Thread: Latin American Infrastructure: Changed Focus

http://www.latinbusinesschronicle.com/a ... px?id=3053

Latin Infrastructure: Changed Focus


IN: Experts see more urban transit projects in Latin America. Here the new Santo Domingo metro. (Photo: Dominican President's Office)


OUT? The Puerto Colonet port project is struggling. Here Mexican president Felipe Calderon looking over plans for the project last fall. (Mexican President's office)


The credit crunch will change the focus of Latin America's infrastructure projects, experts say.

BY CHRONICLE STAFF

Infrastructure investments in Latin America will shift from ports and roads to job-creating projects ranging from urban transportation to water, experts say. But, the region still needs to improve its transportation infrastructure, the top Fedex official in Latin America argues.

"There are a lot of projects on hold [and it's] impossible to get private sector finance," says Norman Anderson, president and CEO of CG/LA Infrastructure. “If projects are not already financed, it’s going to be rough going forward.â€

ALIPAC suffers from the "democracy of the street car" effect in which it is not possible to have serious constructive discussion on policy because of the presence of the vocal opinionated but uninformed. Although racism against the Latinos is not what motivates most of us there are anti Latinos here and there are ALIPAC posters to whom the concepts expressed in the book "Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith published in 1776 are unfatomable or revolutionary. The United States however stands to gain from increased imports and exports with Latin America.

The sooner that more jobs can get created in Mexico and other Latin countries which send illegal aliens the sooner there will be fewer net negative taxpayers competing with the Americans for jobs and burdening our Society with demand for education, health and other resources. The suggestion that the United States help Mexico with infrastucture finance despite sometimes coming from amnesty supporters is a good one as long as we get to choose the projects. There are projects which help the American consumer and exporter more than they help Mexico as a nation.

Infrastructure cost is fungible and our neighbors can use the money saved by our assistance to create even more infrastructure which will provide economic growth that will incentivize the job seekers to stay home or even return.

I hope they aren't expecting the US to fund it!!!

Who do you think funded the American railroad system or the barge canals? It was not us, most of the funding came from Europe. Likewise it would be in our interest for the US government and institutional investors to put billions into Mexican infrastructure.

A recent report from the Inter-American Development Bank estimates that a 10 percent reduction in freight costs in nine Latin American nations would allow exports to the United States to soar 39 percent on average, while transportation costs on Latin America’s imports would fall about 20 percent if the region improved its port efficiency to U.S. levels.

This is a wonderful assumption that exports to the U.S. will be met by consumers here as if they are not worried about losing their jobs. (Was it 3.6 million last year?) And it was only 598,000 in January. Does anyone not realize that American businesses are closing, including the mom and pop diners gone because the factory closed and workers are unemployed.
About the only products I can imagine that make a profit from Latin America are the habanero and jalapeno peppers, plus fresh-frozen goat meat, which will be purchased by the millions here illegally.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't that money borrowed, which meant we paid them principal and interest, rather than them giving us carte blanche cash?

As if what products the Mexicans and other Latin Americans could produce were not already being imported into the United States from outside. As though if the average Mexican laborers had incomes they would not import more. When I wrote my first comment on the article I knew what reaction to expect. One of the major sources of employment for illegal immigration are the businesses that are outmoded for internal production but wish to continue operating within the United States by using cheaper illegal labor. Illegal aliens whose children then burden our eductional and health system. Better to import than provide the laborers with services on our taxpayer dollars here. Two way trade is likelier with Mexico than with Asia.

On the last comment Vortex ask the British about State of Maryland bonds. There would be an expectation of eventual payback from the Mexicans but our own record is far from perfect.

Originally Posted by Richard

Who do you think funded the American railroad system or the barge canals? It was not us, most of the funding came from Europe. Likewise it would be in our interest for the US government and institutional investors to put billions into Mexican infrastructure.

I don't care! America is BROKE, the doors are SHUT!!!!
No help to anyone not AMERICAN.
Mexico has the richest person in the world, let him do it!

Originally Posted by Richard

The sooner that more jobs can get created in Mexico and other Latin countries which send illegal aliens the sooner there will be fewer net negative taxpayers competing with the Americans for jobs and burdening our Society with demand for education, health and other resources. The suggestion that the United States help Mexico with infrastucture finance despite sometimes coming from amnesty supporters is a good one as long as we get to choose the projects.

For years I have wondered why this wasn't the primary objective, unless, of course, this failure to invest in Mexico's infrastructure was intentionally designed to import cheap labor in order to facilitate the decline of the American middle class because of the unsustainable expansion of wealth. Perhaps all part of the grand scheme to lower our standards of living and accelerate the 'dumbing down' of American society?