Argentines protest Milei's economic shock therapy

[MilHojas]

Argentines protest Milei's 'economic shock therapy' – DW – 12/21/2023

In Argentina, economic measures announced by newly elected President Javier Milei have sparked protests in the capital, Buenos Aires. Thousands marched against drastic cuts to public spending, plans to sell off all state-owned companies and a devaluation of the peso.

www.dw.com

Tens of thousands of Argentines protest against Milei amidst strong security measures

The downtown streets of Buenos Aires where the march took place were heavily guarded, especially the Plaza de Mayo

english.elpais.com

Archived version

 

[on the brink]

Milei's DNUs spell Death for the environment. What a tragedy.

 

[sts7049]

no, it doesn't

 

[on the brink]

no, it doesn't

Read the DNUs closely. What about mining and fire restoration? Just to name two of them. They remove all environmental protection regulations.

 

[SinPulgas]

The fire law is a new and controversial law pushed by Maximo and the kirchnerismo. There was a lot written about it at the time. If you're really interested, you can search about the law and the controversy.

As I recall, this part was extremely controversial (taken from fire law link in Quilombo's DNI thread):

Zonas incendiadas - Prohibiciones​

Bosques nativos o implantados - Áreas naturales protegidas - Humedales

En caso de incendios provocados o accidentales que quemen vegetación viva o muerta está prohibido durante 60 años contados desde la extinción del incendio:

• Realizar modificaciones en el uso y destino que esas superficies tenían antes del incendio.
• Dividir o subdividir, lotear, fraccionar, parcelar o hacer cualquier emprendimiento inmobiliario distinto al arrendamiento y venta en tierras particulares. La división y subdivisión está permitida en caso de partición hereditaria.
• Vender, dar en concesión, dividir, subdividir, lotear, fraccionar, parcelar o hacer cualquier otro emprendimiento inmobiliario, distinto al arrendamiento, en tierras fiscales.
• Realizar cualquier actividad agropecuaria que sea distinta al uso y destino que la superficie tenia al momento del incendio.

Se establecen estas prohibiciones para garantizar las condiciones para que se restauren las superficies incendiadas.

Esta prohibición puede extenderse si lo indica el Ordenamiento Territorial de los Bosques Nativos de la jurisdicción correspondiente.

Zonas agropecuarias, praderas, pastizales, matorrales - Áreas con estructuras edilicias que se entremezclan con vegetación fuera del ambiente urbano o estructural

En caso de incendios provocados o accidentales que quemen vegetación viva o muerta está prohibido durante 30 años contados desde la extinción del incendio:

• Realizar emprendimientos inmobiliarios.
• Realizar cualquier actividad agropecuaria distinta al uso y destino que la superficie tenía antes del incendio.
• Modificar el uso de la superficie para desarrollar prácticas agropecuarias intensivas.

Se establecen estas prohibiciones para garantizar las condiciones para que se restauren las superficies incendiadas.

---------------------------------------------------------

So you buy a piece of land to develop, someone starts a fire on it, and you can't do anything with it for 60 years.

It's not an environmental law. It's just political bullshit. There was a lot of discussion about it at the time.

 

[mikic007]

The fire law is a new and controversial law pushed by Maximo and the kirchnerismo. There was a lot written about it at the time. If you're really interested, you can search about the law and the controversy.

As I recall, this part was extremely controversial (taken from fire law link in Quilombo's DNI thread):

Zonas incendiadas - Prohibiciones​

Bosques nativos o implantados - Áreas naturales protegidas - Humedales

En caso de incendios provocados o accidentales que quemen vegetación viva o muerta está prohibido durante 60 años contados desde la extinción del incendio:

• Realizar modificaciones en el uso y destino que esas superficies tenían antes del incendio.
• Dividir o subdividir, lotear, fraccionar, parcelar o hacer cualquier emprendimiento inmobiliario distinto al arrendamiento y venta en tierras particulares. La división y subdivisión está permitida en caso de partición hereditaria.
• Vender, dar en concesión, dividir, subdividir, lotear, fraccionar, parcelar o hacer cualquier otro emprendimiento inmobiliario, distinto al arrendamiento, en tierras fiscales.
• Realizar cualquier actividad agropecuaria que sea distinta al uso y destino que la superficie tenia al momento del incendio.

Se establecen estas prohibiciones para garantizar las condiciones para que se restauren las superficies incendiadas.

Esta prohibición puede extenderse si lo indica el Ordenamiento Territorial de los Bosques Nativos de la jurisdicción correspondiente.

Zonas agropecuarias, praderas, pastizales, matorrales - Áreas con estructuras edilicias que se entremezclan con vegetación fuera del ambiente urbano o estructural

En caso de incendios provocados o accidentales que quemen vegetación viva o muerta está prohibido durante 30 años contados desde la extinción del incendio:

• Realizar emprendimientos inmobiliarios.
• Realizar cualquier actividad agropecuaria distinta al uso y destino que la superficie tenía antes del incendio.
• Modificar el uso de la superficie para desarrollar prácticas agropecuarias intensivas.

Se establecen estas prohibiciones para garantizar las condiciones para que se restauren las superficies incendiadas.

---------------------------------------------------------

So you buy a piece of land to develop, someone starts a fire on it, and you can't do anything with it for 60 years.

It's not an environmental law. It's just political bullshit. There was a lot of discussion about it at the time.

I'm not sure, but it looks like you didn't buy the land that was available to be developed. You bought something with designated purpose, and this law prevents you to change its use by simply burn down, let's say forest.

In those 60 years you can do with this land all you could do before the fire.

Sounds very environmental to me, since it discourage burning down rainforest to turn it into fields.

 

[on the brink]

So you buy a piece of land to develop, someone starts a fire on it, and you can't do anything with it for 60 years.

It's not an environmental law. It's just political bullshit. There was a lot of discussion about it at the time.

This is beyond naive. "Someone" starts a fire on it? My heart bleeds for the poor innocent landowner.

The law prevented the intentional burning of land to make room to industrial or residential development.

 

[SinPulgas]

As I said, this was covered heavily in the press. With many details. If you just want to make off-the-cuff comments without going back and reading the various articles, with interviews and comments from people actually involved when this law was proposed and voted, that's fine. And a lot easier.

 

[mikic007]

As I said, this was covered heavily in the press. With many details. If you just want to make off-the-cuff comments without going back and reading the various articles, with interviews and comments from people actually involved when this law was proposed and voted, that's fine. And a lot easier.

I was responding to what you posted, supposedly very controversial part of the law, that makes complete sense to anyone concerned about environment. And your adding below, which was really silly.

Don't send people to read old press and comments, if you are not willing to provide them yourself. Every law will have some edge cases and will cause some injustice, and this is later solved on different courts.

That South America, or America in general has a problem with environmental issues is not a secret, and their consequences are visible more and more, every year. Argentina has so much land that is poorly used, that certainly doesn't need to expand agricultural or building landscape. Brazil is worse, but this isn't excuse i guess.

 

[on the brink]

As I said, this was covered heavily in the press. With many details. If you just want to make off-the-cuff comments without going back and reading the various articles, with interviews and comments from people actually involved when this law was proposed and voted, that's fine. And a lot easier.

Congratulations on being so perceptive....!

Or could it be that you know me personally, and have talked with me in depth. That would explain how you can assert that I haven't read on the subject, and just make off the cuff comments.

However, I don't recall meeting you. My loss, no doubt.