Then I’d ask you to correct your comment, just to keep the information clean.
Beyond that, In the large scheme, it was bound to happen due to lifting the extremely subsidized price controls on food, rent, transportation, health and the heavily subsidized services.
It’s not pretty but it had to be done.
The country was literally printing money they don’t have to pay things they couldn’t afford
After a 49% poverty left by the previous government. So a tick of 4% after that is almost nothing
People voted him for a reason
I mean that’s a 10% (almost) change. I’d consider that significant for a population.
How is the difference 10% between 49% to 53% ?
It’s an 8.16% increase, not 10% but still awful
Then I’d ask you to correct your comment, just to keep the information clean.
Beyond that, In the large scheme, it was bound to happen due to lifting the extremely subsidized price controls on food, rent, transportation, health and the heavily subsidized services.
It’s not pretty but it had to be done.
The country was literally printing money they don’t have to pay things they couldn’t afford
Like with all things you post, maybe you should check your sources better. I’m not the one who posted the 10% statement
And what you want to correct?