El documento resume temas económicos como inflación, crecimiento, política monetaria y fiscal, deuda pública y pensiones. Destaca que Colombia ha reducido su inflación y creció 3.96% en 2004. Explica la política monetaria expansiva de EEUU entre 2004-2005 para mantener el crecimiento. Finalmente, analiza factores como la recuperación de EEUU y Venezuela que respaldaron el desempeño de Colombia, así como su política comercial.
Hemos comenzado 2018 con una evolución espectacular en los mercados de renta variable y con gran parte de la atención puesta en los bancos centrales, las perspectivas de inflación y el impacto de todo ello en la renta fija y el cruce eurodólar. Te acercamos nuestras perspectivas para estos y otros activos en este 2018:
Hemos comenzado 2018 con una evolución espectacular en los mercados de renta variable y con gran parte de la atención puesta en los bancos centrales, las perspectivas de inflación y el impacto de todo ello en la renta fija y el cruce eurodólar. Te acercamos nuestras perspectivas para estos y otros activos en este 2018:
DEES presenta Informe Trimestral de Coyuntura, tercer trimestre de 2009FUSADES
Este informe presenta un análisis trimestral completo sobre el comportamiento de los principales indicadores económicos de El Salvador, de los siguientes sectores y temas: precios, real, fiscal, financiero, externo, agropecuario, medio ambiente, social y perspectivas mundiales. Además, contiene un análisis sobre temas de interés nacional en ese momento.
Las políticas fiscales de impuestos y gasto público, en colaboración con la política monetaria, tienen como objetivo acelerar el crecimiento económico con un elevado empleo y precios estables.
Se podría optar por solucionar la inflación, pero desde hace años se ha optado por generar empleo. Una de las consecuencias de la política fiscal expansiva es EL DÉFICIT PUBLICO y como financiarlo.
O Power Point foi criado no intuito de apresentar para direção da empresa de forma descontraída e divertida os resultados atingidos pelo setor de marketing na promoção "Momento Relax". Semanalmente eram enviados mini-conteúdos mostrando o crescimento do impacto da campanha de acordo com a duração da campanha. Ao final da promoção, foi enviada a todos da empresa mostrando a penetração que atingida
DEES presenta Informe Trimestral de Coyuntura, tercer trimestre de 2009FUSADES
Este informe presenta un análisis trimestral completo sobre el comportamiento de los principales indicadores económicos de El Salvador, de los siguientes sectores y temas: precios, real, fiscal, financiero, externo, agropecuario, medio ambiente, social y perspectivas mundiales. Además, contiene un análisis sobre temas de interés nacional en ese momento.
Las políticas fiscales de impuestos y gasto público, en colaboración con la política monetaria, tienen como objetivo acelerar el crecimiento económico con un elevado empleo y precios estables.
Se podría optar por solucionar la inflación, pero desde hace años se ha optado por generar empleo. Una de las consecuencias de la política fiscal expansiva es EL DÉFICIT PUBLICO y como financiarlo.
O Power Point foi criado no intuito de apresentar para direção da empresa de forma descontraída e divertida os resultados atingidos pelo setor de marketing na promoção "Momento Relax". Semanalmente eram enviados mini-conteúdos mostrando o crescimento do impacto da campanha de acordo com a duração da campanha. Ao final da promoção, foi enviada a todos da empresa mostrando a penetração que atingida
El Pumarejo: Acción ciudadana y Moneda social (Español)Israel Sanchez
Presentación del entorno social de la Casa Grande del Pumarejo en Sevilla, así como la iniciativa de moneda social PUMA, surgida a través de la Red de Decrecimiento de Sevilla (RDS)
Los videos del powerpoint son:
Documental de Emek Fillogullari sobre la Casa del Pumarejo: http://vimeo.com/68080105
Video de positive money sobre "Que es el dinero?": http://www.positivemoney.org/2013/05/what-is-money-new-video/
Propuesta de la Asociación Nacional de Empresarios Independientes para una reforma fiscal de fondo.
Proponen subvaluar la moneda, como hizo China para aumentar exportaciones y critican duramente la propuesta de Calderón.
3º Foro Entel Pcs PresentacióN N. EyzaguirreJaime Peña
Entel Chile, invitó a este destacado economista que fue ministro de hacienda de Chile .
En su exposición abordó los grandes desafíos que tiene el país en materia de educación.
Breve sintesis del panorama macroeconomico espa�ol
(posee varios enlaces en cada diapositiva para redireccionar a otras diapositivas donde se encuentran los an�lisis graficos de los comentarios)
Minuta número 38
Reunión de la Junta de Gobierno del Banco de México, con motivo de la decisión de política monetaria anunciada el 21 de septiembre de 2015
Chile en los años 2000: Evolución macroeconómica y financieraEmisor Digital
Chile en los años 2000: evolución macroeconómica y financiera. Documento original en Iniciativa para la Transparencia Financiera http://www.itf.org.ar/pdf/documentos/76-2011.pdf
Fuente: Estadísticas del Bank of Japan. http://www.boj.or.jp/en/stat/stat_f.htm
Tomado de: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Hyperinflation&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1
Fuente: www.portafolio.com.co Marzo 30 de 2005
Tomado del Ministerio de Hacienda: http://www.minhacienda.gov.co/servlet/page?_pageid=620,1812&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30&2331_FOLDER_8835323.p_subid=155982&2331_FOLDER_8835323.p_sub_siteid=37&2331_FOLDER_8835323.p_edit=0
FUENTE: Banco de la República. Superintendencia Bancaria. Cálculos DGPM
Gráficas realizadas con Datos de la Reserva Federal: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h15/data.htm Incremento de tasas de interés durante 2004 después de tres años de descenso
In early 2004, against the backdrop of stimulative fiscal and monetary policy, continued rapid growth in productivity, and supportive financial market conditions, business outlays appeared to be firming significantly and household spending remained strong. The FOMC became more confident that the economic expansion was likely gaining traction and that the risk of significant further disinflation had been greatly reduced. In these circumstances, it recognized that a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy could not be maintained indefinitely. Nonetheless, the Committee was concerned about the persistently slow pace of hiring and viewed underlying inflation pressures as likely to remain subdued. Accordingly, the Committee left its target for the federal funds rate unchanged at 1 percent at its January and March meetings. However, beginning in January, it modified the language of its policy statement to gain greater flexibility to tighten policy should circumstances warrant by indicating that monetary policy accommodation would eventually have to be removed. At the same time, the Committee suggested that it could be patient in undertaking such actions. By the time of the May and June FOMC meetings, incoming economic data pointed to a broader and more firmly established expansion, with continued strength in housing markets and business fixed investment. Also, the employment reports for March, April, and May had indicated strong and widespread gains in private nonfarm payrolls, and previous reports for January and February were revised upward significantly. Overall consumer price inflation in the first quarter was faster than it had been a year earlier, and core inflation also increased, in part because of the indirect effects of higher energy prices. The Committee maintained its target for the federal funds rate at 1 percent in May, but on the basis of the evolving outlook for economic activity and prices, it revised its assessment of risks to indicate that the upside and downside risks for inflation had moved into balance. The Committee also stated that monetary policy accommodation could "be removed at a pace that is likely to be measured" to communicate its belief, given its economic outlook, that policy would probably soon need to move toward a more neutral stance, though probably not at a rapid pace. The Committee retained this language at the June meeting while raising its target for the federal funds rate from 1 percent to 1-1/4 percent and noting that it would "respond to changes in economic prospects as needed to fulfill its obligation to maintain price stability.“ The information that the Committee had received by the time of its August meeting indicated that economic growth had softened somewhat earlier in the summer. Although the housing market had remained strong and business outlays had continued to be healthy, consumer spending growth had slowed significantly, and industrial production had begun to level off. Also, the June and July labor market reports revealed that employment growth had slowed considerably. At the same time, core consumer price inflation had moderated in May and June even though sizable increases in food and energy prices continued. However, the Committee believed that the softness in economic activity was caused importantly by higher prices of imported oil and would prove short lived. With financial conditions remaining stimulative, the economy appeared poised to grow at a pace sufficient to trim slack in resource utilization. In that regard, given the unusually low level of the federal funds rate, especially relative to the level of inflation, policymakers noted that significant cumulative policy tightening would likely be needed to meet the Federal Reserve's long-run objectives of price stability and sustainable economic growth. The Committee's decision at the meeting to raise its target for the federal funds rate 25 basis points, to 1-1/2 percent, and to maintain its assessment of balanced risks with respect to sustainable growth and price stability was largely anticipated by financial markets. However, market participants revised up their expectations for the path of the federal funds rate, reportedly because the announcement conveyed a somewhat more optimistic outlook for the economy than many had anticipated. By the time of the September FOMC meeting, available information suggested that the economy had regained momentum. Real consumer spending bounced back sharply in July after a weak second quarter, and incoming data on industrial production indicated a modest strengthening. Housing activity had increased further, and business outlays had picked up significantly in the second quarter. In addition, the labor market showed signs of improvement in August, as the unemployment rate edged down and nonfarm payrolls grew moderately. Core consumer price inflation slowed in June and July, and a decline in energy prices from record levels pushed down readings on headline inflation. Although the Committee acknowledged that higher oil prices had damped the pace of economic activity around midyear, it nonetheless saw the expansion as still on solid footing. Consequently, the Committee agreed to increase its target for the federal funds rate another 25 basis points, to 1-3/4 percent; to reiterate its view that the risks to price stability and to sustainable growth were balanced; and to repeat its indication that the removal of policy accommodation would likely proceed at a "measured" pace. The reaction in financial markets to the policy rate decision and the accompanying statement was muted.
In early 2004, against the backdrop of stimulative fiscal and monetary policy, continued rapid growth in productivity, and supportive financial market conditions, business outlays appeared to be firming significantly and household spending remained strong. The FOMC became more confident that the economic expansion was likely gaining traction and that the risk of significant further disinflation had been greatly reduced. In these circumstances, it recognized that a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy could not be maintained indefinitely. Nonetheless, the Committee was concerned about the persistently slow pace of hiring and viewed underlying inflation pressures as likely to remain subdued. Accordingly, the Committee left its target for the federal funds rate unchanged at 1 percent at its January and March meetings. However, beginning in January, it modified the language of its policy statement to gain greater flexibility to tighten policy should circumstances warrant by indicating that monetary policy accommodation would eventually have to be removed. At the same time, the Committee suggested that it could be patient in undertaking such actions. By the time of the May and June FOMC meetings, incoming economic data pointed to a broader and more firmly established expansion, with continued strength in housing markets and business fixed investment. Also, the employment reports for March, April, and May had indicated strong and widespread gains in private nonfarm payrolls, and previous reports for January and February were revised upward significantly. Overall consumer price inflation in the first quarter was faster than it had been a year earlier, and core inflation also increased, in part because of the indirect effects of higher energy prices. The Committee maintained its target for the federal funds rate at 1 percent in May, but on the basis of the evolving outlook for economic activity and prices, it revised its assessment of risks to indicate that the upside and downside risks for inflation had moved into balance. The Committee also stated that monetary policy accommodation could "be removed at a pace that is likely to be measured" to communicate its belief, given its economic outlook, that policy would probably soon need to move toward a more neutral stance, though probably not at a rapid pace. The Committee retained this language at the June meeting while raising its target for the federal funds rate from 1 percent to 1-1/4 percent and noting that it would "respond to changes in economic prospects as needed to fulfill its obligation to maintain price stability.“ The information that the Committee had received by the time of its August meeting indicated that economic growth had softened somewhat earlier in the summer. Although the housing market had remained strong and business outlays had continued to be healthy, consumer spending growth had slowed significantly, and industrial production had begun to level off. Also, the June and July labor market reports revealed that employment growth had slowed considerably. At the same time, core consumer price inflation had moderated in May and June even though sizable increases in food and energy prices continued. However, the Committee believed that the softness in economic activity was caused importantly by higher prices of imported oil and would prove short lived. With financial conditions remaining stimulative, the economy appeared poised to grow at a pace sufficient to trim slack in resource utilization. In that regard, given the unusually low level of the federal funds rate, especially relative to the level of inflation, policymakers noted that significant cumulative policy tightening would likely be needed to meet the Federal Reserve's long-run objectives of price stability and sustainable economic growth. The Committee's decision at the meeting to raise its target for the federal funds rate 25 basis points, to 1-1/2 percent, and to maintain its assessment of balanced risks with respect to sustainable growth and price stability was largely anticipated by financial markets. However, market participants revised up their expectations for the path of the federal funds rate, reportedly because the announcement conveyed a somewhat more optimistic outlook for the economy than many had anticipated. By the time of the September FOMC meeting, available information suggested that the economy had regained momentum. Real consumer spending bounced back sharply in July after a weak second quarter, and incoming data on industrial production indicated a modest strengthening. Housing activity had increased further, and business outlays had picked up significantly in the second quarter. In addition, the labor market showed signs of improvement in August, as the unemployment rate edged down and nonfarm payrolls grew moderately. Core consumer price inflation slowed in June and July, and a decline in energy prices from record levels pushed down readings on headline inflation. Although the Committee acknowledged that higher oil prices had damped the pace of economic activity around midyear, it nonetheless saw the expansion as still on solid footing. Consequently, the Committee agreed to increase its target for the federal funds rate another 25 basis points, to 1-3/4 percent; to reiterate its view that the risks to price stability and to sustainable growth were balanced; and to repeat its indication that the removal of policy accommodation would likely proceed at a "measured" pace. The reaction in financial markets to the policy rate decision and the accompanying statement was muted.
In early 2004, against the backdrop of stimulative fiscal and monetary policy, continued rapid growth in productivity, and supportive financial market conditions, business outlays appeared to be firming significantly and household spending remained strong. The FOMC became more confident that the economic expansion was likely gaining traction and that the risk of significant further disinflation had been greatly reduced. In these circumstances, it recognized that a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy could not be maintained indefinitely. Nonetheless, the Committee was concerned about the persistently slow pace of hiring and viewed underlying inflation pressures as likely to remain subdued. Accordingly, the Committee left its target for the federal funds rate unchanged at 1 percent at its January and March meetings. However, beginning in January, it modified the language of its policy statement to gain greater flexibility to tighten policy should circumstances warrant by indicating that monetary policy accommodation would eventually have to be removed. At the same time, the Committee suggested that it could be patient in undertaking such actions. By the time of the May and June FOMC meetings, incoming economic data pointed to a broader and more firmly established expansion, with continued strength in housing markets and business fixed investment. Also, the employment reports for March, April, and May had indicated strong and widespread gains in private nonfarm payrolls, and previous reports for January and February were revised upward significantly. Overall consumer price inflation in the first quarter was faster than it had been a year earlier, and core inflation also increased, in part because of the indirect effects of higher energy prices. The Committee maintained its target for the federal funds rate at 1 percent in May, but on the basis of the evolving outlook for economic activity and prices, it revised its assessment of risks to indicate that the upside and downside risks for inflation had moved into balance. The Committee also stated that monetary policy accommodation could "be removed at a pace that is likely to be measured" to communicate its belief, given its economic outlook, that policy would probably soon need to move toward a more neutral stance, though probably not at a rapid pace. The Committee retained this language at the June meeting while raising its target for the federal funds rate from 1 percent to 1-1/4 percent and noting that it would "respond to changes in economic prospects as needed to fulfill its obligation to maintain price stability.“ The information that the Committee had received by the time of its August meeting indicated that economic growth had softened somewhat earlier in the summer. Although the housing market had remained strong and business outlays had continued to be healthy, consumer spending growth had slowed significantly, and industrial production had begun to level off. Also, the June and July labor market reports revealed that employment growth had slowed considerably. At the same time, core consumer price inflation had moderated in May and June even though sizable increases in food and energy prices continued. However, the Committee believed that the softness in economic activity was caused importantly by higher prices of imported oil and would prove short lived. With financial conditions remaining stimulative, the economy appeared poised to grow at a pace sufficient to trim slack in resource utilization. In that regard, given the unusually low level of the federal funds rate, especially relative to the level of inflation, policymakers noted that significant cumulative policy tightening would likely be needed to meet the Federal Reserve's long-run objectives of price stability and sustainable economic growth. The Committee's decision at the meeting to raise its target for the federal funds rate 25 basis points, to 1-1/2 percent, and to maintain its assessment of balanced risks with respect to sustainable growth and price stability was largely anticipated by financial markets. However, market participants revised up their expectations for the path of the federal funds rate, reportedly because the announcement conveyed a somewhat more optimistic outlook for the economy than many had anticipated. By the time of the September FOMC meeting, available information suggested that the economy had regained momentum. Real consumer spending bounced back sharply in July after a weak second quarter, and incoming data on industrial production indicated a modest strengthening. Housing activity had increased further, and business outlays had picked up significantly in the second quarter. In addition, the labor market showed signs of improvement in August, as the unemployment rate edged down and nonfarm payrolls grew moderately. Core consumer price inflation slowed in June and July, and a decline in energy prices from record levels pushed down readings on headline inflation. Although the Committee acknowledged that higher oil prices had damped the pace of economic activity around midyear, it nonetheless saw the expansion as still on solid footing. Consequently, the Committee agreed to increase its target for the federal funds rate another 25 basis points, to 1-3/4 percent; to reiterate its view that the risks to price stability and to sustainable growth were balanced; and to repeat its indication that the removal of policy accommodation would likely proceed at a "measured" pace. The reaction in financial markets to the policy rate decision and the accompanying statement was muted.
The information in hand at the time of the November FOMC meeting generally suggested that the economy had continued to expand at a moderate rate despite the restraint that higher oil prices imparted to real incomes and consumer confidence. Consumer and business spending stayed firm, and the housing market remained buoyant. However, industrial production was about unchanged, and the news on job growth was uneven---lackluster increases in nonfarm payrolls in September were followed by robust expansion in October. Inflation measures were moderate, although up somewhat from one year earlier. On balance, the Committee saw the economy as growing at a pace that would reduce margins of slack in the utilization of resources. The Committee also judged that inflationary pressures would likely be well contained if monetary policy accommodation were gradually withdrawn. The Committee's decision to raise its target for the federal funds rate from 1-3/4 percent to 2 percent with minimal change in the language in the accompanying statement was largely anticipated by financial markets and elicited little reaction. At its December meeting, the Committee viewed available information as continuing to indicate that the pace of the economic expansion was sufficient to further reduce the underutilization of resources, despite elevated oil prices. Consumer spending remained solid, investment spending was strong, and manufacturing production showed modest growth. Also, employment gains in October and November were consistent with gradual improvement in the labor market. Meanwhile, core inflation, while above the unusually low rates of late 2003, remained subdued. Accordingly, the Committee voted to raise its target for the federal funds rate 25 basis points, to 2-1/4 percent, and to retain the previous statement that the removal of policy accommodation would likely be "measured." Investors had largely anticipated the policy rate decision, but a few market participants had reportedly speculated that the Committee would signal increased concern about inflationary pressures. In the absence of any such signal, implied rates on near-dated futures contracts and longer-term Treasury yields declined a few basis points after the release of the December statement. Also at its December meeting, the Committee considered an accelerated release of the minutes of FOMC meetings. The Committee's practice had been to publish the minutes for each meeting on the Thursday after the next scheduled meeting. The Committee believed that, because the minutes contain a more nuanced explanation of policy decisions than the statement released immediately after each meeting, publishing them on a timelier basis would help market participants interpret economic developments and thereby better anticipate the course of interest rates. Earlier release would also provide a context for the public remarks of individual FOMC members. It was also recognized, however, that financial markets might misinterpret the minutes at times and that earlier release might adversely affect the Committee's discussions and, perhaps, the minutes themselves. After weighing these considerations, the Committee voted unanimously to publish the FOMC minutes three weeks after the day of the policy decision. The information that the Committee reviewed at its February 2005 meeting indicated that the economy had continued to expand at a steady pace. The labor market showed signs of further improvement, and consumer spending and the housing market remained robust. Industrial production accelerated, particularly at the end of 2004, and growth of business fixed investment was solid in the fourth quarter. Core inflation stayed moderate, and measures of inflation expectations remained well anchored. Given the solid economic expansion and limited price pressures, the Committee voted to continue its removal of policy accommodation by raising its target for the federal funds rate from 2-1/4 percent to 2-1/2 percent and to essentially repeat the language of the December statement. Futures market quotes indicated that investors had already priced in a 25 basis point increase in the target federal funds rate at the meeting, and market participants reportedly expected no substantive changes to the accompanying statement. Accordingly, the reaction in financial markets to the announcement was minimal. Fuente: http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/hh/2005/february/ReportSection1.htm
Fuente: Ministerio de Hacienda: http://www.minhacienda.gov.co/servlet/page?_pageid=620,1812&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30&2331_FOLDER_8835323.p_subid=160757&2331_FOLDER_8835323.p_sub_siteid=37&2331_FOLDER_8835323.p_edit=0
Mayo5 de 2004 Tomado de: http://www.presidencia.gov.co/sne/2004/mayo/05/07052004.htm Dice la viceministra de Hacienda $12,9 BILLONES COSTARÁN PENSIONES EN EL 2005 Bogotá, 5 may. (SNE). - El pago de pensiones con cargo a los recursos del Presupuesto Nacional será de 12,9 billones de pesos en el año 2005, constituyéndose en el principal problema en el mediano y en el largo plazo. Así lo afirmó la viceministra de Hacienda, María Inés Agudelo, en la Comisión II de la Cámara de Representantes durante un debate sobre la deuda pública externa citado por el parlamentario Efrén Antonio Hernández. La funcionaria indicó que como a mediados de este año se acabarán las reservas del Instituto de los Seguros Sociales, el Gobierno Nacional tendrá que responder por el pago de 9,6 billones de pesos en el 2004. Agudelo indicó que hoy día el pasivo pensional del sector público colombiano se calcula en 279 billones de pesos de 1999, lo que representa 161 puntos del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB). De esos 161 puntos del PIB, 41 corresponden al Instituto de los Seguros Sociales, 46 puntos del PIB a las cajas públicas, 24 a los maestros, 26 a las Fuerzas Armadas, 16 a los bonos emitidos y la diferencia se debe por la garantía de pensión mínima. "Estos 161 puntos del PIB quieren decir lo que nos vale a nosotros todas las pensiones en términos de largo plazo", insistió. PROBLEMA DE CORTO PLAZO Afirmó que el problema de corto plazo es el flujo anual del pago de pensiones. Por ejemplo, en el año 2003 se pagaron 12,3 billones de pesos, pero aclaró que no todo lo canceló el Estado sino con los ingresos recibidos por cotizaciones. La Viceministra de Hacienda dijo que en el año 2003 el déficit en pensiones ascendió a 7,3 billones de pesos, ya con cargo a recursos del Presupuesto Nacional. "Hay algo muy importante, en los próximos 3, 4 o 5 meses se acaban las reservas del Seguro Social. Eso quiere decir que de aquí en adelante el Seguro ya no tiene reservas para pagar las pensiones de sus afiliados, sino que cuando las vaya a pagar después de pagar con cargo a las cotizaciones que le ingresan, va a venir al Ministerio de Hacienda a pedir la diferencia. Eso este año asciende a 9,6 billones de pesos, monto muy importante que tiene que salir del bolsillo de todos los colombianos", explicó. Agregó que según los cálculos del Ministerio de Hacienda, en el 2005 esos pagos serán de 12,9 billones de pesos con cargo a recursos del Presupuesto Nacional. Los pagos de las pensiones hacen parte de los gastos de funcionamiento del Gobierno Nacional Central, junto con las transferencias a los municipios para educación, salud, acueducto y alcantarillado. "Hacia el futuro lo que tiene que hacer el país a través del Gobierno y del Congreso, es dar una discusión sobre cómo vamos a resolver este problema. Ustedes saben que hemos discutido un acto legislativo que ataca de alguna manera y lo traeremos en la próxima legislatura, para cambiar algunas cosas en el régimen pensional, pero acompañando a esto tenemos que reformar la ley de pensiones", señaló. Agudelo conceptuó que si no se enfrenta con responsabilidad ese tema, claramente hacia el futuro la deuda pública subirá con relación al Producto Interno Bruto y podría generar problemas de insostenibilidad en el mediano plazo.
Mayo5 de 2004 Tomado de: http://www.presidencia.gov.co/sne/2004/mayo/05/07052004.htm Dice la viceministra de Hacienda $12,9 BILLONES COSTARÁN PENSIONES EN EL 2005 Bogotá, 5 may. (SNE). - El pago de pensiones con cargo a los recursos del Presupuesto Nacional será de 12,9 billones de pesos en el año 2005, constituyéndose en el principal problema en el mediano y en el largo plazo. Así lo afirmó la viceministra de Hacienda, María Inés Agudelo, en la Comisión II de la Cámara de Representantes durante un debate sobre la deuda pública externa citado por el parlamentario Efrén Antonio Hernández. La funcionaria indicó que como a mediados de este año se acabarán las reservas del Instituto de los Seguros Sociales, el Gobierno Nacional tendrá que responder por el pago de 9,6 billones de pesos en el 2004. Agudelo indicó que hoy día el pasivo pensional del sector público colombiano se calcula en 279 billones de pesos de 1999, lo que representa 161 puntos del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB). De esos 161 puntos del PIB, 41 corresponden al Instituto de los Seguros Sociales, 46 puntos del PIB a las cajas públicas, 24 a los maestros, 26 a las Fuerzas Armadas, 16 a los bonos emitidos y la diferencia se debe por la garantía de pensión mínima. "Estos 161 puntos del PIB quieren decir lo que nos vale a nosotros todas las pensiones en términos de largo plazo", insistió. PROBLEMA DE CORTO PLAZO Afirmó que el problema de corto plazo es el flujo anual del pago de pensiones. Por ejemplo, en el año 2003 se pagaron 12,3 billones de pesos, pero aclaró que no todo lo canceló el Estado sino con los ingresos recibidos por cotizaciones. La Viceministra de Hacienda dijo que en el año 2003 el déficit en pensiones ascendió a 7,3 billones de pesos, ya con cargo a recursos del Presupuesto Nacional. "Hay algo muy importante, en los próximos 3, 4 o 5 meses se acaban las reservas del Seguro Social. Eso quiere decir que de aquí en adelante el Seguro ya no tiene reservas para pagar las pensiones de sus afiliados, sino que cuando las vaya a pagar después de pagar con cargo a las cotizaciones que le ingresan, va a venir al Ministerio de Hacienda a pedir la diferencia. Eso este año asciende a 9,6 billones de pesos, monto muy importante que tiene que salir del bolsillo de todos los colombianos", explicó. Agregó que según los cálculos del Ministerio de Hacienda, en el 2005 esos pagos serán de 12,9 billones de pesos con cargo a recursos del Presupuesto Nacional. Los pagos de las pensiones hacen parte de los gastos de funcionamiento del Gobierno Nacional Central, junto con las transferencias a los municipios para educación, salud, acueducto y alcantarillado. "Hacia el futuro lo que tiene que hacer el país a través del Gobierno y del Congreso, es dar una discusión sobre cómo vamos a resolver este problema. Ustedes saben que hemos discutido un acto legislativo que ataca de alguna manera y lo traeremos en la próxima legislatura, para cambiar algunas cosas en el régimen pensional, pero acompañando a esto tenemos que reformar la ley de pensiones", señaló. Agudelo conceptuó que si no se enfrenta con responsabilidad ese tema, claramente hacia el futuro la deuda pública subirá con relación al Producto Interno Bruto y podría generar problemas de insostenibilidad en el mediano plazo.
57 millones de afiliados, 3 millones (6%) más que un año antes. México concentra 56% del total de afiliados, seguido por Argentina y Chile. Se destacan los crecimientos anuales de México, en valores absolutos, y de Bolivia, en términos relativos. Tomado de: http://www.aiosfp.org/documentos/boletin11.pdf
Cabe considerar, sin embargo, que éste no es necesariamente un buen indicador de la cobertura previsional total de los distintos países, puesto que en algunos casos subsiste el régimen público de reparto y también existen otros regímenes alternativos y/o complementarios, como el de empleados públicos en México y en varias provincias de Argentina; profesionales, bancarios y escribanos en Uruguay y las fuerzas armadas (policía y/o militares) en varios países.
Tomado de: Informe diario SUVALOR, Marzo 22 de 2005
Información de América Latina Tomada de: http://www.bancoldex.com/pdf/perspectivas_economias_latinoamericanas_sept2004.pdf
http://es.biz.yahoo.com/050314/4/3yge6.html 14 de marzo de 2005, Trichet subraya que la actividad económica de la UE sigue envuelta en "incertidumbres" por el petróleo. Prevé una inflación máxima del 2,2 por ciento en este año y en 2006 El presidente del Banco Central Europeo (BCE), Jean-Claude Trichet, subrayó hoy a los eurodiputados que la actividad económica en la Unión Europea sigue envuelta en "incertidumbres" de tipo externo por culpa de los "altos y volátiles" precios del petróleo. Trichet constató que tras los cambios "positivos" en la primera mitad del 2004, luego hubo índices de crecimiento "muy moderados" en la segunda mitad del pasado año, con un aumento de un 0,2 por ciento del PIB en el tercer y cuatro trimestre, lo que dejó el índice anual en un incremento del 1,8%, una "mejora significativa" con respecto a 2003. "En los próximos trimestres, el aumento del consumo podría beneficiarse de los cambios previstos en la renta disponible real. La inversión seguirá beneficiándose seguramente de las variaciones financieras muy favorables. La exportación del área euro seguirá beneficiándose del fuerte crecimiento mundial y por ello esperamos un crecimiento continuo moderado en el área euro en 2005 y 2006, tal y como se refleja en las proyecciones del BCE", resumió el máximo responsable del BCE. Sin embargo, advirtió de que las perspectivas para la actividad económica en la UE "siguen envueltos en incertidumbres en el aspecto externo debido a los precios del petróleo altos y volátiles". En el ámbito interno, hizo hincapié en que hay "incertidumbres" en torno a la evolución del consumo privado, mientras que las condiciones favorables de la actividad empresarial "podría llegar a un crecimiento superior al esperado". En lo que se refiere al desarrollo de los precios, indicó que la evolución en el precio del petróleo y en los impuestos indirectos han tenido un impacto "significativo" sobre la inflación de los precios de consumo del año pasado. Así, la inflación en el conjunto de 2004 fue del 2,1 por ciento, índice que cayo al 1,9% en enero de este año frente al 2,2 de diciembre. A su juicio, este hecho se debió al desarrollo de los impuestos indirectos y la situación administrativa de algunos países. Trichet recordó que la primera estimación de Eurostat para febrero es que la inflación en la UE se sitúe en el 2 por ciento y estimó que marzo registrará el mismo índice que el mes precedente. De cara al futuro, señaló que hay "pocos indicios" de que las presiones inflacionarias internas estén aumentando en la zona euro. "Los aumentos son moderados y esta tendencia seguirá en el contexto de un crecimiento económico moderado. Las previsiones del BCE sitúan la inflación en el 1,6 y el 2,2 por ciento en 2005 y entre el 1 y 2,2% para el 2006", explicó. CONTINUAS VIGILANCIAS Pese a ello, volvió a los riesgos que hay en cuanto a la estabilidad de los precios ya que, en su opinión, "siguen aumentando y exigen continuas vigilancias" por parte de los Estados miembros. "Estos riesgos siguen asociados con los precios del petróleo, la incertidumbre sobre los futuros aumentos de los impuestos indirectos y administrativos, y efectos secundarios potenciales de determinados comportamientos como los cambios a largo plazo", precisó. Asimismo, justificó el hecho de que el BCE haya dejado sin cambios los tipos de interés de la zona euro desde junio de 2003. "Estamos llevando a la práctica que con nuestras medidas tengamos una estabilidad de precios, que es lo que pide el ciudadano al ser un instrumento importantísimo para el crecimiento y la creación de empleos en Europa. La confianza del consumidor es crucial y también la de los inversores", hizo hincapié. Trichet informó a los eurodiputados que las previsiones del BCE es que la inflación alcance el 1,85 por ciento este año y el 1,9 y 2,5 por ciento en los siguientes. "Todos nos piden que la inflación no supere el 2 por ciento", apostilló.
http://es.biz.yahoo.com/050314/4/3yge6.html 14 de marzo de 2005, Trichet subraya que la actividad económica de la UE sigue envuelta en "incertidumbres" por el petróleo. Prevé una inflación máxima del 2,2 por ciento en este año y en 2006 El presidente del Banco Central Europeo (BCE), Jean-Claude Trichet, subrayó hoy a los eurodiputados que la actividad económica en la Unión Europea sigue envuelta en "incertidumbres" de tipo externo por culpa de los "altos y volátiles" precios del petróleo. Trichet constató que tras los cambios "positivos" en la primera mitad del 2004, luego hubo índices de crecimiento "muy moderados" en la segunda mitad del pasado año, con un aumento de un 0,2 por ciento del PIB en el tercer y cuatro trimestre, lo que dejó el índice anual en un incremento del 1,8%, una "mejora significativa" con respecto a 2003. "En los próximos trimestres, el aumento del consumo podría beneficiarse de los cambios previstos en la renta disponible real. La inversión seguirá beneficiándose seguramente de las variaciones financieras muy favorables. La exportación del área euro seguirá beneficiándose del fuerte crecimiento mundial y por ello esperamos un crecimiento continuo moderado en el área euro en 2005 y 2006, tal y como se refleja en las proyecciones del BCE", resumió el máximo responsable del BCE. Sin embargo, advirtió de que las perspectivas para la actividad económica en la UE "siguen envueltos en incertidumbres en el aspecto externo debido a los precios del petróleo altos y volátiles". En el ámbito interno, hizo hincapié en que hay "incertidumbres" en torno a la evolución del consumo privado, mientras que las condiciones favorables de la actividad empresarial "podría llegar a un crecimiento superior al esperado". En lo que se refiere al desarrollo de los precios, indicó que la evolución en el precio del petróleo y en los impuestos indirectos han tenido un impacto "significativo" sobre la inflación de los precios de consumo del año pasado. Así, la inflación en el conjunto de 2004 fue del 2,1 por ciento, índice que cayo al 1,9% en enero de este año frente al 2,2 de diciembre. A su juicio, este hecho se debió al desarrollo de los impuestos indirectos y la situación administrativa de algunos países. Trichet recordó que la primera estimación de Eurostat para febrero es que la inflación en la UE se sitúe en el 2 por ciento y estimó que marzo registrará el mismo índice que el mes precedente. De cara al futuro, señaló que hay "pocos indicios" de que las presiones inflacionarias internas estén aumentando en la zona euro. "Los aumentos son moderados y esta tendencia seguirá en el contexto de un crecimiento económico moderado. Las previsiones del BCE sitúan la inflación en el 1,6 y el 2,2 por ciento en 2005 y entre el 1 y 2,2% para el 2006", explicó. CONTINUAS VIGILANCIAS Pese a ello, volvió a los riesgos que hay en cuanto a la estabilidad de los precios ya que, en su opinión, "siguen aumentando y exigen continuas vigilancias" por parte de los Estados miembros. "Estos riesgos siguen asociados con los precios del petróleo, la incertidumbre sobre los futuros aumentos de los impuestos indirectos y administrativos, y efectos secundarios potenciales de determinados comportamientos como los cambios a largo plazo", precisó. Asimismo, justificó el hecho de que el BCE haya dejado sin cambios los tipos de interés de la zona euro desde junio de 2003. "Estamos llevando a la práctica que con nuestras medidas tengamos una estabilidad de precios, que es lo que pide el ciudadano al ser un instrumento importantísimo para el crecimiento y la creación de empleos en Europa. La confianza del consumidor es crucial y también la de los inversores", hizo hincapié. Trichet informó a los eurodiputados que las previsiones del BCE es que la inflación alcance el 1,85 por ciento este año y el 1,9 y 2,5 por ciento en los siguientes. "Todos nos piden que la inflación no supere el 2 por ciento", apostilló.
![Economía ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()