Talk:Steve Hanke

2020 comment

This page needs to be flagged - way too much material for this person given their social relevance. Also almost entirely written by Josephgrossberg, who if you find their user page, links to their twitter > personal website > linkedin which has details on how they were a student of Steve Hanke. ie conflict of interest, not to mention the existing issue which is that this mistakenly gives reader the impression this person has significant social standing based off of the length and apparent breadth/depth of the wikipedia page. --MarcusLeland (talk) 12:14, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Premerge Histories of Merged Articles

• History of Steve Hanke Prior to Merger of Steve H. Hanke into it
  • (cur) (last) 16:01, 25 May 2005 StAkAr Karnak m (Category:Hanke)
  • (cur) (last) 02:22, 28 Mar 2005 Rcamans
    
• History of Steve H. Hanke prior to its merger into Steve Hanke
  • (cur) (last) 16:02, 25 May 2005 StAkAr Karnak m (Category:Hanke)
  • (cur) (last) 22:26, 17 May 2005 A2Kafir
  • (cur) (last) 03:45, 26 Nov 2004 Gzornenplatz m (format)
  • (cur) (last) 03:45, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:44, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg (→External Links)
  • (cur) (last) 03:43, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:43, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:40, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:37, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:37, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:34, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:34, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
• History of Steve Hanke Expected Soon After Merge (including Steve H. Hanke revisions)

  [note most revisions may take overnight to reappear after merge]

  note italics imply pre-merge title of "Steve Hanke")

  • (cur) (last) 16:02, 25 May 2005 StAkAr Karnak m (Category:Hanke)
  • (cur) (last) 16:01, 25 May 2005 StAkAr Karnak m (Category:Hanke)
  • (cur) (last) 22:26, 17 May 2005 A2Kafir
  • (cur) (last) 02:22, 28 Mar 2005 Rcamans
    
  • (cur) (last) 03:45, 26 Nov 2004 Gzornenplatz m (format)
  • (cur) (last) 03:45, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:44, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg (→External Links)
  • (cur) (last) 03:43, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:43, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:40, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:37, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:37, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:34, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg
  • (cur) (last) 03:34, 26 Nov 2004 Josephgrossberg

Krugman (and just the whole article)

The section on Krugman's critique of Hanke is weird.

It mischaracterizes what Krugman said. It has this weird claim about it being an "ad hominem" attack by Krugman by referencing an article that has nothing to do with Hanke. The citations that are supposed to refute Krugman's claims only refute the aforementioned mischaracterization but not what he actually said.

Krugman wrote that "[a]ccording to many press reports, Hanke has played an important role in the establishment of other, successful currency boards--for example, the Wall Street Journal editorial page claimed he "advised Argentina on linking its peso to the dollar," and Hanke likes to describe himself as an adviser to former Argentine Finance Minister Domingo Cavallo. Cavallo himself tells a different story, though. He claims Hanke first became involved three years after the board was established, when he volunteered his services as a publicist."

The section on Krugman here says: "Indeed, it is well known and was widely reported that Hanke operated as Cavallo's adviser during the 1990s." This does not contradict Krugman. He said the press had reported this but it was false.

Óli Gneisti (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I had the same reaction to that section. I would have deleted it myself except I don't want to get into edit wars with people who have strong biases. --Nbauman (talk) 05:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Someone reverted my edit, also claimed possible vandalism on my part. Óli Gneisti (talk) 13:19, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

As I had previously researched this small section about a 1998 OpEd and added a citation, perhaps you and Ocean11nt can pause the revert war for a few days and I can take a fresh try at editing, post it here, explain my reasoning, and discuss appropriately. Zatsugaku (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I apologize for the extended delay in returning to this edit; I had almost completed notes, references, and a draft a few weeks after I made the above Talk comment, but some circumstances intervened. I was reminded recently when a colleague in Washington attended an event with Domingo Cavallo’s daughter and he recalled I had earlier asked about this episode of Argentine history. I had to reconstitute some of my notes but a reason I initially offered to clarify this entry is that I have a close relative who was a career Foreign Service Officer (FSO) in South America in this era. I was able to “make inquires” and check sources beyond what I can include with citations, but which has given me confidence that I have the basic and supportable facts correct, even though I am not otherwise an SME.

I will shortly propose some edits for a specific part of the entry, but first I want to outline and make the related background available for discussion, broken into a few Talk posts.

I’m certain some editors will find my Talk thread excessive for what is currently such a short entry. However, there seems to have been quite a few revisions already and the actual context has several layers; leaving out that context substantially alters the understanding of the quotes and events they refer to.

What is interesting about this particular Criticism entry is that for one of the quotes, the relevant supporting background is already mostly covered in the article’s Argentina section. However, these sections are distinct, and I think I need to first reprise and support that background here in Talk. The end result of an edit should be that the entry offers readers an improved path to a more complete context for the criticism, either in the section or by reference, and is respectful both to the critic (Minister Cavallo) and the subject (Hanke). (For the particular quote, Krugman was essentially reporting Cavallo’s comments.)

I hope those who have diverging opinions will recognize my effort to avoid imparting any bias or disrespect in the process of providing improved context, and can later refer back to the Argentina section and these Talk posts as appropriate. (To be continued.) Zatsugaku (talk) 05:01, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Cavallo’s NYT quote:

In his OpEd, Krugman relies on an earlier quote in the NYT attributed to Cavallo, former Minister of Economy. However, the quote needs significant qualification as in researching this topic, it became clear the NYT article does not include essential background necessary to understand the history and roles. The lack of qualification justifies why Hanke would take exception to it: the full background completely alters the interpretation of events.

Here is the NYT article by Seth Mydans, 28 Feb 1998, from which the quote is taken: [1]

"In Argentina, Mr. Hanke says he was an adviser to the Government, which created its board in 1991. Domingo Cavallo, who was that country's Finance Minister at the time, said this week that Mr. Hanke's role was essentially as a publicist for the board."

"In 1994, three years after the currency board was in place, he came to me in the ministry, and he offered to help us explain abroad, how does a currency board work, Mr. Cavallo said. That was his involvement, that is, explaining abroad the way our monetary system was working. He was not involved in the launching of the currency board."

First, in fairness to Minister Cavallo, I recognize that people hold diverging opinions as to the role in history of individuals who bring ideas to the table versus those who must undertake implementation and administration. (In industry, this is a topic of significant contention where corporations often diminish the role of independent inventors who file patents but who are not in a position to manufacture.) It is also possible to make semantically accurate statements that nevertheless lead to assumptions that significantly differ from what would be concluded based on a more complete context.

Events surrounding the creation of the Convertibility Plan: It is accurate that Cavallo drafted the legislation for the Convertibility Plan, specific to Argentina, and he implemented it after its passage. (It was technically not an orthodox currency board.) What is not in the NYT article is that Hanke arrived in Argentina and met with President Menem to suggest a currency board more than a year before the legislation and was asked to draft a monograph on how to implement one. (Hanke makes no claim to inventing currency boards.)

Over the next year, Profs Hanke and Kurt Schuler completed a roughly 75-page document in English, the draft of which was circulated in the Argentine legislature. It was translated into Spanish and then published as ¿BancoCentral o Caja de Conversión? by Fundacion Republica para una nueva generación in July of 1991. The publication included a six-page introduction by legislative leader José María Ibarbia. (I have a copy.)

While Cavallo had been appointed in February, the timeline is that the monograph had to be written before it could be translated and published. Scans are available at a few research libraries. (I will include a google translation of a Table of Contents shortly.) A copy (just the first few pages/introduction by Ibarbia) is on Archive.org. I think the monograph’s scope will make clear that it is both a comprehensive rationale and high-level framework for implementing a currency board. Thus, when the Convertibility Plan legislation was drafted/offered by Cavallo, members of Argentina’s National Congress had already been briefed.

In Summary, the NYT quote from Cavallo implies Hanke did not come on the Argentine scene until 1994, three years after the legislation, when in fact, Hanke’s advising/authorship on the creation of a currency board for Argentina predated by more than a year Cavallo’s own appointment in 1991 to the Economy Ministry. Assessing the NYT quote, it comes down to parsing what the phrase “…not involved in the launching…” implies. The plain reading would lead a reasonable person, as it did Krugman, to reach an erroneous interpretation of what had transpired. (To be continued.) Zatsugaku (talk) 21 Dec 2023

Below is the translation of the Table of Contents of the monograph completed in English in 1990 and circulated prior to the Convertibility Plan legislation and formally published in Spanish in 1991 with a prologue by Congressman Ibarbia (after the Plan’s introduction). I have only included the first paragraphs of the prologue as they suffice to substantiate that Hanke and Schuler’s were involved long before 1994 and their proposal was the progenitor of Argentina’s currency reform and thus the NYT quote in question is unequivocally misleading.

Subsequent text in the prologue touches on the administrative divergence between an orthodox currency board and the Convertibility Plan as implemented by Cavallo. Cavallo’s authorship of the actual legislation and subsequent leadership on the Plan is not in question. (Hanke has written numerous papers as to why the divergence was a serious flaw and indeed the prologue portends that outcome. Hanke and Schuler have written extensively on this topic and there is no reason to cover it in this thread. )

Central Bank Or Currency Board?
Steve H. Hanke y Kurt Schuler
Table of Contents
Prologue 1
1. Introduction: monetary reform and development of the Argentine economy 6
2. What is a currency board? 11
3 How a currency board works 14
4. Central banking 28
5. Advantages of a currency board over a central bank 32
6. How to establish a currency board 37
7. How to operate a currency board 44
8. How to protect a currency board 49
9 Summary and conclusion 53
Annex I: Model law for a currency board 55
Annex II: A critique of the supposed disadvantages of currency boards 58
Bibliography 62

PROLOGUE
The Republic Foundation for a New Generation has asked me for a prologue to this work by Steve H. Hanke and Kurt Schuler. As I said Alberdi in the Bases1, “I write quickly to catch up with time in its career and take advantage of their collaboration. There is always a given time in that the human word becomes flesh. When that hour has struck, he who proposes the word, speaker or writer, makes the law."

Although it does not coincide with my monetary reform project, I have for myself that this proposal to create a currency board comes opportunely, especially because it suggests making money independent of government and because it encourages currency competition against the current state monopoly derived from forced tender laws. Clip
José María Ibarbia, Buenos Aires, Julio de 1991.

(To be continued: Next, I’ll summarize the actual context behind Cavallo description of Hanke’s work on “explaining abroad the way our monetary system was working.”) Zatsugaku (talk) 22:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Per above, the second facet of the NYT quote deals with 1994-95, when Cavallo describes Hanke as merely being involved to explain to people outside the country the character of Argentina’s currency board (which Krugman summarizes as essentially being a publicist). Again, this is a case where dropping the context leads to a very different understanding. Why would Hanke be involved and why would he have been given an official government appointment to do so? (“Argentina Appoints U.S. Professor as Currency Advisor”, Bloomberg, Jan 1995)

The situation was the middle of the Mexican Peso crises when, over about a year, the Peso was devalued from about 3.5 to the dollar to about 7 to the dollar. This process triggered what is termed the “Tequila Effect” or “Tequila Crises” which led to significant fears that other Latin American countries were soon to suffer the same fate – leading to a broad-spread capital flight, pressure on currencies, etc.

For those who weren’t in this sector in 1994-95, there was a serious contagion effect leading to speculative attacks and massive short selling by some of the world’s largest players. A key point is that the Mexican Peso had been managed as a fixed exchange rate but the valuation was illusionary. The Argentine Peso was also a fixed exchange rate, leading to assumptions that it might face a similar shock devaluation. But that assumption reflects a misunderstanding of how a currency board works. If one conservatively assesses the scope of the risk at the time, Argentina’s economic stability and tens of billions in value were indeed at stake.

Stepping into a financial crises to explain the distinction to foreign investors, hedge funds, and global FX traders to forestall economic contagion could technically be framed as a “publicist.” Yet the context of the quote was to use the description to diminish Hanke’s credentials, when the context of the advising was clearly to leverage Hanke’s credentials. (Between the monograph for Menem and the Peso crises, Hanke had been involved in establish five other currency boards in Europe.) In the NYT quote, the topic of Hanke’s role in 1994-95 is used rhetorically to acknowledge some participation in Argentina while evading the much more substantive role, along with Schuler, as being the progenitor of a Currency Board proposal in 1989-90.

(Summation and recommendations to follow) Zatsugaku (talk) 11:35, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

A condensed version of the below summation, holding to WP:Impartial, should suffice for WP:Balance as required by WP:NPOV.

In his OpEd, Krugman relied on Cavallo’s NYT quote implying Hanke had no role in Argentina’s Convertibility Plan. But the background shows the quote is narrowly referencing the 1991 convertibility legislation and its administration. Hanke’s role, however, began in 1989, more than a year before Cavallo was appointed as Minister of Economy with the charter to implement such a plan. Consulting to Menem, Hanke was the progenitor of the currency board proposal and co-author of a 64-page monograph explaining what it is and how to do it, the draft of which was circulated in Argentina’s legislature, as confirmed in the prologue by then congressman Ibarbia. As Hanke’s role in that timeframe was not focused on working with Cavallo, Cavallo’s quote is understandable but lacked context and was consequently misleading. Later in 1984-85, during a Latin American currency devaluation crises that threatened to destabilize Argentina’s economy, Hanke was given an official appointment by Cavallo for the purpose of conveying assurances to investors and currency traders that Argentina’s peso would not collapse as had the Mexican peso. Zatsugaku (talk) 05:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

References

Lockdown study

Just read this about a new non-peer-reviewed "study" Hanke wrote: [2]

I expect people to add something about the "study" to the article soon, and I hope it will not be PROFRINGE... --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:28, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Good addition. That paper was getting a lot of coverage. BTW, here's another article, by Laurie Garrett. I know you have a lot of cites, but Garrett is a scientist who has been reporting on emerging diseases for for about 40 years, and a well-established authority.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/08/economists-are-fueling-the-war-against-public-health/?tpcc=recirc_latest062921

Economists Are Fueling the War Against Public Health

A new report is being hailed by conservatives—but doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

By Laurie Garrett

Foreign Policy

FEBRUARY 8, 2022

Hanke's article was also negatively critiqued, and Garrett cited, on TWIV 866, for their Weekly Picks 1:26:27. Rich Condit called it an "example of motivated reasoning indulging in scientific cherry-picking, to prove a preferred thesis about public health." It's "garbage, put together by people who have a political agenda." --Nbauman (talk) 19:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)