How about a variant of these such as placing requirements on the corrupt government to be more democratic and to assure that Mexican labor reap something from this debacle. This might even ring as a populist prescription amongst the people, which would be a first. Dan Epstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] In message <v01510102ab55a601a215@[166.84.250.86]> , You wrote the following: > At 8:09 PM 1/31/95, Andrew Sessions wrote: > > >Is there ant truth to the rumor I heard on BBC tonight that Mexico [read: th > e > >political-economic ruling class] was three days away from defaulting on "its > " > >loans? > > Three days, three weeks, whatever - Mexico would have defaulted pretty soon > if some package hadn't been invented. Mexico has huge financing needs, to > cover imports and debt service, and without fresh inflows, will have to cut > "growth" (such as it is) and imports sharply. This after years of sacrifice > and supposedly imminent rewards. > > So, if Mexico doesn't get aid, it goes under, in its prsent form, rather > quickly. The package must also end with a resumption of fresh inflows, a > pretty risky assumption, but let's forget that for now and concentrate on > the immediate deal. No package, Mexican bankruptcy. With package, a bailout > of fat cats and some medium-fat-cats of both nations. What's a progressive > economist to do? Root for collapse, and with it the beginning of the end of > neoliberalism? Or realize that would hold tremendous risks for Mexico and > its neighbors? > > Doug > > -- > > Doug Henwood > [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Left Business Observer > 250 W 85 St > New York NY 10024-3217 > USA > 212-874-4020 voice > 212-874-3137 fax > >
