When textbook macro pays off
Macroeconomics doesn't get much plaudits around now, but here is a real-life story that should hearten those who think the field is really broken. It concerns Andres Velasco, a distinguished macroeconomist who is currently the minister of finance in Chile, and who also happens to be a good friend, colleague and co-author.
Until the current crisis hit, Chile's economy was booming, fueled in part by high world prices for copper, its leading export. The government's coffers were flush with cash. (Chile's main copper company is state-owned, which may be a surprise to those who think Chile runs on a free-market model!) Students demanded more money for education, civil servants higher salaries, and politicians clamored for more spending on all kinds of social programs.
Being fully aware of Latin America's commodity boom-and-bust-cycles and recognizing that high copper prices were temporary, Velasco stood his ground and decided to do what any good macroeconomist would do: smooth intertemporal consumption by saving most of the copper surplus. He ran up the largest fiscal surpluses Chile has seen in modern times.
This didn't make Velasco very popular. Last November, public sector workers marched in downtown Santiago, burning an effigy of Velasco.
But by the time the financial crisis hit Chile, Velasco (and the Central Bank governor Jose de Gregorio, another fine macroeconomist) had accumulated a war chest equal to a stupendous 30% of GDP.
The price of copper plummeted 52 percent from Sept. 30 to year-end, and Velasco dusted off his checkbook. In the first week of January, he and Bachelet unveiled a $4 billion package of tax cuts and subsidies... Velasco’s stimulus spending, includ[ed] 40,000-peso ($68.41) handouts to 1.7 million poor families...
The surpluses accumulated during the good years has given the Chilean government unusual latitude in responding to the crisis. As a result, the economy is doing much better than its peers. As Bloomberg reports, "the country’s economy is expected to grow 0.1 percent in 2009, as the region contracts 1.5 percent, according to the International Monetary Fund."
And does good economics pay off politically? Eventually, yes. Five months after being burned in effigy, Velasco is currently President Bachelet's most popular minister.
Read more at Dani Rodrik's Weblog













Great post!
We need to see more examples like this.
April 24, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
The unanswered question ---
Whether strangling the Chilean economy in 2006 and 2007 and denying firms funds with which to grow was a good idea. Whether Velasco practiced judicious macroeconomics or kitchen table economics.
April 24, 2009 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also unanswered - whether Chile's economy was strangled during those years* and whether funds were in fact unavailable for firms to use for growth**.
But I see what you did there.
* The post suggests no - "Chile's economy was booming".
**No is also suggested in that the funds saved were government revenues, dispersals would have been in the public sector, and private financing was not unavailable.)
April 24, 2009 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The answer is blueberries. And good ones too.
April 26, 2009 4:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another obvious point is that many of the other countries in the region are less dependent on the price of a single commodity. Remember that a 50% decline in price is the result of decreasing demand, so more than 50% drop in revenues. And that the boom/bust cycle in commodities like copper has been going on for generations, so that anyone who couldn't see it coming would have been a self-destructive idiot.
Ahem.
April 25, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Love to hear a success story, the economic freedom of a lot of people depends on the stewardship of the U.S. Economy - apparently Chile didn't follow our model and it worked for them.
The intersection of politics (and by default politicians) and economics is why both are utterly broken.
I'm grateful we have an Administration that sees the Grand Experiment that is American Capitalism for what it is - a window into America's soul.
How we spend our money matters. What it buys and who it employs matters.
How long the money lasts - matters.
April 25, 2009 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink