|
Ghost of Mussolini posted:Also sorry to double post but I'm on my phone. Lousteau (just like Carrio) won't amount to much. Even when she was the only viable opposition candidate and got a fair amount of other parties to go vote her for the position of president, she still put on a poor showing, and an even worse one for deputies. They have very little footprint outside of the Gran Buenos Aires, and that will always stop them. Lousteau and company, precisely because they are so opposed to clientelist politics, are completely unable to challenge the fuedal bastions in the provinces or make inroads into peronist strongholds like La Matanza. Yeah, i know... at least he has a small chance in the city. Peronism is Argentina's cancer, populism is Latin America's 
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:Yeah, i know... at least he has a small chance in the city. As far as economics goes how does the UNEN compare to the PJ? I know there was some controversy about working with PRO after the election. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 13:43
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as economics goes how does the UNEN compare to the JP? I know there was some controversy about working with PRO after the election. Regarding the city or the country? Those are two completely different beasts. Yggdrassil fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:Regarding the city or the country? Those are two completely different beasts. Nation-wide, I know they really aren't in the running for president.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as economics goes how does the UNEN compare to the PJ? I know there was some controversy about working with PRO after the election. The PJ is "the original" peronism. In the Kirchner era, this means they will attempt to nationalize corporations that were sold off during the nineties. On the other hand, they will keep subsidizing other corporations, like EDENOR/EDESUR (energy companies). Im not sure about how much you know about Argentinians and the dollar, but we do have some kind of cult arround it due to the fact that we had 17 recessions in the last 37 years. This has made the peso one of the most volatile currencies in the continent, thus making the dollar a safe bet to save up. The treasury has little to no reserves, thus the government has prohibited the population from buying/selling dollars. After 12 years of Kirchner mandate, things have gotten worse economically; this makes it very risky to lift the prohibition (everyone would rush to buy dollars, emptying the country's reserve), so that won't happen. You can expect this to continue should Scioli win the elections, thou he has proven to be more flexible in certain areas (for example, he has proposed to start using a 500 pesos bill, which is something the government doesn't want to do -it would mean inflation DOES exist  )I'll write about UNEN in a short while...
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:Yeah, i know... at least he has a small chance in the city. I know it might be different down there but populism became a really overused word in Brazil, specially regarding welfare policies regarding the lower classes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
Fifty years ago today the United States invaded the Dominican Republic http://www.newhistorian.com/usa-invades-the-dominican-republic/3619/
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:I know it might be different down there but populism became a really overused word in Brazil, specially regarding welfare policies regarding the lower classes. Even some of my books from Latin American politics classes said the Bolsa Família could be looked at as vote-buying. I just rolled my eyes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as economics goes how does the UNEN compare to the PJ? I know there was some controversy about working with PRO after the election. It's hard to tell what would happen if UNEN rose to power, but most of them could be identified with social democrats. The biggest socialist parties and the UCR are there. Economically, they are focused on getting control back on our national industries and to work on health and education as priorities, supposedly. It's actually pretty hard to say what UNEN would do regarding economics. Argentinian politics are shady, and (as we say here) politicians erase with their elbow what they write with their hands. The controversy with PRO comes from the desperation many people have over Kirchner's mandate; they want the government to change, no matter the cost, thus producing this weird as gently caress coalitions and treaties that prostitute the parties values to consolidate an alliance that is only useful to try and take the Kirchners down. In UNEN there are three parties that are running national campaigns. Two of them (Carrio's and Sanz's) will have an inner election with the PRO. The PRO's values and ideas are pretty much the complete opposite of most of UNEN's parties.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
In Mexico populist definitely has a negative connotation, as in teference to a politician briving people to accept a situation or decision that is counter to their actual interest. It has also been taken up as a buzzword by the neoliberal right to oppose any kind of government welfare, which is very annoying.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
What people who hate on the Kirchners need to understand is that they did some good things. The country post 2001 was in shamblers, and things got much better. Nowadays, not so much, be it because the new model was unsustainable, or because Cristina doesn't have the abilities Néstor had, or whatever. There were also a bunch of shady deals along the way, of course. But in this country you are either for someone, or completely against them, there is no middle ground. So now that the government is doing poorly, all the rats are abandoning the ship and hating on the K's. I'm (studying to be) a scientist, and I can tell you that things are much better in that field nowadays for example. In the 90's-200X period, there were almost no PhD scholarships available, and the few brave enough to study sciences would flee the country on graduation, or try and find a job in the moribund national industry. We also have a professional scientists thing going on around here (I think France has a similar system) were you actually end up employed by the government to do research and such, and don't depend entirely on your University and tenure like in the US. That system was also all kinds of hosed up in that period, and has gotten way better nowadays. I am convinced that the whole things is going to collapse in the next few years, be it because of an economical collapse once Cristina is no longer in power to hold the Jenga tower together, or because Macri gets the presidency and we get a Menem-2-Electric-Bogaloo situation. But it was very good while it lasted. The main problem nowadays is what someone justly called the "cult of the dollar". With 30% annual inflation, the peso is wothless, so people try to save in dollars. To staunch the bleeding of dollars, a bunch of restrictions on imports and currency exchange were imposed, which of course don't sit well with the middle class (the upper classes are too rich to care, the lower ones too poor). There is currently a restriction on changing pesos into dollars, but that restriction also established a price that is not in accordance to what it should be (so we are back into some sort of 90's convertibility), so many exporting industries have lost competitiveness. What's the point in exporting, if the dollars they get can only be changed into a meager amount of pesos because the official exchange rate is lower than it should be? You could raise the exchange rate, but then the middle classes would cry bloody tears and inflation would shoot up again, since we still rely on a lot of imports. The situation is not easy, and whoever the next government is is going to have a general clusterfuck in its hands. TL;DR: The Kirchner's did do some good things, but now that things are getting worse the rats are leaving the ship and it's hating time. Also Cristina does seem to have a very bad image on the outside, what with someone here calling her a dictator. Also, when has Macri ever called himself anything close to a Peronist?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:It's hard to tell what would happen if UNEN rose to power, but most of them could be identified with social democrats. The biggest socialist parties and the UCR are there. Economically, they are focused on getting control back on our national industries and to work on health and education as priorities, supposedly. It sounds like a very "enemy of my enemy situation", but I guess it is a question of who comes out on top when the dust clears. If Macri won, would it be possible for him to work mostly with right-wing parties in congress (for example PJ dissidents) and push the rest of the UNEN to the sidelines? Would instead the UDI be an honest broker? I mean I guess these are impossible questions to answer without the election results but it could certainly work out unpredictably. Has anyone said what they would do with the Peso? Obviously major devaluation and capital controls are a big issue, but at everyone knows Argentina is also broke. If dollarization or revaluation happened, where would the resources come to support it? I mean I guess you can connect all of this through PJ through Menem, but since 1998, it seems like the effective continuation of the crisis. Markovnikov posted:The main problem nowadays is what someone justly called the "cult of the dollar". With 30% annual inflation, the peso is wothless, so people try to save in dollars. To staunch the bleeding of dollars, a bunch of restrictions on imports and currency exchange were imposed, which of course don't sit well with the middle class (the upper classes are too rich to care, the lower ones too poor). There is currently a restriction on changing pesos into dollars, but that restriction also established a price that is not in accordance to what it should be (so we are back into some sort of 90's convertibility), so many exporting industries have lost competitiveness. What's the point in exporting, if the dollars they get can only be changed into a meager amount of pesos because the official exchange rate is lower than it should be? You could raise the exchange rate, but then the middle classes would cry bloody tears and inflation would shoot up again, since we still rely on a lot of imports. The situation is not easy, and whoever the next government is is going to have a general clusterfuck in its hands. Basically there is no easy solution unless the government finds a hidden mountain of gold under the treasury. Otherwise Argentina could always taken out IMF loans to support a harder currency, but I think we know where that path leads. Another thing obviously is if you raise the official exchange, and if the government doesn't raise spending in accordance, then you start sapping state wages, pensions and whatever state support exists. However, a mock exchange rate obviously has its own issues, it promotes a grey market for conversion, hurts exporters as you say and hides the damage that has happened. I think most people who simply want a harder currency but that is much easier said than done. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
The main problem with the currency is really inflation. Without inflation, the peso is as stable as any other currency. I really don't know what is to blame for inflation. Currency printing by the government to pay for poo poo? Speculation? Imports? If you could find a way to control that, you could slowly get out of the dollar restrictions and regain some semblance of normality. This country is no stranger to hiperinflation really. Alternative comedy solution: Abandon the national currency and go full on dollar, like that Central American country did. And I think an African country did too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:It sounds like a very "enemy of my enemy situation", but I guess it is a question of who comes out on top when the dust clears. If Macri won, would it be possible for him to work mostly with right-wing parties in congress (for example PJ dissidents) and push the rest of the UNEN to the sidelines? Would instead the UDI be an honest broker? I mean I guess these are impossible questions to answer without the election results but it could certainly work out unpredictably. It is, in fact, an "enemy of my enemy" situation. Macri has the advantage (in my opinion) regarding next election, and if he won, he would probably bring back some of the old school neo-liberal policies that characterized the nineties. Aside from that, what he would do is a mistery. He did mention taking off the dollar prohibition in 10 days (MADNESS), but yesterday he disregarded his saying as a "joke". Regarding the peso, the future depends on how the next government manages deficit and the debt, and how they handle the dollar prohibition. Right now, the 'official' peso is valued at 9 pesos = 1 dollar. The 'blue' value (related to the illegal trade of foreign currency) goes for 13 pesos = 1 dollar. If the government lifts up the prohibition as soon as they arrive, the peso will settle arround the 13 = 1 value, if they take on it carefully, they could get closer to 10 pesos = 1 dollar. Again, this also depends on how they manage what little reserve they have left. The problem is that right now, the government is also buying dollars with a pretty bad interest rate. Instead of generating investment in the form of treaties or commercial agreements, they continue to borrow with no regards of future payments and interest rates. For the government, this is a sound strategy: the next president will have to deal with a terrible mess, which will make a great case to make a comeback in 2020.. Markovnikov posted:What people who hate on the Kirchners need to understand is that they did some good things. The country post 2001 was in shamblers, and things got much better. Nowadays, not so much, be it because the new model was unsustainable, or because Cristina doesn't have the abilities Néstor had, or whatever. There were also a bunch of shady deals along the way, of course. But in this country you are either for someone, or completely against them, there is no middle ground. So now that the government is doing poorly, all the rats are abandoning the ship and hating on the K's. This pretty much sums up what is wrong with public mentality in Argentina. The fact the government "does some good things" is not a reason to back them up or defend it. This government has been in the office for TWELVE YEARS, and have not managed to either turn the economy around nor tackle the most important problems we face. They have kept themselves in power by blaming every problem on the media, the US, the vulture funds, the middle class, etc. This mentality problem goes even further back, since the return of the democracy: Alfonsín came, bringing with him human rights and the promess of democracy and fairness. Hyperinflation kicked in, and the people demanded a government that could turn the economy. So came Menem, who sold the country away and made us live in an illusory propserous country (at the same time, erasing what we had achieved regarding human rights in the previous government). When the illusion came down crashing, the people demanded someone that was transparent and decent, we got De La Rua, who was unable to administrate government. Then the people demanded someone that could handle power, even if they abused it. And so we Argentinians keep choosing leaders thinking on what we want them to do, without demanding them to avoid doing what previous governments did wrong. The same thing will happen next election: we will probably choose Macri, hoping for him to open our country to the world again, and we won't demand him not to do the same as Menem (and it's probable he will do just that). We, the Argentinian people have an enormous responsability for how things are today, for not demanding enough from our leaders. Markovnikov posted:The main problem with the currency is really inflation. Without inflation, the peso is as stable as any other currency. I really don't know what is to blame for inflation. Currency printing by the government to pay for poo poo? Speculation? Imports? If you could find a way to control that, you could slowly get out of the dollar restrictions and regain some semblance of normality. This country is no stranger to hiperinflation really. 50% of inflation comes from subsidies. And i'm talking about unnecesary subsidies, those that kicked in during Menem's administration. Since the 1990s, the state has been giving money to several service providing companies, like EDENOR/EDESUR, to freeze taxes. Now, imagine that taxes on these services have barely grown since the 90s, and that this freezing has been going on for almost 25 years. There you have most of the inflation. I'll quote Lousteau on this one: "Energy in the rest of the world is very expensive. We have been living with this subsidized plan for years, and our mentality has adapted to it. Think about this: when an Argentinian goes to sleep, he actually turns on the air con and gets into bed, instead of just sleeping without covers. Now that's ridiculous. Julio De Vido, our Plannification Minister, has spent about 1200000000000 pesos (150 billion dollars) during these years. What you should ask yourself, is where that money is." The other half, well, a big part of it comes from debt interest... which is getting bigger thanks to the borrowing i previously described. TL;DR we are hosed Yggdrassil fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Argentina is chilly as hell why even turn on the AC at all
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Argentina is chilly as hell why even turn on the AC at all A couple days ago we had 25 C°, we are a month away from winter. During summer we had peak temperatures of 38 C°. People died due to the heat. Yggdrassil fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:This government has been in the office for TWELVE YEARS, and have not managed to either turn the economy around nor tackle the most important problems we face. They have kept themselves in power by blaming every problem on the media, the US, the vulture funds, the middle class, etc. Yeah. As a non Argentine with no dog in this fight, I remember seeing the news about the default in the early 2000s, and your government is right back there again? I can't see how anyone is for Kirchner based on that record alone. And of course no one does, but that's an unusually clear record. Add in the Nisman thing to really nail it home. Was Nestor at least competent in some way?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
I am a big opponent of the whole "POLITICS ARE MEANT TO BE FELT, NOT REASONED" stance Peronism takes. Or at least Kirchnerism. No gently caress that, that's how you get this situation. People will vote peronists with complete disregard just because they are peronists and they have always voted peronists. I am amazed by the Campora's desperation as of late too - last night one of my classmates, who is in the Campora, told me if I had heard the good news. When I said no he explained me that, according to what big honchos of the movement had told them, Argentina was currently the leading economy of the region and some european countries were planning to apply some Kirchnerist teachings into their economies. I had instant flashbacks to Kim Il-Sung.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
rockopete posted:Yeah. As a non Argentine with no dog in this fight, I remember seeing the news about the default in the early 2000s, and your government is right back there again? I can't see how anyone is for Kirchner based on that record alone. And of course no one does, but that's an unusually clear record. Add in the Nisman thing to really nail it home. Was Nestor at least competent in some way? Two thoughs on Nestor: 1) The current all out media wars between the Grupo Clarin and the state media did not start in 2003. It started arround 2007-2008. It took 5 years for the government to call out on the 'dismal horror' of Grupo Clarin. They clearly had a fight regarding bussines, so any argumentation of the government waging this war due to legitimate reasons is complete bullshit. Not only that; Nestor's last decree was the fusion between Cablevision and Multicanal -IE consolidation of the media monopoly. 2) YPF, our national oil company, was sold off during Menem's administration. The Kirchners have planted in the people's heads that they are and were against YPF's privatization, and that they were the only ones who opposed Menem during both 1990's elections. In the early 90s, Nestor was governor of Santa Cruz, a province which held 5% of YPF's stocks. Nestor sold those stocks along with the rest of Menem's supporters, and gave a speech, with Menem, at Calafate stating: "We have always had the responses we needed, in due time, from this government. I can say, with almost complete certainty, that since the passing of that great general (Juan Perón), there has never been a president that helped our people as much as you (Menem)" Total hypocrisy. That's Nestor for you. Bonus track: After the much advertised statization of YPF during Nestor's administration, 2 years ago, the Law of Hydrocarbon has taken another step back in the YPF statization race: now they have sold 49% of the company to fund Vaca Muerta. This is the second time the Kirchners have sold part of YPF. Azran posted:I am a big opponent of the whole "POLITICS ARE MEANT TO BE FELT, NOT REASONED" stance Peronism takes. Or at least Kirchnerism. It's a Peronist stance. After 50 years, our media is impregnated with that mentality, as our politicians and most of the population. Peron himself said "shoes yes, books no". Peronism is Argentinian populism. It thrives in poverty and ignorance. Yggdrassil fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Markovnikov posted:The main problem with the currency is really inflation. Without inflation, the peso is as stable as any other currency. I really don't know what is to blame for inflation. Currency printing by the government to pay for poo poo? Speculation? Imports? If you could find a way to control that, you could slowly get out of the dollar restrictions and regain some semblance of normality. This country is no stranger to hiperinflation really. Too much spending relative to income. Capital flight caused by the financial panic and repeated crisis since Peronismo became a thing. A business environment in which no one will invest a single peso they don't absolutely have to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Is Latin America part of The West?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Uruguay isn't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
rockopete posted:Yeah. As a non Argentine with no dog in this fight, I remember seeing the news about the default in the early 2000s, and your government is right back there again? I can't see how anyone is for Kirchner based on that record alone. And of course no one does, but that's an unusually clear record. Add in the Nisman thing to really nail it home. Was Nestor at least competent in some way? At least form what I read, the crisis back in the late 90s and early 2000s was far worse, but in order to get out of it Argentina was stuck with legacies that were difficult to get out of. Nestor at least statistically stabilized the situation, but obviously under Christina inflation has spiked as the government has reduced intervention against its currency. Oddly enough currency reserves have risen since 2013, possibly due to the Chinese currency swap. Also, foreign investment is almost certainty not going to come from cutting back spending. Argentina is in a middle income trap and probably has been in one since the later half of the 20th century. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 08:33 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 08:07
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Is Latin America part of The West? Most countries, like Brazil and Argentina, desperately want to be western, but we always fall short on that. And I think most people from The West (specially americans and europeans) will never think of us as real westerners. We are either a marginal, subaltern part of The West, or we are something else (and not quite sure what that is). For most of the 20 century, LA were more inclined to be the former. Lately, it seems like we (at least the countries with leftwing governments) are trying to go for the later: being something else, free from american influence, aligned with new powers outside The West (Russia, China etc).
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Also, foreign investment is almost certainty not going to come from cutting back spending. Argentina is in a middle income trap and probably has been in one since the later half of the 20th century. Cutting back spending is necessary but not sufficient on its own, no. It would have to be one of many steps toward convincing both foreign and domestic investors that the country is not reeling drunkenly toward another crisis and debt default, and that Argentina is a place they can make money. I was in Buneos Aires last year and while I love the city lots, and in many places things are clean and have a fresh coat of paint, anything that required the least amount of actual money to get done seemed to have been deferred. I don't think the city has had a new metro car or a track upgrade since the system was installed. That's not "a middle income trap" unless that means "hilarious mismanagement and squandering decades of accumulated social capital".
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:I don't think the city has had a new metro car or a track upgrade since the system was installed. I voted against the current local city government but there are new cars in the A-line and Alstom Brazil is making and delivering more for the H-line soon. There's some other real improvements across the city that took serious investment like rain reservoirs and drains to prevent flooding. There could be more stuff but that doesn't mean we're just getting a coat of paint everywhere because of delayed investment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Tony Sorete posted:I voted against the current local city government but there are new cars in the A-line and Alstom Brazil is making and delivering more for the H-line soon. There's some other real improvements across the city that took serious investment like rain reservoirs and drains to prevent flooding. There could be more stuff but that doesn't mean we're just getting a coat of paint everywhere because of delayed investment. Cool. It would make me glad to know my impression was mistaken.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Cutting back spending is necessary but not sufficient on its own, no. It would have to be one of many steps toward convincing both foreign and domestic investors that the country is not reeling drunkenly toward another crisis and debt default, and that Argentina is a place they can make money. I was in Buneos Aires last year and while I love the city lots, and in many places things are clean and have a fresh coat of paint, anything that required the least amount of actual money to get done seemed to have been deferred. I don't think the city has had a new metro car or a track upgrade since the system was installed. That's not "a middle income trap" unless that means "hilarious mismanagement and squandering decades of accumulated social capital". How are domestic and foreign investors going to make money if the economy falls into recession? How would a recession not cause an even further crisis? What do you do about the peso? Why would foreign investors pour in money anyway looking at emerging markets at the moment? How are you going to make costly capital improvements if you cut back spending at the same time? Would cut education spending back to just to build infrastructure? I guess I have a few questions. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:How are you going to make money if the economy falls into recession? How would a recession not cause an even further crisis? What do you do about the peso? Why would foreign investors pour in money anyway looking at emerging markets? How are you going to make costly capital improvements if you cut back spending at the same time? Would cut education spending back to just to build infrastructure? Answer to all of them: digging yourself into a hole with short sighted populist policies puts you in a position where you have no easy, painless, or short-term solutions. What you can't do is keep digging. You have to arrive at a place where this doesn't happen and people are confident it isn't the sort of thing that happens in your economy. Chile managed a difficult and painful transition pretty well, eventually, for as much as the government seems determined to gently caress it up now, with much less human and social capital than Argentina has.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Cutting back spending is necessary but not sufficient on its own, no. It would have to be one of many steps toward convincing both foreign and domestic investors that the country is not reeling drunkenly toward another crisis and debt default, and that Argentina is a place they can make money. I was in Buneos Aires last year and while I love the city lots, and in many places things are clean and have a fresh coat of paint, anything that required the least amount of actual money to get done seemed to have been deferred. I don't think the city has had a new metro car or a track upgrade since the system was installed. That's not "a middle income trap" unless that means "hilarious mismanagement and squandering decades of accumulated social capital". There have been a couple of subway stations opened in the last decade. Mostly the H line that connects the other lines, and some stations that extend pre existing lines (like new stations for the B line). There have also been many reworkings of bus traffic, with some avenues reserved for it and the (in?)famous "metrobus", another fast lane for buses. A couple of tunnels under train tracks got built, for faster crossings. And many of the downtown streets were turned into foot-traffic only. Also also, the bike lanes, if you believe those make any quantitative difference. Still, much more is needed, the city dies from 8-10 and 5-7 due to rush hour. You'd think that would all be praises to the Macri administration, but there have been many more shady developments. Much less investments in education and social policies, and accusations of diverting city funds to self serving propaganda advertisements (it's very obvious how the colour design for the city government took up the colors of PRO, and just how much more propaganda there is, even if it's only for reminding you when to take out your trash). But now you can go borrow bikes from government stands and bike around useless lanes that take up precious car space I guess, so the middle class is happy as pie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Answer to all of them: digging yourself into a hole with short sighted populist policies puts you in a position where you have no easy, painless, or short-term solutions. What you can't do is keep digging. Chile's economic history is well connected copper and even today its economy will swing with its prices. Over 50% of Chilean exports are still connected to copper, and over 60% to mining. Chile has no magic bullet, you can't pull that one with someone who knows export statistics. As far as "short sighted populist policies", education and social spending are both necessary for an economy like Argentina. Military spending is quite low (.7 to .8% of GDP). You can always raise taxes but I doubt you would like that. Cutting spending has economic costs, there is no free lunch. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as "short sighted populist policies", education and social spending are both necessary for an economy like Argentina. Military spending is quite low (.7 to .8% of GDP). You can always raise taxes but I doubt you would like that. Cutting spending has economic costs, there is no free lunch. Tax raises SHOULD happen. It would be a direct result of the cuts to subsidies. Then, all that money for subsidies could be redirected to social spending and education. We are talking about an estimate of 80 billion DOLLARS that should have been taken off from corporate subsidies and into social spending over the last decade. This never happened, and it's one of the main reasons why talking about the Kirchners as left wing would be a very bad joke. Markovnikov posted:You'd think that would all be praises to the Macri administration, but there have been many more shady developments. Much less investments in education and social policies, and accusations of diverting city funds to self serving propaganda advertisements (it's very obvious how the colour design for the city government took up the colors of PRO, and just how much more propaganda there is, even if it's only for reminding you when to take out your trash). But now you can go borrow bikes from government stands and bike around useless lanes that take up precious car space I guess, so the middle class is happy as pie. We usually complain about Kirchner's spending in propaganda. By equal comparison between the national government and the city's government, Macri has spent 3 times more than the Kirchner's in political propaganda. I think the number was around 2 million pesos per day... Ardennes posted:How are domestic and foreign investors going to make money if the economy falls into recession? How would a recession not cause an even further crisis? What do you do about the peso? Why would foreign investors pour in money anyway looking at emerging markets at the moment? How are you going to make costly capital improvements if you cut back spending at the same time? Would cut education spending back to just to build infrastructure? Argentina is an amazing country as far as resources go. The only thing that drives investors away is our high volatility, IE poo poo is going down all the time in here. The key to attracting investors is not by direct measures to lure them, it's to stabilize economy and end with the terrible economic administrations we had so far. The subsidizing of service corporations has to stop. The sub-par borrowing treaties have to stop. We need to develop a good plan to open our borders and generate a competitive inner market. We have the resources. 2015's Argentina has seen it's PBI grow by 2.5 times from the last big recession (1998-2002). We haven't seen a single cent form that capital growth.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:Tax raises SHOULD happen. It would be a direct result of the cuts to subsidies. Then, all that money for subsidies could be redirected to social spending and education. We are talking about an estimate of 80 billion DOLLARS that should have been taken off from corporate subsidies and into social spending over the last decade. This never happened, and it's one of the main reasons why talking about the Kirchners as left wing would be a very bad joke. I believe in part though they go to electricity providers to provide cheaper service? If you cut those subsidies, costs are going to rise back even if discount corruption. A similar argument is going on in Ukraine, the gas company is notoriously corrupt, so they are raising prices to market levels and it very well may be a disaster for the population. You can try to means test service prices, but it has already happened to some extent and otherwise if you raise services prices to the majority of the population then they are going to have to pay for it. quote:Argentina is an amazing country as far as resources go. The only thing that drives investors away is our high volatility, IE poo poo is going down all the time in here. The key to attracting investors is not by direct measures to lure them, it's to stabilize economy and end with the terrible economic administrations we had so far. The subsidizing of service corporations has to stop. The sub-par borrowing treaties have to stop. We need to develop a good plan to open our borders and generate a competitive inner market. We have the resources. 2015's Argentina has seen it's PBI grow by 2.5 times from the last big recession (1998-2002). Ultimately, I will be honest, I think for the time being the investor ship has sailed. Emerging markets are depressed, under-preforming or in crisis. Stabilizing the economy is obviously a good thing, but I am not so certain how it is going to work out as you mentioned. Sub par borrowing is due to Argentina's credit rating which is garbage and has been garbage since the 1990s and will likely continue to be poor. Open borders and competitiveness sounds great until you have an actual market to utilize. It isn't going to be China, the US or Europe. Argentina is an educated country but that doesn't necessarily means success will rain in from abroad. I agree Argentina needs social spending but you are going to have to raise taxes to do it and that isn't even mentioning the Peso. The government is in crisis mode for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I believe in part though they go to electricity providers to provide cheaper service? If you cut those subsidies, costs are going to rise back even if discount corruption. A similar argument is going on in Ukraine, the gas company is notoriously corrupt, so they are raising prices to market levels and it very well may be a disaster for the population. Those subsidies were given in the 90's as part of Menem's big plan to sell everything off. Costs SHOULD rise back: Argentinians are paying today an electricity bill which has costs dating back 20 years ago. If you paid 10 back then, and you should pay 150 today, there's about 140 paid in subsidies that keep those prices down. SOME subsidies have been taken off, but most of them are still intact. This has even affected our mentality on energy usage, as i have previously explained in this thread. Ardennes posted:Ultimately, I will be honest, I think for the time being the investor ship has sailed. Emerging markets are depressed, under-preforming or in crisis. Stabilizing the economy is obviously a good thing, but I am not so certain how it is going to work out as you mentioned. Sub par borrowing is due to Argentina's credit rating which is garbage and has been garbage since the 1990s and will likely continue to be poor. Open borders and competitiveness sounds great until you have an actual market to utilize. It isn't going to be China, the US or Europe. Not only we need social spending, but we need a big amount of money directed towards infrastructure. Argentina has 3 very big problems that affect our productivity big time: -It's an enormous country. -Almost everything is centralized near and in Buenos Aires. -Our national transportation system is utter poo poo (you can also give thanks to Menem for that). To give you an idea, most of our national roads, the ones industrial transport has to use to get products from the provinces to the capital, are 2 lane roads made of dirt (no asphalt). There are no trains. Everything is pretty much moved around in trucks. And don't get me started on corruption. We are talking of spending and redirection of funds without taking into account that most politicians here are utterly corrupt
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:Those subsidies were given in the 90's as part of Menem's big plan to sell everything off. Costs SHOULD rise back: Argentinians are paying today an electricity bill which has costs dating back 20 years ago. If you paid 10 back then, and you should pay 150 today, there's about 140 paid in subsidies that keep those prices down. The issue is that the subsidies you are talking about cutting are still mostly going to be reflected back to the population and the whole "sleeping with AC on" issue is neither here nor there. You may get some efficiency out of it by reducing costs, but it isn't going to be like you are going to going to suddenly have a piggy bank to finance infrastructure with. Infrastructure is a good thing don't get be wrong but the money is going to have to come from somewhere and if you simply cut subsidies to pay for it then basically the cost will be born on the population. Also, service usage usually doesn't reflect income strictly, so either the poor and middle class are going to bear most of it or you have to pay the subsidies back to the end users. As far as corruption it is something you probably aren't going to get rid of, unless you legalize it and call it lobbying. Otherwise, higher taxes and a general redistribution of wealth is needed but it is going to take hard choices.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue is that the subsidies you are talking about cutting are still mostly going to be reflected back to the population and the whole "sleeping with AC on" issue is neither here nor there. You may get some efficiency out of it by reducing costs, but it isn't going to be like you are going to going to suddenly have a piggy bank to finance infrastructure with. Infrastructure is a good thing don't get be wrong but the money is going to have to come from somewhere and if you simply cut subsidies to pay for it then basically the cost will be born on the population. Actually, that's not an issue; it's a FACT that people will have to deal with the full cost of electricity, whether you want it or not. What you do to cut subsidies efficiently is 2 things: -First, you run an informative campaign regarding proper electricity and gas usage. After all, all that political propaganda spending should be invested in this kind of publicity. This has been already done, poorly but more or less effectively, in regards to waste disposal methods in the capital. -Second, you scrap taxes that hit the people and that are literal moneygrabs/poorly designed, like the current income tax. Overall, even with both measures taken, people will have to pay more. But they will get their money back in the form of better education, health, transportation, better wages since logistics are optimized... Of course, corruption in our government would never allow that. That's why we should support candidates that are actively proposing to reform the system against corruption. I've previously made mention of Lousteau. He proposed the creation of a protection program for people that report cases of corruption, and enacting a law that forbids usage of the state's money to fund political campaigns (what Kirchner and Macri have been doing during the last years). I hope we get even more candidates in the future that see how important it is to legislate against corruption.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Chile's economic history is well connected copper and even today its economy will swing with its prices. Over 50% of Chilean exports are still connected to copper, and over 60% to mining. Chile has no magic bullet, you can't pull that one with someone who knows export statistics. It's a shame that along with your ability to google export statistics you don't know more history. Copper is not a new thing in Chile, and has been its major export in bad times (60's, 70's, into the 80's) and good. Sometimes it's a drag and sometimes a boon but since the 70's Chile has had nothing like the economic crisis suffered by, for instance, Argentina, despite fluctuating copper prices and, like I said, much lower stocks of human and social capital. By rights Argentina, which also has a plentiful endowment of resources, should be the most stable and prosperous country on the continent. Instead its neighbor takes that prize and policy is the reason for that. Why is it so hard for you to admit that leftist governments often make bad policy? Every time this comes up you post the same litany of excuses. Ardennes posted:As far as "short sighted populist policies", education and social spending are both necessary for an economy like Argentina. Military spending is quite low (.7 to .8% of GDP). You can always raise taxes but I doubt you would like that. Cutting spending has economic costs, there is no free lunch. As part of a stable economy that can support that spending, yeah, education and social spending are potentially productive and good long term investments. In the context of an economy that just cracked down on travel agencies to prevent dollars leaving the country, that confiscated billions of dollars in private pension funds and forcibly converted them to pesos, that is right now in litigation over defaulting on hundreds of billions in externally held debt and had to do a deal with China just to stave off collapse, one has to wonder whether priorities are misplaced. Or if, as you believe, leftism cannot fail but can only be failed. Yggdrassil posted:Argentina is an amazing country as far as resources go. The only thing that drives investors away is our high volatility, IE poo poo is going down all the time in here. The key to attracting investors is not by direct measures to lure them, it's to stabilize economy and end with the terrible economic administrations we had so far. The subsidizing of service corporations has to stop. The sub-par borrowing treaties have to stop. We need to develop a good plan to open our borders and generate a competitive inner market. We have the resources. 2015's Argentina has seen it's PBI grow by 2.5 times from the last big recession (1998-2002). This guy gets it and you should set aside your ideological commitment and listen to him. edit: True story, several years ago there was a deal in place with Argentina to export natural gas to Chile. A pipeline was built, and a terminal, but the gas flowed for just a little while before through mismanagement and overconsumption Argentina had to reneg on its end of the deal. Now Chile imports expensive gas from indonesia and the pipeline flows the other way. 
wateroverfire fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Yggdrassil posted:Actually, that's not an issue; it's a FACT that people will have to deal with the full cost of electricity, whether you want it or not. What you do to cut subsidies efficiently is 2 things: Ultimately you are just shifting costs, and to be honest, I don't know what type of social efficiency you are going to get out of this especially since services were already means-tested to some extent. quote:-Second, you scrap taxes that hit the people and that are literal moneygrabs/poorly designed, like the current income tax. The bracket system of the income tax needs to be adjusted for (market) inflation but it is still not as regressive as a VAT. If you get rid of all income taxes there is going to be a giant gap in the budget. If anything much higher brackets need to be added to it. quote:Overall, even with both measures taken, people will have to pay more. But they will get their money back in the form of better education, health, transportation, better wages since logistics are optimized... Isn't that the dream? But rarely economics works out so simply and to be honest, you are way over estimating how much savings you are going to get when you consider when costs are actually calculated for lower and middle income families. quote:Of course, corruption in our government would never allow that. That's why we should support candidates that are actively proposing to reform the system against corruption. I've previously made mention of Lousteau. He proposed the creation of a protection program for people that report cases of corruption, and enacting a law that forbids usage of the state's money to fund political campaigns (what Kirchner and Macri have been doing during the last years). Anti-corruption policies are a good thing, but you ultimately have to place a lot of trust in them that THIS TIME it is going to be different. I actually think anti-corruption campaigns are overemphasized and often paper over more intrinsic problems with an society and its economy. That said, the program you mentioned is very much in the European liberal tradition. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Why is it so hard for you to admit that leftist governments often make bad policy? Every time this comes up you post the same litany of excuses. Since when is Peronism leftism?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:Since when is Peronism leftism? "Not real leftists" is also a popular response. =/
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:18
|
|