June 19, 2013

Protesting Carlos Slim's exploitation of poor Mexicans

A mostly Mexican-American group called Two Counties One Voice has been protesting what Carlos Slim does to the poor of Mexico:
  • Slim's company, America Movil (comprised of Telmex and Telcel), has nearly 75 percent of the TOTAL Mexican telecommunications system – from telephone landlines to mobile telephone services.2 ...
  • It has been consistently proven throughout developing countries that access to services like mobile banking provides a route out of poverty.
  • To date, Slim's telecommunications empire has overcharged billions and billions of dollars to Mexicans, especially to the rural poor. Carlos Slim price gouged Mexican customers a total of$13.4 billion each year from 2005 to 2009 for basic telephone and Internet service according to the OECD study.
  • Slim's price gouging cost the Mexican economy $129 billion or about 2 percent of the country's total annual GDP.4...
  • Referencing these monopolistic practices, Mexico's Central Bank Governor noted “in unusually bold language... that successfully promoting an agenda of economic or 'structural' reform could see the country reach growth rates in excess of 5 percent a year – more than double the annual average over the last decade.”6 ...
  • The country's poorest are disproportionately hurt by the price gouging, coupled with the unreliable and poor services. Carlos Slim's monopolistic interests resulted in Mexico ranking LAST in public investment in telecommunications (#34 out of #34) while Slim's company Telmex had a profit margin of 47 percent – one of the highest of the 34 countries.7
  • According to the OECD report, Mexico loses 2.2% of its gross domestic product each year because of astronomically high cellphone rates, low Internet penetration, and mediocre connectivity.
  • Mexico has 10 percent as many wireless Internet subscribers per 100 inhabitants as Turkey. Its cellular phone rates are by far the most expensive in the OECD. Relative to other OECD countries, Mexico is ranked last in terms of investment in telecommunications per capita; but, says the study, “profit margins of the incumbent nearly double the OECD average.”8
Comparisons of Mexico to Turkey are not unreasonable. They currently have virtually the same GDP per capita.

Mexican telecom billionaire Carlos Slim, who intermittently trades off with Bill Gates as the World's Richest Man, bailed out the New York Times after the 2008 crash and owns, at last word, 8.1% of the most influential company in the American news and views hierarchy. 

The NYT has vociferously promoted more immigration from Mexico. Slim profits exorbitantly on calls between the two countries, but the NYT's obvious conflict of interest in promoting Mexican settlement in America, which promotes its second largest stockholder's wealth, is almost never remarked upon (or noticed).

23 comments:

wren said...

Amnesty: A conspiracy of elites to keep the poor man DOWN!

That's what I'm talking about!

Geoff Matthews said...

And you should continue to remark on it. The democrats should be held to the standard they set (concern for the poor).

wren said...

Hey! Don't I pay Carlos Slim every single month through the tax on my cell phone that funds Obamaphones?

I can't afford that!

The elites at the NYT are not only keeping the poor Mexicans down, they are keeping me down!

poolside said...

the NYT's obvious conflict of interest in promoting Mexican settlement in America, which promotes its second largest stockholder's wealth, is almost never remarked upon (or noticed).

And when I brought this up once on an Atlantic article, I was shouted down by the erudite liberal throng.

Anonymous said...

By making the conditions in Mexico less tolerable for the poor, Slim may be increasing the rate of emigration into America, further increasing the amount of calls to the USA. It's a win/win!

Provided that these long distance calls cost more than he would gouge them otherwise. Is there any data that compares the amount a given Mexican generates for Slim in Mexico vs the USA?

Steve Sailer said...

By the way, Slim argues that this Mexican-American protest group is really just a front for some Mexican financial interest that's out to get him:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/21/us-slim-complaint-idUSBRE94K1C320130521

Slim's suspicions don't sound too implausible: Mexican-Americans rarely self-organize out of civic-mindedness. It's one reason American political elites want more of them.

Anonymous said...

While I would not support the predation on the poor by a multi-billionaire, some of those assumptions/facts cited in the study sound pretty far-fetched, notably the second and third. How the heck does access to mobile banking provide a route out of poverty?

Jeff W. said...

How hard is it to get the Mexican government to screw over its own citizens with high phone rates?

If you are enormously wealthy and you bribe the politicans, and if you also have everybody's phone records, I guess it's not too hard.

Commen said...

Hopefully sometime soon, NYT will follow the Slim model and charge $20/paper. Its already on the decline, but there's a lot of ruin in a newspaper, so this would dramatically hasten its demise.

Frozen Jansen said...

"Geoff Matthews said...

And you should continue to remark on it. The democrats should be held to the standard they set (concern for the poor)."

It won't matter. A prominent liberal could set a starving Vietnamese boat family on fire in San Francisco, and not only would the left ignore it, Tim Wise would write the next day about the selfishness responsibility of carbon debt owed by white redneck men in Arkansas.

Anonymous said...

Idea for a bumper sticker in the year 2045:
(Translate if needed)

Si usted está leyendo esto en español, gracias a la banda de los ocho.

Skeptical Economist said...

At the implied suggestion of our host, I have been reading "Manana Forever?: Mexico and the Mexicans"
by Jorge Castañeda.

One of Castañeda's better observations is that Carlos Slim hasn't enjoyed much success north of the border where he can't get a government provided monopoly.

Read it all. It's not exactly a flattering portrait of Mexican society and culture.

Of course, Arias King is still the best writer on Mexico, Mexicans, and immigration. See "Immigration and Usurpation: Elites, Power, and the People’s Will" by Arias King.

Skeptical Economist said...

At the implied suggestion of our host, I have been reading "Manana Forever?: Mexico and the Mexicans"
by Jorge Castañeda.

One of Castañeda's better observations is that Carlos Slim hasn't enjoyed much success north of the border where he can't get a government provided monopoly.

Read it all. It's not exactly a flattering portrait of Mexican society and culture.

Of course, Arias King is still the best writer on Mexico, Mexicans, and immigration. See "Immigration and Usurpation: Elites, Power, and the People’s Will" by Arias King.

2Degrees said...

There was a time when the police chief in Mexico was listed as one of the richest men in the world.

You don't get to be a telecommunications magnate unless you are well connected in government circles.

Interestingly, Thaksin, the great man of the people in Thailand, is also a "self-made" telecommunications magnate. Don't make me laugh.

Anonymous said...

How S. 744 destroys middle-class American tech jobs:

http://goanimate.com/user/0-VFCDPgmUWU

Please watch and circulate.

ben tillman said...

What I want to know is, how does Salim hold onto this monopoly when there's so much money to be spread among the politically connected and Salim is not ethnically connected to the other Mexican power brokers?

Anonymous said...

Well, Slim is a Phoenician trader, isn't was for nothing that the Romans wiped out the phoenician city of Carthage.

Rob said...

How the heck does access to mobile banking provide a route out of poverty?

Maybe it makes it easier to get remissions from relatives in America?

24AheadDotCom said...

poolside writes: "And when I brought this up once on an Atlantic article, I was shouted down by the erudite liberal throng."

I've left several thousands of comments all over and I've been as viciously attacked as someone can be online. I've also been banned by many sites mainly just for disagreeing or showing them wrong.

I've gotten very little help with that beyond up votes and a few attaboys. But, actually working together and supporting people like me is beyond most of those who oppose amnesty.

P.S. When an NYT reporter hypes their latest pro-amnesty screed on Twitter, look up those who RT them. Then, point out to them the conflict of interest the NYT has, perhaps suggesting that the reporter follow the $ on the NYT. For instance, @JuliaPrestonNYT is fairly active.

Anonymous said...

Interesting. This might be why the NYT opposed amnesty last time around but supports it this time.

Dr Van Nostrand said...


Well, Slim is a Phoenician trader, isn't was for nothing that the Romans wiped out the phoenician city of Carthage."

Here we go.Stereotypes that are more 2000 years old?! If the trends from that era persisted. the Italian army should be the most powerful force in the western hemisphere.
Having said that you are right about the Lebanese, little has changed about the Phoenicians but Carthage is a different story.

Carthage was a Phoenician colony for quite a few centuries. They had been independent of Phoenicia for lot longer than U.S had been separated from their mother country.

Phoenicians were known to be warriors but collaborators.
Say what you will about Israelites ,they fought the Babylonians and Assyrians against overwhelming odds even though they had option to surrender and engange in ritual humiliation by having their king kiss the feet of the Mesopotamian king and be left in peace to do trade and prosper.

The Carthaginians obviously though of the same gene pool(with some Berber and other North African admixture) were of a different mindset.
More Romans died in one day at the hands of the Carthiginians at Cannae than Americans during the entirety of the Vietnam war.

Coming back to the Lebanese Phoenicians , how little their habits have changed.Rather than fight like the Zionists do, they simply collaborate and try to play all sides. Once with the Saudis,with the Syrians,with the PLO ,Israel or Iran or all at once.
They are a race of fixers,snitches and conmen

Dr Van Nostrand said...



I've left several thousands of comments all over and I've been as viciously attacked as someone can be online. I've also been banned by many sites mainly just for disagreeing or showing them wrong."

Im reminded of a story from the Upanishads where 6 sages wish to earn some scholarly cred by debating a more famous and erudite sage.
He soundly defeats all their arguments but they go away unconvinced of his victory.
Once take away was that it is not enough to be right or even proving you are right. Strength in numbers does make a difference as the strength of ignorance lies there.
Another though not neccesarily a contradictory lesson was that with such people it is just not necessary to defeat them in debate but humiliation is required as well.
And that can only occur in a large audience with an impartial moderator(usually a king)

Anonymous said...

"Coming back to the Lebanese Phoenicians , how little their habits have changed.Rather than fight like the Zionists do, they simply collaborate and try to play all sides. Once with the Saudis,with the Syrians,with the PLO ,Israel or Iran or all at once.
They are a race of fixers,snitches and conmen"

Hezbollah is the most impressive non-Israeli military force in the Middle East and the only one to go toe to toe with Israel and fight them to a draw. And they come from the most backward sectarian community in Lebanon.