
How a shrunken piece of bread explains Bolivia's economic catastrophe ahead of elections
That's barely half what it would have been two years ago. Unlike American or European shoppers scrutinizing suspiciously capacious chip bags, Bolivians have no doubt that they're paying the same government-fixed price for a much smaller, lower-quality loaf.
For years, you could walk into a government-subsidized bakery like Castillo's anywhere in Bolivia and get a 100-gram (3.5 ounce) roll for 50 centavos (7 U.S. cents), but as a cash crunch cripples flour imports and inflation squeezes budgets, bakers have almost halved the size of their staple bread. Early last year, rolls shrank to 80 grams, then 70, now 60.
'It's like eating a bit of air, a Communion wafer, it doesn't fill you up anymore,' said Rosario Manuelo Chura, 40, dipping some crust into her morning coffee in Bolivia's administrative capital of La Paz.
Castillo isn't particularly pleased about it either. Forced to sell his bread far below market price, he's barely breaking even. 'This situation is not sustainable,' he said, slamming the oven door open.
Bolivia's many harbingers of havoc ahead of its presidential election on Sunday seem to converge in this shrunken piece of subsidized bread that La Paz residents call 'pan de batalla' — 'battle bread.'
The hallowed staple speaks to a state stuck in the past after 20 years under the state-directed economic model of ex-leader Evo Morales, and now struggling to pull itself out of its worst economic crisis in four decades.
The right-wing frontrunners, businessman Samuel Doria Medina and former President Jorge 'Tuto' Quiroga, have proposed eliminating the politically combustible subsidies that underwrite Bolivia's social safety net.
'I say this openly, I'll remove subsidies because they're the greatest absurdity,' Doria Medina told The Associated Press this month, referring to the fuel that Bolivia subsidizes to the tune of billions of dollars a year.
Short on dough, literally
Legend has it that the battle bread earned its nickname from troop rations in the country's Chaco War against Paraguay in the 1930s.
Today, a battle over bread rages within Bolivia, which is running out of hard currency to import wheat because the country grows less than 25% of what it consumes.
Struggling to clear a backlog of imports, the government has slowed or in some cases suspended subsidized flour deliveries. Loaves have vanished from shelves and bread lines have started to appear across La Paz.
The scarcity of U.S. dollars has also hampered diesel fuel imports, leading to fuel shortages and raising questions about the ability of import-dependent Bolivia to keep subsidizing its staples.
Not only do farmers use diesel fuel to power machinery for irrigation, but diesel fuel also contributes to the price of imported foodstuffs.
Prices rise and loaves shrink
Some two years ago Bolivia had a lower annual inflation rate than Germany. Today it has among the region's highest, with the government reporting consumer prices rose 25% in July from a year earlier.
But the price of bread hasn't changed in 17 years.
Bolivia imports most of its wheat from Argentina, where prices have increased — along with the value of the Argentine peso — under libertarian President Javier Milei.
Bolivia's grain agency, EMAPA, distributes the subsidized flour to bakers at a fixed price while requiring them to sell battle bread for 50 centavos a loaf — about a fifth of what it would cost to bake the same loaf with ingredients bought at retail prices.
As the prices of other ingredients climb, many government-subsidized bakeries warn that they are facing bankruptcy. Scores of bakers last month staged a 24-hour strike demanding to sell their bread at market prices.
But a quick scan of history from the 1789 French Revolution to 1989 Venezuelan riots underscores why Morales' Movement Toward Socialism party, or MAS, hasn't dared tinker with the agreement.
'When the price of battle bread goes up, that's the day everything collapses,' said Jacobo Choque, 40, an accountant waiting to buy bread rich in butter from a non-subsidized bakery. The line of Bolivians keen to shell out an extra 20 centavos for better-tasting, thicker rolls stretched almost two city blocks.
Nearby, cash-strapped customers scoured an open-air market, swarming around one of the few stalls selling battle bread.
'We used to have breakfast with one roll, but now we need two to feel full,' said Carmen Muñoz, 65, fuming as she queued. 'Let's not forget that socialism brought us here.'
A subsidy system gone bust
When commodity prices surged in 2007, Morales, a coca-farming union leader elected the year before to his first of what would be three terms, harnessed revenues from booming natural gas exports to bankroll subsidies for bread and other essentials.
But as gas production plummeted about a decade later, MAS dipped into foreign reserves to keep spending. The model became ruinously costly — last year's food and fuel subsidies made up over 4.2% of gross domestic product.
With the government unable to pay suppliers on time and trucks trapped in fuel lines, EMAPA's monthly deliveries of milled wheat have hit snags, leaving subsidized bakeries suddenly without flour. Even as bakers eat into their savings to buy other ingredients, the subsidy agreement bars them from sourcing their own flour.
'Rather than helping, subsidies are hurting us,' Castillo said.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
Some bakers say that EMAPA — long accused of favoring MAS party members — has stopped supplying altogether.
EMAPA denies cronyism, saying it has ramped up investigations into reports of bakers reselling subsidized flour at inflated prices on the black market, or trying to pass off rolls baked with low-cost additives like cassava starch.
'In all my 30 years at this market, this is the most stressful,' said Raquel de Quino, a 60-year-old bread vendor who now spends her mornings confronting customers outraged over the shrinkflation and shortages.
On Saturday, she asked one angry woman to take her rant to the government — at least for its final week in power.
'I'm just the middleman,' said De Quino, throwing up her hands in exasperation. 'Let's pray to God that under the next government, there will bread for our children.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Global News
30 minutes ago
- Global News
U.S., China extend tariff deadline for 90 days just hours before expiration
U.S. President Donald Trump extended a trade truce with China for another 90 days Monday, at least delaying once again a dangerous showdown between the world's two biggest economies. Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he signed the executive order for the extension, and that 'all other elements of the Agreement will remain the same.' Beijing at the same time also announced the extension of the tariff pause, according to the Ministry of Commerce. The previous deadline was set to expire at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday. Had that happened the U.S. could have ratcheted up taxes on Chinese imports from an already high 30 per cent, and Beijing could have responded by raising retaliatory levies on U.S. exports to China. The pause buys time for the two countries to work out some of their differences, perhaps clearing the way for a summit later this year between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, and it has been welcomed by the U.S. companies doing business with China. Story continues below advertisement Sean Stein, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, said the extension is 'critical' to give the two governments time to negotiate a trade agreement that U.S. businesses hope would improve their market access in China and provide the certainty needed for companies to make medium- and long-term plans. 'Securing an agreement on fentanyl that leads to a reduction in U.S. tariffs and a rollback of China's retaliatory measures is acutely needed to restart U.S. agriculture and energy exports,' Stein said. China said Tuesday it would extend relief to American companies who were placed on an export control list and an unreliable entities list. After Trump initially announced tariffs in April, China restricted exports of dual-use goods to some American companies, while banning others from trading or investing in China. The Ministry of Commerce said it would stop those restrictions for some companies, while giving others another 90-day extension. Reaching a pact with China remains unfinished business for Trump, who has already upended the global trading system by slapping double-digit taxes – tariffs – on almost every country on earth. 3:20 Canada targets China with higher tariffs as part of steel industry measures The European Union, Japan and other trading partners agreed to lopsided trade deals with Trump, accepting once unthinkably U.S. high tariffs (15 per cent on Japanese and EU imports, for instance) to ward off something worse. Story continues below advertisement Trump's trade policies have turned the United States from one of the most open economies in the world into a protectionist fortress. The average U.S. tariff has gone from around 2.5 per cent at the start of the year to 18.6 per cent, highest since 1933, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy But China tested the limits of a U.S. trade policy built around using tariffs as a cudgel to beat concessions out of trading partners. Beijing had a cudgel of its own: cutting off or slowing access to its rare earths minerals and magnets – used in everything from electric vehicles to jet engines. In June, the two countries reached an agreement to ease tensions. The United States said it would pull back export restrictions on computer chip technology and ethane, a feedstock in petrochemical production. And China agreed to make it easier for U.S. firms to get access to rare earths. 'The U.S. has realized it does not have the upper hand,'' said Claire Reade, senior counsel at Arnold & Porter and former assistant U.S. trade representative for China affairs. In May, the U.S. and China had averted an economic catastrophe by reducing massive tariffs they'd slapped on each other's products, which had reached as high as 145 per cent against China and 125 per cent against the U.S. 2:11 Business Matters: Global stock markets surge as U.S. and China reach 90-day 'breakthrough' trade truce Those triple-digit tariffs threatened to effectively end trade between the United States and China and caused a frightening sell-off in financial markets. In a May meeting in Geneva they agreed to back off and keep talking: America's tariffs went back down to a still-high 30 per cent and China's to 10 per cent. Story continues below advertisement Having demonstrated their ability to hurt each other, they've been talking ever since. 'By overestimating the ability of steep tariffs to induce economic concessions from China, the Trump administration has not only underscored the limits of unilateral U.S. leverage, but also given Beijing grounds for believing that it can indefinitely enjoy the upper hand in subsequent talks with Washington by threatening to curtail rare earth exports,' said Ali Wyne, a specialist in U.S.-China relations at the International Crisis Group. 'The administration's desire for a trade détente stems from the self-inflicted consequences of its earlier hubris.' It's unclear whether Washington and Beijing can reach a grand bargain over America's biggest grievances. Among these are lax Chinese protection of intellectual property rights and Beijing's subsidies and other industrial policies that, the Americans say, give Chinese firms an unfair advantage in world markets and have contributed to a massive U.S. trade deficit with China of $262 billion last year. Reade doesn't expect much beyond limited agreements such as the Chinese saying they will buy more American soybeans and promising to do more to stop the flow of chemicals used to make fentanyl and to allow the continued flow of rare-earth magnets. But the tougher issues will likely linger, and 'the trade war will continue grinding ahead for years into the future,'' said Jeff Moon, a former U.S. diplomat and trade official who now runs the China Moon Strategies consultancy. Story continues below advertisement —Associated Press Staff Writers Josh Boak and Huizhong Wu contributed to this story.


Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Red Bull moves into rugby by taking full ownership of English club Newcastle
NEWCASTLE, England (AP) — Red Bull's sporting portfolio now includes a top-flight English rugby union team after the energy drinks giant took full ownership of Newcastle Falcons on Tuesday. The club has been rebranded as Newcastle Red Bulls ahead of the new season starting next month, and said the move will embrace 'the innovative approach that Red Bull has brought to its sports initiatives across the world.' They include stakes in a number of soccer teams, including Leipzig, Salzburg and Leeds, as well as in Formula One. Former Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp recently became Red Bull's head of global soccer. Newcastle plays in the top domestic league, newly called the Gallagher Prem, and has won five major titles, including the league championship in 1998. One of its most notable former players is England great Jonny Wilkinson. Newcastle's last trophy was the domestic cup in 2004. 'Together, we aim to elevate rugby to new heights and deliver unforgettable moments for our fans,' said Oliver Mintzlaff, Red Bull's CEO in corporate projects and investments. 'We're delighted to have acquired Newcastle Red Bulls and look forward to empowering the club to reach its full competitive potential.' ___ AP rugby:


Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Land swaps with Russia are not only unpopular in Ukraine. They're also illegal
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — A peace deal that requires Kyiv to accept swapping Ukrainian territory with Russia would not only be deeply unpopular. It also would be illegal under its constitution. That's why President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has categorically rejected any deal with Moscow that could involve ceding land after U.S. President Donald Trump suggested such a concession would be beneficial to both sides, ahead of his meeting Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Zelenskyy said over the weekend that Kyiv 'will not give Russia any awards for what it has done,' and that 'Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.' The remarks came after Trump said a peace deal would involve swapping of Ukrainian territories by both sides 'to the betterment of both.' For Zelenskyy, such a deal would be disaster for his presidency and spark public outcry after more than three years of bloodshed and sacrifice by Ukrainians. Moreover, he doesn't have the authority to sign off on it, because changing Ukraine's 1991 borders runs counter to the country's constitution. For now, freezing the front line appears to be an outcome the Ukrainian people are willing to accept. A look at the challenges such proposals entail: Russia occupies about a fifth of Ukraine Russia occupies about a fifth of Ukraine, from the country's northeast to the Crimean Peninsula, which was annexed illegally in 2014. The front line is vast and cuts across six regions — the active front stretches for at least 1,000 kilometers (680 miles) — but if measured from along the border with Russia, it reaches as far as 2,300 kilometers (1,430 miles). Russia controls almost all of the Luhansk region and almost two-thirds of Donetsk region, which together comprise the Donbas, as the strategic industrial heartland of Ukraine is called. Russia has long coveted the area and illegally annexed it in the first year of the full-scale invasion, even though it didn't control much of it at the time. Russia also partially controls more than half of the Kherson region, which is critical to maintain logistical flows of supplies coming in from the land corridor in neighboring Crimea, and also parts of the Zaporizhzhia region, where the Kremlin seized Europe's largest nuclear power plant. Russian forces also hold pockets of territory in Kharkiv and Sumy regions in northeastern Ukraine, far less strategically valuable for Moscow. Russian troops are gaining a foothold in the Dnipropetrovsk region. These could be what Moscow is willing to exchange for land it deems more important in Donetsk, where the Russian army has concentrated most of its effort. 'There'll be some land swapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody. To the good, for the good of Ukraine. Good stuff, not bad stuff. Also, some bad stuff for both,' Trump said Monday. Ukrainian forces are still active in the Kursk region inside Russia, but they barely hold any territory there, making it not as potent a bargaining chip as Kyiv's leaders had probably hoped when they launched the daring incursion across the border last year. Swapping Ukrainian controlled territory in Russia, however minuscule, will likely be the only palatable option for Kyiv in any land swapping scenario. Conceding land risks another invasion Surrendering territory would see those unwilling to live under Russian rule to pack up and leave. Many civilians have endured so much suffering and bloodshed since pro-Moscow forces began battling the Ukrainian military in the east in 2014 and since the full-scale invasion in 2022. From a military standpoint, abandoning the Donetsk region in particular would vastly improve Russia's ability to invade Ukraine again, according to the Washington-based think tank Institute for the Study of War. Bowing to such a demand would force Ukraine to abandon its 'fortress belt,' the main defensive line in Donetsk since 2014, 'with no guarantee that fighting will not resume,' the institute said in a recent report. The regional defensive line has prevented Russia's efforts to seize the region and continues to impede Russia's efforts to take the rest of the area, ISW said. Ukraine's constitution poses a major challenge to any deal involving a land swap because it requires a nationwide referendum to approve changes to the country's territorial borders, said Ihor Reiterovych, a politics professor in the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. 'Changes in territorial integrity can be done only by the decision of the people — not the president, the cabinet of ministers or the parliament can change it,' he said. 'In the constitution it is written that only by referendum can changes to Ukraine's territory be conducted.' If during negotiations Zelenskyy agrees to swap territory with Russia, 'in the same minute he will be a criminal because he would be abandoning the main law that governs Ukraine,' Reiterovych said. Trump said he was 'a little bothered' by Zelenskyy's assertion over the weekend that he needed constitutional approval to cede to Russia the territory that it captured in its unprovoked invasion. 'I mean, he's got approval to go into a war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap?' Trump added. 'Because there'll be some land swapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody.' Zelenskyy is still trying to regain the people's trust that was damaged when he reversed course on a law that would have diminished the independence of Ukraine's anti-corruption watchdogs. The move was a red line for those citizens who are protective of the country's institutions and are suspicious of certain members of Zelenskyy's inner circle. Freezing the conflict seems a lesser evil for Ukraine Analysts like Reiterovych dismiss a land swap as a distraction. Freezing the conflict along the current front line is the only option Ukrainians are willing to accept, he said, citing recent polls. This option would also buy time for both sides to consolidate manpower and build up their domestic weapons industries. Ukraine would require strong security guarantees from its Western partners to deter future Russian aggression, which Kyiv believes is inevitable. Still, freezing the conflict will also be difficult for Ukrainians to accept. Along with the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the partial occupation of Luhansk and Donetsk after that, it would require accepting that the Ukrainian military is not able to retake lost territories militarily. Kyiv accepted its inability to retake these territories but never formally recognized them as Russian. A similar scenario could unfold in the new regions taken by Russian forces. It also is not a viable long-term solution. 'It is the lesser evil option for everyone and it will not provoke protests or rallies on the streets,' Reiterovych said. —- Associated Press journalist Volodymyr Yurchuk contributed.