"Insecurity is just a perception"

[esllou]

Could you expand on that? It sounds interesting.

just think what was happening four years earlier between the same countries. I've spoken to many people here about all of that and the vast majority have said something along the lines of "yes, it was cheating, but it was a cathartic moment for us, the pirates had been taught a lesson."

 

[perry]

The biggest problem that Argentina has is building a society based on trust and one that respects others in a dignified manner . I have noticed the last years the falling down of respect between others and the glorification of immoral behaviours. This is common through the society if the role models are anything to go by . The shows on Television with the images of Ricardo Font ,Mirtha Legrand , Moira Casan and others are not for me positive role models.

Cheating , lying and plain exaggerating are more common here that is no doubt . I actually find this the most difficult part of my existence here is this endemic lying that is accepted by all as commendable.

Less words and more positive actions are important . There is too much bullshit that complicates daily life here and I admire more and more efficient people and attitudes.

 

[earlyretirement]

The biggest problem that Argentina has is building a society based on trust and one that respects others in a dignified manner . I have noticed the last years the falling down of respect between others and the glorification of immoral behaviours. This is common through the society if the role models are anything to go by . The shows on Television with the images of Ricardo Font ,Mirtha Legrand , Moira Casan and others are not for me positive role models.

Cheating , lying and plain exaggerating are more common here that is no doubt . I actually find this the most difficult part of my existence here is this endemic lying that is accepted by all as commendable.

Less words and more positive actions are important . There is too much bullshit that complicates daily life here and I admire more and more efficient people and attitudes.

Perry,

I really applaud your post. It's so true. For me as well, that is the toughest thing about living here. You'd think after 7 years i'd get used to it but from being raised not to lie/cheat/steal it's really tough dealing with this here and I'd never get accustomed to it no matter how long I lived here. I'm as frustrated today as I was many years ago when I first moved here. Maybe even more so today.

It's also the reason I will move my family out of Argentina next year. I really can't see wanting to raise kids in an environment like this. Because kids are raised in an environment like this...they see their parents, friends of the family, relatives, parents of their friends, etc. all acting this way and they somehow think it's "normal" but they don't realize that it's NOT like this outside in civilized countries. I know dozens and dozens of Argentines that were raised here and then moved out of Argentina to go work in the USA, Europe or Asia and they comment to me that they realized when they left just how corrupt Argentina is and how the system here is just flawed with the cons/games/lies.

I guess if I was from another Latin American country plagued with corruption, inefficiency with a non-functional banking system then it wouldn't seem as bad. But my wife is from South America and she has never seen what goes on here back in her home country on a systematic/fundamental basis and day to day level. I'm not sure what it is here in Argentina but definitely it's worse here vs. other countries in Latin America.

Back before I moved here I'd do million dollar deals with a handshake and the other party wouldn't even try to cheat me in the USA and certain countries in Europe. Here you can have a written contract and they will still try to cheat you or steal from you because they know the judicial system doesn't function here. Even if you are correct and have a case...the case can wade through the murky waters of the judicial system for 2-4 years or longer.

And I'm not saying there aren't bad people or con artists in the USA. Because there are. Just look at Bernie Madoff. But I always joke Argentina is like having tens of thousands of "Mini Bernie Madoffs" operating on a low level small scale everyday life and having to deal with them all the time.

I guess if you are just an ExPat that isn't working here or doing serious business here then it's not as frustrating or as big of a deal but my local friends all complain as well so I don't think it's limited to just foreigners. If you are retired and don't have to deal with businesses here day in and day out it might not be as big of a deal. But if you do serious business in the country on a large scale you will want to pull your hair out.

That's one of the things I'll miss the least when I move out of Argentina.

 

[darmanad]

I have yet to master the cutting and pasting capacities of this site, but here I have reprinted bajo cero's post criticizing mine and and now rebut it. I was waiting for someone else to weigh in on his criticisms of my urban renewal suggestion, but it appears no one opted to do so. Ergo...

People with paranoia should take psychiatric medication.
Did my suggestion to compensate the villa residents and to provide new alternative housing smack of paranoia? People who ridicule others without a real sound basis to do so (like you have done here) immediately give themselves away as narrow minded and crass. You lose credibilty in your first sentence. I suspect your heart is in the right place, but your thinking is preposterous.

Well, there was a mayor like 30 years ago, you probably love him, he used a bulldozer and destroyed all the villas. What is the inconvenience? You don´t like to see indigence?
Exactly what about urban renewal offends you so greatly? What have I said that justifies your silly vitriol? I don't know the mayor to whom you refer or the effect of his acts 30 years ago so I can't tell you whether I would love him, but I can tell you uncategorically that I do prefer to see beauty and well being over ugliness and indigence. I would hope every sane person would. What about you?

This is probably 50% true, but in a civilized country like this one, the state is responsible to provide proper houses. If you go out a little around, you will see they are building new neighborhoods. Take a look at Av. Gral Paz and Richieri, there used to be Villas at 3 of the 4 corners, there are almost no villas today
I waited to reply because I thought that surely someone would jump all over your proposal that the state is responsible to provide proper housing. Surely, you can't mean that the state is obliged to use public funds to provide new housing free of charge to all inhabitants including the newly arrived, whether legal or illegal, working or not, chronically engaged in crime or not. How does one get in on this deal? Where is my new apartment? Do you think the state ought to provide cars and food to all as well? What about clothes, entertainment and psychedelic drugs?
I must misunderstand what you mean to say. Maybe you could straighten me out by amplifying what has taken place at the Gral Paz/Richieri locale you mention. Who cleared the villas? What took their place? Who occupies the structures that presumably replaced the villas? How did they acquire the right to live there?

Incidentally, when I observe villa 31 as I drive by it I cannot believe that only 50% of the structures are in violation of some building code or zoning ordinance. Where did you come up with this figure?
Moreover, is it not the case that these structures are built on land owned by a government entity (city, province, fed) and that all inhabitants are squatters? If so, wouldn't that make them all trespassers? (assuming some AR legal analog to US ownership by adverse possession hasn't been triggered).

In fact, they are all legals as mercosur citizens. What about you?
I am legal, but that is irrelevant except to underscore your ill-mannered animousity. I am not knowledgeable about the rights of mercosur citizens and whether, as you imply, they are entitled to live indefinitely in countries other than their own. Are they entitled to stay forever without seeking some formal change in visa and/or citizenship status? Are they entitled to receive welfare and other free public benefits forever without such a status change? Interesting if that is so.

Taxes, let´s see. In this country if a worker is working under the table (en negro), this is 100% legal for the worker and 100% illegal for the employer.
I have to take your word for it on the taxes law though I confess I find it kind of strange, that a worker who works off the books is immune from any and all taxes quite apart from any criminal violations. I can understand the absence of criminal sanctions, but are you sure the employee has no civil tax liability?
Apart from tax issues, what about the municipal services that the villa residents receive without proper payment? Are other paying citizens subsidizing their gas, lights, water, etc?

People has rights because they are humans in this country.
Well, that's a pretty broad statement. I am sure you mean to qualify the rights and the people who are entitled to them in some way, e.g., age, citizenship, legal status in the country, whether they are fugitives from justice, etc. Additionally, exactly how do you define the actual bundle of rights to which all humans in AR are entitled simply by virtue of their humanity? Does your definition include the right to decent free housing, together with free municipal services to all people including new arrivals and all illegal residents? Is that current law or just your definition?

Seems you don´t know the law. For the last 3000 years to ocupy land give you right over it after some time. The people who live at the villas cannot be just kick out because they own the land and the houses. It is call usucapion.
I did not propose "to just kick out" the residents of the villas who own land and buildings by virtue of the law of "usucapion" (known in US law as ownership by adverse possession). I proposed that a govt entity acquire the land by means of eminent domain which I am theorizing exists in AR as it does in US law. Eminent domain is the process whereby the govt forces a sale in order to construct a project deemed to be for the public good. The govt is required to pay the seller the fair market value of the property. This assumes the villa residents do have property rights. In eminent domain the property owner has the right to adjudicate both the need for the public taking and the amount of compensation.


Guess what? These villas are in public land, it cannot be selled. Bad luck.
Regards.
Do we have some some misunderstanding about what public land is? I understand it to be land owned by the government (local, provincial, federal, etc.) or an agency thereof as opposed to private interests. The governement may sell public land to developers as part of an urban renewal plan - like Puerto Madero.
I will attribute this misunderstanding to your English language shortcomings. I hope it is not something more fundamental.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

I have yet to master the cutting and pasting capacities of this site, but here I have reprinted bajo cero's post criticizing mine and and now rebut it. I was waiting for someone else to weigh in on his criticisms of my urban renewal suggestion, but it appears no one opted to do so. Ergo...

You should cntl copy

at the begining and with the end [/quote999]. I added 999 in orden to this doesn´t work and you can see them.

Did my suggestion to compensate the villa residents and to provide new alternative housing smack of paranoia?

Yes because you said that they are a risk.

Exactly what about urban renewal offends you so greatly?

Why should somebody decide for them where and how they should o live? Expats usually complain when the state interferes on their busisness. Why do you feel with the right to rule over somebody else?

In fact, the way to develop public politics about them must include them on the decision making. This is the way a democracy works respecting rights of people. China, on the other hand, they want to build a damm and they move a 2.000.000 people city just like that.

http://www.cels.org.ar/common/documentos/politica_vivienda.pdf

"La intervención del Estado debe tener especial consideración de la acción
comunitaria, es decir, la intervención directa de los sectores involucrados. Al respecto, y principalmente en lo referente a los derechos sociales, la participación de los propios grupos de individuos resulta imprescindible a los fines de realizar diagnósticos y proponer soluciones creativas frente a situaciones concretas de violación a los derechos económicos, sociales y culturales"

The mayor who solved the problem with a bulldozer was Cacciatore. He also built a wall sorrounding a Villa. Now is knew as Ciudad Oculta. By the way, nobody voted him, he was a dictator.

You can read about Cacciatore here:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osvaldo_Cacciatore

You seems to believe that people have rightse only if they are welthy.
That´s why I got so offended.

but I can tell you uncategorically that I do prefer to see beauty and well being over ugliness and indigence. I would hope every sane person would. What about you?

Well, you should move to Switzerland.
This is not about beauty, this all about people.

I waited to reply because I thought that surely someone would jump all over your proposal that the state is responsible to provide proper housing. Surely, you can't mean that the state is obliged to use public funds to provide new housing free of charge to all inhabitants including the newly arrived, whether legal or illegal, working or not, chronically engaged in crime or not. How does one get in on this deal? Where is my new apartment?

In fact, I am not proposing anything, as a lawyer, I am explaining you the law of this country. No offense. Law 24.464 created the "federal housing system" with the purpose of creating proper conditions for poor people, in an easy and efficient way, to get worthy houses according to art. 14 of the bill of rights.

http://www.vivienda.gov.ar/fonavi.php

There are different programms about housing. Most of them, the state build the houses and they pay them in stallments with no interest. This is better than wasting money in police and jails.

The case I mentioned about the villas around Gral Paz and Ricchieri, the state provided the supplies, the plans, architects and quality standar certification, the people from the villas the labor force to build their own houses, but now they can build them properly.

If you want to get an appartment, first you have to be under the line of powerty.

Do you think the state ought to provide cars and food to all as well?

There is an official programm about food:
http://www.desarrollosocial.gov.ar/planes/pa/default.asp

In fact, by law the flour has a lot of vitamins. This is because poor people eats it a lot: bread, pasta, etc.

Also, children have breakfast and lunch for free at publics school that are in poor places.

Even in the US there are food stamps.

Who cleared the villas? What took their place? Who occupies the structures that presumably replaced the villas? How did they acquire the right to live there?

They own the land, so the state made a deal. You build proper houses, we help you to do so.

Incidentally, when I observe villa 31 as I drive by it I cannot believe that only 50% of the structures are in violation of some building code or zoning ordinance. Where did you come up with this figure?

I didn´t say that.

Moreover, is it not the case that these structures are built on land owned by a government entity (city, province, fed) and that all inhabitants are squatters? If so, wouldn't that make them all trespassers? (assuming some AR legal analog to US ownership by adverse possession hasn't been triggered).

Well, no politician will commit suicide trying to kick them out in a country were over 50% of the population is under the line of poverty.

Are they entitled to stay forever without seeking some formal change in visa and/or citizenship status? Are they entitled to receive welfare and other free public benefits forever without such a status change? Interesting if that is so.

Yes, they are.

I have to take your word for it on the taxes law though I confess I find it kind of strange, that a worker who works off the books is immune from any and all taxes quite apart from any criminal violations.

A worker is not a criminal. An a worker doesn´t have the possibility to chose where to work. The one who has to pay the taxes is the employer, so, if he doesn´t do it, he is stealing to the worker his retirement and health insurance and the state for the taxes.

I can understand the absence of criminal sanctions, but are you sure the employee has no civil tax liability?

100%

Apart from tax issues, what about the municipal services that the villa residents receive without proper payment? Are other paying citizens subsidizing their gas, lights, water, etc?

Well, they pay IVA when they buy food.

Well, that's a pretty broad statement. I am sure you mean to qualify the rights and the people who are entitled to them in some way, e.g., age, citizenship, legal status in the country, whether they are fugitives from justice, etc.

I meant exactly that. And this is according to law. Foreigners and citizens have same civil rights. There are not such a thing as illegals in this country. To live irregular makes you an inhabitant, you have same civil rights than citizens. After some years, you can be deported only if you are a public danger. People lose some civil rights only after a criminal sentence over 3 years of jail but only while they are in jail.

Additionally, exactly how do you define the actul bundle of rights to which all humans in AR are entitled simply by virtue of their humanity? Does your definition include the right to decent free housing, together with free municipal services to all people including new arrivals and all illegal residents? Is that current law or just your definition?

The bill of rights entitle to the same civil rights than a citizen have "to all those men who wish to live in our territory".

I did not propose "to just kick out" the residents of the villas who own land and buildings by virtue of the law of "usucapion" (known in US law as ownership by adverse possession). I proposed that a govt entity acquire the land by means of eminent domain which I am theorizing exists in AR as it does in US law. Eminent domain is the process whereby the govt forces a sale in order to construct a project deemed to be for the public good. The govt is required to pay the seller the fair market value of the property. This assumes the villa residents do have property rights. In eminent domain the property owner has the right to adjudicate both the need for the public taking and the amount of compensation.

Well, this exist here but you need a) A congress law with an special mayority. This means you need more % of votes than a regular law b) public good c) To pay a fair price market. Nobody wants to pays for it because this is too expensive.

To make the city nicer can be done by building proper buildings for these people, that`s why this is very difficult to get (eviction).

Do we have some some misunderstanding about what public land is? I understand it to be land owned by the government (local, provincial, federal, etc.) or an agency thereof as opposed to private interests. The governement may sell public land to developers as part of an urban renewal plan - like Puerto Madero.

Puerto Madero was a scum. Menem was the most corrupted President we ever had. Usually, when public land is sold is regarding to corruption. Specially when this is so expensive.

So, should we spend some billions dollars in relocatirng this people just for selling this land for peanuts to Macri himself to develop a nice place and making a lot of money using the tax I pay?

Regards

 

[darmanad]

Here I cut and paste some of my remarks in post # 84. My remarks are bold blue. Then I set forth your reply contained in your #85 always in plain type. I surreply again in bold blue.

1.Did my suggestion to compensate the villa residents and to provide new alternative housing smack of paranoia?
Yes because you said that they are a risk.
What I actually said is:
"Occupants of villas that are in violation of the law may not deserve to be mistreated, but it is equally true that they do not deserve to be permitted to continue to live in illegal dwellings, especially if these villas contribute significantly to crime, a propositon that seems pretty clear."
Now, if I am wrong and the existence of villas like 31 and Rodrigo Bueno do not contribute significantly to crime, IN AND OUT OF THE VILLAS then you should directly take issue with that proposition. Do you maintain that they do not? I can tell you that in Rio when favelas begin to encroach on middle class urban neighborhoods street crime spikes. Is it different here? Do statistics exist to complement the anectdotal evidence?

But even if villas do not contribute to crime rates, is it correct to accuse me or any other poster of paranoia for positing they do? It's a common perception that they do cause more street crime so why should I be ridiculed simply for theorizing they do? Your remark only serves to incite, not to educate.



2. Exactly what about urban renewal offends you so greatly?
Why should somebody decide for them where and how they should o live? Expats usually complain when the state interferes on their busisness. Why do you feel with the right to rule over somebody else?
In fact, the way to develop public politics about them must include them on the decision making. This is the way a democracy works respecting rights of people. China, on the other hand, they want to build a damm and they move a 2.000.000 people city just like that.
http://www.cels.org.ar/common/docume...a_vivienda.pdf
"La intervención del Estado debe tener especial consideración de la acción
comunitaria, es decir, la intervención directa de los sectores involucrados. Al respecto, y principalmente en lo referente a los derechos sociales, la participación de los propios grupos de individuos resulta imprescindible a los fines de realizar diagnósticos y proponer soluciones creativas frente a situaciones concretas de violación a los derechos económicos, sociales y culturales"
The mayor who solved the problem with a bulldozer was Cacciatore. He also built a wall sorrounding a Villa. Now is knew as Ciudad Oculta. By the way, nobody voted him, he was a dictator.
You can read about Cacciatore here:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osvaldo_Cacciatore
You seems to believe that people have rightse only if they are welthy.
That´s why I got so offended.
It's hard for me to follow this rambling response. You misquote me and say a lot of strange things. Let me reply to some of them.
a. It is in the very nature of government that it makes laws respecting zoning, construction, roads, infrastructure, etc. In that regard, of course it most certainly does prescribe where people may live or work or how certain property within a city/state is to be utilized. Do you want a slaughterhouse or prison next to your upscale home in Barrio Norte or a housing development adjacent to your dairy farm?
Govt engages in this type of governance for common sense reasons of safety, health and welfare of the constituent population. Hopefully, the laws are just and achieve their purpose of maximizing the general good. You can argue that a particular law is unjust, but are you seriously questioning government's role in such matters? Are you an anarchist?
b. Unless you are an anarchist, it is inherent in civilized society for government to promulgate laws that allow people to live together peaceably and sensibly. So, yes, in that sense the elected officials do decide where certain people may or may not live in accordance with existing laws. It's not just me that is to decide where I build my slaughterhouse, it's the rules and laws of civilized society! The alternative is chaos.
c. Posting some legal position paper from 2002, no matter how noble-minded it may be, changes nothing. Respecting the rights of people is a 2 way street. The right to extend your fist ends where my nose begins. Non-villa inhabitants of Bs As have certain rights, too. They should expect local govt to pass laws and take measures to advance the general health, safety and welfare of the citizenry in a fair way. The law of Eminent Domain as practiced in the US at least does give the property owner the absolute right to contest in court the govt's taking and the price for any property taken. The affected villa property owners would have the right to do so in accordance with applicable AR laws. That corruption may skew the result is not a reason to take no action. Let's weed out corruption.
d. Exactly where did I say that only the wealthy have rights? Where do I even insinuate that? Please play fair. Don't make things up to win an argument.


3. I said ...but I can tell you uncategorically that I do prefer to see beauty and well being over ugliness and indigence. I would hope every sane person would. What about you?
Well, you should move to Switzerland.
This is not about beauty, this all about people.
I was responding directly to your question in relation to my suggestion to eliminate villas via urban renewal. You asked: "What is the inconvenience? You don´t like to see indigence?" My answer was directly responsive to this question concerning "seeing indigence". My words simply mean that if given a choice I take beauty and well-being over ugliness and indigence. Wouldn't you if you could make it happen...without injustice? Of course, it's about people, all people, not some people. It's also about progress, better living conditions, and a better quality of life.


4. In response to my observation that most of the dwellings in villa 31 were in violation of some law,you said in your post # 40: "This is probably 50% true, but in a civilized country like this one, the state is responsible for provide proper houses."
In my post# 85 I asked you: Surely, you can't mean that the state is obliged to use public funds to provide new housing free of charge to all inhabitants including the newly arrived, whether legal or illegal, working or not, chronically engaged in crime or not. How does one get in on this deal? Where is my new apartment?
You then replied: "In fact, I am not proposing anything, as a lawyer, I am explaining you the law of this country. No offense. Law 24.464 created the "federal housing system" with the purpose of creating proper conditions for poor people, in an easy and efficient way, to get worthy houses according to art. 14 of the bill of rights.
http://www.vivienda.gov.ar/fonavi.php
There are different programms about housing. Most of them, the state build the houses and they pay them in stallments with no interest. This is better than wasting money in police and jails.
The case I mentioned about the villas around Gral Paz and Ricchieri, the state provided the supplies, the plans, architects and quality standar certification, the people from the villas the labor force to build their own houses, but now they can build them properly.
If you want to get an appartment, first you have to be under the line of powerty.

No offense, but your explanation of applicable law is confused and confusing. It appeared you were in deed proposing that the state provide good free housing with no strings attached. Again, the mere referencing to the Minister of Planificacion papers or decrees does not support your position or even clearly explain what the laws that pertain to this situation actually prescribe.

Your subsequent explanation indicates that the state can contribute to subsidized housing in alternative ways. I have no problem with that. Let the process begin in villa 31. Construct proper housing. My idea, however, is that such housing would be more wisely built a little farther from thecurrent villa sites in Recoleta or Puerto Madero as that land could be auctioned off to developers to get lots of money to better underwrite the state's subsidy of the replacement housing. After all, if there is decent transportation there is no reason the state subsidized housing could not be located in a less ritzy neighborhood. The increased tax base from the housing constructed where villa 31 etc now exists would also be useful to underwrite the cost of the state subsidy and/or to repay bonds floated to raise the revenue to build the subsidized housing.

5. You say that "A worker is not a criminal. An a worker doesn´t have the possibility to chose where to work. The one who has to pay the taxes is the employer, so, if he doesn´t do it, he is stealing to the worker his retirement and health insurance and the state for the taxes."
Sorry, but where did I say a worker was a criminal? The state should invest in good transportation so the low wage earners can have decent housing built on land less expensive than the sites of 31 and Rodrigo Bueno.

6. I asked whether non-AR Mercosur citizens are entitled to all the same rights as AR citizens without seeking a change of visa or statehood. You answered:
"I meant exactly that. And this is according to law. Foreigners and citizens have same civil rights. There are not such a thing as illegals in this country. To live irregular makes you an inhabitant, you have same civil rights than citizens. After some years, you can be deported only if you are a public danger. People lose some civil rights only after a criminal sentence over 3 years of jail but only while they are in jail."
I find this explanation remarkable. When I go to buy an airplane ticket I have to pay more because I do not have an AR DNI. My wife is Brasilian (Mercosur, right?). She also pays more. There must be something I am missing here. Can all Mercosur country citizens and all foreigners of any nationality really get the benefits accorded to AR citizens? Amazing. I want an airplane ticket refund.

7. You say "The bill of rights entitle to the same civil rights than a citizen have "to all those men who wish to live in our territory". Where is the bill of rights found. At one time I had an English language copy of the AR Constitution. I don't recall a bill of rights per se. Can you reference that part of the bill of rights or the legal equivalent that addresses civil rights to all those that wish to live in AR?

8. In reference to Eminent Domain you say :
"Well, this exist here but you need a) A congress law with an special mayority. This means you need more % of votes than a regular law b) public good c) To pay a fair price market. Nobody wants to pays for it because this is too expensive.
To make the city nicer can be done by building proper buildings for these people, that`s why this is very difficult to get (eviction).

You appear to misunderstand my proposal. Firstly, eminent domain does exist here. Second, the price paid is the fair market price of the property in its current condition. If the land was auctioned to developers for upper and middle income housing, it would bring in an enormous amount of money for the city. Then the tax base would generate a flow of revenue to service bonds that would be sold to help finance the construction of public housing in the areas outside Recoleta and Puerto Madero. I think it is a practical approach to eliminating villa 31 and Rodrigo Bueno. Everybody would benefit including the workmen employed to do the construction, the vendors of the construction material, and the merchants who sold furniture to the home buyers, etc, etc.. Foreign investment would flow like water just as in Puerto Madero.
If Puerto Madero urban renewal was riddled with corruption, the answer is not to terminate more urban renewal but to weed out the corruption.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Here I cut and paste some of my remarks in post # 84. My remarks are bold blue. Then I set forth your reply contained in your #85 always in plain type. I surreply again in bold blue.

Please, learn how to use the quote tool, I already explained you how.

Now, if I am wrong and the existence of villas like 31 and Rodrigo Bueno do not contribute significantly to crime, IN AND OUT OF THE VILLAS then you should directly take issue with that proposition. Do you maintain that they do not? I can tell you that in Rio when favelas begin to encroach on middle class urban neighborhoods street crime spikes. Is it different here? Do statistics exist to complement the anectdotal evidence?

The difference with Rio is that here criminals don´t have K47 and they don´t have an army as the Rio´s Narcos do.

So, I give you an example. Do you know Fuerte Apache? It was the most dangerous place in Gran Buenos Aires. Gendarmería Comandos took control of the place and criminality decrece enormously. Why? They patrol properly the place instead o recruiting criminals as the local police used to.

So, are Villas related to criminality? I think this is a prejudice. You have a non corrupted police and your criminality decreases immidiatly.

But even if villas do not contribute to crime rates, is it correct to accuse me or any other poster of paranoia for positing they do?

Your paranoia is related to see a poor person and being afraid. You seems to believe that poor people and criminal are the same. I have been working regarding criminal law since 2001 and I can tell you this is a prejudice.

It's a common perception that they do cause more street crime so why should I be ridiculed simply for theorizing they do? Your remark only serves to incite, not to educate.

You are not theorizing, you are expresing your prejudices. I have seen this too much. I have been in a trial defending a man who was arrested because he was watching nice clothes thougth the window of a shop. I asked the cop: What was he doing? He said, he was going to robbe the place. I asked, how do you know that? He said, he was watching the vidriera (I don´t know the word). I said, what about if I am watching it? He said, you are going to buy doctor...Of course he had no gun, he just was dreaming awake but the sales woman was paranoic and called police.

You can argue that a particular law is unjust, but are you seriously questioning government's role in such matters? Are you an anarchist?

No at all. The check and balance system is all about to put limits to the abuse of power of the government. In this country any judge can do that and you can stop the government action if this is against the bill of rights. So, the bill of rights is from 1860, we can say I am conservative?

So, yes, in that sense the elected officials do decide where certain people may or may not live in accordance with existing laws. It's not just me that is to decide where I build my slaughterhouse, it's the rules and laws of civilized society! The alternative is chaos.

In fact some of the villas you complain about were created by the government.
It might be true but poverty is a reallity you have to deal with in this society, people do what they can, not what the law says.

d. Exactly where did I say that only the wealthy have rights? Where do I even insinuate that? Please play fair. Don't make things up to win an argument.

You didn´t say it openly.

You are misundertanding the legal system. You talked about the violation of construction regulations as something very seriously. The are very low laws. Superior law wins if there is a conflict between them. I explained that the bill of rights protect people so thouse basic rules lose the battle.

My words simply mean that if given a choice I take beauty and well-being over ugliness and indigence. Wouldn't you if you could make it happen...without injustice?

Well, you can hide poverty as Cacciatore did. Or you can try to improve those people life. I suggested a welthy country for you because there are not villas. They didn´t hide them behind the mountains.

No offense, but your explanation is confused and confusing. It appeared you were in deed proposing that the state provide good free housing with no strings attached. Again, the mere referencing to the Minister of Planificacion papers or decrees does not support your position or even clearly explain what the laws that pertain to this situation actually prescribe.

There is nothing confusion about it. The state has a duty regarding housing and because of this there are laws regarding it.

Your subsequent explanation indicates that the state can contribute to subsidized housing in alternative ways. I have no problem with that. Let the process begin in villa 31.

People from Villa 31 is claiming for that for the last 20 years. But local government don´t want it because there are corrupted politician who want to take advantage of the real state busisness in this area.

Construct proper housing. My idea, however, is that such housing would be more wisely built a little farther from thecurrent villa sites in Recoleta or Puerto Madero as that land could be auctioned off to developers to get lots of money to better underwrite the state's subsidy of the replacement housing.

You talk about your country I talk about this one. Do you know how real state auctions works. You go there and you start bidding. All the other there belong to the "auctions mob". So, a guy is going to seat in your left and ask you nicesly to go away showing you his gun in his belt. If you don´t participate you will be surprise how inexpensible the auction finished.
The real auction is at the bar just in front the offical place. They just exchange the titles, no money used.

But, regarding public land, it will be sold for 30 dollars the acre to...himself.

After all, if there is decent transportation there is no reason the state subsidized housing could not be located in a less ritzy neighborhood. The increased tax base from the housing constructed where villa 31 etc now exists would also be useful to underwrite the cost of the state subsidy and/or to repay bonds floated to raise the revenue to build the subsidized housing.

Many people were relocated in this way. But many others arrived and ocupied the land.

So, the solution is to build proper buildings in there, but as I said, corruption is the main obstacle.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Sorry, my mistake. Continues.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Sorry, but where did I say a worker was a criminal? The state should invest in good transportation so the low wage earners can have decent housing built on land less expensive than the sites of 31 and Rodrigo Bueno.

You said continiously that there is a relationship between villas and criminality. I insist, why should they move? Because you don´t like their houses? Why should they travel 3 hours per day when now they live a few blocks from the working place. Who do you think are the mucamas of the welthy places of the north of gran Buenos Aires? Gardeners, etc.

The big problem is the corrupted police and security private services.

I find this explanation remarkable. When I go to buy an airplane ticket I have to pay more because I do not have an AR DNI. My wife is Brasilian (Mercosur, right?). She also pays more. There must be something I am missing here. Can all Mercosur country citizens and all foreigners of any nationality really get the benefits accorded to AR citizens? Amazing. I want an airplane ticket refund.

It is illegal, so you can claim for it.

7. You say "The bill of rights entitle to the same civil rights than a citizen have "to all those men who wish to live in our territory". Where is the bill of rights found. At one time I had an English language copy of the AR Constitution. I don't recall a bill of rights per se. Can you reference that part of the bill of rights or the legal equivalent that addresses civil rights to all those that wish to live in AR?

We call it Constitution, I use bill of rights because is more understandable.

Artículo 14- Todos los habitantes de la Nación gozan de los siguientes derechos conforme a las leyes que reglamenten su ejercicio; a saber: De trabajar y ejercer toda industria lícita; de navegar y comerciar; de peticionar a las autoridades; de entrar, permanecer, transitar y salir del territorio argentino; de publicar sus ideas por la prensa sin censura previa; de usar y disponer de su propiedad; de asociarse con fines útiles; de profesar libremente su culto; de enseñar y aprender.

Artículo 16- La Nación Argentina no admite prerrogativas de sangre, ni de nacimiento: No hay en ella fueros personales ni títulos de nobleza. Todos sus habitantes son iguales ante la ley, y admisibles en los empleos sin otra condición que la idoneidad. La igualdad es la base del impuesto y de las cargas públicas.


[FONT=&quot]Artículo 20- Los extranjeros gozan en el territorio de la Nación de todos los derechos civiles del ciudadano; pueden ejercer su industria, comercio y profesión; poseer bienes raíces, comprarlos y enajenarlos; navegar los ríos y costas; ejercer libremente su culto; testar y casarse conforme a las leyes. No están obligados a admitir la ciudadanía, ni pagar contribuciones forzosas extraordinarias. Obtienen nacionalización residiendo dos años continuos en la Nación; pero la autoridad puede acortar este término a favor del que lo solicite, alegando y probando servicios a la República[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Preambulo:[/FONT]
Nos, los representantes del pueblo de la Nación Argentina reunidos en Congreso General Constituyente por voluntad y elección de las provincias que la componen, en cumplimiento de pactos preexistentes, con el objeto de constituir la unión nacional, afianzar la justicia, consolidar la paz interior, proveer a la defensa común, promover el bienestar general, y asegurar los beneficios de la libertad para nosotros, para nuestra posteridad y para todos los hombres del mundo que quieran habitar en el suelo argentino: invocando la protección de Dios, fuente de toda razón y justicia. Ordenamos, decretamos y establecemos esta Constitución para la Nación Argentina.


Habitante means you live here and you have a living plan here no matter your legal status (according to Supreme Court)

You appear to misunderstand my proposal. Firstly, eminent domain does exist here. Second, the price paid is the fair market price of the property in its current condition. If the land was auctioned to developers for upper and middle income housing, it would bring in an enormous amount of money for the city.

Wrong, this is Argentina. It will bring a lot of money to a politician who is going to sell to himself.

Then the tax base would generate a flow of revenue to service bonds that would be sold to help finance the construction of public housing in the areas outside Recoleta and Puerto Madero. I think it is a practical approach to eliminating villa 31 and Rodrigo Bueno.

Well, I think that the main problem is that they never try to pay them fairly. This is the only way they go.

to weed out the corruption.

Sure, we have to kill all the politicians, now, who is the anarchist? Jajaja, just joking.

 

[darmanad]

I was a lawyer for Legal Aid in the Latino barrio of San Francisco for several years. I have worked for indigent people. I do not fear poor people as you seem to insist. I do not assume a poor person looking at a store item wants to steal it. I do, however, still believe that poverty is a cause of crime and that there is a relationship between the proximity of villas as they now exist and street crime. In particular drug use exacerbates street crime. If that makes me paranoid, so be it.
Many of your responses still make no sense to me especially as they purport to define civil rights, rights of indigents to services, etc, but then I don't speak Spanish sufficiently well to comprehend the Spanish text. But Spanish text aside, sorry, I simply can't follow much of your reasoning or legal explanation.
Further, it seems you are an apologist for the status quo. We can never accomplish anything because of corruption. Villa narcotrafficantes keep good order in the villas, so lets not try to change that. Villa residents pay IVA so they don't need to pay for other municipal services (except to the narcotrafficante mafia boss). The urban renewal will never work because the crooked politicians will steal, etc.

Bill Moyers recently gave a speech at Spelman College in honor of Howard Zinn who taught there. It was entitled "It's okay if it's Impossible." You can see it here. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/11/02-2 . Moyers related this story about Baldemar Velasquez, former farm worker and labor organizer:
The members of his Farm Labor Organizing Committee are a long way from the world of K Street lobbyists. But they took on the Campbell Soup Company - and won. They took on North Carolina growers - and won, using transnational organizing tacts that helped win Velasquez a "genius" award from the MacArthur Foundation. And now they're taking on no less than R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and one of its principal financial sponsors, JPMorgan-Chase. Some people question the wisdom of taking on such powerful interests, but here's what Velasquez says: "It's OK if it's impossible; it's OK!" Now I'm going to speak to you as organizers. Listen carefully. The object is not to win. That's not the objective. The object is to do the right and good thing. If you decide not to do anything, because it's too hard or too impossible, then nothing will be done, and when you're on your death bed, you're gonna say, "I wish I had done something. But if you go and do the right thing NOW, and you do it long enough "good things will happen-something's gonna happen."

All of us, Argentines in particular, need to try do the right thing even if its hard.