Belle Epoque Of Gran Argentina

[ajoknoblauch]

yeah, like the 20 years when Peronism and its symbols were prohibited.

Which utterly eradicated every trace of Peronism, which is now just an historical curiosity.

 

[Matiasba]

how can you say Peronism dominated the political scenario from 1955 till 1973, when after being overthrown by a coup in 1955 and Peron exiled in Madrid, Peronism was prohibited to participate in democratical elections? do you get this? do you understand? the party was forbidden, intervened by militars. Symbols were prohibited, chants, etc. The same during the last dictatorship (1976-1983), peronism was the leit motiv of the dictatorship, was its object of persecution, was the target, how can all these years be dominated by them?
Listen, Im not going to answer you anymore, I dont want to discuss history with someone who demostrates to know nothing of Argentine history. Good day.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

how can you say Peronism dominated the political scenario from 1955 till 1973, when after being overthrown by a coup in 1955 and Peron exiled in Madrid, Peronism was prohibited to participate in democratical elections? do you get this? do you understand? the party was forbidden, intervened by militars. Symbols were prohibited, chants, etc. The same during the last dictatorship (1976-1983), peronism was the leit motiv of the dictatorship, was its object of persecution, was the target, how can all these years be dominated by them?
Listen, Im not going to answer you anymore, I dont want to discuss history with someone who demostrates to know nothing of Argentine history. Good day.

Obviously, this is merely an academic question, as Peronism's disappearance - how many of today's Argentines have even heard of Perón? - makes it nothing more than an historical curiosity.

 

[Hybrid Ambassador]

I found this nice flag elsewhere..

 

[Somewhereinba]

It sounds bad but a lot of the public are also to blame for the state this country is in. I see it everyday in certain attitudes and a lack of care for others. A lot of employees feel entitled and their output is no where near where it needs to be, when they don't get their way they sue the business for unfair dismissal and win the majority of the time. Why would a business hire someone when the law so heavily favours the employee? Don't get me started on the Government and politicians... The amount of money that goes missing and distributed through different channels to 'friends' is ridiculous - I only know this because a good friend works in the Government and see's it daily. A lot of the system is rotten and to be honest I don't see things changing until there is a major shift in attitude and of course a new Government. Who does Cristina think she is dealing with when she has the balls to publish 'official' figures regarding the state of the economy that are so ridiculous - it's insulting and just more proof this women has absolutely no idea what she is doing. I think the botox has gone into her brain long ago.

 

[ARbound]

At the time Néstor took over, there was no alternative to a forceful Keynesianism to reactivate the economy - you can quibble with the details, but it was the right thing to do. The problem is that he, and his successor, have never recognized the limits to Keynesianism, that counter-cyclical policies were necessary to stabilize matters as the country recovered. Cristina and Kicillof, though, appear to think it can continue forever.

Oh I don't oppose Keynesianism, but I think Keynes would view a lot of what Nestor did and essentially all of what Cristina has done (or lack there of) as a complete screw up on his approach.

I believe in Keynesianism more than most, and I think some of what the two of them did was appropriate but the issue is they can't see the forest for the trees. Countries are not like Provinces or cities or a company, they're the Big Daddy of macroeconomics, you need to be able to see the effects (or if you don't see them at first, be willing to compensate for them when you do) so they do not have a negative impact on the main goal.

Over here in North America for example I think more government spending would help, where in Argentina I'd say slowly cut back on non-essentials (FPT anyone?). It is nice that when I left here a year ago milk was 3.99/gallon and it still is today, but Canada, like the United States, is still a very McJob economy, where minimum wage is what you get and take it or leave it. Argentina is at the point where food prices double almost yearly, wages go up about 30% and inflation still isn't taken seriously.

I'm sure someone will try and say I'm arguing for austerity in Argentina, but I'm arguing for restraint. As I always say, what good is making an extra 500 ARS a month if it's only worth 250 ARS in a year?

 

[TWB103]

In my local public library there are 4 reception desk staff members doing the job of one. They do virtually nothing. Meanwhile the paper towel dispenser remains mostly empty - cant afford to restock it or are unaware when it runs out. In the UK you'd have ONE semi retired person - maybe even volunteering!- actively doing the tasks of these 4 young staff members. But I suppose this type of 'employment' keeps the unemployment figure down in Argentina.

La Decada Ganada

 

[Dublin2BuenosAires]

FPT and library staff are small beer, energy and transport spend tower over everything. The house has been bet on vaca muerta, disaster will no doubt ensue.

Next govt in might consider part privatisation of AArg. Spare me the 90s neoliberal routine....

 

[French jurist]

Next govt in might consider part privatisation of AArg.

Yes but...

Spare me the 90s neoliberal routine....

Ah ok

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Oh I don't oppose Keynesianism, but I think Keynes would view a lot of what Nestor did and essentially all of what Cristina has done (or lack there of) as a complete screw up on his approach.

I believe in Keynesianism more than most, and I think some of what the two of them did was appropriate but the issue is they can't see the forest for the trees. Countries are not like Provinces or cities or a company, they're the Big Daddy of macroeconomics, you need to be able to see the effects (or if you don't see them at first, be willing to compensate for them when you do) so they do not have a negative impact on the main goal.

Over here in North America for example I think more government spending would help, where in Argentina I'd say slowly cut back on non-essentials (FPT anyone?). It is nice that when I left here a year ago milk was 3.99/gallon and it still is today, but Canada, like the United States, is still a very McJob economy, where minimum wage is what you get and take it or leave it. Argentina is at the point where food prices double almost yearly, wages go up about 30% and inflation still isn't taken seriously.

I'm sure someone will try and say I'm arguing for austerity in Argentina, but I'm arguing for restraint. As I always say, what good is making an extra 500 ARS a month if it's only worth 250 ARS in a year?

I don't think we disagree on this. In today's Argentina, Keynesianism has overstayed its welcome, and restraint would be a good idea, but when has Peronism ever restrained itself? Soccer For Everyone deserves to be first in line for the guillotine.