Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 'Privatize' is doublespeak for 'Looting'. [View all]forest444
(5,902 posts)13. That was certainly Argentina's experience:
An excerpt from tales of woe from 11 years ago, before political gears were reversed and renationalizations began:
Privatizations were part of the formula pushed on developing countries like Argentina by the World Bank and the IMF, which provided technical and financial assistance to that end.
To overcome the debt crisis (mainly the result of dictatorship-era banking deregulation and bad debts), the government obtained special powers and tools from Congress, which enacted new legislation authorizing the sale of state companies and the capitalization of debt as a form of payment. The new debts only deepened the nation's crisis.
The large increases in the rates of public services, added to weak regulatory frameworks and constant renegotiations of concession contracts, brought large profits to the privatized companies.
Between 1993 and 2000, the 200 largest companies in Argentina racked up $28.4 billion in profits, 56.8% of which were earned by privatized companies, and 26.3% by firms that had ties to those companies.
In the 1990s, inflation virtually disappeared in Argentina; but utility fees rose in line with the U.S. inflation rate, constituting an additional source of earnings for the newly privatized companies.
The linking of public services fees charged in Argentina to the U.S. inflation rate "enabled the privatized companies to pocket $9 billion dollars by late 2000," stated a study by ARI.
In addition, "the privatized firms sent 70 percent of their earnings abroad," while failing to pay the annual concession fees and to make all of the investments stipulated by the contracts, the study added.
The companies also imported large quantities of inputs and goods produced by associated firms, contracting heavy debts in dollars while violating the law that required them to give priority to Argentine products when making purchases.
http://www.monitor.net/monitor/0401a/copyright/argentinaprivatization.html
Privatizations were part of the formula pushed on developing countries like Argentina by the World Bank and the IMF, which provided technical and financial assistance to that end.
To overcome the debt crisis (mainly the result of dictatorship-era banking deregulation and bad debts), the government obtained special powers and tools from Congress, which enacted new legislation authorizing the sale of state companies and the capitalization of debt as a form of payment. The new debts only deepened the nation's crisis.
The large increases in the rates of public services, added to weak regulatory frameworks and constant renegotiations of concession contracts, brought large profits to the privatized companies.
Between 1993 and 2000, the 200 largest companies in Argentina racked up $28.4 billion in profits, 56.8% of which were earned by privatized companies, and 26.3% by firms that had ties to those companies.
In the 1990s, inflation virtually disappeared in Argentina; but utility fees rose in line with the U.S. inflation rate, constituting an additional source of earnings for the newly privatized companies.
The linking of public services fees charged in Argentina to the U.S. inflation rate "enabled the privatized companies to pocket $9 billion dollars by late 2000," stated a study by ARI.
In addition, "the privatized firms sent 70 percent of their earnings abroad," while failing to pay the annual concession fees and to make all of the investments stipulated by the contracts, the study added.
The companies also imported large quantities of inputs and goods produced by associated firms, contracting heavy debts in dollars while violating the law that required them to give priority to Argentine products when making purchases.
http://www.monitor.net/monitor/0401a/copyright/argentinaprivatization.html
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
62 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Excellent post. That should be the start of a new thread. If you post it as a new thread,
JDPriestly
Jan 2015
#52
Righto. If you see "reform", "strengthen", "reinvest in" lock up the silver. "Healthy Poverty" is
appalachiablue
Jan 2015
#22
You can BET they're gonna try to "improve" Social Security under Hillary.
Spitfire of ATJ
Jan 2015
#49
I'm on Social Security, and that is one reason that I will not vote for Hillary.
JDPriestly
Jan 2015
#53
senior moment -- what was the term for hiring political supporters, before the civil service act?
unblock
Jan 2015
#10
Yep, Tammany Hall which lasted into the 20th c., with 1930s Fiorello LaGuardia & others. Thought
appalachiablue
Jan 2015
#56
patronage was what i was thinking of. piratizing gets around the civil service laws
unblock
Jan 2015
#30
It's also double speak for "zero regulations, accountability, oversight, or ethics."
Initech
Jan 2015
#14