Argentina’s public health response to Covid-19 was far better than Jair Bolsonaro’s disastrous mismanagement in Brazil. Yet as the two countries seek to rebuild, both are enfeebled by their subordinate place in the global financial system, a subordination that is threatening to turn today’s shock into a protracted crisis.
In the past few weeks, both Argentina and Brazil have hit the headlines — but for very different reasons. Argentina is praised for its early lockdown which, at over ninety days so far, is currently the longest in the world, and for its relatively low number of deaths and cases (1,043 and 44,931 respectively to date).
Brazil, in contrast, drew attention because of President Jair Bolsonaro’s dangerous dismissal of the pandemic, which he termed a “little flu.” His response has been swamped in chaos: his sacking of the health minister was followed in less than a month by the resignation of his successor, while he has also publicly fought governors who imposed a lockdown, and openly attacked democratic institutions by calling for a military intervention in Congress and the Supreme Court.
Indeed, Brazil is in the midst of a political crisis, and the total number of deaths and cases, currently at 51,271 and 1,106,470 respectively, is still rising steeply — making the entire region the premier Covid-19 hot spot. Even the official figures are now in question, with Bolsonaro ordering that case numbers should no longer be reported and data erased from the official site.
Despite these striking differences, the two South American countries are each likely to face dire external economic consequences as a result of the global pandemic, on top of their many shared domestic problems. The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) estimates a significant contraction of these economies for 2020: 6.5 percent for Argentina and 5.2 percent for Brazil.
The reason why Argentina and Brazil took very different approaches to the public health crisis, yet will face similar external economic problems, lies in the common role they play in the international division of labor. In a nutshell, the two countries are producers of agrarian and mining commodities
The goods exchanged on the commodities market, traditionally raw materials such as metals and fuels, and cereals.
for the world market, and have a subordinated financial insertion into the global financial system.
The Covid-19 crisis reduced the inflow of ground rent and caused an outflow of foreign capital from the region, worsening already existing problems. A global public health crisis has again exposed the weaknesses of capitalist development in South America, posing the need for deep structural changes.
While the current proposals coming from progressives both from the region and abroad focus on providing necessary relief in short order, understanding the structural roots of Argentina’s and Brazil’s current economic problems will allow us to see the need for a much deeper political, economic, and social transformation.
The role of Argentina and Brazil in the international division of labor has historically been to act as worldwide suppliers of cheap agrarian and mining commodities for the world market. This is mostly because favorable natural conditions (fertility, rain patterns, and temperature, among others) allow these countries to produce food and raw materials more productively and with lower costs per unit.
Given that the price of agrarian and mining commodities is set by the land with the lowest productivity (otherwise the price will not suffice to keep it in production and there will be unsatisfied solvent demand), the extra productivity of labor in Argentine and Brazilian lands becomes an additional amount of profit
The positive gain yielded from a company’s activity. Net profit is profit after tax. Distributable profit is the part of the net profit which can be distributed to the shareholders.
, which takes the form of ground rent.
Therefore, when Argentina and Brazil sell these commodities in the world market, their commercial prices carry a flow of ground rent toward these countries. At first, ground rent goes into the pockets of landowners — a class that, from the point of view of the valorization process, is nothing more than a social parasite. That is, it does not participate in any way in the production process yet still extracts a portion of the value created on it.
However, different mechanisms allow a direct (i.e., through the mediation of the nation-state) or indirect redistribution of this ground rent toward industrial capitals and workers. For example, export taxes allow the state to capture some of the ground rent from landowners and direct it toward industrial capitals through subsidies, and toward workers through social programs, among other means.
As a result, the expansion of ground rent allows capital accumulation in Argentina and Brazil to grow beyond the limits imposed by the restricted productive capacity of the heterogeneous and low-productive local industrial capitals (mostly small capitals that lagged technologically behind, and managed to survive by compensating their lower rate of profit through paying low wages and appropriating ground rent); whereas a relative decline of ground rent inflows means the stagnation or contraction of these economies.
In other words, a greater influx of ground rent provides an impulse to produce, which propels a demand for labor, and thus, growth in wages; whereas, when ground rent stagnates or contracts, the opposite happens.
Given that ground rent flows are inherently unstable, these countries experience sharp economic and political cycles. The history of Argentina and Brazil appears thus as a pendulum that swings from periods of growth embodied by center-left populist governments that adopt some degree of pro-working-class policies, to periods of contraction personified by neoliberal ones that openly attack the working class.
Given the role Argentina and Brazil play in global capitalist accumulation, it becomes easier to understand the effect of the coronavirus pandemic on their economies. For the most important impact of the crisis is the contraction of the inflow of ground rent. This appears first as a deterioration of external trade, affecting Argentina and Brazil both due to the fall in prices as well as the shrinkage of external demand.
Most of the commodities that constitute Argentina’s and Brazil’s main exports have fallen in price since the start of 2020. According to the central banks of both countries, from the beginning of the year, the price of the raw materials most important to Argentina fell 14 percent by May (7 percent lower than the same time last year), and those relevant to Brazil fell more than 3 percent from January to April (although they were still 3 percent higher than the same period last year).
When it comes to external demand, ECLAC estimates a contraction of 6 percent in the volume of regional exports. The fall of exports to China is estimated to be much larger (a decrease in value of 24.4 percent), and will have an important impact in Argentina and Brazil due to China’s importance as a commercial partner. In particular, it will reduce the purchases of iron, copper, zinc, aluminum, soybeans, and soybean oil.
Additionally, the fall in Chinese demand due to the Covid-19 crisis will affect the exports of intermediate inputs and with it, industrial production. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
This was established in 1964, after pressure from the developing countries, to offset the GATT effects.
(UNCTAD) projected that Brazil could lose $84 billion a year given a 2 percent reduction in China’s exports of intermediate inputs, particularly affecting the automotive and metals sectors — two important activities for the Brazilian (and also Argentine) economy. Manufacturing already showed important drops of production in these two countries in March, compared to the same month of the previous year.
All things considered, ECLAC estimates that the value of exports in the region will fall at least 17.6 percent in South America as a whole and 15.1 percent in Brazil.
The fall in trade will mean a significant contraction in the inflow of ground rent to these countries, and therefore in the capacity of the state to appropriate and redistribute it, which is likely to continue in the months to come. In turn, this will constrain Argentina’s and Brazil’s resources to implement countercyclical policies at the scale seen in developed economies.
The subordinated position of Argentina and Brazil in international financial markets is the other side of the coin of their role in global production. Their subordination finds an expression, first of all, in the difficulties they face to acquire US dollars or loanable capital denominated in that currency to engage in world trade (including importing necessary means of consumption and production), not to mention storing value. At some point, the need to acquire dollars exceeds their capacity to produce or borrow them leading to a limit on their growth, which is typically known as the “external restriction.”
The original trade impact of coronavirus is likely to be worsened by the subordinated financial position of the South American countries, which has already led to capital flight and a stop of external financing, further creating dollar shortages. UNCTAD estimates that the cumulative net nonresident portfolio capital (i.e., mostly short-term foreign investment in capital markets equity
The capital put into an enterprise by the shareholders. Not to be confused with ’hard capital’ or ’unsecured debt’.
and debt) outflows from Brazil have been the largest in the world in January and February, even though it considered only equity while for the other countries debt is also included. In March and April, the country was surpassed by India and Indonesia, but the outflows kept increasing, reaching more than $12 billion per month. However, in late May there was an incipient return of external flows to the country when Brazil issued five- and ten-year bonds at lower rates of interest
An amount paid in remuneration of an investment or received by a lender. Interest is calculated on the amount of the capital invested or borrowed, the duration of the operation and the rate that has been set.
For Latin America as a whole, ECLAC estimates that not only will there be a reduction in capital inflows to the region ($80 billion less compared to 2019), but there is also going to be an outflow of capitals from the region. Additionally, UNCTAD estimates that the region will experience the largest drop of foreign direct investment flows, with a reduction of between 40 and 55 percent.
As a result, exchange rates in Argentina and Brazil have already suffered intense pressure and have lost value significantly. Since January, the Brazilian real has depreciated by 33 percent (although it fell by 48 percent by mid-May, before it started to recover). The fall was so precipitated, that until early April the real was the third hardest-hit currency in the world after those of South Africa and Mexico. On the other hand, the Argentinean peso has depreciated by 15 percent, although the informal exchange rate has depreciated by 61 percent.
Given that the overvaluation of the exchange rate is the main indirect mechanism of ground rent appropriation for both Argentina and Brazil, a devaluation
A lowering of the exchange rate of one currency as regards others.
will further limit the amount that could be distributed to industrial capitals and workers. In a nutshell, this is because a devaluation raises the price of exports (a rise that goes into landowners’ pockets) while increasing the price of imports. More expensive imports raise costs for domestic industrial capitals that buy means of production abroad. They also push up the prices of consumer goods (many of them not domestically produced) for workers, lowering their real wages.
To contain the depreciation of their currencies, the central banks of Argentina and Brazil had to sell US dollars, leading to an accelerated loss of international reserves. From March 10 to the end of May, Argentina has lost $2.2 billion, while Brazil has lost $21.9 billion (around 5 and 6 percent of their total reserves at the beginning of the period, respectively), although Brazil recovered from its lowest point in early May.
In turn, the loss of reserves will affect the two countries in several ways. One problem will be repaying their external debt. This problem is particularly acute in Argentina, which is currently carrying out a debt renegotiation process that could lead to the country’s ninth sovereign debt
Government debts or debts guaranteed by the government.
default. The Argentinean external debt is mostly in the hands of the central government and stands at 73.6 percent of its GDP. This level is largely the result of the huge inflow of external debt during Mauricio Macri’s administration, which gave a fictitious boost to the scale of accumulation. In this situation, acquiring more external debt as a source of financing is almost off the table for Argentina.
In Brazil, nonfinancial corporations hold a much larger share
A unit of ownership interest in a corporation or financial asset, representing one part of the total capital stock. Its owner (a shareholder) is entitled to receive an equal distribution of any profits distributed (a dividend) and to attend shareholder meetings.
of external debt, which could lead to bankruptcies if there is no access to US dollars. For example, the state-owned oil company Petrobras is the world’s most indebted oil company, and given the collapse in oil prices will probably face severe difficulties.
In this context, acquiring foreign currency has already become more expansive for South American countries. The cost of borrowing for Argentina and Brazil has skyrocketed since the beginning of March. The Emerging Markets Bond
A bond is a stake in a debt issued by a company or governmental body. The holder of the bond, the creditor, is entitled to interest and reimbursement of the principal. If the company is listed, the holder can also sell the bond on a stock-exchange.
Index (EMBI), which shows the spread between interest rates
When A lends money to B, B repays the amount lent by A (the capital) as well as a supplementary sum known as interest, so that A has an interest in agreeing to this financial operation. The interest is determined by the interest rate, which may be high or low. To take a very simple example: if A borrows 100 million dollars for 10 years at a fixed interest rate of 5%, the first year he will repay a tenth of the capital initially borrowed (10 million dollars) plus 5% of the capital owed, i.e. 5 million dollars, that is a total of 15 million dollars. In the second year, he will again repay 10% of the capital borrowed, but the 5% now only applies to the remaining 90 million dollars still due, i.e. 4.5 million dollars, or a total of 14.5 million dollars. And so on, until the tenth year when he will repay the last 10 million dollars, plus 5% of that remaining 10 million dollars, i.e. 0.5 million dollars, giving a total of 10.5 million dollars. Over 10 years, the total amount repaid will come to 127.5 million dollars. The repayment of the capital is not usually made in equal instalments. In the initial years, the repayment concerns mainly the interest, and the proportion of capital repaid increases over the years. In this case, if repayments are stopped, the capital still due is higher…
The nominal interest rate is the rate at which the loan is contracted. The real interest rate is the nominal rate reduced by the rate of inflation.
of dollar-denominated bonds and US Treasury Bills (T-Bills), more than doubled in the couple of weeks that went from the beginning of March to the end of April. Since then it has recovered, but it is still significantly higher than pre-Covid-19 levels. The ICE BofA Emerging Markets Corporate Plus Index showed a similar increase.
Moreover, the large withdrawal of foreign investors from emerging markets has been particularly acute in equities, adding fuel to the fire in domestic stock markets. In Brazil, the fall was so precipitated that circuit breakers were triggered to avoid further losses six times in eight days. In this country, the trend had already started in 2019, when foreign investors pulled a net R$15.2 billion ($3.7 billion) out of the country’s stock markets.
As the threat of a balance of payments
Balance of payments
A country’s balance of current payments is the result of its commercial transactions (i.e. imported and exported goods and services) and its financial exchanges with foreign countries. The balance of payments is a measure of the financial position of a country vis-à-vis the rest of the world. A country with a surplus in its current payments is a lending country for the rest of the world. On the other hand, if a country’s balance is in the red, that country will have to turn to the international lenders to meet its funding needs.
crisis has become more pressing for both countries, several proposals have been floated on how to confront the situation — typically proposals suggest increasing the provision of dollars. It is striking that these debates are not as heavily focused on the national economy itself as they used to be. Rather, the international character of the coronavirus crisis has forced both right- and left-wing economists to take into consideration the global nature of capitalism and the need for solutions at that level.
Right-wing economists and politicians — both from South America and abroad — are advocating policies that mostly fall into three categories.
First, an extension of currency swap lines by the Federal Reserve
Officially, Federal Reserve System, is the United States’ central bank created in 1913 by the ’Federal Reserve Act’, also called the ’Owen-Glass Act’, after a series of banking crises, particularly the ’Bank Panic’ of 1907.
FED – decentralized central bank : http://www.federalreserve.gov/
, something that has been already announced for Brazil (providing up to $60 billion for at least six months), following an experiment previously conducted after the 2008 crisis. Similarly, the Fed started a repo lending facility with foreign central banks, including the Argentinean Central Bank
The establishment which in a given State is in charge of issuing bank notes and controlling the volume of currency and credit. In France, it is the Banque de France which assumes this role under the auspices of the European Central Bank (see ECB) while in the UK it is the Bank of England.
ECB : http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/Pages/home.aspx
, to loan dollars using T-Bills as collateral
Transferable assets or a guarantee serving as security against the repayment of a loan, should the borrower default.
Second, increases in International Monetary Fund
International Monetary Fund
Along with the World Bank, the IMF was founded on the day the Bretton Woods Agreements were signed. Its first mission was to support the new system of standard exchange rates.
When the Bretton Wood fixed rates system came to an end in 1971, the main function of the IMF became that of being both policeman and fireman for global capital: it acts as policeman when it enforces its Structural Adjustment Policies and as fireman when it steps in to help out governments in risk of defaulting on debt repayments.
As for the World Bank, a weighted voting system operates: depending on the amount paid as contribution by each member state. 85% of the votes is required to modify the IMF Charter (which means that the USA with 17,68% % of the votes has a de facto veto on any change).
The institution is dominated by five countries: the United States (16,74%), Japan (6,23%), Germany (5,81%), France (4,29%) and the UK (4,29%).
The other 183 member countries are divided into groups led by one country. The most important one (6,57% of the votes) is led by Belgium. The least important group of countries (1,55% of the votes) is led by Gabon and brings together African countries.
(IMF) and World Bank
The World Bank was founded as part of the new international monetary system set up at Bretton Woods in 1944. Its capital is provided by member states’ contributions and loans on the international money markets. It financed public and private projects in Third World and East European countries.
It consists of several closely associated institutions, among which :
1. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD, 189 members in 2017), which provides loans in productive sectors such as farming or energy ;
2. The International Development Association (IDA, 159 members in 1997), which provides less advanced countries with long-term loans (35-40 years) at very low interest (1%) ;
3. The International Finance Corporation (IFC), which provides both loan and equity finance for business ventures in developing countries.
As Third World Debt gets worse, the World Bank (along with the IMF) tends to adopt a macro-economic perspective. For instance, it enforces adjustment policies that are intended to balance heavily indebted countries’ payments. The World Bank advises those countries that have to undergo the IMF’s therapy on such matters as how to reduce budget deficits, round up savings, enduce foreign investors to settle within their borders, or free prices and exchange rates.
loans or grants to countries in need, and some cancelation of debts owed to them.
Third, the issuance of IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDR). All of these policies address (partially) the short-term dollar needs of the countries in the region. However, they do not challenge the current international monetary system and offer no structural change to global finance.
In contrast, progressive economists are typically calling for three different types of policies. First, they demand the lifting of US economic sanctions. These do not affect Argentina or Brazil, but they certainly impact other Latin American countries, such as Cuba and Venezuela. Second, they call for increases in capital controls. Finally, they demand cancelation of unfair debts and the provision of help to countries that seek to restructure their external commitments.
These policies also address the dollar needs of South American countries, while challenging to some degree the current international financial system. There is no doubt that they would be an integral part of any strategy to provide necessary relief to the region in short order. However, they are not an answer to the region’s structural problems insofar as they leave unchallenged the productive structure and financial position of these countries in the world economy.
As we have seen, the critical economic situation faced by Argentina and Brazil is a result of their role as worldwide suppliers of agrarian and mining commodities, and their subordinated insertion into the global financial system. Their international position was greatly worsened by Covid-19, leading to major economic difficulties. As long as policy proposals only provide short-term relief without radically transforming the international division of labor and the global financial system, the problems of both Argentina and Brazil will persist.
Rather than relying on old formulas, this moment requires left-wing economists to think critically and boldly — providing radical solutions for what are structural problems.