Neighbors: Brazil To Help Uruguay Avoid Argentina

[ajoknoblauch]

As a point of reference the rest of the world calls these people the "middle class" - the economic engine that drives the economy. This economic class is disappearing rapidly here. Then you will be left with the super-rich and everyone else. Lets call everyone else "poor" for the sake of argument. Any politician with 2 working brain cells understands that the number of votes from the poor vastly outnumber the votes from the rich.

The electoral platform then is very clear - ''I'm a supporter of the 'working class.' The reason you can't afford meat and milk is the fault of the rich. Elect me and I'll make sure your government subsidies are raised so you can feed your family and we'll create programs to redistribute the wealth of the rich to you all - the people who really deserve it!"

Meanwhile, the President owns multiple luxury hotels that all charge in Dollars among other amazingly fortuitous land holdings and gets manicures and pedicures daily. We are now rapidly moving toward a colonialist society where there was a local "Governor" appointed by the Motherland to oversea the management (aka pillage of human and natural resources) of the colony. Except the poor don't understand this.

We can talk all day long about the inequality of the 1% that controls over 50% of the country's wealth and I would agree with you. We have a similar problem in the US. However, the way to a strong, economically viable country isn't handouts to the poor in exchange for votes. The way is for the government to invest in programs that raise the literacy and skill rate and create opportunities and incentives for people to invest in their own future by way of more education, investments in housing, etc.

I agree in general but, in reality, voter participation is much lower among the poor, at least in the States, so that it's far harder to "buy" votes there. There is an important role for government intervention in reducing poverty, but it doesn't necessarily mean overt redistribution. We can disagree over details, but taxation to mitigate poverty is imperative.

 

[internationalguy]

As a point of reference the rest of the world calls these people the "middle class" - the economic engine that drives the economy. This economic class is disappearing rapidly here. Then you will be left with the super-rich and everyone else. Lets call everyone else "poor" for the sake of argument. Any politician with 2 working brain cells understands that the number of votes from the poor vastly outnumber the votes from the rich.

The electoral platform then is very clear - ''I'm a supporter of the 'working class.' The reason you can't afford meat and milk is the fault of the rich. Elect me and I'll make sure your government subsidies are raised so you can feed your family and we'll create programs to redistribute the wealth of the rich to you all - the people who really deserve it!"

Meanwhile, the President owns multiple luxury hotels that all charge in Dollars among other amazingly fortuitous land holdings and gets manicures and pedicures daily. We are now rapidly moving toward a colonialist society where there was a local "Governor" appointed by the Motherland to oversea the management (aka pillage of human and natural resources) of the colony. Except the poor don't understand this.

We can talk all day long about the inequality of the 1% that controls over 50% of the country's wealth and I would agree with you. We have a similar problem in the US. However, the way to a strong, economically viable country isn't handouts to the poor in exchange for votes. The way is for the government to invest in programs that raise the literacy and skill rate and create opportunities and incentives for people to invest in their own future by way of more education, investments in housing, etc.

I might be getting myself into trouble here but I will say this anyway. Margaret Thatcher may have been deeply hated by many but she was very right about one thing. When she took office the economy in the UK was shattered. She believed that if you start taking from the rich to give to the poor, the rich will either leave or will end up running out of money. Once there's nothing more to take away from the rich, what are you supposed to do? Instead she thought that promoting growth by encouraging the rich to create jobs would benefit the economy. This as a basic principle is absolutely spot on. The problem is when corporations take over and start becoming profit seeking machines that have no real face. True economic growth comes from small business, not from giant soulless corporations. Not that there's anything wrong with a company eventually growing to become huge, it's the current way things work that makes it so bad for everyone. The Wal Mart model that seeks nothing but profit, pays terrible wages, and destroys every small business in it's path. There's something very wrong with that. However, there's also something very wrong with an oversized government welfare program, because it encourages abuse. The government is a very bad job creator and it spends a lot of money to create them.

There was a novel that depicted the US as a third world country around 2030, and while I obviously don't want that, I'm starting to see so many similarities in the way people are starting to think back home. Demanding EXTENDED welfare programs, free this, free that. I do think that the most vulnerable and neediest people need to be helped and protected by the government, however the way things are going people are starting to like to get all the free handouts (just like it happens here). I don't want to know where it will end but I hope that some common sense starts to kick in and we find the right balance in the US so we won't start to look a lot like Argentina when it comes to free stuff from the government. I'm going to hope that the democratic party doesn't have some idea to use the poor the same way the government does here.

 

[GS_Dirtboy]

I pretty much agree with that. Government can create incentives for large corporations to "do the right thing" and create an attractive environment for small businesses to flourish. I for one don't agree with the Libertarians.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

I pretty much agree with that. Government can create incentives for large corporations to "do the right thing" and create an attractive environment for small businesses to flourish. I for one don't agree with the Libertarians.

The libertarians are blinded by illusions of self-sufficiency.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

More on the benefits of taxing the wealthy: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/01/02/progressive_consumption_taxes_are_great_here_s_why.html

 

[sleslie23]

restrict? its a tax, they don prohibit nothing!! In fact, as I said, lots of people still travel!!!!

Its ike the dollar restriction, every people complain, I know is a pain in the ass, but nobody has a problem with the dollar blue, with the arbolitos, excahanging money. So the restriction pretty much not work in its purpose.

This logic is one of the things I WON'T miss about Argentina.

 

[Matiasba]

This logic is one of the things I WON'T miss about Argentina.

you find bad that the people who travel abroad, clearly the wealthiest (unlike other parts of the world that are more middle class, more 'common' people) now have a tax? people who travel abroad is the people that make money in argentina and not invest. And the dollar restriction its precisely because of that, the take the money outside, you understand? the money they make here, they pass it to dollars and put it far away from Argentina, making every 10 years a dollar crisis. Thats why the restrictions exist.

 

[internationalguy]

you find bad that the people who travel abroad, clearly the wealthiest (unlike other parts of the world that are more middle class, more 'common' people) now have a tax? people who travel abroad is the people that make money in argentina and not invest. And the dollar restriction its precisely because of that, the take the money outside, you understand? the money they make here, they pass it to dollars and put it far away from Argentina, making every 10 years a dollar crisis. Thats why the restrictions exist.

Sure I know why they exist, I just don't know why they don't seem to know restrictions don't work. In fact they make things worse.

 

[Matiasba]

Sure I know why they exist, I just don't know why they don't seem to know restrictions don't work. In fact they make things worse.

If the dollar restriction works or not we ll know it in two years, when Kirchnerismo ends. If they do not finish like the Militars, Alfonsin, and Menemismo/Alianza, with a huge crisis, big chaotic social situation (what we had in December multiplied for 10, and most importantly -spontaneous), if they dont leave the country under hyperinflation, if they leave it with some reserves (like we currently have and they are trying to mantain), if we dont have a huge social crisis, with way much more poverty than we have now, more crime, no social plans of any kind, unemployment, if they can keep their political power, control institutions (such as unions, police, etc) then I will consider this measure a triumph.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

If the dollar restriction works or not we ll know it in two years, when Kirchnerismo ends. If they do not finish like the Militars, Alfonsin, and Menemismo/Alianza, with a huge crisis, big chaotic social situation (what we had in December multiplied for 10, and most importantly -spontaneous), if they dont leave the country under hyperinflation, if they leave it with some reserves (like we currently have and they are trying to mantain), if we dont have a huge social crisis, with way much more poverty than we have now, more crime, no social plans of any kind, unemployment, if they can keep their political power, control institutions (such as unions, police, etc) then I will consider this measure a triumph.

It's already a failure, but it will take a little more time for all the consequences to manifest themselves.