China – Gaucho’s new best friend

I am writing this post from Montevideo in Uruguay, which is why it will be about…Argentina and Brazil - more specifically, about their economies. In the alphabetical order:

Argentinians remember the last decade of 20^th century with nostalgia - people could easily afford going on holidays to Europe or USA and buying good quality products from abroad was inexpensive. Life was good. Unfortunately, the same reason that seemed to have brought them prosperity was the main cause of the crash at the beginning of this century. In the early 90’s the government decided to tackle high inflation by fixing peso’s exchange rate to the dollar. Indeed, the inflation dropped quite quickly but cheap dollar contributed to significant increase in import, thus negatively impacting local manufacturers – people preferred to buy better quality and cheap foreign goods. However, if you spend more than you make, you need to find ways of financing the deficit. Argentinian government chose the easiest way – through privatisation and increasing already high foreign borrowing. This worked until the beginning of 2002, when Argentina defaulted on part of its debt obligations.

Argentinians lost a lot of money during the crisis - saving deposits were frozen for a year after a run on banks, peso devalued strongly. Unemployment and poverty levels rose significantly. Fortunately, the recovery came quite quickly, aided by high prices of commodities (e.g. soya beans) as well as weak peso – good for bringing tourists and for exports. In the recent few years Argentina has enjoyed a +5% annual GDP growth rate, but the overall picture is still far from being rosy. Growth brought high inflation –officially at just below 10%, independent estimates suggest it is actually three times higher. What is worse, the inflation would have been much higher had the government decided to put real prices on public services such as gas or public transportation. These subsidies are however a political hot potato and although unfair and costing the budget a lot of money, nothing will be done before October elections.

The bigger problem is of a structural nature - the growth has been largely due to high commodity prices and there is a need for reforms to build stronger foundations. Currently, abundance of red tape and numerous government interventions do not encourage investments. The other serious problem is scarcity of external funding – after the default on payments, Argentina has only recently managed to get access to international debt markets. Argentinian debts is however still graded below investment level, which makes any borrowing very expensive. The government still needs money to finance deficit, so instead of borrowing from abroad, it is increasing internal debt by raiding a state pension fund. Apparently it has too much money – if this is true, it is probably the only such case in the world. There is however someone a light in the tunnel. China, unaffected by the default, is happy to lend money on reasonable terms as well as invest - all as long as Argentinian commodities find their way to satisfy Chinese growth first.

China, through its appetite for commodities, has also contributed to the growth of neighbouring Brazil. However, Brazilians owe much more to good governance. Continuing sound macroeconomic policies of his predecessors, leftist government of the former trade union leader Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, has managed to increase competitiveness of the economy, reduce poverty (successful Bolsa Familia programme) and grow GDP at respectable and sustainable rate. In addition, unemployment of c.6% can only be looked at with envy by the Europeans.

Brazil, one of the four main emerging economies (so called BRICs), is also a world leader in ethanol production and home to world class companies in aerospace and mining. Its recent good fortunes seem never-ending – not only have they been granted the right to organise the World Cup (2014) and Olympic Games (2016), but they have also discovered one of the world’s largest new offshore oil and gas reserves, located 250 km from Rio de Janeiro.

How about Uruguay? Having two large growing economies across the border can only be a good thing. You just need to elect the right people to take advantage of this. 

Rainbow nation

The term Rainbow Nation was coined by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and then famously used by Nelson Mandela, who wanted to highlight a positive side of South African cultural diversity in order to unify the nation – an extremely difficult task after the end of apartheid.

I think the term is also a very fitting description of Brazilians and I do not just mean colourful outfits of samba dancers. With skin colours in all shades from northern European white to African black, this is a country where no (non-Asian looking) person will look alien. As a consequence, such diversity should mean the country does not have a problem of racism – in a world where everyone around looks slightly different, skin colour should not be an issue. Here is why:

The source of racism (apart from specific historical reasons like slavery) has to do with two things: the way our brain works and our ignorance. First, the brain: when we hear a piece of new information we like to put it in a context (why, when, where, etc.) – this facilitates memorising. As a result, we tend to remember better the information that already nicely fits the context and easier forget one that does not. If we are lucky the news will be accompanied by in-depth analysis by a well informed and communicative specialist in the field. Let’s face it, it only happens when we read good quality newspapers/magazines like The Economist. Rest of the news that hit us every day are in a raw and, often confusing, format, but our brain will still make an attempt to contextualise it. The problem is that it is unable to analyse profoundly every information, unless we make a conscious effort to do so. If we do not, it will grab the most simple explanation, using the available contexts.

Another thing worth noting is that we like to think nice things about ourselves and see negatives mainly in others. How many people really welcome criticism?

Now, minding the above - take this example: if we are white and see a black criminal on the news being handcuffed by police, the first thing we notice about him and the lens through which we will subconsciously look at him is the colour of his skin - this is quite obvious main difference between the two: we – clearly a nice person and the criminal – clearly a bad guy. This is a context. If he is white, we are more likely to think first about his social background, lack of education or bad role models in his youth - any obvious differentiator from us and, incidentally, another context.

The example above nicely leads to the issue of ignorance or, in many cases, simple lack of relevant knowledge or experience. If we have no previous experiences with black people, the context “black criminal” is created without any internal conflict against other contexts. However, if we have a black neighbour, colleague at work or even a friendly shop-assistant from local convenience store, our experiences with those people are likely to already be a separate context and the two will now clash. The strongest context (i.e. the one with more information) should then win.

Coming back to Brazil – if you have all colours of rainbow around you all the time, the rainbow itself will not be something you notice any more. Wouldn’t it be nice if all people were colour-blind?

PS. I have already written in this blog about how our brain loses against our gut, in response to the worldwide panic following Japan’s earthquake and its effects on the nuclear reactor in Fukushima. You can find it here. 

Locked

Bolivia is one of only two countries in South America without the access to the ocean. Not only however Bolivia is land-locked, but despite its very central location and borders with Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Peru, it also seems to be very inward-looking, sort of mentality-locked.

In mid-May I got stuck for a few hours in Quijarro, Bolivia’s main border town with Brazil. I was unfortunate to get there in the middle of the strike affecting local immigration office and was refused an exit stamp in my passport. No exit stamp by Bolivians means no entry stamp from Brazilians. I was accompanied in my misfortune by two young English lads (hilariously dressed in a style resembling messieurs John Travolta and Samuel L Jackson in the final scenes of Pulp Fiction), who had by then visited most of the countries in the Amazon basin. The guys were not particularly bright, but made an interesting observation – the only two countries they had visited where there was “something seriously wrong” were Venezuela and Bolivia.

I took a liberty of interpreting their observation as a critique towards political system in both countries, which are embodied by populist leaders (Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales) claiming to be political heirs of South America’s greatest independence hero Simon Bolivar. Neither of them believes in market economy and both try to promote home-grown forms of socialist utopia.

Chavez can finance his ideas with money from oil, but Evo is in a much worse position. Although Bolivia apparently has a lot of valuable mineral resources which could contribute to the economic growth of the country, the government’s ideological lack of trust towards foreign investors makes any extraction on large scale quite a difficult task - the country lacks financial resources and know-how to make use of what it has. The other potential source of income for Bolivians could be tourism. It seems to have it all – really high mountains, large part of the country in Amazon basin, picturesque salt flats, lake Titicaca and most importantly – it is really cheap. I have not however noticed any effort from the authorities to invest in touristy areas and make travelling a good experience, like they do quite well in Peru. Backpackers will always come, but they are not the ones who are the most valuable tourists (in money terms).

The Bolivian government promotes co-operatives as the best form of enterprise. This is the case in such industries as mining and transportation. It gives people job security but does not encourage growth neither leads to improvements in standards, efficiency or service levels. Bolivia’s largest border is with the biggest regional economic success story – Brazil, which until recently was run by a very socialist in his youth Luis Inacio "Lula" da Silva. Current Bolivian president Evo Morales used to be a coca grower and local trade union leader, just like Lula. This is where the similarities end - the Brazilian president led his country from one success to another, the Bolivian is not giving his country even the slightest chance. 

Travelling routines

I think a large number of readers of this blog know what it means to travel independently, but for those who are not familiar with the experience (i.e. who do not travel too much or prefer to buy organised trips) I will try to explain what it entails, based on my average day in a new place (basically every 2-3 days).

 Arrival

I travel mainly by bus – it is the cheapest way and the bonus is that I get to see nice, sometimes spectacular, views. South America is however a huge continent and a journey from one place to another often takes more than 12 hours. The solution is an overnight bus – a very pleasant and affordable option in Argentina and Chile (flat beds in Flecha bus below – 10 hours from Cordoba to Tucuman), a cheap and painful one in Bolivia, which has a lot of unpaved roads (e.g. 12 hours of bumps between Sucre and Santa Cruz). In the last six weeks I spent at least 150 hours just travelling.

Accommodation

Before the arrival I check hotels recommended by Lonely Planet and pick one in the centre. If the price is OK (max 30 pounds, usually much less, a few times more) and the room looks good value for money (I always see the room before deciding), I take it. I am not too picky – just need a clean place with a bathroom and some daylight; I usually don’t stay much in the room anyway. Also, I do not need to feel that I got the best possible deal in town – I am on holidays and not in a competition for the most efficient traveller.

I usually choose hostels (best are family run) or B&Bs, but opt for single room rather than a dorm shared with other 3-20 (depending on the hostel) random people. I need my space. The difference in price is often quite significant in local currency (threefold), but counting in pounds it is not that great. However, if I was travelling longer I would be definitely spending my time in dorms, particularly in more expensive countries.

Since I travel in low season there is no need to book anything in advance. Haggling unfortunately is not a custom in South America, but I would do that (have done) in Asia and Africa.

Sometimes the accommodation is not a hotel, as I use Couch Surfing. I will write more about this in a separate post.

Daily activities

So far I have spent most of my time in the Andes and tried to avoid cities. I like doing adventure based activities such as mountain biking, trekking, rock climbing, rafting, etc. These however usually require a guide, proper equipment and as a result need to be organised by an agency. I usually check 2-3 agencies and if the price and itinerary are fairly similar, I decide on the one looking the most professional. Sometimes it is more of a hunch, but it has not let me down so far. If I have a good experience I book with them again in the evening (in most places the offer in agencies is very similar and the choice is too great for me to bother looking for the absolutely best deal).

Obviously I use agencies only when it is absolutely necessary. Otherwise I would e.g. take a map from local tourist office, rent a bike or take a walk to a nearby mountain, lake, vineyard, visit a city, take pictures, etc.

Eating

I don’t use kitchen facilities in hostels to cook, because eating out is for me a part of a cultural experience in a country. Basically, I would rather have a terrible cheap room than a terrible cheap meal. Having said that, there are ways to have good meal at reasonable price - that would be empanadas in Argentina or going for menu of the day in Chile. Following the locals and not the tourists (I avoid eating near main squares) is the way to go. The highlight for me has been Bolivia, where I always visit local market to have a home-type made meal cooked by local women. It is seriously basic stuff, but genuine and tasty. I rarely see gringos eating there as opposed to many locals, which is a great recommendation and adds to the cultural experience.

Departure

The most efficient way is to buy the next ticket upon the arrival, but I usually do not know how long I will stay in each place. I am quite flexible with my plans and have e.g. spent three more days than initially predicted in Villa La Angostura and two fewer in Cordoba or Salta. All depends on my mood, weather, activities on offer, etc. One time I had to shorten my stay because of heavy pollution (Sucre, Bolivia), which gave me headaches. Anyway, most of places I visit are fairly small, so walking to the bus terminal is an easy option during the day. In bigger places you can often buy a ticket in the city centre via a travel company – it does not cost much more and saves a lot of hassle.

For the journeys up to seven hours I prefer to take morning buses (usually they depart at 6-7am), for longer ones I would take an overnight bus. My longest journey so far was 22 hours from Buenos Aires to Bariloche. However, with almost flat bed it was also the most comfortable. The worst one was from Uyuni to Tupiza (both in Bolivia) – bumpy ride in very high mountains in a small bus older than myself, three hours late and crammed with crying babies, lots of stuff that did not fit into the trunk and three drunken miners.

If the departure is late, I usually ask in my hostel if I can check-out a bit later. Usually it works and I was always able to leave my backpack, use internet, a toilet (sometimes a shower) and spend some time in a common room before the departure.

To sum it up, travelling independently (and even more – solo) is often a lot of work, takes an effort, lots of planning and requires good organisation skills (these improve with experience). It is however very rewarding, a great learning experience and I cannot imagine travelling in a different way.  

Of dogs and men

Choosing a dog is often a statement, but its behaviour can tell you much more about the owner - this reflection occurred to me while wandering the hills of Valparaiso, Chile. In the previous post I state my observations about Chilean psyche in comparison to their Argentinian neighbours. I think my dog/men theory only reinforces them.

Dogs in Argentina are as friendly as one can imagine and the sample I base my observation on goes in hundreds. Parks in Buenos Aires during the day are full of dog walkers – each of them with at least four dogs, but often with as many as nine. In my three months in the city I never saw any fight between the dogs; on the contrary – they walk in harmony and enjoy the day together. Same goes for homeless dogs – they approach people in a very friendly and trustful way, without fear and almost always wagging their tails. I will write a separate post about Argentinians, but safe to say for now that they are the most relaxed and easy-going people I have ever met in my travels. However, on a related topic, here you can read why I think Buenos Aires is the coolest city on planet Earth.

My observations of Chilean dogs (in Santiago and Valparaiso) are based on a much smaller sample, but the difference was striking. I was usually barked at or approached cautiously. I have also seen dogs chasing and barking at cars and cyclists – not something happening much across the Andes. I do not intend to draw any far-fetched conclusions from these, only, observations. Neither I am suggesting that Chileans are unfriendly or not to be trusted – dogs in Poland behave much more like dogs in Valparaiso, if not worse. I just think that the life of Chileans is more stressful than that of their eastern neighbours and the dogs end up affected.

To explore my dog/men theory further I reminded myself my experiences with the homeless dogs in Athens, which were roaming the parks in visible numbers before the Olympics. They were largely harmless and cautiously friendly but I was never quite sure how they might react – there seemed to be a dark side to them waiting to be unleashed in response to improper behaviour. Greeks, likewise, are really friendly people, but also very impulsive. At first, their way of speaking (voice and gestures) gave me the impression that they were always arguing and the exchange of punches was never far away. That made me feel uneasy, until I realised that this was just the way they converse. Coming back to Poland; it is mandatory to keep the dogs on leash and homeless dogs are captured and put in dog pounds – quite fitting for a country where the majority of people declare that a person they don't know should generally not be trusted. 

In pursuit of growth, or happiness

Recently I spent a few days in Chile – in Santiago, Valparaiso and Viña del Mar. This is not enough time to draw sound conclusions about any country, but after having had spent almost four months in a neighbouring Argentina, I noticed quite significant differences, which I would like to share. 

For a start, Chileans seem to be much more stressed than their Argentinian neighbours. I saw mainly tired faces in Santiago’s metro on Easter Sunday – after three full days of holidays! The other difference is how generally well, if not excessively, things are organised. Take Santiago’s metro; it reminds me of the one in Singapore – very clean, modern, efficient and with omnipresent signs reminding about proper behaviour: don’t litter, don’t enter with a backpack on your back, let people step out first before boarding the train, etc. Buses display information to passengers about the current speed, reminders about fastening seatbelts and telephone numbers if someone would like to complain about the service.

Chileans are rightly proud of the excellent transportation system in Santiago as well as achievements of their economy (recent growth of Santiago’s business district is really impressive).  The symbol of the growing economic power of the country is soon to be the highest skyscraper in South America (on the picture below, obscured by Santiago’s smog). However, my impression was that in the pursuit of growth, development and perfection they somehow lost the ability to relax and enjoy life. When I shared my observation with a couple of Chileans I was staying with in Santiago (hurray for Couch Surfing!), they concurred without the slightest hesitation. However, they quickly pointed out the mess that is Argentinian politics and worse economic situation of their neighbour. I take the point, but somehow felt much better after seeing relaxed Argentinians upon my return to Mendoza a few days later.

About leadership

Argentinian politics, complicated as it is, has one feature that makes it distinct from the traditional Western political systems – divided broadly into social-democrats and conservatives, with all the variety of names and seasonal extremists. In Argentina, the political system is described using the last name of the leader of the governing party – in the last eight years it has been kirchnerismo (owing to late Nestor Kirchner and his widowed wife Cristina, the current president) and before that – duhaldismo (Eduardo Duhalde). It all started with a gentleman called Juan Peron. Such was his importance in the history of Argentina that all current major political movements claim to be descendants of peronismo, regardless if they are more to the left (like kirchnerismo) or right (the opposition).

The majority of North and South American countries (including Argentina) have presidential systems, with one person clearly in charge. Europe, on the other hand, seems to be more sceptical about strong leaders (the history of XX century has taught us a lesson) and trusts more in institutions. This is why it is difficult for a European to understand the rock star/ prophet following of some of the American leaders like Obama (before elections), Evo Morales in Bolivia, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela or Lula in Brazil – their personalities seem to overshadow the office they hold.  Cristina Kirchner does not have charisma of any of them, but the same rule applies to her as well; she is perceived to be personally responsible for everything that happens in the country. This is a double-edged sword, but her PR machine is in charge to make sure people hear more about the good stuff. Photo below shows her smiling face next to the information about the regeneration of the old football stadium in Mendoza - something nice to show to local football fans before October elections. 

Buenos Aires is not perfect

I have established in one of the previous posts that Buenos Aires is a really cool city, and more importantly achieves this without trying too hard. Porteños are however more sceptical about their city. Trying to fit in I decided to compile my list of things that would bother me had I lived/ worked in the city longer. Nowadays, being a short-term visitor, quite relaxed about life and with plenty of spare time – they simply don’t bother me too much. 

• Services are generally poor and really slow; this is something Porteños complain about as well. Public sector services, restaurants, supermarkets – service is not organised efficiently and, frankly, hardly anyone seems to really care. On the positive note and to my great relief, broadband provider’s helpline turned out to be actually… helpful
• Bs As is a city for cars and nothing illustrates it better than thirteen one way lanes of Avenida Libertador (not a circular of any sort). Pedestrians are tolerated as long as they stay on the pavements. Pedestrian crossings are numerous but seem to be invisible for drivers, so one needs to be very careful crossing.
• The city is very green, but environmental awareness is low. There is no real recycling, unless you count as such poor cartoneros, who go through rubbish on the street and take away anything that can be sold. The most annoying thing however is the amount of plastic bags given with your shopping in the supermarket – they are really small and of poor quality so it is not uncommon for the shop assistant to put only two/three items in each.
• As much as I love the night life in Buenos Aires, the parties simply start too late. I attended a birthday party that started at midnight, although obviously nobody showed up that early. Also, there is no point going to a disco (boliche) before 2am – dancing does not start until 3am anyway.
• Subte, as the local metro system is called, is quite old and its air conditioning system is highly inefficient. I cannot imagine using it to go to work wearing a suit.
• Holidays. This is not very Bs As specific, but far the most important/ annoying if you happen to work here - you only get 15 days of vacation during your first five years of employment in the same company. If you change your employer, the clock starts to tick from the beginning. In some cases, if you take all 15 days in one go, they include weekends! This is pure capitalist exploitation; I did not expect this from a country that gave the world Ernesto Che Guevara.

This is it. Only the last point is a big deal for me; combined with the distance to other parts of the world it makes travelling a real luxury. The rest is just nuisance and I still stand by my statement that Buenos Aires is a very pleasant city to live. A similar list for any of the other seven cities I have lived in to date would be longer. Buenos Aires may not be perfect, but at least it is not trying too hard. Cool.