Some leftists argue that people should not use GDP to measure economic progress. It seems that the NYT has embraced this view in an article singing the praises of Brazil's economy. The NYT tell us that Brazil has "something Latin American long lacked: confidence." It's not clear how the NYT measures confidence, but Brazil does rather poorly by criterion that are more easily measured, like economic growth. While the IMF estimates that Chile's per capita growth between 2002 and 2007 averaged 3.6 percent, and Argentina's growth averaged 7.8 percent, Brazil's growth is estimated at just 2.4 percent. In spite of this weak growth performance, the NYT tells readers declares that inflation in Brazil has fallen because of the "competent management of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva." It also tells readers that "more Brazilians have more money" than they did previously. These comments have no place in a news article. Economies grow, unless there is a war, natural disaster, or really bad management. The relevant question is the rate of growth. Brazil has done very poorly by this measure. If Brazil's economy had some alternative criteria by which it had done well to offset it weak growth, such as more leisure time for workers or more equal distribution of income, then perhaps the NYT's enthusiasm for Brazil's economy could be justified in spite of its weak growth, but the article presents no such evidence. In short, the NYT is anxious to celebrate Brazil's economy in spite of the data, not because of it.
--Dean Baker
