How ugly has it gotten, or not?

[AlexS]

Well, the answer is we always compare with 2001 (51%) and 1989 and yes, with NK (26%) and CFK (30%) the situation of poverty improved a lot while MM was a factory of poverty.

CFK was very good administrating the lack of resources while MM in the best scenario he squandered them, in the most realistic he stole them.

Here you insist in the confusion. It is not a fiscal umbalance, it is a credit where the State does not need to pay interest.
This is the reason of the whealth of the US: they just print money.

Here is a chart for the current account imbalance. You can find charts for the budget imbalance as well.



Every central bank practices monetary expansion. The only difference is when the US does it, they expand at a much lower rate than Argentina and therefore has a lower inflation rate. The US borrows money in USD too, so if they print and inflate they devalue their own debt. The US isn't rich because they print more money than other countries. If that was the case Venezuela and Zimbabwe would be rich.

I guess your mind won't changed that CFK was a very good administrator.

Good weekend to all!

 

[Bajo_cero2]

The Us is rich because they print money and people want it, not like in Venezuela or here.
There is no doubt that CFK was a good administrator, specially if you compare her with MM.

 

[ghost]

Well, the answer is we always compare with 2001 (51%) and 1989 and yes, with NK (26%) and CFK (30%) the situation of poverty improved a lot while MM was a factory of poverty.

CFK was very good administrating the lack of resources while MM in the best scenario he squandered them, in the most realistic he stole them.

Here you insist in the confusion. It is not a fiscal umbalance, it is a credit where the State does not need to pay interest.
This is the reason of the whealth of the US: they just print money.

The price of Botox and designer shoes will go sky high

 

[deadOA]

The Us is rich because they print money and people want it,

US is rich because of its sheer brute power (no matter what they do). And dare I say in spite of "Capitalism".

The trouble with "Capitalism" is capitalists, they´re too damned greedy.and will self destruct

 

[Bajo_cero2]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=2367808476826356

 

[milanesas]

I have lived in Argentina since 2010 and have yet to see a total collapse of the economy despite constant warning lights and economists predicting one being imminent. Not to say that it can't happen, because I realize Argentina has a history of defaults, but CFK and her party are pretty skilled at scraping by. My prediction is that FF makes a deal with China to get a massive loan that they publicize as being fairer and better terms than the loan with the IMF/other Western funds, but in reality it's a massive giveaway long term to the Chinese and a way for them to gain power and natural resources similarly to how they have in other developing countries. With this loan the country will be able to pay back existing debt, ramp up social programs and subsidies again and appear the saviors to the common person.

 

[sts7049]

I have lived in Argentina since 2010 and have yet to see a total collapse of the economy despite constant warning lights and economists predicting one being imminent. Not to say that it can't happen, because I realize Argentina has a history of defaults, but CFK and her party are pretty skilled at scraping by. My prediction is that FF makes a deal with China to get a massive loan that they publicize as being fairer and better terms than the loan with the IMF/other Western funds, but in reality it's a massive giveaway long term to the Chinese and a way for them to gain power and natural resources similarly to how they have in other developing countries. With this loan the country will be able to pay back existing debt, ramp up social programs and subsidies again and appear the saviors to the common person.

this is far more dangerous a scenario than taking loans from the IMF (tying yourself to china in that way). but sadly most people won't care.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

this is far more dangerous a scenario than taking loans from the IMF (tying yourself to china in that way). but sadly most people won't care.

I disagree.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

I disagree.

I disagree. I explain you why.
Everytime the IFM lend money, they ask for an exchange rate that favours imports cheap that destroys the local economy because we cannot export. This is because we and the US compete on farm goods so, they boycotts us.
China, instead, is a client.