Yves here. As Don Quijones explains, “In many ways, Mexico is the poster child of neoliberalism.” So take this as a cautionary tale of what rule by our modern oligarchs will look like.
By Don Quijones, a freelance writer and translator based in Barcelona, Spain, and editor at Wolf Street, where this article was originally published
Despite being Mexico’s second richest man and owning one of the world’s largest mining groups, German Larrea is an enigma. Until this month the only photo that existed of the media-shy recluse was a blurry black and white image.
All that has now changed: his name and a new photo – one taken of him schmoozing with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto at a recent meeting of Citibank’s Mexican division, Banamex – are plastered across the front and financial pages of Mexico’s daily newspapers.
This new wave of unwelcome public attention is the result of what many are describing as the worst ecological disaster in Mexican history. On August 6 the Buenavista del Cobre mine belonging to Larrea’s flagship company, Grupo Mexico, the country’s largest mining and infrastructure company, spewed 10 million gallons (40,000 cubic meters) of copper sulfate acid into the Sonora and Bacanuchi rivers, turning the waterways orange and poisoning the water supply of 24,000 people in seven communities along the rivers.
Authorities place the cost of the total cleanup in the hundreds of millions or even billions of Mexican pesos, yet so far the government has issued Grupo Mexico with a one-off sanction of just 40 million pesos (roughly $3 million). As for Larrea, he has quickly crawled back under the woodwork whence he came, having issued not a single public apology.
It is not the first time that Larrea has shown such callous disregard for the occasionally destructive externalities of his particular line of business. In 2006 a methane explosion in the Grupo Mexico-owned Pasta de Conchos coal mine left 65 miners trapped underground. Only two of the 65 bodies were found before the decision was made to call off the search, just five days after the explosion. During that time neither then-Mexican president Vicente Fox, nor Larrea, visited the mine or interacted with the families. In fact, not a single Grupo Mexico shareholder bothered to show up.
According to Forbes, Larrea is the 60th richest billionaire in the world, boasting a total wealth of $15 billion. Through the control of just over half of Grupo Mexico, he and his family own mining assets in Mexico (Minera México), Perú (Southern Copper) and the U.S. (Asarco). They also own Infraestructura y Transportes México (ITM), which runs two railroads, Ferrocarril Mexicano y Ferrosur, as well as a 30 percent stake in the Mexican airport operator Grupo Aeroportuario del Pacífico.
Larrea is also the majority owner of Cinemex, Mexico’s second largest cinema chain. He sits on the boards of Citi-owned Banamex, the Mexican stock exchange, the Mexican Shareholders Group, and until recently the giant Mexican media group Televisa. In fact, rumours are that Larrea is poised to take advantage of the recent shake-up of Mexico’s telecommunications sector to launch his own media empire.
Like many of his fellow Mexican billionaires, Larrea owes much of his fortune to one man: Carlos Salinas de Gortari, who served as president of Mexico between 1988 and 1994. During his six-year presidency Salinas not only signed up to NAFTA, but he also embarked on a privatization spree, selling off mines, banks, railways, electricity networks and, of course, Telmex, the national telephone company. Salinas relied on a relatively small group of Mexico’s oligarchy to supply him with campaign (and perhaps personal) funds, in return for the sale of state assets at favorable rates and terms. For example, Salinas’ close friend Carlos Slim, now the richest billionaire on the planet, was essentially able to pay for Telmex out of the future profits of the company.
Welcome to Slimlandia
While Slim is often celebrated in the international press for both his sharp business acumen and generous philanthropy, his success has come at a heavy price, in particular for Mexican consumers.
To wit, from Fortune:
George W. Grayson, a professor of government at the College of William & Mary, coined the term “Slimlandia” to describe how entrenched the Slim family’s companies are in the daily life of Mexicans.
It’s not a reverential term. Many Mexicans hoped privatization, which began in the early 1990s, would create competition and drive prices down drastically. That hasn’t happened. “Slim is one of a dozen fat cats in Mexico who impede that country’s growth because they run monopolies or oligopolies,” says Grayson. “The Mexican economy is highly inefficient, and it is losing its competitive standing vis-à-vis other countries because of people like Slim.”
According to a study by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), between 2005 and 2009 Mexican consumers were overcharged $6.5 billion a year for landline usage. The total loss to the Mexican economy of Slim’s dominance in telecommunications is estimated at $129 billion over a five-year period, due to excess charges and poor investment in infrastructure.
Granted, Slim was recently forced by changes in Mexico’s telecommunications legislation to divest a large part of his holdings (worth some $10 billion) in América Movíl. But his dominance over the Mexican economy remains broadly unchallenged, as was shown by the government’s recent decision to award the tender to design Mexico City’s new airport to a firm run by Fernando Romero, a Mexican architect who just happens to be married to one of Carlos Slim’s daughters. What’s more, Grupo Carso, one of Slim’s many construction companies, is part of a consortium that is preparing to bid for contracts related to the new airport. If the consortium wins, it will lead a project forecast to be worth some 12 billion dollars – and probably a whole lot more given contractors’ tendency to go over budget.
The Rise of Mexico’s Oligarchs
Slim is not the only Mexican billionaire whose fortune was built from the ashes of once state-owned assets. Just as happened in Yeltsin’s Russia, the “liberalization” and privatization of Mexican markets has given rise to a new über-caste of oligarchs. More than half of the 11 Mexican tycoons featured on Forbes’ 2012 Rich List (who between them controlled a total wealth of $129.7 billion) are or once were owners of former state-run enterprises. They include owners or important shareholders of mines (Larrea and Alberto Bailleres), telecoms companies (Slim, Ricardo Salinas Pliego and Emilio Azcárraga) and banks (Roberto González Barrera, Alfredo Harp Helú and Roberto Hernández Ramírez).
But for every winner in a system founded along oligarchic lines, there must be countless losers. In Mexico, all the promises of miraculous growth, unstoppable development, cheaper prices, and better living have come to naught. Instead of state-run monopolies calling the shots, Mexico is subject to the whims of privately owned oligopolies run by a small coterie of hyper-connected individuals who now effectively own the country.
In many ways, Mexico is the poster child of neoliberalism. For decades and under successive governments the country has followed the standardized rule book of 21st century economic governance to the letter. According to the economist Julián Castaño, Mexico is now Latin America’s second most privatized nation. It has also signed more bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements than just about any other nation under the sun.
Yet the result, far from one of freer more open markets, is ever-increasing concentration of power and wealth, rising prices and dwindling choice for consumers – a trend that seems set to continue as Salinas’ disarmingly handsome apprentice, Enrique Peña Nieto, prepares to complete the project his master began 26 years ago.
Mexico, the tide may well be subtly turning against Monsanto and its fellow GMO oligopolies and in favor of independent food growers and consumers. Read… Mexican Judge Departs From Script, Turns Monsanto’s Mexican Dream Into Legal Nightmare
The name “Slimlandia” is excellent! The comparison of the Salinas years in Mexico with the Yeltsin years in Russia in an interesting one. Nearly simultaneous, too!
Also the periods of Bill Clinton in America and John Major in the UK. If I wasn’t wearing my ACME brand “Tinfoil Hat,” I’d suspect something sinister was afoot.
It is happening here in the USA, too, JohnnyGL.
Just from a much broader base. Remember how many banks there used to be? Remember how often we were told we were “overbanked” as merger after merger resulted in the TBTF banks that blew up our economy?
Mexico, having the fractious history it does, would seem to be entering the neo-liberal Paradise. Yet, this situation neglects the Narco Wars now torturing the Mexican population. On the surface a law and order issue, I would contend that this is another Mexican Civil War. The only difference I can see is that the Narcos have yet to declare themselves as seeking to replace the Oligarchs Government with one of their own. In fact, the Narcos are a shadow government in many regions of Mexico. Astute observers now publically speak of Mexico as a “failed state.” Now the Narcos are moving into the American Southwest. Hmmm…..
Agree Slimlandia is a great name, but it’s unfortunate the past couple decades weren’t put more into context in this post.
Perhaps being in Spain, he’s not as familiar with what has been happening in the New World, especially the Peso crisis, NAFTA, and the drug war? Also, Mexico actually has higher per capita GDP than many industrializing nations, and overall it’s one of the largest economies on the planet, so I’m not sure why the professor makes statements like this:
“The Mexican economy is highly inefficient, and it is losing its competitive standing vis-à-vis other countries because of people like Slim.”
The issue is the politics of distribution, not business efficiency or international competition.
Mexico’s GDP per capita is higher than other major New World nations like Venezuela, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador, as well as many Old World nations like Iran, South Africa, China, Ukraine, Indonesia, and India.
per capita? how about we skim off the crème de la cremita and see what’s going on?
if you want a real opinion ask a mexican:
Si le das mas poder al poder,
mas duro te van a venir a coger
porque fuimos potencia mundial
somos pobres, nos manejan mal.
Dame dame dame dame todo el power
para que te demos en la madre
Gimme gimme gimme gimme todo el poder
so I can come around to joder
Re – “highly inefficient”
I think “Quijonnes,” the author, is referrering to oligopoly and monopoly rents extracted by the Mexican billionaires.
when i first arrived in mexico there were free “pay”phones everywhere. then they sold telmex.
Servants are cheap in Mexico, a key priority for the global overclass.
Yeah, but, bodyguards can eat a household budget up quickly.
I remember the first time I went to Mexico City in 1984. McKinsey had a small office in one of the better suburbs.
I had never seen gunmen on roofs before.
It has to be much worse now.
Wait for 15 more years for the technological asymmetry to take hold. You will notice drones don’t eat much at all.
Ah, but remember, this can easily become an arms race. Counter drones are already being thought up and tested in various locales. An economics of returns will eventually take control. Finite resources will limit feasible objectives. Plan accordingly.
Yes to all of this, but the Mexican oligarchs have done even worse. Mexico’s recent population explosion was deliberately engineered by the Mexican oligarchs who waged a massive propaganda campaign to convince Mexicans to have enormous numbers of children at an early age (see “The Mexicans: a personal portrait of a people”, by Patrick Oster). Ostensibly to make Mexico “bigger and better”, the only reason I can think of for this policy is to ensure that wages remained stuck at sub-poverty levels. It’s working. It’s working so well that grinding misery now threatens utter collapse, and the same oligarchs that wanted more people are now desperate to dump their surplus population on the United States….
In effect, the oligarchs bred the Mexican people as if they were cattle, to ensure that wages stayed low. I can’t think of any more vile or fascistic behavior.
When the rich engineer a population explosion we are always promised a bigger pie for all. And always we are lied to.
So now the Iranian oligarchs are doing the same thing, they are going to outlaw contraception and propagandize that having more children than you can reasonably support will be wonderful. I would wager a substantial sum that it won’t be.
the fertility rate in iran is lower than the united states.
Right, and that’s a problem for people who make money off other people’s consumption.
I had a sick feeling about Rouhani from pretty near the beginning, and it’s pretty clear now that he’s the former scapegoat trying to give the cool kids money and stuff to be part of the cool club…
“Mexico’s recent population explosion”
Mexico’s birth rate, once among the world’s highest, is in free-fall. In the 1960s Mexican mothers had nearly seven children each (whereas women in India then had fewer than six). The average now is just over two—almost the same as in the United States. The UN reckons that from 2040 the birth rate in Mexico will be the lower of the two.
This is why libertarians are largely idiotic fools who ignore both US history of the 1870s-1910s and what occurs in almost every country in the world where the gov’t doesn’t provide a valid counterweight to private sector consolidation.
As Thiel said in his WSJ op-ed 2 weeks ago, ‘Competition is for losers.’
As the US ruling class becomes more and more oligarchical and living standards for everybody else fall, will US society and polity come more and more to resemble the shambles of Mexico and the other Latin American countries which the US has traditionally despised, bullied, suborned and manipulated?
We have all heard of “Montezuma’s Revenge”. Maybe the Mexicanisation of the US could be referred to as “Zapata’s Revenge”.