¿periodismo Para Todos Vs Fútbol Para Todos?

Stepping out of the political arguments the sad thing is the quality of the local footbal has suffered drastically. Clubs incomes are normally heavily dependent on tv money, without that private income they cannot hold on to promising youth player (ocampos and lamela from river for example) and cash in by selling them as soon as they can for euros.

The shameful lack of appetite of the government to tackle the hooligan culture is really holding back the development of the game here also.

Private money could improve the level of the game here, also if the country had a currency worth talking about we would see better players from the region arriving in the country.

The league should be structured in a way to redistribute income to clubs who should be obliged to invest in their communities and ban barrabravas.

Unfortunately the league is reflective of the closed paranoid nature of the current govt. inward looking, frightened to grow and happier to promote and foster internal corruption than grow up and face the world.
 
Dublin2BsAs I agree with you 100%, but this government & the AFA (which is practically just the government anyway) have no interest in tackling the Barras Bravas, because they are friends of the government! The Kirchnerismo uses them for various political means: Punteros, Going along to her speeches and rallies, Advertising at the games and arround the communities (putting up banners & signs, all the political messages/graffiti) etc etc.
 
Stepping out of the political arguments the sad thing is the quality of the local footbal has suffered drastically. Clubs incomes are normally heavily dependent on tv money, without that private income they cannot hold on to promising youth player (ocampos and lamela from river for example) and cash in by selling them as soon as they can for euros.

The shameful lack of appetite of the government to tackle the hooligan culture is really holding back the development of the game here also.

Private money could improve the level of the game here, also if the country had a currency worth talking about we would see better players from the region arriving in the country.

The league should be structured in a way to redistribute income to clubs who should be obliged to invest in their communities and ban barrabravas.

Unfortunately the league is reflective of the closed paranoid nature of the current govt. inward looking, frightened to grow and happier to promote and foster internal corruption than grow up and face the world.

It's not their "lack of appetite to tackle the hooligan culture." It's their open encouragement of same, which is part of their political base.
 
Matiaba, would you have a problem if a NeoLiberal was elected as President and he used your tax dollars on Futbol in order to broadcast a NeoLiberal agenda?
 
Matiaba, would you have a problem if a NeoLiberal was elected as President and he used your tax dollars on Futbol in order to broadcast a NeoLiberal agenda?

I would not have any problem of any kind if someone make the poor people of this country, the people who most suffered, people under the poverty line, that dont have practically anything but futbol, enjoy to watch their team for free.
And it sounds something a neoliberal wouldnt do, in fact, we have a neoliberal, Macri, who manifestated that he d privatize it again. So, neoliberals tend to privatize and make bussiness of everything, even things such as education or health which are rights and the State has the obligation to give.

So, if futbol remain free, I can perfectly stand propaganda despite I dont like it.
 
Thats not true, "neo-liberal" countries still have a blend of free & subsidised services. Its just the scare tactics used by the government and Ks here that any other model will mean EVERYONE has to pay for EVERYTHING.

I will give you a few examples of how it works in Australia, given thats what I know best. Dont get me wrong, we have plenty of own problems (social problems amongst the Aborigines, rising cost of living etc etc), but this is just to give you an idea of how a liberal, free market model can work:
- Primary / Secondary Education: majority of students attend public schools (which are free for those who cant afford), albeit governments also subsidise private schools
- Tertiary/College Education: university education is not free, however heavily subsidised such that the government loans you money and then you start paying it back when you are capable. This means that if you cant afford upfront payment (basically no one can haha), it wont prevent you from going to University.
- Health: if you cant afford it there is free health (subsidised by the government and also by a personal tax, paid proportionately to your income)
- Welfare: Systems in place whereby if you dont work you still get money, albeit you generally have to provde you are actively looking for work, and need the benefits
- Sport on TV: both pay per view and free to air. Generally works that the bigger sports games still shown on free-to-air for those who cant afford it. If not, there is always a friends house, bar etc to watch it as someone put it.
 
Change football for all schedule to compete with Lanata. When will it end?
http://www.iprofesional.com/notas/161048-Ftbol-para-Todos-podra-cambiar-de-horario-para-darle-pelea-al-programa-de-Lanata
 
I said I was going cold turkey on Lanato, but last night I was dragged kicking and screaming to the TV.
Is it me, or is circumstantial evidence a major part of his set up?
 
Never mind the tv audience, how would you feel leaving the stadium at almost midnight on a winter night! Freezing your particulars off so the government can carry the fight against tabloid journalism.

Mind you FIFA are so corrupt there is no good reason why AFA shouldnt follow suit. Look what happened to the English FA when they tried levelling allegations of global corruption in the game. Soccer and politics are perfect bedfellows here...
 
Thats not true, "neo-liberal" countries still have a blend of free & subsidised services. Its just the scare tactics used by the government and Ks here that any other model will mean EVERYONE has to pay for EVERYTHING.

I will give you a few examples of how it works in Australia, given thats what I know best. Dont get me wrong, we have plenty of own problems (social problems amongst the Aborigines, rising cost of living etc etc), but this is just to give you an idea of how a liberal, free market model can work:
- Primary / Secondary Education: majority of students attend public schools (which are free for those who cant afford), albeit governments also subsidise private schools
- Tertiary/College Education: university education is not free, however heavily subsidised such that the government loans you money and then you start paying it back when you are capable. This means that if you cant afford upfront payment (basically no one can haha), it wont prevent you from going to University.
- Health: if you cant afford it there is free health (subsidised by the government and also by a personal tax, paid proportionately to your income)
- Welfare: Systems in place whereby if you dont work you still get money, albeit you generally have to provde you are actively looking for work, and need the benefits
- Sport on TV: both pay per view and free to air. Generally works that the bigger sports games still shown on free-to-air for those who cant afford it. If not, there is always a friends house, bar etc to watch it as someone put it.

Of course theres not such thing as a 100% neoliberal government. In fact, we have here a blend too, and every private school of Buenos Aires have subsidio from the State, since education is a constitutional obligation the State must stand for.


I dont know if it was Stiglitz (former Nobel prize on economics) or who, the one that said there are two capitalisms, one that you have it in first world countries, and the other of third world countries, mainly in Latin America, which consists basically on sacking and pillaging, where the big corporations make the most of their money, where you have week governments with low taxes, where big capitals can come make their money and leave with total liberty. He called it "pilaging capitalism".

So basically, and I have history on my side, the free market policies have sunk this country several times, They come and leave and destroy local economy. The private sector does not respect anything, they are like so greedy they just want their investment to work. So they can buy polticians or judges or congressmen to make their bussiness work. A good example of this is what happens with mineras today. Its an activity prohibited in first world countries. Same as papeleras. But they can come here extract and destroy the natural resources with total impunity, intoxicate local communities, and leave with their profit. And it have happened with lot of areas. In the nineties, we have almost all the country privatized, and the result of that policies were the worst economic crisis ever.

So my point is that here you just cant make free market policies work, because of how the upper classes, the people who would command that process, behave. They have no respect for nothing, they have no sense of community or nationalistic thoughts. They dont care of the country. They make their money here and instead of reinvesting it here, to the country grows, they take it every 10 years to Caiman Island. They dont believe in the country. They bet the money against the country, in hedge funds, for example. They make this country explode every ten years, they empty the country of dollars, they take it from the Central bank so we always run out of. This explains the restrictions we have today, the controls, the crazyness of this government to take care of every penny.

Theres a huge entrepreneur culture implanted in the dictatoirship which implies total impunity to do whatever they want, that wont change in the short term.

And on the other direction, we have the State, which with this governement is growing and taking care of an increased number of areas. Despite corruption.
 
Back
Top