Of course it's a possible outcome; it would be a longterm win because ultimately the free market is the most effective poverty reduction tool.
Cleaning up the legacy of Peronism is going to be messy business with a lot of splinters, and unfortunately, many of these splinters will be people and family. Yet the status quo was creating more poverty each year and was on the road to collapse. So pick your poison; at least in Milei's case, that poison is a chemotherapeutic (imo).
Time will tell. Hoping for the best.
There are different shades of poverty, and no government can take this topic lightly. Milei at the moment sounds like he is not taking the matter seriously. It's one thing people can't afford some luxury, whole other if they can't afford basics. Till now we should agree poor in Argentina could still afford some decent lifestyle, they are mostly living in relative poverty, but those are now endangered to slide into absolute poverty, some even into extreme poverty, which wasn't the case in Argentina till now. Someone earning 1000 usd in 2015 is today earning 300 usd, which place him in relative poverty. With only taking subsidies for transportation and energy away, this person slides into absolute poverty, since can't even pay bills and rent anymore.
Those people won't survive chemo. And they should. If the only way to kill cancer is to kill the patient, medicine stops. Luckily government has more tools to keep most vulnerable citizens protected, if they opt to do so. And this is where Milei will rise or fall. Promise of better future doesn't work on hungry. You need stronger force to keep them in check, and we know what this is. I think Milei does not poses such force.
In my opinion Milei would do much better job, if he would postpone his chemo a bit, although he already acted too fast with devaluation. Inflation in the world is winding down, Argentina has finally some normal agricultural and energy year. Better to see how much is coming in, how much is still missing, where is best to take and what is best to do. If anything, his actions seem irrational to external world, which is scaring factor as well.
Free market as completely free does not exist, we all know that. There are reasons for that. And if we know that, we also know that removing everything will just cause havoc in the market, and readjustment will be needed. This only attracts speculative capital and cause old capital to flee, when given a chance, just as it happened under Macri. It may come back later, but you can't count on it.
You have to be very cautious, which valve you open and which should remain close for at least some time, for adjustment to happen. Also there are grades of opening you should use.
Saying time will tell and I hope for best isn't good enough. Poorest people have to be protected at all costs needed. They did not cause the situation, but they are already sacrificing the most. I will drop this here, old, but gold:
"Though subsidies can be a tool to protect the poor, in Argentina they led to distortions and a large share have been absorbed by upper classes and non-residential consumers. In 2015,electricity bills reflected less than 10% of production costs (Bidegaray, 2015), and lower tariffs have led to an increased demand of public services. Not only have energy and transport subsidies distorted both demand and supply, they have also not been efficiently targeted to the poor; instead, they have been distributed across all income groups,
with the non-poor receiving the largest shares (Castro and Barafani, 2015; Lombardi et al., 2014; Marchionni etal., 2008; Navajas, 2015; Puig and Salinardi, 2015). For a recent discussion of the distortionary aspects of subsidies in Argentina, see Coppola et al. (2016)."
