I’m in China this week, giving various lectures at Northeastern University in Shenyang. My topic today was “Real-World Examples,” which gave me an opportunity to share many of the charts I’ve developed showing how market-oriented nations enjoy much more long-run success.
One of the charts shows how Chile has enjoyed strong growth since it shifted to free markets, especially compared to Venezuela, which is burdened by a vicious form of statism.
But I noticed that I created that chart back in 2011 and it only shows data for the years between 1980 and 2008. And I thought that might lead students to think I was deliberately omitting recent years because the data somehow contradicts my message about free markets and small government.
So it’s time for me to update my comparison of Chile and Venezuela. And I’m going to have lots of evidence to share because the World Bank published a lengthy report on Puzzles of Economic Growth just a couple of years ago. And chapter 7 specifically compares the two countries we’re examining today.
Chile and República Bolivariana de Venezuela are South American countries of similar size and population. They…share a similar history,
cultural heritage and comparable social structures. In 1971, they recorded a similar level of per capita income, that is, $6,603 (chained dollars with a base year of 20001) in Chile and $7,231 in República Bolivariana de Venezuela.
The report explains how neither country enjoyed much success in the 1970s, though oil-rich Venezuela at least benefited from rising energy prices.
What’s most relevant, at least for today’s discussion, is how Chile then jumped over Venezuela thanks to pro-market reforms,
In 2003, this value was nearly twice as high in Chile ($12,140) as in República Bolivariana de Venezuela ($6,253). …Chile became a stellar economic growth example in the region and has been outperforming República Bolivariana de Venezuela ever since. The ratio of GDP per capita in Chile and in República Bolivariana de Venezuela changed from 0.75 in 1983 to 1.94 in 2003.
Here’s a chart from the report, showing how Chile’s economy grew rapidly while Venezuela languished.
The report is filled with lots of data.
One item that caught my attention (in part because of Trump’s short-sighted policies in America) is how Chile dramatically reduced trade barriers while Venezuela was more protectionist.
From 1979, Chile’s economy was characterized by the lowest level of tariff restrictions in all of Latin America (10 percent) and a lack of nontariff barriers… República Bolivariana de Venezuela increased its trade restrictions to force consumers to purchase goods produced by the nationalized industries.
But Chile’s success goes well beyond trade policy.
Here’s a table looking quality of governance and red tape.
And here’s some data looking at obstacles to entrepreneurship. As you can see, it took almost four times longer to open a business in Venezuela in 1999.
I assume the numbers are even worse today. Assuming, of course, than anyone even wanted to open a business in that sad country.
Here are some excerpts from the conclusion of the World Bank report. This is a pretty good summary of how Chile reversed its descent to socialism while Venezuela doubled down on bad policy.
In 1971–2003, both Chile and República Bolivariana de Venezuela experienced periods of growing statism in their economic policy. In Chile, however, it was only a short episode (Allende’s socialist experiment in 1971–73), while in República Bolivariana de Venezuela this policy direction was maintained nearly for the entire period covered by the analysis (with its culmination being Chávez’s populist administration elected in 1998). During these periods, state-owned enterprises grew in both countries; market mechanisms were additionally disturbed by administrative price controls and restrictions imposed on freedom of entry into the market—and constrained business activity in many sectors of the economy… Furthermore, severe restrictions on foreign trade and capital flows were imposed. In Chile, the statist experiment was interrupted after three years—once it had driven the economy into a state of profound imbalance with a giant deficit and unchecked inflation. A radical program of economic stabilization and reforms broadening the scope of economic freedom was initiated. This dramatic change in economic orientation produced positive results. From the second half of the 1980s until the end of the analyzed period (2003), Chile was the fastest-growing country in South America.
Now it’s time for me to share an updated version of my chart (though I’m removing Argentina so we can focus just on Chile and Venezuela). As you can see, the updated numbers from the Maddison database tell the exact same story as my 2011 chart.
And why has Chile grown so much faster? As I told the students here in China, it’s because there’s more liberty to engage in voluntary exchange.
In the latest report from Economic Freedom of the World, Chile is ranked #15 while Venezuela is at the very bottom.
P.S. Some people have tried to portray Chile as a failure, but such assertions are easily debunked.
P.P.S. Kudos to the World Bank for publishing a very substantive report. For what it’s worth, it’s the international bureaucracy most likely to produce sensible publications.
- The negative economic impact of government spending.
- How money-laundering laws hurt the poor.
- How tax complexity breeds corruption.
- The benefits of privatized Social Security systems.
- The superb reports on Doing Business.
- How free markets produce better outcomes.
P.P.P.S. The only bad World Bank study I’ve encountered equated high tax burdens with a good report card.
———
Image credit: Mark Scott Johnson | CC BY 2.0.
