Is The Washington Consensus Dead?

[Exarch]

THe Washington consensus:

The consensus included ten broad sets of recommendations:[1]

1. Fiscal policy discipline;
2. Redirection of public spending from subsidies ("especially indiscriminate subsidies") toward broad-based provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary health care and infrastructure investment;
3. Tax reform – broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax rates;
4. Interest rates that are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real terms;
5. Competitive exchange rates;
6. Trade liberalization – liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to be provided by low and relatively uniform tariffs;
7. Liberalization of inward foreign direct investment;
8. Privatization of state enterprises;
9. Deregulation – abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer protection grounds, and prudent oversight of financial institutions;
10. Legal security for property rights.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Consensus

given that in the wake of the Great Recession, Washington itself did not follow its own formula, but rather, bailed out its own inefficient industries/banks and is now about to go into a second round of mad printing of $$$$, thereby devaluing the USDollar, is it time to call it for The Washington Consensus?

[Phier]

Ask me Nov 3rd.

[hellheaven1987]

The term Washington Consensus was initially coined in 1989 by John Williamson to describe a set of ten specific economic policy prescriptions that he considered should constitute the "standard" reform package promoted for crisis-wracked developing countries by Washington, D.C.-based institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and the US Treasury Department.

Well, it only aim for developing countries.

[Exarch]

Well, it only aim for developing countries.

well one can claim that every country is in a sense "developing" citing growth figures so that makes them eligible

[Claudius Gothicus]

In South America It happily died around the early 2000's

[hellheaven1987]

In South America It happily died around the early 2000's

I assume it is because of corruption??

[Claudius Gothicus]

I assume it is because of corruption??

It died because we learned to take care of our own interests before those of the global banking lobbies.

[Phier]

It died because we learned to take care of our own interests before those of the global banking lobbies.

Really? Hows that been going for you?

[Claudius Gothicus]

Really? Hows that been going for you?

Less deficit, more demagoguery, less poverty, same corruption, more inflation, less unemployement, momentary stagnation and more authoritarism.

We improved greatly in some fields yet ed up greatly on others(at least for Argentina. Brasil, Uruguay and Chile have been doing great from the early 00's)

[LegionnaireX]

THe Washington consensus:

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Consensus

given that in the wake of the Great Recession, Washington itself did not follow its own formula, but rather, bailed out its own inefficient industries/banks and is now about to go into a second round of mad printing of $$$$, thereby devaluing the USDollar, is it time to call it for The Washington Consensus?

Well to be fair the bank-bailout was quite necessary to keep the global financial system from crashing down. If you don't have banks to lend money you have no economy. Aside from that, many of those premises are what the Republicans claim they are going to do when they win back Congress.