analysis suggests.

A crucial factor is the cost of the final bill. The average rich-world banking crisis in the Reinhart-Rogoff sample leads to recession. But this result is driven by the “big five” blow-ups (among them the implosion of Japan's banking system in the 1990s). Mr Taylor notes that the other 13 had little discernible effect on the wider economy. If all of America's subprime borrowers defaulted and only half of the $1.3 trillion lent to them was recovered, the losses of $650 billion would amount to around 5% of GDP—on a par with the smallest of the big five crises. If losses turned out to be lower, as most estimates suggest, America would probably get off lightly.

A problem shared

Another reason to be cheerful is that the subprime crisis does not strictly correspond to previous banking crises, where losses were concentrated on banks at the heart of the payments and lending systems. Although the banks are more exposed to losses than at first seemed likely, many distressed creditors are either overseas banks or hedge funds. That has costs of its own, not least damaging uncertainty about where exactly the subprime bodies are buried. But the scattering of losses outside America should export some of the economic harm.

And, of course, the Federal Reserve may yet save the day. Mr Taylor finds evidence from the paper's sample of crises to suggest that a swift policy response helps to limit the economic fall-out. In the worst cases, the average levels of interest rates were broadly the same in the years after the initial trauma as they had been before it. In countries that experienced only limited economic damage, policy rates were kept materially lower after the crisis struck.

These arguments offer hope that the worst effects of the subprime disaster may yet be contained. But the scale and scope of America's housing boom-and-bust suggest that problems will not be restricted to subprime lending. Falling house prices threaten the solvency of plenty of prime borrowers too. Many more mortgagees will be hurt by lost housing equity. The credit-market malaise is also likely to lift default rates in the corporate sector, causing additional bank losses.

And although the export of subprime exposure has helped preserve the capital of American banks, it has rocked banks abroad. The results are unlikely to be pretty. Mr Rogoff sought to stay close to home, as he was addressing the AEA. But, in an aside, he noted that some European countries—Spain, Britain and Ireland—fit just as snugly into the template of asset boom, indebtedness, capital inflows and economic woes to come. Given the reach of the housing boom and financial derivatives, he might also have noted that a pessimist would find it just as easy as an optimist to say that this time things are different.

Tomado de The Economist.

Kenya tourism, economy devastated by violence - CNN.com

SAMBURU, Kenya (AP) -- Lounging by the hotel pool in one of Kenya's storied nature reserves, Debbie Shillito sees one small advantage to the travel warnings issued after a presidential election here sparked violence.

"You get all the attention," Shillito, a Canadian tourist, told The Associated Press in the Samburu National Reserve, where only 15 percent of the rooms at her upscale hotel were occupied this week, leaving the staff at her beck
and call. Last year at this time, the start of the high season, the hotel was 80 percent full.

Elephants graze in Kenya's Masai Mara Game
Reserve on Wednesday.

Kenya, one of the most prosperous and tourist-friendly countries in Africa, has seen up to $1 billion in losses linked to the bloody turmoil following President Mwai Kibaki's disputed re-election, officials said.

In the days after the December 27 vote, riots and ethnic violence erupted from the coast to the rural highlands, killing some 500 Kenyans, displacing thousands, and prompting the Nairobi stock exchange to close and shops and restaurants to padlock their doors. Ships docking at the port of Mombasa could not offload their goods destined for Kenya and elsewhere in the region because transporters feared being attacked by militias who had set up roadblocks on some of Kenya's main roads.

The United States and Britain warned their citizens against all but essential travel to Kenya, where tourism usually brings in $900 million a year and is among the top five foreign currency earners. More than 5,000 tourists who had been expected to arrive at the coast this week canceled trips at the last minute, according to an official of the Kenya Tourism Federation who asked that his name not be used because he was not allowed to speak to the media.

"These travel advisories are what are stopping people coming here," said Jake Grieves-Cook, spokesman for the tourism federation. The image of Kenya has changed from "giraffes, welcoming people and stability" to "the lunatic with a machete sharpening it on the road," he said. "So we have a lot of work to counter that image."

Tourism's high seasons are December to March and then July to September.

"At the time when we had the worst riots, we had over 30,000 tourists," on the Kenyan coast, which has a total bed capacity of 32,000, said Grieves-Cook. "Everything as far as the tourists were concerned proceeded without a problem at all."

He said that no tourist has been injured or killed during the violence.

Shillito, who traveled from British Columbia with her husband, said friends have been worried about her safety.

"The news coming from this place may be nerve-wracking but I have not felt under threat," she said. "Without a doubt I am going to recommend Kenya to all my friends."

The effects stretch far beyond tourism. The turmoil also has driven up prices of staple foods such as bread, maize flour and some vegetables because of roadblocks along main roads. The transport problems also led to temporary fuel shortages in the region because supplies got stuck at the port in Mombasa. Kenya is the transit point for a quarter of the gross domestic product of Uganda and Rwanda, and one-third of Burundi's GDP, according to the World Bank.

Uganda at one point suspended domestic flights for lack of fuel.

The United Nations has long used Kenya as a logistics center for providing aid to neighboring countries, including Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Congo. Now stockpiled aid was being used for Kenyans who fled their homes because of the political violence.

Kenyan business owners, many of whom saw their shops looted or burned in the chaos, said they will try to rebuild.

"They've paralyzed me," said Francis Maina, whose three-year-old furniture shop was looted and burned. Only a few sofa sets with mismatched cushions and a few unfinished chairs remained.

He says he needs more than $150,000 to restart but he is not optimistic about getting a loan from the bank.

"When they see this," he said, pointing at the ashes from burned timber, "they will not give me anything."

Conservationists in parks such as the Masai Mara say they rely on tourism to keep the parks up and running. But even though no violence has been reported in the parks, and no tourists have been killed in the violence, tourists are still too scared to come to Kenya, officials say.

"It is hard to comprehend how quickly things went wrong," said Brian Heath, chief executive of the Mara Conservancy. "One day we had full occupancy in a couple of days there is hardly anyone."

Independent economist David Ndii says it is difficult to predict the full economic impact of Kenya's political violence, but it will certainly cut the 6.1 percent growth rate Kenya recorded last year. In addition to tourism, tea and coffee are key to an economy seen as the region's anchor.

"Even you if you restore calm, basically for the next couple years you cannot get the growth you had before," he said. "We are talking of shaving off 2 to 3 percentage points of your economic growth."

Tomado de CNN.com