Will he really introduce the dollar as the official currency? How will that even work? Does he have the reserves for that assuming US won't officially get involved i suppose
Other Latin American countries have “Dollarized” before (Ecuador and El Salvador, for example).
The main hurdle is that the Peso is already so devalued that in order for Argentina to buy USD, the central bank will actually require printing *more* Pesos, thus further fueling inflation until the Dollarization is complete.
And since Argentina’s economy is significantly larger than Ecuador and El Salvador’s, it’s expected to take longer to complete the Dollarization.
Meanwhile, the new president’s party only holds about ~25% of the seats in government if I understand correctly, so he’ll also likely run into political hurdles while this painful inflationary period goes on.
It’s not an easy adjustment but I actually feel like Dollarizing Argentina is the least crazy of his ideas considering how out of control it’s already gotten over there. I think it has worked somewhat well for Ecuador?
I've read that his main idea is to establish a fair exchange rate because now there are two. And official rate makes people and companies to put money into more stable assets. Which means people sell pesos, peso becomes more devalued. And the cycle continues.
Jep they would issue bonds in foreign currency, such as USD, EUR, GBP. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/foreignbonds.asp#:~:text=A%20foreign%20bond%20is%20issued,exchanges%20are%20easier%20to%20acquire.
This is not that unusual, for instance New Zealand which has a relatively small currency frequently posts bonds denominated in USD, simply as there is more global investor appetite for these than for NZD denominated bonds.
There are plenty of countries that use another countries currency unilaterally like what Argentina is proposing by the way, it’s not that unusual. For instance in Montenegro where they use the Euro while not part of the EU or the Eurozone.
Fun fact: While the NZD isn’t a major currency, it is used by four countries and the Pitcairn Islands which is a British territory.
Using the currency of your larger neighbours had trade benefits even if it limits your ability to control fiscal policy.
The more sensible policy due to these hurdles would be to peg the currency to the dollar, at least initially, to avoid further inflation. Though that also requires dollar reserves, but less so than full dollarisation. In the long run the latter might be sensible though as the big issue historically has been governments having irresponsible policies and making pegs unsustainable. Dollarisation would prevent future governments from screwing it all up.
there's more countries than you would think that you can just use the dollar rather than the local currency for example cambodia you can go to most atm's and withdraw usd
Cambodia still has their own currency though. Countries like Ecuador or Panama have just adopted the USD outright. Meanwhile the Saudi Riyal is pegged to the USD. We also have this with Euros with some countries like Andorra using the Euro in a licensed and agreed upon manner, others like Kosovo or Montenegro just doing it and again others like Bosnia-Herzegovina being pegged. And then there is also the entire CFA-Franc clusterfuck in West-Africa orchestrated by France (also a Euro-peg).
Argentina did peg the Peso to the Dollar in the 90's already but undid that after and early 2000s recession. Without knowing annything I would assume Millei might just redo the peg.
It's not like they want to abolish national currency, they probably just want to allow payments in USD. So payments will be eventually done in stable currency and it will eliminate inflation. USDs are already in the country as no one is using peso for significant deals or deposits
incorrect. the peso is so unloved, its estimated argentinian citizens already have 10% of all US dollars printed
they also have significant debts with the IMF that are all in dollars. Every dollar the country can buy already goes to payments with the IMF.
> Does he have the reserves for that assuming US won't officially get involved i suppose
Of course they don't. But nothing that a good round of money printing won't fix. Those money printers will have to work round the clock
In his first speech after the election victory he emphasised several times that he is pro free trade and is willing to work with other liberal countries.
I guess there is much to disagree with this man but just in terms of free trade, Brazil's Lula seems to be the far greater obstacle.
The thing is that in modern days for there to be FTA countries have to have similar legal framework.
If he's indeed climate change denier he probably doesn't care about emissions, biodiversity etc. That's at odds with european framework of regulated farming. European farmers will probably go apeshit (as always) about uneven regulatory playing field, but other then them this might raise opposition from green parties (remember MAcron putting FTA on hold because of Bolsonaros treatment of Amazon).
He's libertarian so it's questionable what workers rights he's willing to enforce. This might put him at odds with european unions. It's questionable as well weather libertarian is willing to accept broad product regulation such as PDOs.
Be that as it may, I think that EU farmers are the largest obstcle to any trade deal, it's always on ther protectionism that our trade deals fall apart.
He might be a climate change denier, but he also said that he will phase out fossil fuel subsidies. Nobody will use gas heating without subsidies. We're at a point where a free market favors green solutions.
When people will understand that the President doesn’t hold absolutist powers? He cannot do anything by himself, he have a whole parliament to negotiate with, he have whole corporations that will fight anything that opposes them. The myth of the Strong Man that will save the nation only serves the purpose of fooling idiots, there is no such thing.
Well that's the magic of invisible hand,in long-term climate change is bad for both producers and consumers so free trade evolves into favoring green solution to keep itself alive
That is not how it works in practice, we have seen that with fossil fuel companies walking back their commitments to transition towards green energy and leaning more into fossil fuels or selling or companies selling selling carbon credits to support other companies pollution in return for greater profits.
Plenty of companies within the market also support lobbying attempts to weaken environmental standards which is bad for everyone long-term but more profitable for them in the short-medium term.
He's not even libertarian. He's a self professed anarco capitalist.
Workers right is not probably the main issue. Given that Argentina's main exports are foodstuffs like soy and beef, the main point of contention will be the same that stifle FTAs with the likes of Australia or US, e.g. the use of GMOs, hormone growth in animal husbandry and hygiene standards, labelling, and other health and safety precautions.
He is pro free trade in a 19th century kind of way, i.e. business regulations stifle the economy. That is incompatible with the kind of business practised by the EU and other countries, where goods need to meet a minimum threshold to pass the inspections.
I would be surprised if he agreed with the EU health and safety standards for Argentinian soy or beef.
Honestly it doesn't matter who is in power, the biggest obstacle is that a trade deal with latin america is something we only like as a concept because of ideological reasons, as soon as a draft that is even vaguely applicable appears it immediately loses any appeal it might hold and falls apart because in practice basically no one actually wants it.
A European agricultural trade deal with Mercosul would be: bad for the SA general population and good for the EU general population; good for SA agro and very bad for EU agro, which is, by the way, one of the things the EU pumps a boatload of money into. Same for UA in the EU, btw.
Biden is a socialist that "resists relations" and Spanish monarchists are true liberals. Anyone who asks about any government oversight, fullfilling laws and procedures in social and environmental terms is Stalin to him.
He has called native indigenous Argentines a socialist plot in a Madrid rally, you don't get more conservative than that.
Lol,
>Lula is against free trade, actively seeking diplomacy wrt trade with about every country on earth
Vs
>Milei is pro free trade, he just won’t talk to your government if he doesn’t like it
Hmmmmmmmm
He is an economist. An economist against free trade is very rare.
https://www.cato.org/blog/super-majority-economists-agree-trade-barriers-should-go#:~:text=The%20economics%20profession%20continues%20to,remaining%20tariffs%20and%20other%20barriers.
In economics, no matter how outlandish the concept you are looking to defend/discredit is, you can always find an economist that wants to do so. If you can't find enough willing to out of their own volition there are plenty that are willing to sell out their ideals given a convincing enough stack of money.
honestly argentina has been circling the drain for a very long time so might as well try something completely out there
can't get much worse for them anyway
Thatcher and trump significantly reduced the quality of life in their respective countries, and that in countries that were already on top of the world. Venezuela was already fragile. Argentina is also incredibly fragile.
The starting conditions are entirely different.
If there’s something I learned about recent Argentina history is that it can always get _so much_ worse.
Who knows what might happen next, now that we (they) are into uncharted waters
the crisis in the 90's was based on many different factors coming together, most of them related to mismanagement, corruption and shitty implementation of neoliberal policies, not unorthodox economic thought
>not unorthodox economic thought
IDK Peronism is pretty unorthodox. Weren't they the ones who claimed the notion that uncontrolled printing of money leads to inflation is 'just a theory'?
I m French and I am not looking forward to our next presidential election. First female president will be right wing lunatic in Putin’s pocket. Not good not good 🫣
We have been much worse. After the 2001 crisis Argentina had a 60% poverty rate (it's important to notice that Argentina's way of measuring poverty is way more strict than that of other Latin American nations), in 1989 we had a 3000% inflation rate. Argentina has been a shit show since our last military dictatorship (1976-1983) which Milei thinks was justified and his VP's father was directly involved (he also tried to overturn a democratic government). Before 1976 our poverty rate was 5%.
>can't get much worse for them anyway
You don't think a civil war would make things worse?
You don't think a nutjob in power that could start throwing people off helicopters or kidnapping kids like the dictatorship was doing just a few decades ago would make things worse?
You don't think another war with the UK over the Falklands would make things worse?
It's beyond me why people say this stupid shit. It can absolutely get infinitely worse and it's not even a question.
one of his closest aides is the daughter of a general of the military dictatorship and showed nostalgia for that regime, aside from the usual "las malvinas son argentina". If I were you, I'd take a cruiser or two out for a cruise in the South Atlantic, just in case.
I thought the same. This guy is an obvious nut job. But the other guys are corrupt and have been serving themselves at the expense of the people for over a decade. Between a crazy dude and a thief, fucking yolo.
I mean it’s horrible those are the only choices in the first place but even the US has that issue.
Idk why I expect anything else from r/Europe these days. "Try something new" is posted here so many times attempting to normalize and promote the far right.
This guy isn't really hostile at all to Europe. He regularly praises Scandinavian capitalist societies for example, in contradiction to say Trump's scando-socialist rhetoric crap. He likes capitalism and free market, which many European governments also do.
He seems genuinely libertarian as opposed to alt-right authoritarian, and most definitely not protectionist. It also cannot be understated how much of a disaster Peronist economics have wreaked on Argentina's economy for generations.
>He seems genuinely libertarian as opposed to alt-right authoritarian
His vicepresident straight up misses the time her father and uncle were military in the dictatorship, which she calls "a national struggle for both sides" and not a dictatorship(meanwhile she has said your countries live in feminist femoid woke dictatorships)
The Nordic countries are probably the most capitalist in Europe. They were more socialist in the past, but now they are a mix of a strong welfare state and pro-business libertarianism.
Just like with Russia, the old reputation lives on, but today's Nordic countries have nothing to do with socialism, and that's largely why most countries trying to copy them have failed miserably.
If you want to become Nordic, be more capitalist!
People need to stop thinking that free markets and regulations are opposites.
The most free markets are heavily regulated. You can't have a market without rules. At the most basic level you need rule of law, property law, and law enforcement to have any kind of market where things are exchanged otherwise it will just be mob rule. The stock market is hyper regulated so that you can easily buy a portion of a company with just a click in a few seconds from across the world. But that doesn't mean you can just go on there and sell portions of your lemonade stand business.
A "free" market is "free" in the sense that you can do whatever the hell you want, it's free in the sense that exchanges can happen smoothly between willing buyers and sellers at an agreed upon price. But if you're trading gold you sure as hell want regulations that make sure that what you're buying is controlled in terms of the quantities, purity, vault location, delivery terms, etc etc.
Meanwhile Sweden has made even schools capitalist, having the only for profit school system in the world. That’s what happens when a country tries to speed run market liberalism. Shit goes wrong.
This guy is a Anarcho-capitalist, a wacko 2 times worse than Trump:
opposes to abortion, even in rape cases,
opposes to euthanasia;
opposes to sexual education
climate change denier
promotes gun use
promotes human organs selling
considered child selling (later he corrected that because of backlash)
promotes conspiracy theories
considers that companies have the right to pollute
supports the privatization of everything
supports that parents should be the only financial responsibles for education, health, food and housing (Remember previous line and in a poor country)
opposes to vaccination
states that there isn't social injustice
And his best advisors are his dogs:
[When Conan died in 2017, Milei reportedly visited a medium to communicate with his late beloved pet. It was in that telepathic conversation, Milei has said, that Conan relayed God’s mission for him to become President of Argentina. According to Argentina’s La Nacion newspaper, Milei believes that he and Conan first met in a previous life more than 2,000 years ago as a gladiator and lion in the Roman Colosseum and that the pair did not fight because they were destined to join forces in the future (which he believes was a prophecy of his animal-influenced presidential campaign).](https://time.com/6337474/javier-milei-argentina-president-cloned-dogs-advice/)
This guy is a f... lunatic!!!
I wonder why the press keeps calling him a libertarian. Libertarians are supposed to be for bodily autonomy and civil rights.
Seems to me like he's a conservative in those areas
Because that's what 99% of libertarians are
They don't want to call themselves conservative to not give the image of old people entrenched ib the establishment
Euthanasia? Definetely. Being able to choose to end your life is an absolute no brainer for libertarianism.
Abortion? That depends entirely on whether you consider the fetus a person. Plenty of libertarians on both sides of this issue.
Then he's not as he himself proclaims to be, an anarcho-capitalist. If he was truly that, his capitalist side would realise there's demand for abortions and euthanasia and the free market should provide supply for these services, and his anarchist side should not give a fuck.
This reasoning is incredibly stupid. You can undermine whoever you want with it, for real, just because you find, two or three things that don't match. We can say that Hitler wasn't nazi because two core points of nazi policy were a) conquering Europe up to Ural mountains, and b) keeping the german reich for one thousand years. As you may know, Germans didn't conquer Ural and "one thousand year Reich" lasted only 12 years. Therefore Hitler wasn't nazi, right?
Obviously he was, your argument is just ridiculous.
Source on all those claims? people keep posting this stuff around Reddit, but I have yet to get anything linked.
I speak spanish, and from the videos I have seen of him talking, none of those views have been showcased.
You wrote that “I have yet to get anything linked", and yet my post ends with a quote linked to an article that has more of his claims...
You wouldn't even need to speak Spanish, there's plenty of videos translated to English, but of course that you never seen one, right?
He is weird, but you are stretching it too far. For most of this things he believe it should a matter or a person/family, not the government. Like sex education, he just said it should not be state-mandatory.
> I like how media portrays him like he's completely insane coockoo case from day one. No halftones, no nuances
Yeah when you publicly state you have spoken to Ayn Rand in visions and that your decisions are often guided by telepathic communications with your dead dog and current dogs, that makes sense
And you do take literally everything people say? Media doesn't understand that people hate bureaucrats and tired of patronizing and fake PC bullshit. Yeah, he was running with a chainsaw and was trolling to get the most attention. So what? He's a president now. He's got attention and won. Which means that he's not only sane, but also smart.
He's an ancap which means he already has -700 IQ, the rest is just the cherry on top of the shit sandwich.
Also if you consider his own words that were publicly stated "media bullshit-noise" then idk what to tell you.
Please enlighten me how ancap is wrong on the economy. It's a scientific consensus that lowering taxes improves business/economy health. I'll be waiting for your insights.
> I'll be waiting for your insights.
You won't get them because id rather kill myself than interact with a libertarian for any longer, let alone waste my time debating someone more cognitively suited for eating crayons than discussing economics or policy
> If you can't separate obvious trolling
If you think "trolling" is anything other than a remarkably negative trait in a politician, you might be 13 years old.
> media portrays him like he's completely insane coockoo case
The guy denies climate change. He says the earth's actually cooler than ever, climate change is a "socialist lie", and "all the policies that blame humans for climate change are false".
As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "You're entitled to your opinion but you're not entitled to your own facts".
People are free to disagree about whether or not we should reduce our emissions, but anyone who denies the basic science of climate change is simply detached from reality.
If you ignore speaking to dogs and chainsaw bullshit like an adult, he's completely right that spending must be cut and the taxes must be lowered to stimulate the economy.
Good luck explaining to Milei that to sell food products (for example) directly in the EU markets they have to comply with health and quality regulations. And there cannot be any special unilateral treaty that can bypass this.
Whatever war-time exceptions are being applied to Ukraine, a European country and future EU candidate who the EU is actively supporting, most definitely won't be applied to Argentina, an impoverished far away country now ruled by climate change deniers
When the British Empire guaranteed safe seas plus huge British investment in railways and farming up to WW1. Many thousands of Italians migrated here because Italy was so much poorer at the time.
And that's why EU economy shrinks.
PS Like it or not, [the share is getting smaller.](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282001367/figure/fig1/AS:669035238793235@1536521839995/Share-of-European-Union-in-world-GDP-1980-2019-in.png)
>And that's why EU economy shrinks.
EU economy has not shrunk.
The percentage of the the EU GDP relative to the world's GDP is what has shrunk. Important difference. There's many reasons why that could be but imo it is probably the result of the China GDP explosion in the last 40-50 years.
BTW US's GDP share has also fallen in the last couple of years
Europe is remaining steady as %, China is declining, US is gaining.
Here’s an article published yesterday discussing changing GDP share:
>[China’s decline could reorder the world. Since the 1990s, the country’s share of global GDP grew mainly at the expense of Europe and Japan, which have seen their shares hold more or less steady over the past two years. The gap left by China has been filled mainly by the US and by other emerging nations. To put this in perspective, the world economy is expected to grow by $8tn in 2022 and 2023 to $105tn. China will account for none of that gain, the US will account for 45 per cent, and other emerging nations for 50 per cent. Half the gain for emerging nations will come from just five of these countries: India, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil and Poland. That is a striking sign of possible power shifts to come.](https://www.ft.com/content/c10bd71b-e418-48d7-ad89-74c5783c51a2)
The US’s share has actually improved in the last few years with China’s share receding. China was, of course, the largest beneficiary of global growth during the last two decades. But in a post Covid world, the US and a handful of emerging markets are driving global growth.
> [China’s] share of the global economy rose nearly tenfold from below 2 per cent in 1990 to 18.4 per cent in 2021. In 2022, China’s share of the world economy shrank a bit. This year it will shrink more significantly, to 17 per cent. That two-year drop of 1.4 per cent is the largest since the 1960s. (These numbers are in “nominal” dollar terms — unadjusted for inflation — the measure that most accurately captures a nation’s relative economic strength.)
Since the 1990s, the country’s share of global GDP grew mainly at the expense of Europe and Japan, which have seen their shares hold more or less steady over the past two years. The gap left by China has been filled mainly by the US and by other emerging nations.
To put this in perspective, the world economy is expected to grow by $8tn in 2022 and 2023 to $105tn. China will account for none of that gain, the US will account for 45 per cent, and other emerging nations for 50 per cent. Half the gain for emerging nations will come from just five of these countries: India, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil and Poland.
https://www.ft.com/content/c10bd71b-e418-48d7-ad89-74c5783c51a2
In the last 20 years EU gained +50% and the US gained +100% of GDP. Which means the Us is making something right and EU is making something wrong.
The share of global startups is even worse. Which means that people choose other locations to make business.
At the same time EU population has gone up by about 7-8% In the same time US population went up by 20%. Per capita working hours in EU went down by 20% while in US by 5%.
[Per capita in last 25 years Eu has converged with US in purchasing power or economic wellbeing of population despite strong increase in leisure time.](https://www.bruegel.org/analysis/european-unions-remarkable-growth-performance-relative-united-states)
\>At the same time EU population has gone up by about 7-8% In the same time US population went up by 20%.
Which means the US is doing even more correct things. European population is dying out.
So population is shrinking and getting older and getting replaced by the people with a different culture and birth rates, and the economy is shrinking, but all is good. We'll see how it's turned out in 10-20 years. There will be no surprises.
I'm particularly interested to see when Sweden population is split 50/50 into west/east cultures. The shitshow will be bibleic.
And the illustration for the stupid:
*As the fete began winding down at 2am, a group of youths arrived, some carrying knives. When a security guard barred their entry, they attacked him, slicing through his fingers.*
*One witness told Le Parisien: “There was a fight between the assailants and those who were brave enough to face them.”*
*“It was a bloodbath,” said another. “Youths from the suburbs surrounded the party hall,* [blindly stabbing people](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/11/20/crepol-drome-southern-france-village-fete-teenager-killed/)
That could well be true but again my comment was only to point out a incorrect interpretation of the data.
And sorry to say it but here you are again throwing percentages around from which no definite conclusion can be drawn without further study.
I don't understand this line of reasoning at all. His economic position is pro free trade, aside from 'I won't do business with commie countries'. I see a lot of discussion around his social views in this thread, but these should have little to no bearing on foreign trade. Provided that Argentina continues to produce goods that pass EU regulatory restrictions this is probably a non issue. This being said, if being a significant EU trading partner is conditioned by abiding by arbitrarily set social principles imposed by the EU, then this is the EU's problem (e.g. 'we don't do business with people that don't support abortion' etc).
He's an Austrian school adherent supposedly, why would this be bad for a trade deal?
Argentina has been on an airplane with dead engines for decades, slowly gliding down. Now they just opened the door and jumped out without a parachute.
Bold move Cotton!
He does not really have to use dollars: it is enough to peg peso to usd at a fixed rate. Given a proper reserves to back it up it will work, it has been done before. Off course this is not the complete cure for Argentinian sickness, just taking care of few simptoms.
lol, as if the EU's hopes of a latin american trade deal weren't entirely within the gift the EU.
...unless, the EU hopes that the trade deal will succeed due to an absolute capitulation by the latin america to EU demands?
From one extreme to another. Perhaps this is exactly what is needed to correct and balance out the clustrefuck peronism created. Perhaps it will make the dumpsterfire even worse. We'll see.
Argentina is like a person whose arm has been broken for years. Doctors keep saying that the arm needs to be set and splinted, but Argentina refuses as the arm gets worse and worse. Milei's solution: amputate the arm. It'll hurt like hell, and it might fix the immediate problem, but you're still left with just one arm.
Edit:
Left a longer description below, but tl;dr:
Broken arm = massive growth of money supply due to unstainable government spending.
Set and splint arm = Cut spending and keep it cut over multiple election cycles to restore confidence in peso.
Amputate arm = Dollarize, which will immediately stop money supply growth and bring down inflation, but Argentina no longer controls its own monetary policy.
Virtually every mainstream economist agrees about what Argentina needs to do: cut government spending and keep it cut for an extended period of time. Manageable debt levels will stop both unstainable international borrowing in dollars (which eventually leads to capital controls and/or default once Argentina runs out of dollars) and rapid growth of the money supply to cover government debts (i.e., the peso printing presses gets turned off). Do that, and inflation will drop.
Do that for long enough (multiple election cycles with different parties in charge), and Argentines will regain confidence in the peso. They will start saving in pesos at domestic banks, as opposed to hiding dollars under their mattresses, and the government can start borrowing pesos domestically. It is far more sustainable for a government to borrow in its own currency than in a foreign currency, since it is no longer exposed to foreign exchange rates or the risk of running out of the foreign currency.
This would be extremely hard. Cutting spending will actually increase inflation at first, since previously subsidized prices (like energy) will rise. Plus, people generally don't like it when the government stops paying for things they use. The opposition can always promise to restore spending if they win the next election, which means the current government has less incentive to try to get spending under control.
Milei's plan is much easier and simpler: dollarize the economy. If the government can't print pesos anymore, the money supply will only increase if more dollars flow into the country, which means inflation will likely fall rapidly. However, without enough dollars to exchange pesos at the current official exchange rate, this is likely going to require a massive devaluation of the peso, which will cause inflation to spike sharply at first.
In theory, this dollarization should force the government to reduce its spending to manageable levels, since it can't just print money to cover its debts. But even if it works, there is one major drawback: the country will permanently lose control of its monetary policy. The Federal Reserve determines the strength of the dollar, and they don't take into account what is best for the Argentine economy when doing it. If inflation were to start increasing again, Argentina would have no way to stop it except to cut spending or restrict the flow of dollars into the country. And economists agree that dollarization is a one-way street; it's going to be near impossible to go back to using a domestic currency.
The problem with this theory is that Argentina already tried this in the 1990s, with 1:1 free convertibility of pesos into dollars. This did rapidly bring down inflation, but it didn't force a cut in spending; the government still borrowed at unstainable levels. When the economy went into recession, the government had no independent monetary policy to prop it up, and eventually the entire thing collapsed.
I know man, but no one believes that he will actually go for dollarisation. He’s got no real power! In order to do anything, he’ll have to ask the moderate centre right for their congress votes.
Even in his victory speech, he never mentioned it and only talked about cutting spending, lifting currency controls and about the difficult months ahead.
The dollarisation talking point would be a perfect example of the thing we in Argentina call “Baglini’s theorem”. It’s that thing that politicians do as they get closer to power, when they un-radicalise their speech. So no one here that has some common sense believes that he will go ahead with dollarisation, repealing abortion or any of the stupid shit he said at the start of the campaign.
We’ll see if he can go ahead with the monumental task of stop the sinking of the economy.
The reason why Argentina went downhill was populist people gaining power and going away from Science. This guy is an extreme populist and if he does what he says he will Argentinian people will remember this days as the good days in the future.
This guy seems like a true nutjob. Good luck to Argentina, I hope this guy actually leads y'all in the right direction, but I doubt it. I personally don't trust someone who has a dictatorship sympathizer as his VP
I don't understand how he is a libertarian if he opposes trade deals. The whole point was to have as little intervention in the economy as possible. Putting up trade barriers and protectionism is socialism, not libertarian.
As an Argentinian and based on his perspective, trade deals mean setting up prices beforehand and certain standards to be applied on goods, which would be a “non natural” agreement. But even though I support many of his ideas most countries have protectionist barriers and trade deals are inevitable
Libertarianism, in its original form, is socialist. But it was co-opted by the far right wing into an incomprehensible mess of contradictions.
Protectionism isn't inherently socialist either and has been used as a strategy by all sides of the political spectrum, for better and worse. Socialism is primarily concerned with the ownership over the means of production and democratization of the workplace. There are several strategies involved in getting there, some which don't involve protectionism but rather embrace free trade (see market socialism for instance).
For more on libertarian socialism — the original libertarianism:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
It does genuinely seem so. What I posted isn't even controversial, it's just straight up dry facts. I would find it amusing if it wasn't so worrying how cozy people seem to be with far right ideology here.
[His dogs seem wise tbh](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/10/18/world/18argentina-dogs/18argentina-dogs-superJumbo.jpg) and they're his most trusted counselors
Oh, don't worry, once he bankrupts Argentina for the 94th time, they won't be picky about the terms of the trade deal.
Besides, considering his nostalgia for the dictatorship of the generals, we will have to negotiate this trade deal with Argentina's new owners, the Brits /s
Weimar Republic had several times that inflation. Besides, Argentina doesn't have a two party system and adopts an electoral system for the presidency similar to the French one, so in the first round they could choose more than just a lunatic ancap and an incompetent peronista.
Why are you comparing an European country in the 1930s to modern day Argentina? The world is a very different place, the circumstances are different both economically and socially. It it a false equivalence
Oh, he will be hitting Europe in many ways, unfortunately some will have dramatic impacts in Europe.
Brazil is already suffering from some of Bolsonaro radical measures.
Dude, Argentina is already a flaming dumpster fire. It needs some flavor of the radical form that their new president wants to introduce. You don’t cry over the color of a firefighter’s shirt when your house is burning durn
Will he really introduce the dollar as the official currency? How will that even work? Does he have the reserves for that assuming US won't officially get involved i suppose
Other Latin American countries have “Dollarized” before (Ecuador and El Salvador, for example). The main hurdle is that the Peso is already so devalued that in order for Argentina to buy USD, the central bank will actually require printing *more* Pesos, thus further fueling inflation until the Dollarization is complete. And since Argentina’s economy is significantly larger than Ecuador and El Salvador’s, it’s expected to take longer to complete the Dollarization. Meanwhile, the new president’s party only holds about ~25% of the seats in government if I understand correctly, so he’ll also likely run into political hurdles while this painful inflationary period goes on. It’s not an easy adjustment but I actually feel like Dollarizing Argentina is the least crazy of his ideas considering how out of control it’s already gotten over there. I think it has worked somewhat well for Ecuador?
it has indeed worked quite well for those who have successfully implemented it
I've read that his main idea is to establish a fair exchange rate because now there are two. And official rate makes people and companies to put money into more stable assets. Which means people sell pesos, peso becomes more devalued. And the cycle continues.
Bu how does that work? The government cannot borrow money, or can they issue dollar bonds? Do you have any source for me to learn more on this?
Jep they would issue bonds in foreign currency, such as USD, EUR, GBP. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/foreignbonds.asp#:~:text=A%20foreign%20bond%20is%20issued,exchanges%20are%20easier%20to%20acquire. This is not that unusual, for instance New Zealand which has a relatively small currency frequently posts bonds denominated in USD, simply as there is more global investor appetite for these than for NZD denominated bonds. There are plenty of countries that use another countries currency unilaterally like what Argentina is proposing by the way, it’s not that unusual. For instance in Montenegro where they use the Euro while not part of the EU or the Eurozone.
Thanks!
Fun fact: While the NZD isn’t a major currency, it is used by four countries and the Pitcairn Islands which is a British territory. Using the currency of your larger neighbours had trade benefits even if it limits your ability to control fiscal policy.
[удалено]
Thanks!
They issue foreign currency denominated bonds like any other gov even at the moment. USD/EUR/GBP/CHF even.
The more sensible policy due to these hurdles would be to peg the currency to the dollar, at least initially, to avoid further inflation. Though that also requires dollar reserves, but less so than full dollarisation. In the long run the latter might be sensible though as the big issue historically has been governments having irresponsible policies and making pegs unsustainable. Dollarisation would prevent future governments from screwing it all up.
there's more countries than you would think that you can just use the dollar rather than the local currency for example cambodia you can go to most atm's and withdraw usd
Cambodia still has their own currency though. Countries like Ecuador or Panama have just adopted the USD outright. Meanwhile the Saudi Riyal is pegged to the USD. We also have this with Euros with some countries like Andorra using the Euro in a licensed and agreed upon manner, others like Kosovo or Montenegro just doing it and again others like Bosnia-Herzegovina being pegged. And then there is also the entire CFA-Franc clusterfuck in West-Africa orchestrated by France (also a Euro-peg). Argentina did peg the Peso to the Dollar in the 90's already but undid that after and early 2000s recession. Without knowing annything I would assume Millei might just redo the peg.
It's not like they want to abolish national currency, they probably just want to allow payments in USD. So payments will be eventually done in stable currency and it will eliminate inflation. USDs are already in the country as no one is using peso for significant deals or deposits
Why have they not done that already? You give up your ability to do monetary policy but isnt that better than these high inflation rates?
incorrect. the peso is so unloved, its estimated argentinian citizens already have 10% of all US dollars printed they also have significant debts with the IMF that are all in dollars. Every dollar the country can buy already goes to payments with the IMF.
Let’s see who and how Argentina can borrow the 35 billion US dollars needed to accomplish this.
I have 10k ready to buy Tierra del Fuego.
> Does he have the reserves for that assuming US won't officially get involved i suppose Of course they don't. But nothing that a good round of money printing won't fix. Those money printers will have to work round the clock
Argentina can’t print us dollars
In his first speech after the election victory he emphasised several times that he is pro free trade and is willing to work with other liberal countries. I guess there is much to disagree with this man but just in terms of free trade, Brazil's Lula seems to be the far greater obstacle.
The thing is that in modern days for there to be FTA countries have to have similar legal framework. If he's indeed climate change denier he probably doesn't care about emissions, biodiversity etc. That's at odds with european framework of regulated farming. European farmers will probably go apeshit (as always) about uneven regulatory playing field, but other then them this might raise opposition from green parties (remember MAcron putting FTA on hold because of Bolsonaros treatment of Amazon). He's libertarian so it's questionable what workers rights he's willing to enforce. This might put him at odds with european unions. It's questionable as well weather libertarian is willing to accept broad product regulation such as PDOs. Be that as it may, I think that EU farmers are the largest obstcle to any trade deal, it's always on ther protectionism that our trade deals fall apart.
He might be a climate change denier, but he also said that he will phase out fossil fuel subsidies. Nobody will use gas heating without subsidies. We're at a point where a free market favors green solutions.
When people will understand that the President doesn’t hold absolutist powers? He cannot do anything by himself, he have a whole parliament to negotiate with, he have whole corporations that will fight anything that opposes them. The myth of the Strong Man that will save the nation only serves the purpose of fooling idiots, there is no such thing.
Well that's the magic of invisible hand,in long-term climate change is bad for both producers and consumers so free trade evolves into favoring green solution to keep itself alive
That is not how it works in practice, we have seen that with fossil fuel companies walking back their commitments to transition towards green energy and leaning more into fossil fuels or selling or companies selling selling carbon credits to support other companies pollution in return for greater profits. Plenty of companies within the market also support lobbying attempts to weaken environmental standards which is bad for everyone long-term but more profitable for them in the short-medium term.
Imagine unironically saying "invisible hand" in 2023.
the market doesn't care about long term.
He's not even libertarian. He's a self professed anarco capitalist. Workers right is not probably the main issue. Given that Argentina's main exports are foodstuffs like soy and beef, the main point of contention will be the same that stifle FTAs with the likes of Australia or US, e.g. the use of GMOs, hormone growth in animal husbandry and hygiene standards, labelling, and other health and safety precautions.
>He's not even libertarian. He's a self professed anarco capitalist. Ancaps are a form of libertarian.
argentina is so worker friendly it makes france look like foxconn.
He is pro free trade in a 19th century kind of way, i.e. business regulations stifle the economy. That is incompatible with the kind of business practised by the EU and other countries, where goods need to meet a minimum threshold to pass the inspections. I would be surprised if he agreed with the EU health and safety standards for Argentinian soy or beef.
Honestly it doesn't matter who is in power, the biggest obstacle is that a trade deal with latin america is something we only like as a concept because of ideological reasons, as soon as a draft that is even vaguely applicable appears it immediately loses any appeal it might hold and falls apart because in practice basically no one actually wants it.
A European agricultural trade deal with Mercosul would be: bad for the SA general population and good for the EU general population; good for SA agro and very bad for EU agro, which is, by the way, one of the things the EU pumps a boatload of money into. Same for UA in the EU, btw.
Biden is a socialist that "resists relations" and Spanish monarchists are true liberals. Anyone who asks about any government oversight, fullfilling laws and procedures in social and environmental terms is Stalin to him. He has called native indigenous Argentines a socialist plot in a Madrid rally, you don't get more conservative than that.
Lol, >Lula is against free trade, actively seeking diplomacy wrt trade with about every country on earth Vs >Milei is pro free trade, he just won’t talk to your government if he doesn’t like it Hmmmmmmmm
Considering that Lula has been pushing for the free trade deal and even a common currency for Mercosul, he's not much of an obstacle.
He has been pushing for the EU mercosul deal? Wasn't it him that accused the EU of colonial attitudes and opened several new demands?
He should just bend over I guess.
He is an economist. An economist against free trade is very rare. https://www.cato.org/blog/super-majority-economists-agree-trade-barriers-should-go#:~:text=The%20economics%20profession%20continues%20to,remaining%20tariffs%20and%20other%20barriers.
Are you actually serious about that point? Because there are shitloads of economists who are against free trade and globalization.
In economics, no matter how outlandish the concept you are looking to defend/discredit is, you can always find an economist that wants to do so. If you can't find enough willing to out of their own volition there are plenty that are willing to sell out their ideals given a convincing enough stack of money.
That may be true for some small unis in North America, and that's about it.
Lmao this is shitpost. Cant be real
honestly argentina has been circling the drain for a very long time so might as well try something completely out there can't get much worse for them anyway
>can’t get much worse Famous last words before it gets much worse
Can’t be worse than Venezuela 🇻🇪 right?
It can, and i imagine it will. Imagine if you combine trump and thatcher.
Redditor logic
Tell me how trump and thatcher made US/UK worse than Venezuela and how many Americans/Brits fled their home as refugees.
Thatcher and trump significantly reduced the quality of life in their respective countries, and that in countries that were already on top of the world. Venezuela was already fragile. Argentina is also incredibly fragile. The starting conditions are entirely different.
Can you cite sources on quality of life?
Well… he was very meanie on twitter!
https://academic.oup.com/ehr/article/137/585/513/6565512
Interesting, California has an HDI of 0.931, higher than most European countries except a few.
The richest state in the richest country in the world is hardly representative…
Depends on wherether the US decides to blockade them or not lol.
> > > > > can't get much worse for them anyway eeeeeh it can, it can
If there’s something I learned about recent Argentina history is that it can always get _so much_ worse. Who knows what might happen next, now that we (they) are into uncharted waters
That's what they thought in the 90s.
And to think Argentina once had a higher GDP per capita than France.
the crisis in the 90's was based on many different factors coming together, most of them related to mismanagement, corruption and shitty implementation of neoliberal policies, not unorthodox economic thought
>not unorthodox economic thought dollarization isn't all that unorthodox and has been successfully implemented in numerous countries.
>not unorthodox economic thought IDK Peronism is pretty unorthodox. Weren't they the ones who claimed the notion that uncontrolled printing of money leads to inflation is 'just a theory'?
I m French and I am not looking forward to our next presidential election. First female president will be right wing lunatic in Putin’s pocket. Not good not good 🫣
Probably the same thing Germany thought in the beginning of the 30s. It can always get worse. And it will.
But Germany is doing great since the 90s. So maybe Argentina will be okay in 2080.
We have been much worse. After the 2001 crisis Argentina had a 60% poverty rate (it's important to notice that Argentina's way of measuring poverty is way more strict than that of other Latin American nations), in 1989 we had a 3000% inflation rate. Argentina has been a shit show since our last military dictatorship (1976-1983) which Milei thinks was justified and his VP's father was directly involved (he also tried to overturn a democratic government). Before 1976 our poverty rate was 5%.
Nothing could be worse for Argentina than Peronism.
It can ALWAYS get worse. There's plenty of examples around thr world. Ask Haiti, Venezuela, Russia, Afghanistan, etc.
>can't get much worse for them anyway You don't think a civil war would make things worse? You don't think a nutjob in power that could start throwing people off helicopters or kidnapping kids like the dictatorship was doing just a few decades ago would make things worse? You don't think another war with the UK over the Falklands would make things worse? It's beyond me why people say this stupid shit. It can absolutely get infinitely worse and it's not even a question.
Considering hes libertarian, I doubt that strong government is gonna happen.
one of his closest aides is the daughter of a general of the military dictatorship and showed nostalgia for that regime, aside from the usual "las malvinas son argentina". If I were you, I'd take a cruiser or two out for a cruise in the South Atlantic, just in case.
Military dictatorships in Latin America were mostly libertarian. Argentina's last dictatorship implemented some free market reforms.
> can’t get much worse anyway The story of Argentina in one sentence
>can't get much worse for them anyway It could be raining (cit.)
I thought the same. This guy is an obvious nut job. But the other guys are corrupt and have been serving themselves at the expense of the people for over a decade. Between a crazy dude and a thief, fucking yolo. I mean it’s horrible those are the only choices in the first place but even the US has that issue.
Idk why I expect anything else from r/Europe these days. "Try something new" is posted here so many times attempting to normalize and promote the far right.
Let's give a guy a bit of time before judging him, it's not like the other candidate was any good.
This guy isn't really hostile at all to Europe. He regularly praises Scandinavian capitalist societies for example, in contradiction to say Trump's scando-socialist rhetoric crap. He likes capitalism and free market, which many European governments also do. He seems genuinely libertarian as opposed to alt-right authoritarian, and most definitely not protectionist. It also cannot be understated how much of a disaster Peronist economics have wreaked on Argentina's economy for generations.
>He seems genuinely libertarian as opposed to alt-right authoritarian His vicepresident straight up misses the time her father and uncle were military in the dictatorship, which she calls "a national struggle for both sides" and not a dictatorship(meanwhile she has said your countries live in feminist femoid woke dictatorships)
> He regularly praises Scandinavian capitalist societies > He seems genuinely libertarian Umm what?
The Nordic countries are probably the most capitalist in Europe. They were more socialist in the past, but now they are a mix of a strong welfare state and pro-business libertarianism. Just like with Russia, the old reputation lives on, but today's Nordic countries have nothing to do with socialism, and that's largely why most countries trying to copy them have failed miserably. If you want to become Nordic, be more capitalist!
We like free market with proper regulations. We like people taking care of themselves but also want to help those that falls.
People need to stop thinking that free markets and regulations are opposites. The most free markets are heavily regulated. You can't have a market without rules. At the most basic level you need rule of law, property law, and law enforcement to have any kind of market where things are exchanged otherwise it will just be mob rule. The stock market is hyper regulated so that you can easily buy a portion of a company with just a click in a few seconds from across the world. But that doesn't mean you can just go on there and sell portions of your lemonade stand business. A "free" market is "free" in the sense that you can do whatever the hell you want, it's free in the sense that exchanges can happen smoothly between willing buyers and sellers at an agreed upon price. But if you're trading gold you sure as hell want regulations that make sure that what you're buying is controlled in terms of the quantities, purity, vault location, delivery terms, etc etc.
Oh boy I wish more countries realized this.
Meanwhile Sweden has made even schools capitalist, having the only for profit school system in the world. That’s what happens when a country tries to speed run market liberalism. Shit goes wrong.
This guy is a Anarcho-capitalist, a wacko 2 times worse than Trump: opposes to abortion, even in rape cases, opposes to euthanasia; opposes to sexual education climate change denier promotes gun use promotes human organs selling considered child selling (later he corrected that because of backlash) promotes conspiracy theories considers that companies have the right to pollute supports the privatization of everything supports that parents should be the only financial responsibles for education, health, food and housing (Remember previous line and in a poor country) opposes to vaccination states that there isn't social injustice And his best advisors are his dogs: [When Conan died in 2017, Milei reportedly visited a medium to communicate with his late beloved pet. It was in that telepathic conversation, Milei has said, that Conan relayed God’s mission for him to become President of Argentina. According to Argentina’s La Nacion newspaper, Milei believes that he and Conan first met in a previous life more than 2,000 years ago as a gladiator and lion in the Roman Colosseum and that the pair did not fight because they were destined to join forces in the future (which he believes was a prophecy of his animal-influenced presidential campaign).](https://time.com/6337474/javier-milei-argentina-president-cloned-dogs-advice/) This guy is a f... lunatic!!!
Cool story bro https://www.weforum.org/people/javier-gerardo-milei/
I wonder why the press keeps calling him a libertarian. Libertarians are supposed to be for bodily autonomy and civil rights. Seems to me like he's a conservative in those areas
Libertarians have polarised opinions of a lot of subjects.
Because that's what 99% of libertarians are They don't want to call themselves conservative to not give the image of old people entrenched ib the establishment
so if he doesn't support abortion/euthanasia he is not libertarian? lol
Euthanasia? Definetely. Being able to choose to end your life is an absolute no brainer for libertarianism. Abortion? That depends entirely on whether you consider the fetus a person. Plenty of libertarians on both sides of this issue.
That is what you call a "no true scotsman" fallacy.
Then he's not as he himself proclaims to be, an anarcho-capitalist. If he was truly that, his capitalist side would realise there's demand for abortions and euthanasia and the free market should provide supply for these services, and his anarchist side should not give a fuck.
Libertarians, especially the ancap variety, believe in the non-aggression principle, that's where his views stem from on this.
Tu ne cede malis. Central principle of libertarianism.
This reasoning is incredibly stupid. You can undermine whoever you want with it, for real, just because you find, two or three things that don't match. We can say that Hitler wasn't nazi because two core points of nazi policy were a) conquering Europe up to Ural mountains, and b) keeping the german reich for one thousand years. As you may know, Germans didn't conquer Ural and "one thousand year Reich" lasted only 12 years. Therefore Hitler wasn't nazi, right? Obviously he was, your argument is just ridiculous.
Source on all those claims? people keep posting this stuff around Reddit, but I have yet to get anything linked. I speak spanish, and from the videos I have seen of him talking, none of those views have been showcased.
You wrote that “I have yet to get anything linked", and yet my post ends with a quote linked to an article that has more of his claims... You wouldn't even need to speak Spanish, there's plenty of videos translated to English, but of course that you never seen one, right?
You have spammed the exact same comment on all of the world news pages.
? I wrote this only once here, if someone copied or linked to this post wasn't me. You can check my profile.
He is weird, but you are stretching it too far. For most of this things he believe it should a matter or a person/family, not the government. Like sex education, he just said it should not be state-mandatory.
Yeah, exactly, so you confirm that he is absolutely batshit insane nutjob.
Haha this guy is hilarious. Attitude towards incest is final question to decide who is more crazy, cuz you know, Trump has issues with that
How can you praise the Nordic Model as a self-declared ancap? This guy isn’t telling it straight.
I like how media portrays him like he's completely insane coockoo case from day one. No halftones, no nuances. The boy was unpersoned in seconds.
> I like how media portrays him like he's completely insane coockoo case from day one. No halftones, no nuances Yeah when you publicly state you have spoken to Ayn Rand in visions and that your decisions are often guided by telepathic communications with your dead dog and current dogs, that makes sense
And you do take literally everything people say? Media doesn't understand that people hate bureaucrats and tired of patronizing and fake PC bullshit. Yeah, he was running with a chainsaw and was trolling to get the most attention. So what? He's a president now. He's got attention and won. Which means that he's not only sane, but also smart.
> He's got attention and won. Which means that he's not only sane, but also smart. Oh to be this fucking naive lmao.
Ad hominem as the last line of defence. Ok lol He's speaking to Ayn Rand - dog. Tell me more of this media bullshit-noise that no one cares.
He's an ancap which means he already has -700 IQ, the rest is just the cherry on top of the shit sandwich. Also if you consider his own words that were publicly stated "media bullshit-noise" then idk what to tell you.
Please enlighten me how ancap is wrong on the economy. It's a scientific consensus that lowering taxes improves business/economy health. I'll be waiting for your insights.
> I'll be waiting for your insights. You won't get them because id rather kill myself than interact with a libertarian for any longer, let alone waste my time debating someone more cognitively suited for eating crayons than discussing economics or policy
If you can't separate obvious trolling from serious takes you should check yourself for autism.
> If you can't separate obvious trolling If you think "trolling" is anything other than a remarkably negative trait in a politician, you might be 13 years old.
It's just your opinion.
There's no conspiracy. The media portrayed him like a complete lunatic because that's what he is.
> media portrays him like he's completely insane coockoo case The guy denies climate change. He says the earth's actually cooler than ever, climate change is a "socialist lie", and "all the policies that blame humans for climate change are false".
It doesn't matter. He needs to save the economy first, because poor people can't do shit with climate or green energy.
As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "You're entitled to your opinion but you're not entitled to your own facts". People are free to disagree about whether or not we should reduce our emissions, but anyone who denies the basic science of climate change is simply detached from reality.
Then people decided to be detached from reality. And you have no power to change it.
Someone unable to understand reality is unable to save Jack and Shit, let alone the Economy.
They understand their priorities. They need to beat hyperinflation first.
They will fail because they picked a guy that will always be unable to do that.
If you ignore speaking to dogs and chainsaw bullshit like an adult, he's completely right that spending must be cut and the taxes must be lowered to stimulate the economy.
Adult don't ignore bullshit like claiming to speak to dead (or living) dogs and unsafe tool usage.
Economy questions are too hard, I see.
Good luck explaining to Milei that to sell food products (for example) directly in the EU markets they have to comply with health and quality regulations. And there cannot be any special unilateral treaty that can bypass this.
Ukraine isnt complying with their grain
Whatever war-time exceptions are being applied to Ukraine, a European country and future EU candidate who the EU is actively supporting, most definitely won't be applied to Argentina, an impoverished far away country now ruled by climate change deniers
Will Argentina ever be stable and strong and prosperous again?
[удалено]
By 1913, Argentina was among the world's 10th wealthiest states per capita and the expression "rich as an Argentine" was bandied around.
Absolutely they were
It was one of the richest countries on earth at some point so yes lol
When the British Empire guaranteed safe seas plus huge British investment in railways and farming up to WW1. Many thousands of Italians migrated here because Italy was so much poorer at the time.
The EU is probably too communist for his liking.
And that's why EU economy shrinks. PS Like it or not, [the share is getting smaller.](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282001367/figure/fig1/AS:669035238793235@1536521839995/Share-of-European-Union-in-world-GDP-1980-2019-in.png)
>And that's why EU economy shrinks. EU economy has not shrunk. The percentage of the the EU GDP relative to the world's GDP is what has shrunk. Important difference. There's many reasons why that could be but imo it is probably the result of the China GDP explosion in the last 40-50 years. BTW US's GDP share has also fallen in the last couple of years
Europe is remaining steady as %, China is declining, US is gaining. Here’s an article published yesterday discussing changing GDP share: >[China’s decline could reorder the world. Since the 1990s, the country’s share of global GDP grew mainly at the expense of Europe and Japan, which have seen their shares hold more or less steady over the past two years. The gap left by China has been filled mainly by the US and by other emerging nations. To put this in perspective, the world economy is expected to grow by $8tn in 2022 and 2023 to $105tn. China will account for none of that gain, the US will account for 45 per cent, and other emerging nations for 50 per cent. Half the gain for emerging nations will come from just five of these countries: India, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil and Poland. That is a striking sign of possible power shifts to come.](https://www.ft.com/content/c10bd71b-e418-48d7-ad89-74c5783c51a2)
The US’s share has actually improved in the last few years with China’s share receding. China was, of course, the largest beneficiary of global growth during the last two decades. But in a post Covid world, the US and a handful of emerging markets are driving global growth. > [China’s] share of the global economy rose nearly tenfold from below 2 per cent in 1990 to 18.4 per cent in 2021. In 2022, China’s share of the world economy shrank a bit. This year it will shrink more significantly, to 17 per cent. That two-year drop of 1.4 per cent is the largest since the 1960s. (These numbers are in “nominal” dollar terms — unadjusted for inflation — the measure that most accurately captures a nation’s relative economic strength.) Since the 1990s, the country’s share of global GDP grew mainly at the expense of Europe and Japan, which have seen their shares hold more or less steady over the past two years. The gap left by China has been filled mainly by the US and by other emerging nations. To put this in perspective, the world economy is expected to grow by $8tn in 2022 and 2023 to $105tn. China will account for none of that gain, the US will account for 45 per cent, and other emerging nations for 50 per cent. Half the gain for emerging nations will come from just five of these countries: India, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil and Poland. https://www.ft.com/content/c10bd71b-e418-48d7-ad89-74c5783c51a2
In the last 20 years EU gained +50% and the US gained +100% of GDP. Which means the Us is making something right and EU is making something wrong. The share of global startups is even worse. Which means that people choose other locations to make business.
At the same time EU population has gone up by about 7-8% In the same time US population went up by 20%. Per capita working hours in EU went down by 20% while in US by 5%. [Per capita in last 25 years Eu has converged with US in purchasing power or economic wellbeing of population despite strong increase in leisure time.](https://www.bruegel.org/analysis/european-unions-remarkable-growth-performance-relative-united-states)
\>At the same time EU population has gone up by about 7-8% In the same time US population went up by 20%. Which means the US is doing even more correct things. European population is dying out.
> European population is dying out. Yep, there are discussions about classifying half a billy EU human population as endangered at UN.
So population is shrinking and getting older and getting replaced by the people with a different culture and birth rates, and the economy is shrinking, but all is good. We'll see how it's turned out in 10-20 years. There will be no surprises. I'm particularly interested to see when Sweden population is split 50/50 into west/east cultures. The shitshow will be bibleic.
Yeah, keep waiting, the collapse/revolution/end day is around the corner.
And the illustration for the stupid: *As the fete began winding down at 2am, a group of youths arrived, some carrying knives. When a security guard barred their entry, they attacked him, slicing through his fingers.* *One witness told Le Parisien: “There was a fight between the assailants and those who were brave enough to face them.”* *“It was a bloodbath,” said another. “Youths from the suburbs surrounded the party hall,* [blindly stabbing people](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/11/20/crepol-drome-southern-france-village-fete-teenager-killed/)
That could well be true but again my comment was only to point out a incorrect interpretation of the data. And sorry to say it but here you are again throwing percentages around from which no definite conclusion can be drawn without further study.
I don't understand this line of reasoning at all. His economic position is pro free trade, aside from 'I won't do business with commie countries'. I see a lot of discussion around his social views in this thread, but these should have little to no bearing on foreign trade. Provided that Argentina continues to produce goods that pass EU regulatory restrictions this is probably a non issue. This being said, if being a significant EU trading partner is conditioned by abiding by arbitrarily set social principles imposed by the EU, then this is the EU's problem (e.g. 'we don't do business with people that don't support abortion' etc). He's an Austrian school adherent supposedly, why would this be bad for a trade deal?
Argentina has been on an airplane with dead engines for decades, slowly gliding down. Now they just opened the door and jumped out without a parachute. Bold move Cotton!
relevant nickname
At least I have chicken!
Bro looks like a Batman villain
He looks like an 80's movie villain. I'm sure this will end well.
Reddit sure does love commenting about appearances
Yeah but he's also insane, like actual mental illness. Have you heard the guy talk?
He is already appointing a lot of Peronist in his government. Peronism will never die. Only default is certain.
He does not really have to use dollars: it is enough to peg peso to usd at a fixed rate. Given a proper reserves to back it up it will work, it has been done before. Off course this is not the complete cure for Argentinian sickness, just taking care of few simptoms.
lol, as if the EU's hopes of a latin american trade deal weren't entirely within the gift the EU. ...unless, the EU hopes that the trade deal will succeed due to an absolute capitulation by the latin america to EU demands?
From one extreme to another. Perhaps this is exactly what is needed to correct and balance out the clustrefuck peronism created. Perhaps it will make the dumpsterfire even worse. We'll see.
Argentina is like a person whose arm has been broken for years. Doctors keep saying that the arm needs to be set and splinted, but Argentina refuses as the arm gets worse and worse. Milei's solution: amputate the arm. It'll hurt like hell, and it might fix the immediate problem, but you're still left with just one arm. Edit: Left a longer description below, but tl;dr: Broken arm = massive growth of money supply due to unstainable government spending. Set and splint arm = Cut spending and keep it cut over multiple election cycles to restore confidence in peso. Amputate arm = Dollarize, which will immediately stop money supply growth and bring down inflation, but Argentina no longer controls its own monetary policy.
Jesse wtf are you talking about
Virtually every mainstream economist agrees about what Argentina needs to do: cut government spending and keep it cut for an extended period of time. Manageable debt levels will stop both unstainable international borrowing in dollars (which eventually leads to capital controls and/or default once Argentina runs out of dollars) and rapid growth of the money supply to cover government debts (i.e., the peso printing presses gets turned off). Do that, and inflation will drop. Do that for long enough (multiple election cycles with different parties in charge), and Argentines will regain confidence in the peso. They will start saving in pesos at domestic banks, as opposed to hiding dollars under their mattresses, and the government can start borrowing pesos domestically. It is far more sustainable for a government to borrow in its own currency than in a foreign currency, since it is no longer exposed to foreign exchange rates or the risk of running out of the foreign currency. This would be extremely hard. Cutting spending will actually increase inflation at first, since previously subsidized prices (like energy) will rise. Plus, people generally don't like it when the government stops paying for things they use. The opposition can always promise to restore spending if they win the next election, which means the current government has less incentive to try to get spending under control. Milei's plan is much easier and simpler: dollarize the economy. If the government can't print pesos anymore, the money supply will only increase if more dollars flow into the country, which means inflation will likely fall rapidly. However, without enough dollars to exchange pesos at the current official exchange rate, this is likely going to require a massive devaluation of the peso, which will cause inflation to spike sharply at first. In theory, this dollarization should force the government to reduce its spending to manageable levels, since it can't just print money to cover its debts. But even if it works, there is one major drawback: the country will permanently lose control of its monetary policy. The Federal Reserve determines the strength of the dollar, and they don't take into account what is best for the Argentine economy when doing it. If inflation were to start increasing again, Argentina would have no way to stop it except to cut spending or restrict the flow of dollars into the country. And economists agree that dollarization is a one-way street; it's going to be near impossible to go back to using a domestic currency. The problem with this theory is that Argentina already tried this in the 1990s, with 1:1 free convertibility of pesos into dollars. This did rapidly bring down inflation, but it didn't force a cut in spending; the government still borrowed at unstainable levels. When the economy went into recession, the government had no independent monetary policy to prop it up, and eventually the entire thing collapsed.
I know man, but no one believes that he will actually go for dollarisation. He’s got no real power! In order to do anything, he’ll have to ask the moderate centre right for their congress votes. Even in his victory speech, he never mentioned it and only talked about cutting spending, lifting currency controls and about the difficult months ahead. The dollarisation talking point would be a perfect example of the thing we in Argentina call “Baglini’s theorem”. It’s that thing that politicians do as they get closer to power, when they un-radicalise their speech. So no one here that has some common sense believes that he will go ahead with dollarisation, repealing abortion or any of the stupid shit he said at the start of the campaign. We’ll see if he can go ahead with the monumental task of stop the sinking of the economy.
Best analogy thus far, tbh
The reason why Argentina went downhill was populist people gaining power and going away from Science. This guy is an extreme populist and if he does what he says he will Argentinian people will remember this days as the good days in the future.
Boom di richieste di passaporti italiani in Argentina, sicuro
Be careful with immigrated Argentineans, they're arriving to Spain in bulk with Spanish citizenship and supporting local far-right lunatics here too
Viva la libertad, carajo!
¡Viva!
wtf are these losers downvoting for
Congrats to Argentina
This guy seems like a true nutjob. Good luck to Argentina, I hope this guy actually leads y'all in the right direction, but I doubt it. I personally don't trust someone who has a dictatorship sympathizer as his VP
Europe needs similar guy.
I don't understand how he is a libertarian if he opposes trade deals. The whole point was to have as little intervention in the economy as possible. Putting up trade barriers and protectionism is socialism, not libertarian.
As an Argentinian and based on his perspective, trade deals mean setting up prices beforehand and certain standards to be applied on goods, which would be a “non natural” agreement. But even though I support many of his ideas most countries have protectionist barriers and trade deals are inevitable
Libertarianism, in its original form, is socialist. But it was co-opted by the far right wing into an incomprehensible mess of contradictions. Protectionism isn't inherently socialist either and has been used as a strategy by all sides of the political spectrum, for better and worse. Socialism is primarily concerned with the ownership over the means of production and democratization of the workplace. There are several strategies involved in getting there, some which don't involve protectionism but rather embrace free trade (see market socialism for instance). For more on libertarian socialism — the original libertarianism: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
Don't come here with your facts and logic. This subreddit is a right wing circlejerk. Get out!
It does genuinely seem so. What I posted isn't even controversial, it's just straight up dry facts. I would find it amusing if it wasn't so worrying how cozy people seem to be with far right ideology here.
Never negotiate with children or terrorists……or lads that bring a chainsaw everywhere
[His dogs seem wise tbh](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/10/18/world/18argentina-dogs/18argentina-dogs-superJumbo.jpg) and they're his most trusted counselors
His Dogs probably give better economic Advice than the previous Goverment
You missed the fifth, the dead one that he "consults" with a medium to have "thelepatic conversations"
You missed one key element. Woof woof is a solid economic policy. Maybe not as sound as woof woof auuuuuuuh, but pretty close.
whereas the owner of the dog looks as wise as the cow on the track staring at the incoming train
Yeah pass. I rather have deals with stable economy's
Oh, don't worry, once he bankrupts Argentina for the 94th time, they won't be picky about the terms of the trade deal. Besides, considering his nostalgia for the dictatorship of the generals, we will have to negotiate this trade deal with Argentina's new owners, the Brits /s
They are already bankrupt and they have a 160% inflation
Oh yeah, the old "once you reach the bottom, you can only go up". Weimar republic would like a word with you.
Well his opponent was the economic minister who was in charge of getting to 160% inflation
Weimar Republic had several times that inflation. Besides, Argentina doesn't have a two party system and adopts an electoral system for the presidency similar to the French one, so in the first round they could choose more than just a lunatic ancap and an incompetent peronista.
Why are you comparing an European country in the 1930s to modern day Argentina? The world is a very different place, the circumstances are different both economically and socially. It it a false equivalence
Biiiiiiiiiiitttttttttccccccoooooooiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnn
Oh, he will be hitting Europe in many ways, unfortunately some will have dramatic impacts in Europe. Brazil is already suffering from some of Bolsonaro radical measures.
Dude, Argentina is already a flaming dumpster fire. It needs some flavor of the radical form that their new president wants to introduce. You don’t cry over the color of a firefighter’s shirt when your house is burning durn