THE CATO - One of the most repeated phenomena in recent history is the discovery of things that are already invented, such as the "new man", "the new journalism" or "the entrepreneurial state".

The recently published book The Myth of the Entrepreneurial State, co-authored by Deirdre McCloskey and Alberto Mingardi, reveals the fallacy of the discovery of the entrepreneurial state by Italian-American economist Mariana Mazzucato.

The successful author is an advisor to the United Nations, to the president of the OECD, to governments such as the Scottish and Italian, to the European Commission, to NASA; she has received all the awards; she has four honorary degrees, and a resume that makes the morning star pale.

And yet, in her most famous book, Mazzucato discovers, again, the squaring of the circle. That is why the work of Mingardi and McCloskey is so important, as they remember how outdated this idea of ​​a State is that, acting as an entrepreneur, benefits everyone and is efficient.

However, the occurrence that rulers should be successful industrialists dates back to the inspiring aristocrat of utopian socialism, Claude-Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon. In his Catechism of Industrialists (1823-24), Saint-Simon argued that the industrialists were the ones who should take the reins of the country since they are the most interested in maintaining tranquility, in the public economy, in limiting arbitrariness, and they are the most efficient administrators.

What seemed intolerable to him is that an essentially industrial nation is run by those who are not productive. It is not Mazzucato's proposal, it is the opposite, but it is from this seed that the fashion of the entrepreneurial state arises.

In the mid-nineteenth century, after the teacher died, Saint-Simonians like Michel Chevalier defended the free market and the company as a means to increase the power of the State. A rich country that pays high taxes will allow the strengthening of the State.

In this way, the government will be able to undertake, as an entrepreneur, large infrastructures. Not surprisingly, it was Chevalier who, in 1860, signed, together with Richard Cobden, the free trade agreement between France and England.

Chevalier participated in the creation of the Suez Canal and the Panama Canal, and had the idea of ​​building the trans-Mediterranean railway. He was a worthy disciple of his teacher, Saint-Simon, who had already raised the union of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, through a canal.

As Mingardi and McCloskey recall, it is from John Maynard Keynes that, after two world wars and a global economic depression, the need for the State to stimulate demand and gain prominence in the market is called into question.

But if we agree with Mazzucato and his many followers, and concede that investors, as Thaler explains, act dominated by biases; if we accept that society is childish and immature; If it is true that people do not see beyond our noses and we need to depend on someone to help us, why do we have to believe that government ministers are not going to act dominated by biases, they are not going to be childish and immature and go to look long term?

Above all, if we analyze the political decisions of our own Government, not in this year 2020, but for several decades, it cannot be said that they are the best leaders to guide anyone. What is observed is, rather, blind loyalty to the party over the interest of the voters, pathological short-termism, extreme superficiality and a lot of empty gesture.

This reflection comes to the case after reading María Vega who, in yesterday's article by her, in line with the ideas of Mariana Mazzucato, pointed out the lack of experience of the Spanish political class in the business world. Marcos de Quinto and a few others could be excluded. Indeed, the entrepreneurial role of the State is not without its dangers, because it cannot occur.

An entrepreneur, by definition, as Nassim Taleb always remembers, is someone who risks his skin, loses his money, gambles what is his. The bad results of business experiments by the state are not paid by the cause of the mess, neither in money, nor in votes. There is always a culprit outside the government's management that allows these holes to be covered. Mazzucato doesn't risk her money as Enel's advisor either: the gurus know how to get out unscathed.

But Mariana Mazzucato is not the exception, she is the most successful orthodox economist, and more so in these times. As McCloskey and Mingardi recalled, after catastrophes we must expect a growth in the role of the State.

Fear, economic weakness, and in the case of the pandemic, the unexpected and information confusion, are all factors that make anyone's knees tremble and follow the one who tells us that he will save us.

And there is Pedro Sánchez, who in all the media claims the victory of having brought the vaccine, an arrival that makes us all happy, but which is the work of the European Union.

If the president of Spain were Espinete, the European Union would have distributed it in our country as well. Another falsehood spread by social networks is that it is free: European Union funds are provided by citizens of the European Union.

As we remember Carlos Rodríguez Braun, Luis Daniel Ávila and I are all at the Treasury, darling, a book that will be released on January 20, the government propaganda machine deceives us into believing that we pay little and for our own good.

Of course, the arrival of the vaccine is very good news and I am optimistic. I think that little by little we will recover our pulse and that the sun always comes out after the storm. What we find when we regain consciousness, that is something else. Happy New Year to everyone.

This article was originally published in El Español (Spain) on December 29, 2020.

CLARÍN - Like its three Kirchnerist predecessors, the current government has a clear preference for rate freezes and intervention in the prices of deregulated products, staying true to its populist and interventionist precepts.

The government of the Frente de Todos clings to transitory measures because they provide it with a fictitious and circumstantial political comfort and is excited that they can improve its electoral performance. This transience has a deadline, October 2021, in which "anything goes". Of course, regardless of the serious consequences that the country will have the day after, win or lose the midterm elections.

The discretionary management of energy rates and prices has an interesting analogy with that used by the current administration in the health system in the face of the COVID 19 pandemic; It is endless, it worsens services, wreaks havoc on the economy and therefore on the quality of life of the population

Guillermo Nielsen's displacement from the “virtual” presidency of YPF would have been idle if the Government's intention to add the company to the electoral plan had not been mediated, transforming it into a de facto regulator of fuel prices, into a profit promoter provincial and in a government propaganda broadcaster.

Now, once again, the Government clings to short-termism, it is interested in today, in pulling and then we will see when that "later" is imminent, even if it does the impossible so that it does not happen before October.

Although the consequences are well known after the frustrating twelve-year energy experience of Kirchnerism applying a similar policy, a good part of the citizenry seems to have forgotten them after the improvements introduced by the Cambiemos government.

The sacrifice that the inevitable tariff honesty applied by the previous administration meant to society and the immense political cost it paid, were in vain. The substantial improvement of services, the reduction of the fiscal deficit from 4 points of GDP to 1.5 produced by the decrease in energy subsidies, the balance in the foreign trade accounts, the environmental improvement introduced by the efficient use of consumption before the price signals of economic tariffs and the huge investments in renewable energies are returning rapidly to the very poor values ​​of the end of 2015.

People had begun to become aware of what it costs to produce energy and were agreeing to pay its cost as in any country in the world and not do it compulsively via subsidies for what they do not use.

Until 2002 there was no energy subsidy, there was no shortage of electricity, and gas was exported. Rates were the lowest in the region and private investment flowed into the sector. The State intervened in the segment of regulated gas and electricity services through the Regulatory Entities, and concentrated on collecting stable taxes respecting the laws that govern the sector, thus generating a favorable climate for private investment.

In turn, the non-regulated segment, that is, with free prices, such as the production of electricity, gas, oil and their derivatives, was managed under market rules within the current legal framework and international reference values.

But, with the return of Kirchnerism in its recharged K4 version on the eve of the elections, paralyzing practices for the sector such as indefinite rate freezing, intervention in unregulated prices and breaking of contracts return.

The aftermath of this deja vu is already manifesting. The capitalism of friends returns, the statizing fantasies, the demonization of the concession companies, the regasification ships, the discretion in subsidies and the debt forgiveness.

Meanwhile, investment has come to a standstill in a dynamic industry that requires a constant flow of funds. Gas production fell to historic values, prompting a new state assistance plan for companies unable to produce at the frozen price of demand, thus increasing the pressure of energy subsidies that in 2020 reached USD 8,000 million.

Paradoxically, what this new subsidy will cost us indirectly will be much more onerous than paying the full rate, but they will not notice it in the short term and this is what the Government is interested in before the elections. Yes, the Economy is going to notice it given the lack of foreign exchange to import gas, the quantity and price of which will be much higher than the slightly estimated.

The volumes of LNG, gas by ship, to be imported this winter will increase due to the fact that production will be lower than expected due to the delays in the implementation of the gas plan and due to the reduction in the supply of gas from Bolivia as its production falls. As for the original price, naively calculated based on the low international pandemic values of about $ 3 per million BTU, I don't think it will be available this winter for less than $ 10.

Recently in Korea, up to $ 20 has been paid. So this year the country will need a quantity of foreign currency for energy, which we have and do not produce, of such magnitude that not even the unusual price of commodities in the countryside will compensate. While we continue to enjoy the fiction of "cheap" rates and prices, it cannot last long.

LA NACIÓN - "In a neighborhood of rich men, without weapons or grudges, it is only money and not love". That was the legend that the police found when they managed to enter the bank in the town of San Isidro that suffered, in its safe deposit boxes, what was called “the robbery of the century”, a general robbery of which this month fifteen years.

This is how President Alberto Fernández seems to be, without arms or grudges in a government of the rich, and not precisely because of his love affairs; at least according to his statements not long ago regarding the true robbery of the century.

A government of the rich that governs for the rich, who are themselves. They are the "rich men" who do not bother Juan Grabois or Luis D'Elía, those who have money that they do not hate.

The author of the phrase "this with Néstor did not happen", famous for so repeated in the channels to which the former head of Cabinet of the viceregal marriage went, this time he was charged with the dirty work.

The first task on that wish list is impunity for all those accused of corruption, for which it should not save on expenses, including - if possible - the displacement or neutralization of the Supreme Court justices that they themselves later appointed. of having displaced the members of the previous one with a stroke of the pen.

The task cannot be accomplished in any way, subtly or silently, for example. The hatred of the leaders demands, in addition to revenge against enemies, the humiliation of those who once deserted from their ranks. That is why the President must grossly and ostensibly contradict each and every one of the public statements with which he had recently censured the main actions of the government from which he had just emerged. One day the memorandum with Iran would become a solution for Justice; later it turned out that prosecutor Alberto Nisman had committed suicide; on another occasion, the union member Hugo Moyano would become an exemplary leader who unfairly almost no one recognizes; Again, the city where he lived at ease for years in his most expensive neighborhood would shame him because of its opulence, and, as always, the culprits would be the media, for which shortly before he had made a veritable rally to sentence that her former boss's actions were deplorable.

The denial must be crude, unscrupulous, without leaving a way out or a doubt that allows saving the honor of the word. That is the style of Kirchnerism. It could hardly be ignored by whoever had seen it from within.

In a story entitled “El illustrious love”, Manuel Mujica Lainez fantasizes the story of a single woman, underestimated even by her family, who had never left her home, but earned the respect of all by crying inconsolably in the middle of the funeral of the Viceroy Melo, whom he did not know.

The head of the Executive Branch imagines that he will obtain the indulgence of the campers for crying over the fate of the vice president, whom he does know. And this with the forgiveness of Pedro Melo of Portugal, who made a good government in the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata, since in addition to his efforts to secure the borders, he was one of those who promoted the paving of Buenos Aires, where even today he is buried. Has the opulence of the city then begun? With opulence and all, one day the plague arrived (Covid-19, in this case) and, with it, the opportunity to strengthen the presidential image. Or at least that was the dream.

But it occurred to someone that, along with the freedom of the usual suspects, it was necessary to promote the freedom of thousands of detainees for the most diverse causes, including crimes against the physical and sexual integrity of people. In this way, the shame would be complete and the anger, capital. In which ears was the noise of the pans loudest?

In politics, whoever acts overreacts. And that's how the expropriation of a grain company was also ordered. Who could not imagine that the silent majority would not see in those actions the advantage of their own confinement? There was no national date that did not summon citizens to the streets to ask for a little dignity.

"I was wrong, I thought they were going to go out and celebrate," the President excused himself when he revoked his own measure, as if that were an argument to promote an expropriation. But the people had indeed come out to celebrate; to celebrate the autonomy of their will against the fraudulent exploitation of the confinement.

And about the end of a black year, the negotiation with death. The exploitation of a massive funeral in the Government House, the uncontrolled and crowded crowd in the least suitable place for such a convocation and the absurd spectacle of a president wielding a megaphone to give predictably useless directives.

Then, abortion, a law that not even the former president wanted to be sanctioned when she governed (that is, when she governed as such), but that the current president wanted to hang like a green cock and show that he was winning progressivism to his mentors, among other reasons that will probably never be seen. All at Christmas time and shortly after receiving help from the Vatican for the negotiations with the IMF. A model of gratitude that will undoubtedly be recognized by the president even by the smallest of altar boys.

After that, the dark negotiations with doubtful vaccines, the accelerated efforts to prioritize them and the ridiculously epic tone infused to the transport trips of the vials. If those vaccines were to eventually harm the health of a significant number of people, it will not be the former eastern countries' closest friends in government who will be exposed.

Today it seems that an eternity has passed since the candidate Alberto Fernández was able to attract a part of the middle class to his campaign with the smiling motto: "We will return to be better." And yes, there are people who can always improve on certain habits. And since the habit does not make the monk, this time no one is going to throw bags in a convent.

The vice-presidential directive is today asphyxiating the private health system. When the middle class depends even on the government for its life, the stage will be almost ready to run to the supporting actors and represent the Venezuelan tragedy.

Meanwhile, in an effort to demonstrate his seventies orthodoxy, the President spoke out against merit. Microphone in hand, before an audience, he proclaimed that he did not believe that merit was what makes us grow, "because the dumbest of the rich has many more possibilities than the most intelligent of the poor," he sentenced.

Is it so? If this is true, the example does not seem to be Lázaro Báez, who quickly progressed from his position as a bank employee to having 1,412 properties, largely thanks to his friendship with Néstor Kirchner, the president “with whom this did not happen”, as Mr. Alberto Fernández himself said when it had not yet occurred to him that they could return to be better.

However, he must have had some foundation to launch that apothegm. Credit will have to be given. For something he became president.

INFOBAE - It is remarkable that someone has spoken of the “curse of exporting food”. If anyone is asked who gets the cheapest lettuce, would they answer the one who produces it or who buys it? No one would hesitate to say that to the one who produces it. Since in the country that exports a food, its producer chooses between selling it to local consumers or abroad; the internal price must be similar to the one he would charge by placing it at the border or port at the disposal of buyers from other countries. These, in turn, must take them to their own consumers; which will add the marketing, logistics and freight expenses. Therefore, those who buy them in the gondolas of importers will have to pay all those costs that are not paid by those who buy them in the exporting country. Conclusion, it is a blessing to be able to produce food; because that lowers the price of them.

The question is: why are there countries that import their food, their people can pay more for it and still have sufficient access to it, while in others that produce it, there is part of their population that does not have enough to eat, such as in Argentina?

Let's go back to the example of one person. Only a minority is dedicated to producing food; but that does not mean that the rest cannot buy them. That will depend on whether, by doing something else, they can generate the income to acquire them. The same thing happens with countries. Those that prosper have a good diet, whether they produce food or not; since what is relevant is to produce the resources so that its inhabitants can buy them.

In Argentina, some economists and politicians have made us believe that we are rich because we have many natural resources. Nothing more wrong. An apple on a tree can satisfy hunger; but only if someone takes the trouble to harvest it. If not, it will never feed anyone. From the beginning of this century, the utopia arose that the Argentines would be saved with “Dead Cow”. However, in the period of greatest increase in the price of oil in history, not only the interventionist policies of Kirchnerism kept it very dead, but they made sure that Argentina was one of the two countries in the world where, without mediating a war , the production of hydrocarbons fell.

It is no coincidence that the other was Venezuela. A country that is settled on a sea of ​​oil; but fuel and energy are scarce for its inhabitants, because nobody wants to invest there. Conclusion, that "wealth" they have is not such. Only investment and work is what makes a resource in wealth and well-being for citizens when they are made available. That is true for Venezuela, Argentina and any other country in the world.

An Argentine or a foreigner invests because he thinks that he has found a need that he can cover by organizing the production of a good or service at a price that allows him to cover costs and earn money; but that, at the same time, whoever is going to sue him can pay. Besides, of all this risk, he assumes the one to see how to handle it well. So there are many things that can fail and make you lose his money and effort. In Argentina, he has to add to it that politicians intend to spend insatiably squeezing them with taxes that they must add to their prices and beg that the consumer pay them or they will go bankrupt. According to the World Bank, the country is in 21st place, out of 190, among those that most taxes are charged to companies. Not only that, they make a report where they take a typical SME with good profit margins on sales and see what would happen to them in each country if it paid all taxes and fees. Argentina is one of the two places where it would lose money and some are scandalized by the high informality of the sector. If all paid taxes, most would go bankrupt.

If you still think that investing here is extremely attractive, keep in mind that most government officials consider that they know how to handle work or business much better than their fellow citizens. For example, they can make you lose money by freezing you or controlling your prices; because it suits them politically. Or force you to sell cheaper to some and not letting you sell to others. For example, the true owner of the export currencies is who produced the good or service that was sold abroad and generated them. However, the Central Bank has decided that this man is obliged to sell them to him at a much lower price than others would pay them, causing him to lose part of his income. Now, if a public body can order you what to do with something, that is no longer yours; which overwhelms the property rights. They have even prohibited importing supplies; which forces to buy locally a more expensive and worse one, making the final products also so. The list is long and, in fact, already in 2019 there were more than 67,000 regulations and, since it took office, this government has dedicated itself to increasing them by dozens per week.

Without investment there is no productive employment or the possibility of generating the necessary resources, not only so that everyone has access to enough food, but also to pay other expenses, among them the permanent waste of our politicians and officials. The true Argentine curse is the widespread belief that we are "rich" and we just have to redistribute so much abundance well by choosing miraculous governments that multiply the "loaves and weights." While the countries that prosper and are successful in eradicating hunger, they are clear that this can only be achieved with effort and investment and that these become more lavish the more the State respects the rights of those who work and invest, the freedom of markets and , in short, legal security. Argentina can be one of these countries, only if it urgently faces the structural reforms necessary for investments to arrive and we generate more opportunities for progress for all Argentines.

Get to know our Foreign Policy and Trade Openness proposals.