I see the spokespersons for the business community and the ideologues of neoliberalism very nervous about these projects. For them, the State should not actively participate in the economy; rather, it should focus on protecting and expanding markets, removing obstacles to the free movement of goods and capital, and providing guarantees for investment. Therefore, they predict that Sheinbaum’s projects will be harmful to the economy and will reduce growth and investment.
I have a different criticism. From my point of view, it is very positive that the Mexican State raises its level not only of intervention, but of participation in the economy. However, as you rightly said Viri Rios it seems that the Mexican government has a statist agenda of the 20th century and not the 21st: “In a world that is transitioning to the economy of services, logistics and the digital world, Morena’s economic strategy is too close to the dream of the century past: making trains, launching satellites and making a car with national content.”
More importantly: the scale of priorities of the Mexican government is broken. The State must intervene first where the population needs it most, where society suffers from deficiencies and lack of rights and conditions for its economic, physical, personal and human development.
The “Internet for all” program is a good example of that. In a country with so many inequalities and with an oligarchic telecommunications market, it is correct that the State has the objective of providing free and quality internet for the entire population, in order to facilitate their access to a right that should be basic and universal in its entirety. 21st century.
However, in this same program the contradictions of Morena and Sheinbaum are seen: on the one hand, they launch an ambitious program to provide universal and free internet; but, on the other hand, they pamper the telecommunications oligarchs and make it easier for this market to continue to be co-opted by the usual businessmen.
The same contradictions are evident in all Morenoist initiatives to reinforce the role of the State in the economy. Morena refuses to pass the reform to reduce the working day to 40 hours a week and has only reluctantly supported several of the Citizen Movement’s labor initiatives. Furthermore, the dismantling of the health system, the worsening of the (already very poor) educational system and the reluctance to invest in quality public transportation nullify any possibility of building a welfare state.
Seriously, is it a priority for the State to build its own electric cars and satellites when it is not even capable of guaranteeing the most basic rights to its citizens? Wouldn’t it be better to invest that money in a universal health system, in improvements to public transportation and in labor reforms so that the working class raises its quality of life?
Once these basic goals have been achieved, the State could consider more ambitious objectives to expand its economic role, but it seems pointless to me to invest in these priorities, leaving such basic things as a universal, quality health system in the background.
