The question is entirely mentioned in the attachment, I am looking for a descriptive answer. Please help me with it.

At the turn of the last century, Argentina and Canada were quite similar in very many respects. Both had populations of roughly 5 million. Both had largely European immigrant populations Both attracted substantial and heavily British investment funds from abroad. Both had good agricultural land. Most important,. both looked poised for growth and eventual richness. In 1900 per capita income in Canada was \$2911 when expressed in 1990 US dollars and in Argentina it was \$2756. Over the 122 years that elapsed since then per capita income in Canada rose over eleven-fold to $33288 but in Argentina it only rose by a little over one third that pace to $10995. Argentina for most of the twentieth century and the first part of this century has had highly interventionist government policies, profligate fiscal policy and unstable monetary conditions with periodic bouts of high inflation. Canada in contrast was much more market-oriented with less government intervention and much more stable monetary and fiscal policies. In 2020 Argentina was judged to be one of the least free countries and Canada one of the ten freest countries in the Fraser Institute's Economic Freedom of the World report. Over the period 1970 to 1021 Argentina scored 5.6 on average and Canada 8.2 , with 10 being a perfect score. As one writer recently put it in an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal "Argentina is the bedtime horror story that other economies use to scare each other. Long after other emerging markets had internalized fiscal and monetary rectitude, Argentina has continued to lurch from default to hyperinflation and back." Are there links between differences in policy and in economic performance in the two counties or might something else explain Argentina's failure to thrive economically? If so spell them out. At the turn of the last century, Argentina and Canada were quite similar in very many respects. Both had populations of roughly 5 million. Both had largely European immigrant populations Both attracted substantial and heavily British investment funds from abroad. Both had good agricultural land. Most important,. both looked poised for growth and eventual richness. In 1900 per capita income in Canada was \$2911 when expressed in 1990 US dollars and in Argentina it was \$2756. Over the 122 years that elapsed since then per capita income in Canada rose over eleven-fold to $33288 but in Argentina it only rose by a little over one third that pace to $10995. Argentina for most of the twentieth century and the first part of this century has had highly interventionist government policies, profligate fiscal policy and unstable monetary conditions with periodic bouts of high inflation. Canada in contrast was much more market-oriented with less government intervention and much more stable monetary and fiscal policies. In 2020 Argentina was judged to be one of the least free countries and Canada one of the ten freest countries in the Fraser Institute's Economic Freedom of the World report. Over the period 1970 to 1021 Argentina scored 5.6 on average and Canada 8.2 , with 10 being a perfect score. As one writer recently put it in an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal "Argentina is the bedtime horror story that other economies use to scare each other. Long after other emerging markets had internalized fiscal and monetary rectitude, Argentina has continued to lurch from default to hyperinflation and back." Are there links between differences in policy and in economic performance in the two counties or might something else explain Argentina's failure to thrive economically? If so spell them out