[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-325503-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-325503-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","hansons-latin-american-letter-washington-10-november-1979","HANSON'S LATIN AMERICAN LETTER - Washington 10 November 1979","","Hanson’s Latin American letter dated Washington, 10 November 1979 analyzes U.S. and international creditworthiness ratings for Latin American countries and connects them to military influence, political uncertainty, and investment plans. It discusses survey-based credit scales, highlights Peru’s low rating and perceived Russian-backed armament context, and reports expectations of increased U.S. capital expenditures, especially in Peru and Mexico, with details on manufacturing allocations. It also examines confidence in Brazil, investment prospects in Chile and Argentina, and broader implications for U.S. national policy toward minerals and capital flows in the 1980s.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/hansons-latin-american-letter-washington-10-november-1979/325503/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/hansons-latin-american-letter-washington-10-november-1979/325503.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Noah","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-27","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",11,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What method does the letter use to discuss creditworthiness in Latin America?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It references ratings compiled by Institutional Investor based on a survey of views from fifty leading international banks and interviews with forty bank executives, scaled 1 to 10 with higher scores indicating greater creditworthiness.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Why is Peru singled out in the creditworthiness discussion?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Peru receives the poorest rating, which the letter attributes to concerns about offensive armament, Russian influence, internal difficulties, and uncertainty about how elections could shape external military adventures.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How does the letter connect these ratings to U.S. corporate investment outlooks for the 1980s?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Despite reservations, the letter reports projected increases in U.S. capital expenditures for countries such as Peru and Mexico, and argues that mining and minerals policy gaps could create serious challenges for the United States in the 1980s.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},325503,1790053628,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":97,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},8796095462418,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/80000253c1241d02b47?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1778826106357471780","HANSON'S LATIN AMERICAN LETTER  \nWASHINGTON10 November 1979Number 1808  \nDear Sir:  \nrmament Imp1tonsrof dollar51973-1977Peru $550Cuba480  \nArmament Im1rtonfrof do11arsrces 1973-1977Latin America:$3558Peru898Chile357Bolivia24Ecuador87Mexico66Brazil572Argentina216  \nts  \nSome American newspapers have been calling attention to the ratings forWHO IScreditworthiness compiled by Institutional Investor magazine on the basisCREDITWORTHY?of a survey of the views of fifty leading international banks and inter-views with forty bank executives.The cour.t :ies are scaled 1 to 10.Thelatter means most creditworthy and least likely to default.The formermeans least creditworthy and most likely to default.  \nIn comparison there are the judgments of U.S.corporations presumably re-lated in part to the scope of actual investment opportunities.  \nThe poorest rating in Latin America was given to Peru which has beenNOTarmed to the teeth with offensive armament by the Soviet Union,indeedPERU!with more equipment and more sophisticated military equipment even thanthe Russians were willing to provide their Cuban colony.  It is true thatthe Cubans exported $160 million of equipment to their areas of inter-  \nvention in Africa etc.,but this does not measure the amount of Russian equipment madeavailable to the Cuban mercenaries outside Cuba during that period,since much isshipped more directly to the Cubans on the war fronts they have created.  \nThe poor rating given Peru stems presumably also from the fact that itsrecovery from its status as a \"charity case\"has been made suspect by internal diffi-culties and uncertainty over what an election might bring,there being at all timesthe possibility that an external adventure mil.itarily against Chile or Ecuador mightbe needed to divert attention from conditions at home,a thesis bolstered by the factthat the Russians do not deliver armament in this quantity and quality without purpose.  \nNevertheless,the latest survey of American corporations reveals thatthey will increase significantly their capital expenditures in Peru in 1980,largelyfor petroleum.The interest in Peruvian manufacturing continues to be minimal:$3million in 1980,compared with $6 million in 1978 and $10 million in 1979.  \nA weckly lette for busmessmen pmblisbnd privsely in Wasbingfon,D.C.  \nCapital Expenditumr11bons o doiorsy-oned Afiliates  \nPeru  \nThe U.S.Treasury has told banks that it takes a fool to be sanguine atthis time about making loans to the developing countries.For the direct investor,nevertheless,Peru continues to attract funds despite the question of Russian influ-ence and the potential external military adventure as the internal economic and socialsituation deteriorates.  \n(Incidentally,the data on military outlays of scarce foreign exchange,and expansion correspondingly of military expenditures in the budget,come from theU.S.Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.)  \nIn the creditworthiness ratings referred to above,Mexico and Venezuelaunderstandably led the Latin American nations,being only slightly belowLARGERthe USSR and Italy.Reporting to the Department of Commerce in June,theINVESTMENTSdata now released show American corporations expanding significantly inINMexico as expected:MEXICO  \nMexico  \nVenezuela  \nWe should quickly add that data for capital expenditures do not meanproportionate outflows of net capital from the United States.Plowbacks of earningsetc.provide much of the requirements,as the data in our Letter 1805 indicate.  \nProjection of Capital Expenditures byU.S.Majority-Owned Affiliatesin Mexican Manufacturing(millions of dollars)Automobile  \n   \n   \n   \n96101Chemicals and Drugs596889111Machinery  \nThe scope of capital expenditures projected for Chile in 1980 remainssmal1,but it should be noted that the potential of corporate interestnow actively indicated in Chilean mining and petroleum augurs for a flowof billions in the succeeding years.  \nINVESTMENT  \nIN CHILE  \nn ChileProjectChileKey:  \n*Under $20 million**Over 5","cbCaif1BHVsek0Xm","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaif1BHVsek0Xm","pdf",1187840,"English","# Creditworthiness and Ratings\n## Method and Interpretation\n# Country Analyses and Investment Signals\n## Peru\n## Mexico\n## Chile\n## Brazil\n## Argentina","[{\"question\":\"What method does the letter use to discuss creditworthiness in Latin America?\",\"answer\":\"It references ratings compiled by Institutional Investor based on a survey of views from fifty leading international banks and interviews with forty bank executives, scaled 1 to 10 with higher scores indicating greater creditworthiness.\"},{\"question\":\"Why is Peru singled out in the creditworthiness discussion?\",\"answer\":\"Peru receives the poorest rating, which the letter attributes to concerns about offensive armament, Russian influence, internal difficulties, and uncertainty about how elections could shape external military adventures.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the letter connect these ratings to U.S. corporate investment outlooks for the 1980s?\",\"answer\":\"Despite reservations, the letter reports projected increases in U.S. capital expenditures for countries such as Peru and Mexico, and argues that mining and minerals policy gaps could create serious challenges for the United States in the 1980s.\"}]","HANSON'S LATIN AMERICAN LETTER - Washington 10 November 1979 | PDF",1789970691,13]