Economic challenges in Peru: political tensions and lack of public trust.

On August 11, the economic landscape of Peru has been the subject of attention on various occasions, reflecting both political tensions and social concerns regarding government decisions. This year, the debate over tax incentives for the construction sector has taken center stage, highlighting the disparities in the economic outlook of different ministries. The Minister of Economy, who has expressed his opposition to tax incentives, has argued that such measures could create distortions in the Peruvian economy. From his perspective, the focus should be on fiscal sustainability rather than resorting to policies that, although tempting in the short term, could be detrimental in the long run. This stance contrasts with that of the Minister of Housing, who has expressed the need to boost construction through incentives, seeking to stimulate a sector that has traditionally been a driver of employment and development in the country. The situation becomes more complex when considering that Peru still faces high levels of poverty. From Minister Carranza's office, a call for solidarity has been made to reduce this scourge, suggesting that actions should be more comprehensive and consider the well-being of the population as a whole. This implies that any measure must take into account not only the immediate economic benefits but also its impact on social inequality and the quality of life of citizens. Looking back a decade, in August 2014, the political and economic landscape was equally problematic. At that time, President Ollanta Humala's approval ratings experienced ups and downs, with 49% of the population considering that his government would be average in the following two years. The perception of the economy was marked by a slowdown, where sectors D and A/B showed higher levels of concern, while strata C were the least affected. This reflects a persistent reality where perceptions of the economy are deeply tied to the socioeconomic situation of each group. As time progresses, the analysis of surveys and public opinion studies reveals that skepticism about the future is a constant in the Peruvian narrative. Currently, only 13% of Peruvians believe that the government of Dina Boluarte will be good in the coming years, highlighting a widespread lack of confidence. The situation becomes even more complicated with the introduction of 13 bills that could increase employment costs, raising concerns among labor economics experts. These bills, which address issues such as access to profits for outsourced workers and the modification of the probationary period, have been criticized for not considering the broad problem of labor informality in the country. In a context where it is estimated that more than 70% of workers in Peru are informal, regulating a small segment of the population could not only be insufficient but counterproductive, generating greater distortions in the labor market. The lack of a comprehensive approach that addresses informality and considers the reality of workers is a challenge that the government must urgently address. The solution to these problems requires not only economic measures but also a social commitment that takes into account the well-being of all Peruvians, especially those living in vulnerable situations. Thus, the path toward sustainable and equitable economic recovery in Peru appears to be fraught with obstacles. The discordance between different ministries and the lack of a clear and consensual strategy could perpetuate uncertainty and distrust in public management. In this context, it is imperative that the country's political and economic leaders find common ground that allows for the implementation of policies that benefit everyone, rather than just a few. The history of these debates and their implications for the future of Peru serves as a reminder that the economy is not just about numbers and graphs; it is, above all, a matter of people and their lives. The country's ability to face its challenges will depend on its capacity to build bridges between different visions and generate inclusive solutions that promote fair and sustainable development.