segunda-feira, 19 de abril de 2010
TEc "The trillion-dollar club" BRICs' coming of age as I view them
A spot-on cleverly written article that explains everything there is to know about the BRICs.
The imaginary bloc was concocted by a Wall Street expert who, like most bright Goldman Sachs' financiers, saw the rise of an otherwise unlikely combination of second tier large economies as a potential financial risk/opportunity.
All he then did was band them together under an easy-to-read-and-pronounce-acronym to sell that upcoming 'product' to the world.
It does make sense mainly but not only for the size of each of the four's economies and their increased importance multiwise.
I do not think Germany's and Japan's post-WW2 rise to economic prominence bears a comparison to this grouping and the individual ambitions of each.
Germany and Japan were the two defeated nations of a protracted military conflict both initiated.Perhaps unknowingly both still bear a few scars not entirely gone, 65 years on!
Their uneasiness with guns and uniforms and self imposed relatively low profile on foreign affairs is fully traceable to the aftermath of that tragic historic period.
None of the BRIC nations have any such hangovers.
On the contrary, emerging economies as they are to different degrees - coming from very diverse backgrounds - each is keen for international recognition and increased say in world matters.
In the larger scheme of things I believe it does make sense to consider the BRICs as a bloc.
Not because the acronym is now conveniently used ad nauseum to refer to those countries in a bundle.
It is simply the realisation that indeed there are trillion-dollar economies on a steep climb in the up until recently tightly labelled group of developing nations - Russia in the odd ambiguous position here.
And each of the foursome is vying for greater influence worldwide.
Despite overwhelming differences between them they share more than a few overlapping interests too, especially vis a vis the traditional established economic order and one-sided view of the world.
The imaginary bloc was concocted by a Wall Street expert who, like most bright Goldman Sachs' financiers, saw the rise of an otherwise unlikely combination of second tier large economies as a potential financial risk/opportunity.
All he then did was band them together under an easy-to-read-and-pronounce-acronym to sell that upcoming 'product' to the world.
It does make sense mainly but not only for the size of each of the four's economies and their increased importance multiwise.
I do not think Germany's and Japan's post-WW2 rise to economic prominence bears a comparison to this grouping and the individual ambitions of each.
Germany and Japan were the two defeated nations of a protracted military conflict both initiated.Perhaps unknowingly both still bear a few scars not entirely gone, 65 years on!
Their uneasiness with guns and uniforms and self imposed relatively low profile on foreign affairs is fully traceable to the aftermath of that tragic historic period.
None of the BRIC nations have any such hangovers.
On the contrary, emerging economies as they are to different degrees - coming from very diverse backgrounds - each is keen for international recognition and increased say in world matters.
In the larger scheme of things I believe it does make sense to consider the BRICs as a bloc.
Not because the acronym is now conveniently used ad nauseum to refer to those countries in a bundle.
It is simply the realisation that indeed there are trillion-dollar economies on a steep climb in the up until recently tightly labelled group of developing nations - Russia in the odd ambiguous position here.
And each of the foursome is vying for greater influence worldwide.
Despite overwhelming differences between them they share more than a few overlapping interests too, especially vis a vis the traditional established economic order and one-sided view of the world.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário