I know it doesn’t work like that but I think it’s mildly interesting
- 57% of Argentina population is 25MM people
- 12% of USA pop (amount who live in poverty) is 38MM people
Yeah, it doesn’t matter that the U.S. has more people living in poverty as what matters is the relative amount of the total population.
I know you know, but thought I’d say it just in case someone else didn’t get why you said “it doesn’t work this way”
You’re right from a hard-statistical point of view, but from a casual, layman conversation I think it is, as I said, mildly interesting.
It definitely is interesting :)
The issue is a lot harder to ignore when the person to your right and the person to your left is starving to death.
Things got bad the last few years, but the hunger index is still only 6.4.
I’m not sure if Milei has been in power for long enough to have any sort of meaningful impact.
I don’t expect him to have a positive impact, mind. But it always takes a bit of time before things change.
It’s been my experience that you can screw things up way faster than you can fix them
You mean going YOLO over this lunatic wasn’t a good idea after all?
I’m not sure if Milei has been in power for long enough to have any sort of meaningful impact.
Doing things the regular way, he wouldn’t have.
That’s not what he’s doing, though. He’s tearing apart huge chunks of the government apparatus that people depend on with no safety nets or other mitigation of inevitable consequences.
It’s like the “let’s tear down each wall until we find out which ones are load bearing” approach to governance. Except they all are and he just keeps swinging his +5 Sledgehammer of Demagogue Stupidity.
except they all are
[Citation needed]
Demagogue Stupidity
Right, because its was so much more Democratic and smart to vote for the drug addict, corrupt, 400% inflation-rate causer, Sergio Massa
Sure thing, boludo. Let’s see what you think in a year’s time.
Make that three years, zurdito, then we’ll see
The former government contributed a lot to this, specially in the last year. Poverty has been steadily on the rise since 2003. I cant (imo) blame Milei for this, but I can’t deny that if anything Milei has accelerated the impact of Kirchners’ missmanagement.
Another things to keep in mind, the Kirchners were famous for lying about inflation and poverty indices and this government is consequently “taking pride” in transparency. Milei is also using this numbers to show how bad the economy is… so numbers could be biased or exaggerated.
Poverty here is generally measured by household income, which means that inflation leaves a lot of people under the poverty line, which may or not be momentary cause we get constant salary increases… always under inflation, of course.
The thing is really bad, and people is living out of savings. A sign of that is that we can buy US$ by 1400 pesos in a bank, but people is selling so many dollars in the black market to pay bills that we can buy them for 1000 pesos on the streets.
If all this mess will pay out in the long term, I cant tell, but appealing to our erratic history, I would say that it won’t.
First move of any new management is to take the worst possible stocktake and shine the worst possible light to last management’s figures. Then any meagre positive movement or even if things remain the same will look like improvement.
Really interesting. Thanks for this.
I knew nothing about him 5 minutes ago.
Where are you buying pesos at 1400?!
Also, the blue exchange is so small that it doesn’t even affect the economy
The thing is, I’m not. But if you buy legal dollars, it’s ~800 +75% (a part of that are 30% or so taxes, the other part are 45% or so retentions that are returned as tax deduction doing the proper paperwork).
I held the retained part as taxes because of high inflation, but that’s just me.
You can follow that as “dollar tarjeta”
The blue was near 1350 some time ago and started falling when people began to sell their dollars. Now it is slightly cheaper than buying legal dollars + taxes - retentions.
When you remove all financial support from people who need it to survive, they instantly are poor, it doesn’t take years.
But I’m sure it’s a hard to swallow pill for liberals.
Yeah. I’m hardly a fan of everything he says or does, but it’s a bit like appointing a new captain an hour after the Titanic hit the iceberg, then blaming him for not stopping the ship from sinking. Argentina was well on its way to hyperinflation long before the presidential elections.
Thatcherism works everybody
You mean Peronism?
Nah, Milei is not peronist.
And Milei didn’t cause this. He was in office maybe a month at this point? And the poverty rate had already rapidly risen from 40% to 50% in the six months prior under Fernández.
49% but yes
In my experience, Conservatives usually don’t do anything to improve the income levels of working class people.
Removed by mod
If I was Argentinian, I’d move to Patagonia and be a wildman.
There are other options than laissez-faire capitalism or communism.
The issue is that there has to be pain in the present for a much better future.
Why does their president’s haircut make him look like a 1980’s film star
Because he has 1980’s economic policy.
I read somewhere (sorry no sauce but it seemed informed) that it’s a deliberate choice by him to appeal to working class boomers or something. Did you all know that a medium channeled his deceased dog which in turn told him to run for president?
If you’re talking about his hair, you’re not discussing his policies. He’s derailing the dialogue before it can happen, and all he has to do is deliberately look like an idiot.
“Haha, jokes on them. I only wear this haircut to look stupid ironically!”
Ah yes, the “Boris Johnson gambit”
In January. March is happening now, Argentina just went back to school, well, at least those who could afford it.
He took office in December, so this is entirely the fault of Peronism and doesn’t have anything to do with Milei yet.
One of the things Faux News did to build up Trump was to show the unemployment rate when Trump had 100 days in office and compare it with Obama. Obama came in after the 2008 meltdown and had [apx] 10% unemployment at 100 days. Trump came in after eight years of Obama and had [apx] 4%.
Yeah, people love to look at who’s in the White/Pink House and think everything since the day he took office was single-handedly caused by him.
