« What do they eat in La Gloria? | Main | More on the new Geoffrey Miller book, *Spent* »
Is there a silver lining for Mexico?
To be sure, tourism to Mexico is devastated and the country will suffer many economic problems (yes, real business cycle theory still is relevant these days). But is there any upside?
I hesitate to speak too soon but I'm actually somewhat impressed by how the Mexican government, at least at the national level, has responded. There have been many failures of Mexican health care systems at local levels but keep a few things in mind: a) some of the problems lie with citizens who won't go see doctors, or who won't go see non-shaman doctors, b) too many Mexicans self-administer antibiotics, and c) when there is so much air pollution it is harder to discover flu cases, especially in the midst of flu season there. Nonetheless Mexican reporting systems seem to have discovered an unusual flu fairly promptly.
Once the national government discovered what is going on, they acted decisively and without undue panic. There has been very little denial, a common feature in the early stages of health crises (how long was it until the U.S. government acknowledged AIDS?). No one is treating the Mexican federal government like a banana republic or a basket case or thinking that the Canadian government would have done so much better.
Am I wrong? Could this episode in the longer run bring Mexico closer to the community of developed nations? Might Mexicans now be more likely to self-identify with a government that is at least partially competent?
Time will tell.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on May 2, 2009 at 02:15 PM in Political Science | Permalink
Comments
Indeed, it has been a bit surprising (and reassuring) the extent of coordination between federal and the city government, as well as the level of citizen compliance. It's too soon to tell if the government over-reacted. Still, there are some open questions.
Besides detecting a rare virus, it also seems like the government realized something was wrong because of the unusual number of "atypical neumonia" cases. On the first days the suspected death toll was estimated at 150 or so--which probably led to a big first reaction here and abroad. Further lab tests now indicate that the number of virus-related deads is much lower (at about 20 or so), which suggests a more modest outbreak.
But where do the suspect deaths came from to begin with? Those cases were atypically off-season and young adults. Mexico City epidemiologists are excellent but the infrastructure at the bottom is poor. I am troubled with the idea that Mexico's health services prove more risky than the H1N1 virus per se.
Posted by: Javier at May 2, 2009 3:36:32 PM
I never though of it in this way, but I think you're correct. I found all this, the response and the information coming out, surprisingly organized. And maybe ,the infrastructure is dated, or they don't have the lates tech, but they are serious about becoming a player, and they didn't show anything but professionalism.
Posted by: alejandro at May 2, 2009 6:03:44 PM
There is a lot of world-class human capital in Mexico. Ernesto Zedillo was not some kind of outlier and the professionalism mentioned above is dead on. It's too bad that it took an epidemic to more widely show display some of that talent.
Posted by: Charlie Sawyer at May 2, 2009 6:33:05 PM
I agree. I don't know how much it well affect nationalism or confidence in the government but I have been happily surprised by the Mexican government's response. Other countries should appreciate this since pandemics are obviously a public bad. Perhaps the IMF or some other international financial agency should be lending money to countries incubating a disease, so that they may afford to temporarily shut down transportation and business and whatnot in order to contain it.
Posted by: Andrew at May 2, 2009 7:05:38 PM
As a Mexican and a Chilango, this is indeed the proudest I have been of my country and my city ever since the 1985 earthquake. Even prouder: in 1985, in the midst of devastation and government paralysis, unaffiliated citizens stepped up to the plate and provided a crucial effort in the first few dismal days after the quake. This time around, the Mexican people has also behaved admirably, maintaining discipline and refusing to panic in the face of an invisible enemy; but, equally important, the national government has been there throughout the crisis, providing guidance and leadership. In particular, Health Minister José Angel Córdova has been quite a revelation: for all the initial confusion about the number of infected persons, he has shown himself as an able communicator, the cool and composed face of an acting and effective government.
So, yes, I agree: this week will indeed bring economic pain, but, just maybe, it does portend good things to come for Mexico.
Posted by: Alejandro Hope at May 2, 2009 7:36:21 PM
That's my impression of the federal level reaction from Mexico.
Posted by: sherifffruitfly at May 2, 2009 7:55:23 PM
I live in a Mexican state where the virus has not spread. An hour ago, I saw a woman driving alone wearing a mask with the window on the driver side open. Does this make any sense? I think not. The U.S. government says masks are useless, while the Mexican government claims the opposite. I'm not a doctor, but I have a poorly functioning nose, and I tried to mow my lawn while wearing a mask a few years ago, and it didn't help, probably because I continued to insist on breathing, so I reckon the U.S. is right in this case. Nevertheless, one of the reasons I live in Mexico is that the health care system is better than the U.S., but that's a discussion for another day.
One of the local stores that sells masks for painters raised his prices by a factor of 10 last week, so one of the local busybodies called in the Gestapo to read to him the Riot Act. Mexico has vague laws that fix prices (or outlaw "gouging"), but the vendor didn't know how much he could charge. I'd be happier if they allowed the free market to operate and left everyone alone.
Posted by: John Locke at May 2, 2009 8:02:52 PM
It might bode well if they met the most basic criterion of a functioning government and established a monopoly on organized violence in the country.
Posted by: TW Andrews at May 2, 2009 10:13:51 PM
"It might bode well if they met the most basic criterion of a functioning government and established a monopoly on organized violence in the country."
By that criterion, the United States does not have a functioning government, given that 17,000 murders are committed per year in the US, many of whom (a majority, probably) by organized gangs.
The Weberian criterion you are looking for is "the monopoly on the legitimate use of force", legitimate being the operative word. Unless you want to argue that organized crime has social legitimacy in large swaths of the Mexican territory (not an absurd argument, but it does require streching the definition of legitimacy), the Mexican government meets the criterion by a wide mark.
Posted by: Alejandro Hope at May 2, 2009 10:30:20 PM
"But the U.S. (insert some absolutely silly comparison)"
(sigh)
Posted by: PM at May 3, 2009 12:12:16 AM
Tyler writes:
"some of the problems lie with citizens who won't go see doctors, or who won't go see non-shaman doctors."
Thank God that Tyler and Alex have worked hard over the years to promote the importation into the U.S. of even more Mexican citizens who won't go see non-shaman doctors.
Posted by: Steve Sailer at May 3, 2009 1:03:34 AM
I'm wondering whether any of the people here applauding Mexico have actually paid close attention to the news lately (not just press releases).
One thing that is deeply puzzling and worrying about how Mexico has handled the case is the fact that (as of yesterday) they have not publicly sequenced the genome of the Mexican virus and have not allowed the CDC to do so, either. I've been reading the blog of a virologist (virology.ws) who speculates that the Mexican government is attempting to keep some form of secrecy about the genome so that they can lay claim to the patent on any vaccine. Seems pretty opportunist, especially since it seems to me that the CDC is doing the gruntload of the work.
Not being able to compare the exact genome sequence makes it much more impossible to see whether the versions of the virus all originated in Mexico.
There is also the Mexican government official who claimed that the virus came from Eurasia, not Mexico; that guy obviously doesn't belong in his job as Mexico's chief epidemiologist. He also tried to claim they had no origins in Mexican pig farms, something that can't be substantiated either way right now-- but his version seems the less likely.
Posted by: Libertarian Girl at May 3, 2009 1:07:14 AM
Am I wrong?
Yes, you almost always are wrong. Especially about your beloved third-worlders.
Could this episode in the longer run bring Mexico closer to the community of developed nations?
Unlikely.
If there was a good performance by the Mexican Gov - a big if, it was probably a fluke due to an unusually capable minister and a few good people around him.
If there is a Mexican entity that consistently performs at First World standards, I haven't seen it.
Does anyone know an example of a company or some such that is a world class?
It is not a trick question, I really would like to know.
Posted by: Mick at May 3, 2009 2:08:47 AM
The Weberian criterion you are looking for is "the monopoly on the legitimate use of force", legitimate being the operative word.
Isn't Gov always has a monopoly on use of force because Gov declared so?
You are making no sense. By your definition even the weakest govrmt about to fall still has force monopoly because it says so.
Posted by: Mick at May 3, 2009 2:14:01 AM
"Does anyone know an example of a company or some such that is a world class?
It is not a trick question, I really would like to know."
Cemex?
"Isn't Gov always has a monopoly on use of force because Gov declared so?
You are making no sense. By your definition even the weakest govrmt about to fall still has force monopoly because it says so."
It makes sense. It could be said that Pakistan has areas where the government no longer has the monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Colombia and Sri Lanka were previously good examples. And then there are many so-called "breakaway regions" in the world.
Posted by: whitebread at May 3, 2009 3:44:39 AM
What does the self-administration of antibiotics have to do with the flu?
Posted by: sourdough at May 3, 2009 11:21:37 AM
So the mexican government is perfect, and you must follow suit. sure:
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/sociedad/servicio/salud/complice/virus/elpepusoc/20090503elpepisoc_4/Tes
Posted by: k at May 3, 2009 12:26:40 PM
I see W.Buffett is considering offering Swine Flu pandemic insurance. I'll guess there is 10-15% chance of a flu pandemic by May-2010 and it would kill 0.25% of developed world and 1% elsewhere. I doubt insurance would meaningful beyond a death toll of tens of millions and moral hazard in insuring designer pandemics (not that this would stop USA finance companies from offering bioterror insurance and unleashing a pandemic). W.Buffett would no doubt want a chunky 20% rake.
I see this as a good thing since I think the 3rd world would get a good chunk of the insurance benefits.
Posted by: Phillip Huggan at May 3, 2009 11:40:35 PM
...link: http://www.reuters.com/article/swineFlu/idUSTRE5422NI20090503
Buffett: they are really jacking up the price of blizzards at Dairy Queen. In 2003 in Alberta I could get a blizzard at one DQ for $6 and it was nearly a litre. Now they are closer to half a litre and same price. It's a recession man. And most franchises don't even stock raspberry misty coolers anymore. It was a healthier menu item and you could crunch the ice and then eat the raspberry; like getting two desserts for under $2.
Posted by: Phillip Huggan at May 3, 2009 11:45:23 PM
...IDK if my estimates are anywhere near accurate but I'm very curious what methodology W.Buffett is planning on using to get estimates. Whatever it is, WHO should probably copy it.
Posted by: Phillip Huggan at May 4, 2009 1:33:57 AM
"What does the self-administration of antibiotics have to do with the flu?"
Flu victims bypass the doctor, take antibiotics, and go about their merry way, passing the virus to everyone else, all the while believing that the antibiotic is curing them.
Posted by: Holdie at May 4, 2009 11:12:55 AM
It's always nice to see a compliment to someone or something, even if that
thing is a government. The bad thing, of course, is that Tyler couldn't
pull this off without slurring another. An undeserved slur, I mean. A warranted
slur would be entirely appropriate.
I doubt there's any good reason to believe that the U.S. government
or U.S. doctors conspired to conceal the existence of AIDS. On the contrary
this was the nation, or more accurately certain individuals of this nation,
that discovered the existence of the problem in the first place. Which
given the novelty of the disease and given it's highly unusual characteristics
was no small achievement. Note that in retrospect we now know that the
HIV virus was present in a number of countries years before it was recognized
in the U.S. and France. A great many people in a great many countries had the
opportunity to "see" the problem and didn't. Not that I'm arguing that they
should have or that there was something wrong with them because didn't, because in
fact it was far from easy to understand problem. (There's some argument whether
it was discovered first in the U.S. or France. But regardless the idea that people
were hiding this seems kind of in poor taste.)
Reacting to something that we already know a great deal about (we've known about
and have been tracking H1N1 viruses for years) and is very similar to other viruses
that are extremely well known isn't quite the same thing.
In fact actually if you want to get right down to it, it's not improbable that
we don't really understand what just happened in Mexico. It's kind of a mystery,
for instance, how a particular virus which is manifesting itself as a normal or
even mild flu in the rest of the world has managed to kill a number of healthy,
young people in Mexico. Usually influenza kills mostly the very young
or the very old -- basically those whose immune systems are not working.
Could it be that there is another organism involved? And that it's the synergy
of the two that caused the healthy adult deaths in Mexico? That would
explain why the deaths are now subsiding in Mexico -- because the simultaneous
infections were coincidence and the two epidemics have already moved out of
phase -- and why we're not seeing anything similar elsewhere.
Posted by: Mark Amerman at May 4, 2009 2:30:50 PM
I never though of it in this way, but I think you're correct. I found all this, the response and the information coming out, surprisingly organized. And maybe ,the infrastructure is dated, or they don't have the lates tech, but they are serious about becoming a player, and they didn't show anything but professionalism.
Posted by: HP Business laptop battery at May 18, 2009 8:28:08 AM
I live in Chiapas and I don't know a single person who sees the government response as a good one. That sample has a strong leftie bias but not a unanimous one. Most people see the government as having overreacted, a few see underreaction, nobody gives them credit. I'm too busy playing devil's advocate to figure out what I think myself, except that the third week of suspension for my daughter's school was clearly overkill.
Posted by: homunq at May 25, 2009 4:42:30 AM
aion gold
aion money
cheap aion gold
cheap aion money
buy aion gold
Mabinogi online gold
Mabinogi gold
buy Mabinogi gold
cheap Mabinogi gold
Mabinogi money
2moons dil
2moons gold
buy 2moons dil
2moons dil
cheap 2moons dil
flyff gold
flyff penya
flyff money
buy flyff penya
cheap flyff penya
cheap flyff gold
Dofus kamas
buy Dofus kamas
cheap kamas
Dofus kama
Dofus gold
Dofus money
Knight online gold
Knight Gold
Knight Noah
Knight online Noah
Posted by: aion at Jul 10, 2009 3:23:40 AM