The article reflects on the relationship between crime and economic growth, particularly in the Mexican states of Jalisco and Michoacán, questioning how different the economic landscape would be if criminal organizations were not thriving. It cites historical examples from Colombia during the 1990s, where the country experienced growth rates of 4-5 percent per year despite the severe violence led by Pablo Escobar. This suggests that, under certain circumstances, economies can still grow despite high levels of violence.

Furthermore, the article highlights other nations such as Israel, India, Pakistan, and Russia, demonstrating that it is possible for economies to advance in the context of continuous conflict or insurgency. These examples offer a broader perspective on how economic resilience can occur amid violence, implying that the impact of crime on growth can vary significantly based on various factors, including governance, international aid, and the nature of the conflicts involved.

Importantly, the author notes that military spending and security investments contribute to a nation’s GDP, which can skew perceptions of growth in regions impacted by violence. This raises critical questions about the true nature of economic growth in Mexico’s affected states, suggesting that the effects of crime may be more complex than merely a hindrance to economic development. Overall, the discussion prompts a reconsideration of how we assess economic health in violence-stricken areas.