Argentina Ranks 4Th On Cato Institute Misery Index

[scotttswan]

You need to hold your government to a higher standard Matias.

Just after i left the uk there was a huge scandal where multiple politicians had misused expenses. The resulting fallout was over a million pounds was paid back to the country, the expenses system was reformed with full public disclosure and multiple politicians actually got jail time over fraud.

http://en.wikipedia....xpenses_scandal

Whereas here you have Menem sitting in the senate still. The current government are all friends of his.

 

[Matiasba]

still no arguments!

 

[thorsten]

Matias, where are your arguments. You always post some theories (remember your theory about the huge amount of supermarkets here compared to Europe?) and when get proven wrong you switch to the next topic... We also had a discussion on the poverty. If you really want to make an argument, explain me please how low the poverty actually is. Maybe you have real data here, but as far as I know poverty statistics are heavily based on inflation and we all know that INDEC posted fake numbers for the latter over a long period and thus the respective poverty stats are wrong. Weirdly, since the new consumer price index which is supposed to represent the real (very high) inflation, INDEC decided not to publish new poverty figures anymore. Do you believe in the technical problems they gave as a reason (I'd except to find at least one person with mediocre Excel skills in an organization as big as INDEC), or is it maybe just a way to keep the inclusion bubble a bit longer alive (until the elections are over)?

 

[Matiasba]

Matias, where are your arguments. You always post some theories (remember your theory about the huge amount of supermarkets here compared to Europe?) and when get proven wrong you switch to the next topic... We also had a discussion on the poverty. If you really want to make an argument, explain me please how low the poverty actually is. Maybe you have real data here, but as far as I know poverty statistics are heavily based on inflation and we all know that INDEC posted fake numbers for the latter over a long period and thus the respective poverty stats are wrong. Weirdly, since the new consumer price index which is supposed to represent the real (very high) inflation, INDEC decided not to publish new poverty figures anymore. Do you believe in the technical problems they gave as a reason (I'd except to find at least one person with mediocre Excel skills in an organization as big as INDEC), or is it maybe just a way to keep the inclusion bubble a bit longer alive (until the elections are over)?

Not everything in INDEC is wrong. There are statistics, like employment, that nobody disccuss it. With poverty, some say 25%, some, like UCA, says 30%. Nobody says more than 30%. It is a lot, but I dont remember any government with this social planning. I dont remember AUH or something similar, or sibsidios as this government has, or + 2,600,000 jubilados. I remember exclussion and more poverty, from every government. This government inverted inertia of al these things, created jobs ike noone before, industrialised a lot, those are not fake numbers, you cant lie wwith that.

 

[sergio]

David, I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the BAExpats demographic.

From looking at most of the polls and comments here, the posters on this site tend to be far more anti-oficialismo than do most Argentines (notwithstanding whether or not they earn in Blue dollars). For example, I ran a "Peronism and Democracy" poll here that showed that some 90% of the voters thought Peronism was vastly negative for the country. Meanwhile, the Peronists are by far the most popular party in the country. I.e., expats tend to be far less supportive of the government than the natives-- and it's the natives that earn in pesos!

I'm not saying your view of the government is wrong, I'm just saying that you seem to have it backwards when you say "[background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]Many Argentines will agree with this, and most expats will not".[/background] The majority opinion here tends to reflect (as one would expect) the interests of expats, who generally are better off financially and live overwhelmingly in the richer areas of Cap Federal. Meanwhile, that is not at all representative of Argentina, as can be seen in the elections here, where barrios like Palermo and Recoleta inevitably vote in the opposite direction of the majority of the country.

I know you've been here a considerable amount of time, and that you've been around the Argentine block more than most expats here, so I don't take it lightly to take issue with something you say, but while I think you're right when you say we expats run the danger of getting trapped in a sort of expat bubble, I think you might have the bubble backwards.

Before things got really bad expats on this forum were generally supportive of the government. I was one of the minority who was critical and thus criticized by some expats. This expat attitude has changed due to high inflation and currency controls that have adversely affected expats and driven many back to the US or wherever. As for Argentine attitudes, I find that those who oppose the government tend to be the well-educated, often professionals or people with better incomes. Most of Argentina is poor. This is a simple reality. Millions of people are dependent on welfare. They see the government as a source of aid and they vote accordingly. What they lack is a realistic picture of how the government is keeping them down by not making serious changes that would result in a better economy for everyone. If the anger we are seeing in Brazil - anger over spending massive amounts of money on the World Cup that will never be recovered - could spill over into Argentina, there could be some change however Argentines had this opportunity during the crisis when there were numerous Presidents in one week. They could have seized the opportunity to insist on changes but instead they reverted to the same old party and its failed policies. As for misery, most Argentines are used to misery. It is a way of life. The middle and upper middle classes are the ones who are suffering now. They have to work harder to maintain the same standard or they are just sinking into a lower socio-economic class. The study applies to them more accurately than it does to the majority of people in this country.

 

[Redpossum]

Yellow card, Matías.

There's no need to belittle ARBound for his unfortunate situation. Not cool. While I agree he is unfairly extrapolating his own problems to the rest of the country, he is not trolling by any stretch of the imagination. There is no call to be mean.

If you're going to referee, Rooney, you need to be more fair and even-handed in your enforcement. Joe says some pretty cruel things and you never even bat an eyelash. Culture of impunity?

 

[thorsten]

Not everything in INDEC is wrong. There are statistics, like employment, that nobody disccuss it. With poverty, some say 25%, some, like UCA, says 30%. Nobody says more than 30%. It is a lot, but I dont remember any government with this social planning. I dont remember AUH or something similar, or sibsidios as this government has, or + 2,600,000 jubilados. I remember exclussion and more poverty, from every government. This government inverted inertia of al these things, created jobs ike noone before, industrialised a lot, those are not fake numbers, you cant lie wwith that.

And this is where our difference is: When I want to rate an organization like INDEC, it would be based on their task, i.e., are they providing all statistics needed accurately and in time - just not being wrong in every aspect would not qualify as a quality criteria. Same is for governments: are they fulfilling their task, which is in my opinion providing an environment to foster better wealth for the whole country. This does not necessarily mean not making debts, or instantly decreasing poverty figures for example, but building up potentials which can be leveraged by future generations. So the question is: did the government everything to leave the country for the children in the best possible position. If you just give away subsidies without structural improvements, you will end up with a couple of happy pawns in the short term paid with the future - and this is policy here. Just comparing basement figures like unemployment was x when the government started and y when it ended is - even though used frequently - a sign that people seem to view the role of the government differently. Many aspects like unemployment depend on the policies only in long-term, so if you change labor laws for example, you will often see the effect in many years, but not instantly. By just looking at the numbers instead of the policies and their goals, you basically measure global economy only (I'd guess that almost all latin american countries grew, decreased poverty, ...). Unfortunately, as structural changes that improve the country in the long-term often have negative effects in the short term (investments, higher taxes, ...), they are not very attractive to many politicians - and this is not only the case for Argentina by the way, even though I have the feeling that populism is higher here as you have always nice excuses like "the old government gave us the debt", "we are still better than the dictator", "its all globalization's fault"...

 

[ajoknoblauch]

And this is where our difference is: When I want to rate an organization like INDEC, it would be based on their task, i.e., are they providing all statistics needed accurately and in time - just not being wrong in every aspect would not qualify as a quality criteria.

So, has INDEC quantified the benefits of Futbol Para Todos yet?

 

[ARbound]

I actually have nothing against you Matias like I said before, some points, just seem word for word from Capitanich, and you did say when you were
in Mexico that the Campora does speak for you, jokingly, which is why I found the picture of someone literally "beating the [campora] drum" but I guess
it didn't come across that way.

Thank you Ed, I've made a poor decision moving here and will leave when possible, but I am stuck until then. I also admit that if I was living here
on dollars then I'd have a very different view point of the country, and like many Argentines I think, I can sometimes be too harsh. I'll admit that.
I don't however, blame anyone for me being here, I bought the ticket, legalized the documents at the consulate and got the apartment and job.

I think we all can come across as mean/actually intend to be mean sometimes, the hard part of the internet is you can't always tell with 100%
accuracy if someone is joking, being dramatic, facetious, etc. I think Joe, even if I don't always agree with him, is a nice enough guy btw.

 

[steveinbsas]

Now have a look at the Wikipedia article on the Cato institute, check the three founders, see where it says Charles Koch? As in Koch brothers? I think that tells us all we need to know about the Cato institute. Whether or not individual Libertarians are aware of it, this is nothing more than a stalking horse for the reactionaries.

Well, I had a look at the Wikipedia article on the Cato institute and see where it says Charles Koch. How does that tell us "all we need to know about the Cato institute?" As a matter of fact, I like what I read about the Cato Institute in the Wikipedia article. This is probably due to the fact that I am indeed a "reactionary" who wants to see a return to the economic conditions of a previous era (the Reagan 80's and the Clinton 90's).

From the Wikipedia article: The Institute's website states, "The mission of the Cato Institute is to originate, disseminate, and increase understanding of public policies based on the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace."

As for Charles Koch, let him speak for himself (following an "introduction" by Nick Sorrentino):

http://www.againstcr...a-free-society/

Steve, you mean well, and your heart is in the right place, but you are being used.

Now, if by posting these links, I am being used, I am prepared to be used as often as possible.