Introduction
Altagracia Gómez’s speech at Davos is indeed an effective piece of communication. She speaks the right language, in the right forum, and with the appropriate tone. However, the issue lies in the fact that the script does not change the economy. It only alters the perception of those who do not live in Mexico.
The Discourse: A Closer Look
In Davos, it was suggested that Mexico needs to “reimagine” the relationship between private initiative, academia, and government. This led to the creation of an Advisory Business Council within the economic cabinet, which sounds modern. However, the question remains: can this council guide industrial policy when Mexico displays clear signs of institutional uncertainty, insecurity, prolonged permits, and a political logic that penalizes private investment when it doesn’t align with the official narrative?
The heart of the message is “Plan Mexico,” a grand national plan with long-term vision, productive and social infrastructure, and specific KPIs. On paper, it’s perfect. But in reality, one might ask: where is this plan in public life? A serious plan should be visible in budgets, priorities, reforms, real coordination with states and municipalities, and a credible signal that the government understands growth is a necessary condition for development.
Economic Goals and Their Challenges
Mexico aims to be one of the ten largest economies globally and reduce poverty and inequality. It’s claimed that recent policies, especially the increase in the minimum wage, have lifted “thirteen million” people out of poverty. Beyond the number, the critical point is the conceptual confusion: conflating nominal transfer or income with sustainable social mobility. While you can improve a statistic for a period, poverty isn’t defeated with phrases or isolated increases if there’s no productivity, formal employment, and sustained growth. The minimum wage can help, but without accompanying investment and productivity, the effect wears off, pushing informality or precarity.
Investment Targets and Their Hurdles
The investment target is to reach “twenty-five percent of GDP” by 2026 and “twenty-eight percent” by 2030, as this is claimed to be the only way to break the growth barrier. While true that without investment, high growth isn’t possible, the disappointment lies in the question: what has the government done to ensure consistent, massive, and sustainable investment?
Investment isn’t decreed; it responds to rules, certainty, security, available energy, and functional justice. If permits currently take “two point seven years,” as acknowledged in Davos, it’s not just an administrative detail; it’s a symptom of a non-functioning state that doesn’t produce.
The Path to Simplification
Despite the challenges, a promise is made that these two point seven years will decrease to one. A new secretariat for simplification is announced, which is welcome. However, simplification isn’t resolved by creating offices; it’s resolved by removing discretion, truly digitalizing, harmonizing criteria, and most importantly, eliminating the incentive for making bureaucracy a business.
Industrial Strengths and Overlooked Factors
Davos lists industrial strengths: heavy trucks, auto parts, vehicles, medical devices, semiconductors in certain segments, critical minerals, potential renewable energy, and aerospace. While this might be true to some extent, a list of rankings isn’t a development strategy. The crucial point left unsaid is that the bottleneck for these industries to scale isn’t discourse; it’s real logistical infrastructure, security, energy, and legal certainty. Aplause won’t fix this; tough decisions will.
Macroeconomic Stability vs. Real Development
The closing message emphasizes macroeconomic stability: an independent central bank, stable inflation, good debt-to-GDP ratio, low unemployment compared to others… It sounds great. However, citizens don’t consume “debt-to-GDP ratio”; they pay for tortillas, rent, transportation, and medications. What’s clear is that macroeconomic stability doesn’t replace development; it only makes it possible. The issue here is presuming stability while postponing growth and presuming “humanism” while neglecting productivity.
Key Questions and Answers
- Q: Does the speech at Davos translate into real economic change in Mexico? A: The speech sounds good, but without corresponding actions, it remains disconnected from the lived experiences of Mexicans.
- Q: What are the challenges in implementing the proposed plans? A: The main obstacles include institutional uncertainty, prolonged permit processes, and a lack of sustained investment, among others.
- Q: How does the increase in minimum wage impact poverty reduction? A: While it can temporarily lift people out of poverty, sustained growth and productivity are necessary for lasting change.
- Q: What is required to boost industrial growth in Mexico? A: Real logistical infrastructure, security, energy availability, and legal certainty are crucial for industrial growth.
- Q: Can macroeconomic stability alone drive development? A: Macroeconomic stability is necessary but not sufficient for development; it must be coupled with real growth and productivity.
