South American Union !

[Ronaldo+10]

Im not sure how much this has been discussed, but what does everyone think of the idea of a South American Union in the likes of the Eu ??? With the Eu expanding, this topic came up today in a barbacue with some friends. I know nationalism runs wild in some places, so i would like to hear the different opinions from other sudamericanos.

[Penarol1916]

Im not sure how much this has been discussed, but what does everyone think of the idea of a South American Union in the likes of the Eu ??? With the Eu expanding, this topic came up today in a barbacue with some friends. I know nationalism runs wild in some places, so i would like to hear the different opinions from other sudamericanos.

I don't think so. Things are just way to chaotic right now for something like this to get done properly.

[DanRod78]

Have you ever heard of the "Congress of Panama" of 182X. As I remember Simon Bolivar did this to encourage the union of SouthAmerica "because the monster of the North is going to swallow us someday(something like that)"

Guess who's the politician that has been pushing the most for the union of SouthAmerica in the last decade?????
Presidente Hugo Chavez de Venezuela
The same motherf...r that everybody (usually rich and powerful) criticize daily in Venezuela.

Why him? Why is he hated? blablabla?
Like my dad always told me when he explained politics to me "Divide and you'll conquer"

Why is it not happening.
1st. I'll give you 3 keys names: Uribe, Toledo and Lagos.
2nd. Since the US became a superpower, how many countries have united?(answer=0), how many have divided(answer=many).
It's easier for the US and powerful people of the World to go to a country of 1 million people, buy all the media and corporations and control the politics of the country as they pleased.
A good example of this is Venezuela, Gustavo Cisneros and the Mendoza family have so much power that with the help of people in the venezuelan oil industry they stopped the Venezuelan economy for 2 months to try to overthrow President Chavez.
Isn't that what happened to the socialist president of Chile in the 1970s with the help of the CIA and the big corporations of Chile?(answer=yes)

How do powerful countries stop us from uniting: Create chaos, fights, war, border disputes, etc.

If you want to know more, just let me know.

[CHILENOOO]

Have you ever heard of the "Congress of Panama" of 182X. As I remember Simon Bolivar did this to encourage the union of SouthAmerica "because the monster of the North is going to swallow us someday(something like that)"

Guess who's the politician that has been pushing the most for the union of SouthAmerica in the last decade?????
Presidente Hugo Chavez de Venezuela
The same motherf...r that everybody (usually rich and powerful) criticize daily in Venezuela.

Why him? Why is he hated? blablabla?
Like my dad always told me when he explained politics to me "Divide and you'll conquer"

Why is it not happening.
1st. I'll give you 3 keys names: Uribe, Toledo and Lagos.
2nd. Since the US became a superpower, how many countries have united?(answer=0), how many have divided(answer=many).
It's easier for the US and powerful people of the World to go to a country of 1 million people, buy all the media and corporations and control the politics of the country as they pleased.
A good example of this is Venezuela, Gustavo Cisneros and the Mendoza family have so much power that with the help of people in the venezuelan oil industry they stopped the Venezuelan economy for 2 months to try to overthrow President Chavez.
Isn't that what happened to the socialist president of Chile in the 1970s with the help of the CIA and the big corporations of Chile?(answer=yes)

How do powerful countries stop us from uniting: Create chaos, fights, war, border disputes, etc.

If you want to know more, just let me know.

I would say money and power always keeps us from uniting...too much nationalistic pride...etc.
BTW...i just wanted to add that the president of Chile that my venezuelan friend who I called Chavez earlier (i'm sorry), named was Salvador Allende....
He almost got it right, because he started out as being a Socialist...and midway through his presidency, he changed to Communism...and then the answer does = YES.

[DanRod78]

The powerful wouldn't allow, because the it would most people would benefit from it.
Just imagine for 1 second, that Southamerica was 1 country, Like US or like European Union or the Soviet Union.

Right away we would be a Superpower. I have no doubt about it.

If you don't think so, I recommend you reading about the "Quebec province" of Canada. I read that if they separated from the rest of Canada that is a bunch of waistland, they would be one of the powerful countries of the World.

[LMvCP]

nothing wrong with being patriotic.

you can still progress and keep your boundries. The problem lies with class structure, lack of transparency, and open corruptive practices.

The spanish influence is not only limted to language, religion, architecture, customs. We as Latin Americans got the bad seeds from the Spanish as well. If you think about it, the latin culture and language is so organized that labels, titles, and class structure do as much good as they do bad. Go to any Latin country or country with latin influence, you will see that structure. In thoery is logical, but in modern times its impractical. The point is, those titles & labels restrict and detain progress. For example, I can go to Mexico, over there I am refered to as Licenciado X. All my family are refered to as Licenciados, Ingenerio, Doctor, Su Señoria (i have a couple uncles that are judges), etc. IF you dont have those, you dont get far. Where as in most nordic and/or anglo nations, you dont see that. Its there to an extent, but its not as crippling.

As far as transparency, procedures and documentation have to be accounted for and striaght across the board for everyone. An example is that one of my buddies enlisted in the navy as was in Monteviedo for a while. He was telling me that he was trying to get a driver's license in Uruguay. He told me that one of his native friends told him he had to bring X items with him to get his license. His friend even gave him a sheet of paper by the department on what was needed. When he got there, totally different. They tried to make it more complex, fees for this and the other. Im sure that its like that in many other latin countries as well.

Corruptive... well that kind of coincides with transparency, but just different practices.

And when you read between the lines, it has to do with trust. I remember a couple months back, they had a poll in Mexico and asked if they trusted thier government, like 70% said they did not trust them. Thats not acceptable

Kind of off topic

By no means im a trying to insult the spanish, but its just a reality and every latin country did get those tendencies. My pops was in Equatorial Guinea. For those of you that dont know, thats was a spanish colony in Africa. well, its not spanish, but the influence is there. My pops calls me about 2-3 days after he was there. And he tells me the country is a real shyt hole. the ugliest place he has ever been to. The people are real nice. So, his chuaffer was giving him the tour of Malabo (the capital) and just a real crap hole. THe chuaffer kind of suspected that my pops was not real enthused by the city. And the driver said to him, "Sir, this place use to be a lot nicer. I know it sounds bad, but the country was a lot better off and cleaner when the spanish were in control."

Well, pops didnt say anything, but just kind of luaghed to himself, because he knows what the spanish influece has done to Mexico and most Latin countries he has lived in and worked in. But what he couldnt understand is that country has recently found oil deposits and since 1995 or so they have been making billions. And for 90+% of the population which is like 300K to be below poverty levels.. just speaks of thier corruptive practices.

[JuanArango82]

I know for sure that the president of Ecuador and Brazil are up to it. The only problem is Toledo he is just an American is disguise. If by some miracle Fujimori comes back we could start of a Merconorte union which could slowly become a South American Union.

I won't be easy because some countries are satisfied with their U.S. blanket.

[Saltenya94]

nothing wrong with being patriotic.

you can still progress and keep your boundries. The problem lies with class structure, lack of transparency, and open corruptive practices.


Isn't the real problem too many people and not enough jobs?

Sure the corruption from the governments to the police is sadly, part of the culture in S.A. If it went away ppl would ask, "where did it go?" Some might even miss thier old friend and start crying, but rdl674 why does Corruption not happen as you put it in, "[N]ordic and/or anglo nations." From what I know the answer lies with the problem, but I'll wait for others to put thier 2 cents on this one as well.

On the problem of lack of jobs + lack of resources for its ppl:

the Chinese government as you're all probably aware isn't too thrilled of their huge populations esp. in the country side, when put in the context of their resources....

If you have one child they can’t do anything about it... BUT if you have two children, three children, four,etc. you get the bajesus taxed out you, in which case today most families have only one child. (and yes I'm aware of the male/female child thing - but that's for another topic)

As a result today, Chinese children each have more resources spent on each child individually, then one generation ago.** Possible b/c now resources aren't stretched so thin. This of course is a no-brainer each child wins. The family is forced to have their one child succeed, whether it be economically, socially or physically.

By not having 7-9 children, with 3-4 success cases and 4-5 "oh there just bumming around" the country wins, because they have more ppl making $$$ and less ppl bumming around in seedy bars + unemployment checks, i.e. sucking thier resources. ((**This is by percentage, not $GDP))

Now, another thing to consider is POPPULATION!!!

according to the http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/daily/graphics/EU_043004.html it is quite obvious what Europe is trying to do with the EU, as they've put it bluntly, compete with the US and Asia, by looking at the charts of their 10 new member nations (as you can see your patriotism is still in tact).

"The European Union grows from 15 member countries to 25 on Saturday, with 74 million more people coming in to its fold. Eight of the new members are in Eastern Europe and many have higher unemployment rates, lower average incomes and generally lower living standards" -W.P.

THINGS TO CONSIDER:
By adding 74 M. (M.* = million) to their pre-Saturday pop. of 381 M. = The EU now has 455 M. ppl.

The EU now has 164 M. more people than the US, but
830 M. less than China, and
594 M. less ppl than India.

Now according to these numbers (from cia.gov) if South America added its pop.s together.

38,740,807 (2003) - Argentina
8,586,443 (2003) - Bolivia
182,032,604 (2003) - Brazil
41,662,073 (2003) - Colombia
15,665,216 (2003) - Chile
13,710,234 (2003) - Ecuador
28,409,897 (2003) - Peru
6,036,900 (2003) - Paraguay
24,654,694 (2003) - Venezuela

= 359,498,868 (2003) - Combined S.A. population.

If you're still not sure why big populations can help a country go to the library and look up "Supply and Demand" in an economic book and then look at China and the US as examples.

Also I'm all for a S.A. Union - S.A leaders are no idiots - they no what's going on in Europe, but how can you get the richer countries in S.A. to take the poorer countries debt? What's in it for them?

In Europe, they realized that if the US and Asia kept taking advantage of them economically, all thier success post WWII would wither away.

Sure we can't think like "us" for this to happen. A S.A.U. has to be a win-win situation for the cattle-rancher in Argentina, the miner in Bolivia, the Docker in Peru, the scientist in Chile, etc... But if South American republics loose more money bynot joining as a Union than by joining, it will happen. After all, this was what got the wheel rollin' for the EU to take place.

Right now, the countries individually owe too much money, and someone is going to have to carry the whole continent on its back till things even out. Like Germany did in the EU. But - what's in it for them?

The other question to ask in the EU picture is what did Germany get out if it? Many would say they lost a lot, but others would diagree. What did G.B. get out of - putting one foot in the EU and keeping one foot out ? And does every country in the EU - including the new members have a chance of being another "Irish Miracle"? Which gained so much from the EU. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59736-2004May1.html
If this can happen is S.A. - I'm all for it. But if they're not ready, they're not ready.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59736-2004May1.html

[DanRod78]

I believe that the rich countries in South America are Venezuela, Brasil and Argentina and I also believe that this are the countries that are pushing for the union of South America.

As far as I know, the US WILL ALWAYS do everything that they can to stop this dream from happening.

I know of at list one clear way that they are trying to stop this, and its called "Plan Colombia".
Did you know that when Colombia got the millions of dollars from US, part of the requirement to get the money was for the colombian government to meet 5 human right requirement.
The colombian government weren't meeting any of the 5 requirements, so Bill Clinton vetoed that requirement and Colombia got their money.
Most of the money is used in military things to fight "the terrorists" in Colombia.

I see the situation as throwing fuel on fire. And I really think that the reason for doing this is that Venezuela and Colombia are the two countries in South America that are more likely to unite since they were a country before (besides oil).

[Ricky_DCU]

Now according to these numbers (from cia.gov) if South America added its pop.s together.

38,740,807 (2003) - Argentina
8,586,443 (2003) - Bolivia
182,032,604 (2003) - Brazil
41,662,073 (2003) - Colombia
15,665,216 (2003) - Chile
13,710,234 (2003) - Ecuador
28,409,897 (2003) - Peru
6,036,900 (2003) - Paraguay
24,654,694 (2003) - Venezuela

= 359,498,868 (2003) - Combined S.A. population.


I think you forgot Uruguay, so that would be another 3.5 million or so.

As for the claim in an earlier post that Quebec would be a great power if it separated from Canada, I don't buy that. Quebec's population is about 8 million- or the same as Sweden (with a lower per capita GDP). The rest of Canada has about 24 million (for 32 million total)- and I don't think most people would classify the rest of Canada as a wasteland.

[LMvCP]

Isn't the real problem too many people and not enough jobs?

Did you know those problems go hand in hand. How is it that nordic and anglo countries have fewer children? Not all of it has to do with women being in the workforce either.

Its not that simple.

The birth rate has gone down in Latin America as a whole the past 30 years. Part of that has to do with better education and against the will of the Catholic Church. Im not just pinning the Catholic church hear, most Christian churches have always been hesitant to face modern problems.

Sure the corruption from the governments to the police is sadly, part of the culture in S.A. If it went away ppl would ask, "where did it go?" Some might even miss thier old friend and start crying, but rdl674 why does Corruption not happen as you put it in, "[N]ordic and/or anglo nations." From what I know the answer lies with the problem, but I'll wait for others to put thier 2 cents on this one as well.

I'm not referring to the slap-in-the-hand corruptive practices that police officers perform on a dialy basis.

I never said that corruptive practives dont happen in nordic and/or anglo countries. They do, but in different, shapes and forms.

On the problem of lack of jobs + lack of resources for its ppl:

creating jobs is not that easy. To create jobs requires trust from domestic and international investors. And in orderto have trust, a country needs to show transparency. Make sure that everything is accounted for, make sure that all procedures and documentations are the same for everyone. Enforce corruptive practices.

How is it that Latin American Presidents leave their offices a lot richer than when they went in? In Mexico, if all profits from Petroleum, Minings, etc were accounted for, we would not be in our current position with a poverty level of 30%, but unfortunately, not all proceeds can be accounted for.

A long time ago, many couldnt get past a high school education in Mexico, today, there are more college educated people per capita than in the United States. All those people fighting and moving for education for their kids.. my respects to them. But now what? I say this because you just say we dont have jobs. Okay... give them a job and then what???? tax the shyt out of them? get the politicians even more greedy by taxing thier natural liberties?

And thats one thing that gets me, per capita we have more college educated people than most "developed" countries, but yet we are not fully developed country. That is suppose to mean that we are smarter and should be able to solve problems. But yet, what good is a piece of paper saying you studied this and that if the resources are not there because they cant be accounted for.

I remember a couple years back, we were driving in Mexico on a family vacation. And we crossed this railroad crossing. To my "surprise" a train was going and we were stopped. But they didnt have the flashing lights, the red and white post. I asked my pops if they didnt have that type of stuff in Mexico. My pops says they do. So i asked him why they didnt have it. He said, to keep money, but I assure you that crossing posts and lights were in the plans.

THINGS TO CONSIDER:
By adding 74 M. (M.* = million) to their pre-Saturday pop. of 381 M. = The EU now has 455 M. ppl.

The EU now has 164 M. more people than the US, but
830 M. less than China, and
594 M. less ppl than India.

Now according to these numbers (from cia.gov) if South America added its pop.s together.

= 359,498,868 (2003) - Combined S.A. population.

dont forget surinam and the other 2 little minows

[megapolemico]

38,740,807 (2003) - Argentina
8,586,443 (2003) - Bolivia
182,032,604 (2003) - Brazil
41,662,073 (2003) - Colombia
15,665,216 (2003) - Chile
13,710,234 (2003) - Ecuador
28,409,897 (2003) - Peru
6,036,900 (2003) - Paraguay
24,654,694 (2003) - Venezuela

= 359,498,868 (2003) - Combined S.A. population.

Besides Uruguay you're also forgetin Guyana, Surinam and the French Guyana. That's just gettin technical tough, if such union would exist I doubt they would be included. They never get in with us in anything anyway. Just look at Conmebol. And they're in neither Mercosur nor CAN also

[Saltenya94]

Oops, can't believe I forgot Uruguay, apologies to all the Uruguayans. From msn.com/encarta. and as it turns out French Guiana is part of the EU!

"South America has a 2004 estimated population of 369 million, or 6 percent of the world's people. The continent comprises 12 nations. Ten of the countries are Latin: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Two of the nations are former dependencies: Guyana, of the United Kingdom, and Suriname, of The Netherlands. "

South America also includes French Guiana, an overseas department of France. "
From http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761574914/South_America.html#p2

"As part of France, French Guiana is part of the European Union, the largest part (in area) outside Europe, and the only part outside Europe that is not an island." http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/French%20Guiana

So tecnically, French Guiana, couldn't be part of any S.A.U. because they already uses the Euro, http://www.zone.ee/karello/coincollection/europe/euro/
and is the launching site of the EU space program.

rdl674, you bring up some good points, most of which I agree. Your point of a declining birth rate in the Americas - gives me much hope. When I brought up China I didn't nescarilly say what worked for China would work for South America. Nor did I say it was the soultion to Latin America's woes. I just said that the governments and its people have to come up with some realistic economic goals together. Esp. when put in the context of what sells and for How much to the spenders of the world. To explain I'll use....

The coffee drinking, Toyota driving, Viagara using Portland male as an example:

Like I was telling someone over dinner. If a person in oh let's say, Portland, OR. buys a 13 oz. can of Coffee (made with Colombian coffee beans) for $4.49. How much money did Colombians - get out of it (in profits & wages) when put in the context of human labor? for example how much do they make in 4 hrs? VERSUS.

The same Portland person buying a $17,000, Toyota. In Japan how many cars could a few ppl make in those same four hours? How much were they each paid in those four hours of work?

Then that same Portland person gets a prescription for Viagara, for $200.00. How many Viagra pills are made in those same 4 hrs. in the US? Again how much are the employers of Pfizer a NY company recieving from their employer in those same four hours?

Now I ask, how many Toyota, Pfizer companies does S.A. have? Now, how many does it have of the 1st example?

[Saltenya94]

Passed the 15 mins. to correct some key words.

Then that same Portland person gets a prescription for Viagara, for $200.00. How many Viagra pills are made in those same 4 hrs. in US manufacturing plants? Again how much are the employees of Pfizer (a NY company) receiving from their employers in those same four hours?

Now I ask, how many Toyota, Pfizer companies does S.A. have? Now, how many does it have of the 1st example?

[Penarol1916]

Look, you want to understand the real problems of poverty in South America, I recommend two people to read, Douglas North, who won the Nobel Prize for his theory that the chief cause of poverty is not over-population or resource exploitation by outside countries, it is the recognition and enforcement of private properties, he's done some great studies on how these other things are just white noise that don't really affect national income or poverty levels. Protecting private property not only encourages foreign investment, but it also encourages not only property improvement and investment in your own property, but you are also able to use that property as collateral for loans that people use to start businesses. It is when you are unsure of whether or not the government will seize your property, or the titles are unclear or difficult to obtain that nations are in trouble. This all ties into what rdl was saying about corruption and transparency in that titles are irregularly enforced in courts for these two reasons in many SA nations.
Then I recommend you read Hernando de Soto's "The Mystery of Capital" where he is putting these theories into practice. The extreme poor in most nations are sitting on billions in assets, but they are unusable because they do not have titles, and they don't have incentives to obtain titles because of the bureacracy. He uses Peru as an example, it takes over two months and 23 steps in order to obtain a title to a property that you inhabit and noone else owns. It takes nearly three months and $1,000 to register a business, and that does not include bribes or delays for not paying bribes. This is stifling innovation and keeps value-added firms like Pfizer and Toyota (which Saltenya pointed out) from forming in Latin countries.
de Soto cites U.S. policy in the 1800's as a possible way to include these extreme poor in the economic system, there they granted titles to people who had put the land to use, and he has worked with people in Brasil, Indonesia, and Peru to do the same on a limited basis, the results have been great for those that have been able to participate. To me, there is too much class tension in South America for a Union to work very well, but if people believe that they have an honest chance of moving up in life, those class tensions tend to diminish and society can move forward. Sorry that this post is so long, but I've been involved in international economic development for too long for me not to vomit out so much crap.

[chaski]

Since the US became a superpower, how many countries have united?(answer=0)Germany

If by some miracle Fujimori comes back :eek:

[Saltenya94]

Don't get me started on Fujimori. ha.

"Since the US became a superpower, how many countries have united?(answer=0)" - DanRod78

Along with Germany, Vietnam. Another cold-war battle-ground.

The other one still around of course is S. Korea & N. Korea. There was talk of Greek and Turkish Cyprus getting together for the May 1 EU exapnsion deadline... but only the Greek side got in.

On a side-note.... One day in high school, there was a new student in one of my classes, she looked exotic - I naturally had to introduce myself ;). Turns out she was from Cyprus, she had a very sexy accent, and wow what a looker.

[Penarol1916]

Don't get me started on Fujimori. ha.

"Since the US became a superpower, how many countries have united?(answer=0)" - DanRod78

Along with Germany, Vietnam. Another cold-war battle-ground.

The other one still around of course is S. Korea & N. Korea. There was talk of Greek and Turkish Cyprus getting together for the May 1 EU exapnsion deadline... but only the Greek side got in.

On a side-note.... One day in high school, there was a new student in one of my classes, she looked exotic - I naturally had to introduce myself ;). Turns out she was from Cyprus, she had a very sexy accent, and wow what a looker.

You forgot to add Yemen to that.

[peruytu]

As good as a "South American" union may sound, its just simply almost impossible. Discrimation, guerrilla movements, poverty, terrorism, corruption, nationalism and the huge gap between poor and rich will always be the splinter of South America.

South America is somewhat of a new continent, compared to that of Europe or even United States (not a continent but might as well be one). Thus, its infancy in socio-economic status will empede its growth as a stable and self sufficient continent.

Argentina, who was this great rich commercial country in which other South American countries looked up to ended up being this great disaster that brought the whole economic growth in South America on a stand-still. Why? Because of politicians who run government that are based on lies and corruption. Now this is nothing new in South America... this is the case in every country there. Don't be surprised if the same thing happens in Brazil or Chile. Chile, probably the most nationalistic and xenophobic country in South America will undoubtedly be still the most prosperous... why? Because of it has become good at distancing itself from South America itself. The fact that they have "free trade" agreements with many rich countries around the world also helps... especially the one it has with the United States.

[peruytu]

As good as a "South American" union may sound, its just simply almost impossible. Discrimation, guerrilla movements, poverty, terrorism, corruption, nationalism and the huge gap between poor and rich will always be the splinter of South America.

South America is somewhat of a new continent, compared to that of Europe or even United States (not a continent but might as well be one). Thus, its infancy status in socio-economy will empede its growth as a stable and self sufficient continent.

Argentina, who was this great rich commercial country in which other South American countries looked up to ended up being this great disaster that brought the whole economic growth in South America on a stand-still (it affected Uruguay mostly). Why? Because of politicians who run governments that are based on lies and corruption. Now this is nothing new in South America... this is the case in every country there. Don't be surprised if the same thing happens in Brazil or Chile. Chile, probably the most nationalistic and xenophobic country in South America will undoubtedly be still the most prosperous... why? Because it has become good at distancing itself from South America itself. The fact that they have "free trade" agreements with many rich countries around the world also helps... especially the one it has with the United States.

I know many people diss Toledo and blame him for his leaning-stance towards the United States.. and that's due to the fact that he has many connections with the US. Now for him to deal very closely to United States was inevitable. But now, is this a positive or a negative thing? It could mean both. Peru (with or without Toledo) right now has no choice but to have it economy linked to that of the United States. Prime example: a few years back when Ecuador was on the verge of bankrupcy they decided to dollarize their economy to at least stabilize it. The outcome was a positive one. Yes, it may have widened the gap between rich and poor alot further but at least its stable and its growth is evident. Same thing will happen to most poor countries like Bolivia, Paraguay and even Peru. Currently Peru (Toledo) is on a verge of signing an economic landmark "free-trade" agreement with the US on May 18. To be honest, this wouldn't be possible without Toledo... as unpopular as he may be, he's doing alot of good things for Peru's economic growth. This has become apparent in Peru's 4% economic growth in Toledo's term. Although still poor, Peru is doing something they should've done a long time ago. The only reason it hasn't is because incompetent politicians who only worry about becoming rich from Peru's government. Yes, Toledo may be that same person but he already was rich (he was a top figure in the World Bank before becoming president).. he may get richer yes, but at least he's not out for-self like most our previous presidents were. Along with Peru, Ecuador and Colombia will also have talks about "free-trade" agreements with US next month in July.

Ecuador and its dollarization of its economy is the beginning of the inevitable. If South America wants to become "one union" it must do what Europe has done that is that creation of the Euro. South America, currently, is not capable of doing something like this.. its only option is to go with the dollar.

No matter how hard South America tries to improve and grow on the economic level, it will always have the United States as it's main factor.

Peru y tu?