>>2850463>>2850463
>I never claimed Milei had solved Argentina’s structural problems or that living standards had suddenly become good…First and foremost, it is not that Milei hasn't solved structural problems, he hasn't solved any kind of problem, he has created problems for everybody save for a handful of exports sectors and rentiere guys. He even fucked over the national industrial bourgeoise who turned to him in the first place. Solving inflation by killing the real economy and terminally indebting and deindustrializing the country is not "solving" anything. What kind of liberal bourgeois economics are you on? The chronic dependency on the IMF has a long history, as you say, from the military junta to Menem to Macri, indeed. But the last succdems? Néstor paid the debt and successfully won against fondos buitre legal causes, so for all their succdem bullshit you need to give then credit on that ground, although paying for imperialist debt is not my cup of tea. In fact, something which led to last succdem Fernandez to such great unpopularity was the fact he pussied out of not paying the debt that Trump's lapdog Macri got at the very end of his term, which btw is the biggest IMF loan in history. Even a quick look at every real economy indicators show that succdems were much more successfull economically, EVEN when it comes to foreign investment, despite this new cuck programs they are doing. You know what Milei could have done to solve Argentina's chronic dependency to IMF? Not withdrew from the BRICS membership process, but as it turns out, he did and took more debt again, and again, burning through that money because his "model" (as they call it) has no fucking revenue. Caputo is even talking about another loan. Maybe he is just the latest tool for the alliance between local rentist oligarchy and the USA? I dont know, you tell me. Oh, something I forgot to say is that the federal govt is in debt with education and not delivering on the province's budgets, all the while he is cutting through everything, which shows how little money they are working with.
>My point was much narrower: compared to the Fernández administration, inflation has fallen dramatically, and even critics generally acknowledge that. Whether that stabilization proves durable—or whether it simply comes at too high a social cost—is the real debate.Compared to the worst possible term a succdem pussy could have faced? Wow congratulations. Just so you know, Milei's wonderful economics have led to a level of industrial activity as low as Fernandez during COVID. The difference? One was facing a global pandemic, what is this guy even facing? And btw, what stabilization? The working people are just receiving cut after cut, debt after debt, lower wages, lower retirement pension, worse working conditions… Again, a handful of rentists are enjoying a stable arena for their dirty business, so what? The majority of people are not in a "stable" situation, as you yourself mention. Even considering the recovery from the initial shock you mention, even looking at official (wrong) poverty stats, he failed to raise from poverty all the people he brought down. I dont know what your argument is, you are arguing that Milei's govt is lifting people out of poverty by looking at some stupid chart while not even considering his actual, concrete policies, which are all anti labour policies without exception? Is this what you're saying? Even by looking at other stupid charts, such as petty delinquency, job loss, small and medium firms closure, purchasing power… You can do 2+2 and reach the conclusion that something doesn't adds up in the poverty stats. So the "debate" isn't "stabilization, but at what cost?" But rather "stabilization, but for whom?".
>As for Peronism, I think you’re treating seventy years of very different governments as one coherent project. Perón in the late 1940s isn’t Menem in the 1990s, isn’t the Kirchners, isn’t Alberto Fernández. There were periods of successful industrialization and rising living standards, but also periods of fiscal mismanagement, inflation, clientelism and repeated debt crises. Calling the entire tradition either a “golden age” or an unmitigated disaster oversimplifies Argentine history.I didn't say peronism is a coherent long term project. Menem is as much peronist as Gorbachev is Bolshevik or communist or whatever label you may like. Kirschners are nothing but damage control from neoliberalism, your basic pink wave LATAM guys, and I said that despite them being basic succdems Milei makes them LOOK like a golden age, not that they actually were. I even said that Peron's 70s return wasn't as great as his first time, a first time I described as a "classical keynisian era", and may I add "unaligned national bourgeoise", type of govt, which was already too much for USA and oligarchical rentist back home, so they couped him out. He returned some kind of succdem fervent anticommunist with shady ties to epsteinite-like P2 people, and even then it was too much for the local ghouls to bear, so they operacion-condor'd his wife once again.
The only solution for Argentina we, in this site, know well, and it isn't succdem reform. So I got nothing but contempt for this succdem peronist who are fooling people for decades with a project they can't really materialize in any "structural" (as you say) way. But fact is, for the average person, they are a golden age compared to these fucking leeches going out of control, and the vast majority of "structural" problems can be traced back to the military govt, to Menem, Macri and now this fucking farce of a guy.
>I also don’t buy the idea that every positive macroeconomic indicator can simply be dismissed as fake because Milei is in office…
>Ultimately, I think it’s too early to declare either victory or catastrophe. Argentina has looked like it was “finally fixed” before, only to collapse again a few years later. If Milei’s reforms survive the next external shock and produce sustained increases in real wages, investment and productivity, then he’ll have a stronger case. If they don’t, then this will just be another chapter in Argentina’s recurring cycleAgain, cf. Supra, positive indicator for whom??? May I ask, who are you, are you baiting me? Victory or catastrophy? Dont make me laugh. It is not that we should wait for the future to see —you didn't need to be a fortune teller to tell everything that is happening and going to happen from the beginning. Argentina has never been fixed nor looked fixed. If Peron was more like a succdem quasi-fash revolutionary like the kuomintang or islamic revolution, maybe he could have done some kind of "fixing", by kicking out all the leeches, especially if at least he nationalized banking, but this shit is even less realistic than a ML revolution. But he didn't, hence why he didn't amount to shit save for his somewhat impressive and cherished first run with his wife Evita, which was totally running on borrowed time, as history showed. Considering he was the closest Argentina got to being "fixed", what can we say about the rest? Total bullshit. Also, you remind me of some kind of pre-socratic philosopher with that bullshit about "cycle", as if this country had some sort of magical curse left behind by genocided indians. If you at least knew the bare minimum about argentina's class structure and its history you wouldnt need to invoke such empedoclean cosmologies. Argentina's problem has always been imperialism, facilitated by this parasitic and utterly despicable entrenched oligarchy, some of which have surnames as old as the country itself (for example: Martinez de Hoz) you can find in the Sociedad Rural, in Diario Clarín, in the finantial sector, in mining, real estate and, depending on their allegiance, industrial sector (some of whom are succdem peronists), in cahoots with Washington, wall street, the CIA, the IMF, and the whole circus.