How to win in Trump’s era

For years, when someone talked about the knowledge economy, I stopped paying attention. He believed they were homilies about the importance of cutting -edge technology and education. And who doubts that technology and education are important? Now I understand my stupidity: in reality, the knowledge economy is the crucial mutation in the capitalism of this century, a game in which the United States has the court in a crushing way, and the countries that do not learn to play it are condemned to run from behind.

I did not become Trotskyist or anti -capitalist: I would only love to see my country to win in capitalism as it is, not in which some libertarians imagine, and for that they need strategic decisions. The knowledge economy is not just to manufacture cell phones or chips; is to possess ideas, algorithms, designs that make everything else work. It is very good to produce goods; But even the Argentine field, competitive as it is, needs more and more patents, Copyrights And of licenses, and for thirty years there is the money to make money. No matter who manufactures or export; It matters who owns the software, of the operating system, of the design. Today that owner, in most cases, is in the United States.

They knew how to do it with Master Hand. In the 90s, while the world sang (and rightly) loas to free tradeThe United States signed treaties such as gasoline, but with a strategic detail: each agreement came with a armored reinforcement to protect its patents and copyright. The new common sense said: let’s open the markets and the rest comes alone. The rest of the world did it; The United States, meanwhile, ensured that the rules on intellectual property were written in their favor. As the global economy became increasingly dependent on technology, software, pharmaceuticals, brands, the greater income is not for the one that produces, but for the one with the legal key to use the idea.

This refers us to A well -known fact, who pointed out liberals such as Schumpeter or Stiegler: capitalism tends periodically to generate monopolies, which can degenerate in feudalism forms. The left usually uses this to challenge the system; They omit that state control over the economy is a more oppressive and more corrupt monopoly, which also requires a growing repressive apparatus. This does not mean that in a historical moment like this – in which the virtualization of property radically changed the rules of international capitalism -, restoring the conditions of free competition requires an active effort from governments.

Jim Balsillie, the man who co -founded Blackberry, also compares the current situation with a feudalism. Not because Balsillie has affiliated with the FIT, but because she knows from experience that the business today is in permanent income. One can manufacture the product, sell it, distribute it, but in the end is the owner of the patent, who charges every time we use his idea. That owner is usually based on the United States and that is where he generates mostly work and pays most of his taxes.

Balsillie puts as an example to Google. He says that although his country, Canada, has offices of that company and its universities leave many of the software developers that Google uses, barely draws 1% of the benefits; The rest is for the United States. The truth is that it is difficult to establish precisely how much companies such as Alphabet, Disney, Hasbro or Nickelodeon contribute to the American economy, to name those that generate the most through their intellectual property.

But if One discounts fiscal deductions or credits and considers the gross benefits of the ten companies larger in 2023 and 21% of federal tax, it can risk that this year left the US treasure about 30,000 million dollars. Almost the entire Argentine countryside. In comparison, the benefit that other countries take out is almost nothing. Again: the true value is not in the infrastructure – the servers, the offices – but in the algorithms, the intellectual property, the marks, which are owned by the parent company.

Can a country like Argentina also win in this game? It is clear that it is not easy. The treaties International (such as NAFTA replacement, the USMCA) continues to reinforce these rules. And every time a country tries to generate its own knowledge industry, it clashes against a wall: the patents already registered, the treaties that do not allow copying, the technological dependence.

But it is not impossible either. Some countries – south core, Israel, even China – understood that could not limit themselves to being consumers of others of others. They invested not only in education and connectivity, but in promoting own companies, with their own intellectual property. In Argentina, meanwhile, we continue to buy technology with label and copyright. Every year that passes, the court leans a little more.

The matter is complicated because in recent years the United States did not settle for dominating the field of intellectual property. He also decided to recover land in industrial production. For that, he reduced corporate taxes and increased tariffs on foreign products. This began in Trump’s first presidency, continued with Biden, and in his second presidency Trump decided to put fifth.

In 2017 Trump signed the Tax and Reduction Law, which reduced the corporate tax from 35% to 21%. The idea was clear: make more attractive produce and operate from the United States. Now implements 25% tariffs on Imported steel and aluminum. It seeks to kill two birds with a shot: on the one hand, attract and retain companies within the United States; on the other, protect them from foreign competition through tariffs. If it achieves it, it is a historical feat: nothing less than to reverse deindustrialization and unemployment, the famous negative effects of globalization.

Works? That is another story. Some companies announced bonds and salary increases after fiscal reform; On the other hand, tariffs caused reprisals from other countries. In addition, although unemployment reached historical minimums before the pandemic, the fiscal deficit increased due to the decrease in tax revenues. Trump hopes to compensate for him with the tariffs and chainsaw of Elon Musk. If all this is going to bring another golden era for the United States or if it is going to put it on the dreaded path that the Peronist Argentina toured in the twentieth century, as they say in journalism, news in development.

But The conclusion does not change: to have a chance in the knowledge economy, Argentina needs do some intelligent things that the United States did first in the 90s and then successfully emulated smaller economies. It is not just about administering intellectual property (something that Argentina already does through organizations such as INPI), but to use it as an economic lever.

Specifically, Argentina would serve an advisory committee (as the United States has been for decades) for decades) that connects to INPI with universities, technological, pharmaceutical, audiovisual and legal specialists. Promote Argentine patent -generating companies and defend local patents in international litigation, so that intellectual property strengthens the trade balance. It is a spicy idea, but maybe it is correct: win in today’s capitalism by doing what the liberals, including the one who signs this, we learned to hate: direct resources strategically from the state.