Quote from southamerica:
.
February 8, 2008
SouthAmerica: Reply to Mvic
You missed the point that I was trying to make.
I am not comparing Italy with Louisiana.
Let me give you another example maybe you will understand what I am saying.
Here I am quoting from an article of mine published on Brazzil magazine in September 2002 â âCountdown to Armageddon.â
I wrote that article around the time when the economy of Argentina was imploding and that country was going bankrupt â and the Brazilian economy were being affected by the collapse of Argentina a country right next door and an important trading partner of Brazil at that time.
âIn January 1999, the economies of Brazil and of California were very close in size; each economy had a gross national product (GNP) of approximately US$ 1.1 trillion. Today, California still has an economy that exceeds US$ 1.2 trillion, even though energy deregulation went out of control in California and almost bankrupted that state. California faces a budget deficit of US$ 24 billion; a figure that represents almost 30 percent of its total budget. If California were not protected by the value of the U.S. dollar, because the U.S. dollar is the currency of California, then we would have a different story.
California is the largest state economy in the U.S. and the second largest is New York, which is about 70 percent the size of California's. If California were an independent country their economy would rank number six in the world in terms of GNP.
If California had its own currency such as the Real, then their currency would be crashing right now. Their banking system would be in shambles as in Argentina, and Californians would be crawling and begging the International Monetary Fund for a bailout. Interest rates in California would be choking any possibility of future growth, unemployment would be exploding, businesses would be going belly-up left and right and California with all the strings attached from the IMF would be headed to economic meltdown and political chaos.
Since Brazil does not have the same type of protection of its currency, you can see very clearly the result to each economy. In the last 3 and 1/2 years California was able to keep its GNP level even with all the economic adversities they had during that period. In contrast, Brazil lost half of the value of its GNP to about US$ 558 billion and its economy is on a free fall.â
As you can see California was a basket case not long ago.
.
You are wrong and evidemce of that is to be found in the example of Japan and the UK to name two countries that have sufferred similar economic downturns like California but have not had the consequences of a Brazil or Argentina. The reason is that the per capital level of production in these countires along with the sophistication of their financial system allows them to survive a financial crisis that other countries can not. In part it is because they are not economies that are largely built on commodities and low level manufacturing. In a downturn commodity prices act as a huge drag on the economy of a country that has a large % of its GDP tied to commodity prices. Contrast this with the high value added manufacturing and services (software, hi tech, and financial) that makes up California's economy and it is obvious why tryng to compare the effects of an economic downturn in a 1st world and 3rd work economy doesn't work. Its like comparing the economic value of cheap shoes and productivity software, it makes no sense. Infact you might even say that California might do even better with its own currency as it would not be weighed down by large areas of the US that are far less productive.
I think you are making the mistake of having a political bais and trying to construct a scenario to support it rather than looking at the facts first and going from there.

