Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Apples and Oranges? a Cross-national Comparison of Privatization in Argentina and Germany
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Jackiewicz, Edward L. Boggs, Jeffrey S. |
| Copyright Year | 1996 |
| Abstract | Over the last decade, many national policy-makers jettisoned autarkic industrial policies and adopted the neo-liberal economic solution. Neo-liberal policies, based on a theoretical framework in which the unfettered "market" acts as the final arbitrator in allocating resources, among other things, call for the privatization of domestic industries. Policy-makers adopt privatization programs ostensibly to reduce budget deficits, upgrade technology, and induce innovation. Privatization provides a means for breaking labor unions, disciplining labor and annihilating other public services. Privatization decenters the state and the labor force to the benefit ofcapital. Thus, implicit in the neo-liberal agenda is the total restructuring ofthe national social contract at the behest ofan elite group ofdecision-makers. This paper specifically examines the adoption ofand repercussionsfrom privatization in two countries: Argentina and the former German Democratic Republic. We choose Argentina and Germany for and even social contracts - profoundly influence the four reasons. The first (and weakest) reason manner in which national elites implement pertains to the authors' familiarity with these two privatization policies. We also argue that a state's countries. Second, data for both countries are relative position in the global economic order readily accessible. Third, comparing Argentina and moderates the degree to which national institutions Germany allow us to determine if privatization can ·soften- the deleterious effects of privatization programs produce similar results in economies with (i.e. massive layoffs). To develop these ideas, we substantially divergent political and economic highlight the institutions most responsible for proflles. The fourth reason is that both countries mediating privatization in Argentina and Germany, occupy different positions in the global economy. two countries recently undertaking extensive Germany, a dominant country in world economic privatization programs. affairs, is an important member of the global The authors contend there exists a trend economic elite. In contrast, Argentina, mired towards privatization globally. With the collapse of among the world's subordinate countries, is well the Soviet Bloc, the dominant development embedded in the global economic periphery. framework currently marketed involves restructuring Based on each state's position in the national economies so they superficially resemble international framework, Argentina and Germany the neo-classical general equilibrium model. It are only distantly related. It initially appears as if should be noted that this development framework, reunified Germany is a core state whilst Argentina which calls for privatization of nationally productive takes a peripheral position vis-a-vis the World Bank assets, abrogation of a well-knit social safety net, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). While floating exchange rates, and increased foreign true that far-reaching privatization in the former investment shift the locus of economic-decision German Democratic Republic followed from national unification, we argue, upon closer scrutiny |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://msaag.aag.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/8_Jackiewicz_Boggs.pdf |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
