The Case For President Sergio Massa

Stan, are you really the only person in CABA who hasn’t been informed of the tow-truck scam? Do please try to catch up with the rest of us, maybe starting with this:


No prizes for guessing which mayor and party tried to evade scrutiny of this scam to the last.

In the grand scheme of Argentina corruption, this doesn't seem so outrageous
 
That was corruption? I'm confused.
Yes, that was corruption because they flew usd we didn't have. They took loans for 100 years in order to do money flight. Plus Macri kept the exchange rate very low but increased the tall he owned and many other public services he owned until 3000%. So, he made 3000% more profit and he bought usd very cheap and sent them abroad to pay fake debts to his own off shores.
Vicentin was a good example. They gave all the usd they had at Banco Nacion to Vicentin whose owner, guest what, was Macrista. He flew that money and left the company in buncrupsy.
Meanwhile we have this hiperinflación caused by the artificial debt created by Macri and the artificial lack of usd created by Macri.But for you this is not corruption. Right!
 
In the grand scheme of Argentina corruption, this doesn't seem so outrageous
Well, this is the only data point I found: ‘"levantan en promedio 345 autos por día y en 2021 llegaron a cobrar cerca de 547 millones de pesos"‘

So in 2021 the gross income from this scam was about USD 2.7 million (the Dólar Blue was about 200 Pesos back then if anyone remembers). Even deducting the cost of the trucks and salaries plus the, ahem, USD 200 fee per month, over 20+ years it was a nice little “changuito” for someone 😊

It took an alliance of UCR, LLA, UP and I don’t know who else to finally stab this beast through the heart. At least it’s gone now, you can turn your back on your car for 5 mins without it vanishing.
 
The left in South America has never fully understood:


Sadly, the left in Europe is also becoming more populist.

I would not call the left in South America idealist, it is more about feeding off people's frustration, polarizing society between rich an poor and stealing from the rich. No such ideologies as everyone (poor and rich) are equal and should both be taken care of at the same time, the right to property is inviolable and sacred, liberty consists in being able to do anything that does not harm others and so on.

The left in South America consists of leeches, they do not earn my respect. I am not telling that the right is better. Politics in South America is not about ideology where men stand up for their rights, it is about populism where opportunistic politicians exploit frustrations to game the system. It does not benefit anyone and ultimately it is the responsibility of the people who lack the ideology to stand up for their rights.

Times were more difficult during the French (or American) revolution and this brought out the best in people. We are missing people who value the right things.
Since you mentioned both Europe and stealing from the rich let's go back to when Europeans first arrived in the new world and review what actually happened and how it's the basis for all that's happened since. I remember learning about this in grade school.

The one sentence definition is that the wealthy class in Europe sent over their agents who took over the land from the indigenous, brought over enslaved Africans in chains to work the land, and then sent all varieties of minerals and agricultural products back to Europe - Triangular Trade. That's just the economic impact. There's also the destruction of cultures which were replaced with European cultures. I remember travelling through much of Mexico and when you go site seeing it was normal to get a two-fer - part of the original temple (or other site of cultural significance) of the indigenous and the centuries old church the conquerors/agents of the wealthy class built on top of it's ruins so there was no mistaking who was boss and who all the resources (land and people) now belonged to.

download (1).jpeg

Politicians feed off people's frustration because, surprise, a lot of people are frustrated and are open to someone who at least claims to speak for them as opposed to someone who speaks for the rich. The way I see it, ever since rich Europeans came to the new world they are the ones who polarized society between rich and poor (or at least continued it, since the conquered had their class structures as well). They are the ones who stole, not from other wealthy people, but the people who were already living here since long before the rich Europeans arrived. If today leftist politicians are feeding off people's frustration and leeching it's because society has created and long maintained a system based on exploitation that also creates a situation where it frustrates average people who are not only left out, but told to appreciate their shitty existences. No surprise that a abstract carrot and concrete stick is used to reinforce this. Be a good and obedient servant to your master now and you will be rewarded in the afterlife for your obedience and subservience. You say we are missing people who value the right things. I see people on the left talking about values such as dignity and basic human rights whereas the only value I see the rich valuing is wealth and they don't care how they obtain it, what kind of negative effect it has on the environment (the Amazon is another perfect example of the rich exploiting the poor in the insatiable pursuit of wealth), or people. The weird thing, to me, is that so many people who are not extremely wealthy or even rich choose to support them while vilifying the people who are actually much closer to them in status. Those who the right wing populists feed off of frustrations and do their leeching because as much as they say they're "fighting for you" they never lower their taxes, fix their roads, end corruption, or fulfill any other promises that will benefit anyone but other rich people. When the wannabe rich say "he fought for us" it usually means that he validated their hate because he (it's usually a he) hates the same people they hate and sadly that's all they think they need. Maybe they act/vote in such a way because they figure that one day they too may be wealthy enough to benefit from all the governments give the rich; Socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the rest of us.

There's no need for anyone to be a Billionaire. Billionaires wouldn't exist but for a system that allows them to exploit those frustrated people you mentioned. People see the pay disparity between the average worker and CEOs, how the disparity has been growing, and, no surprise, it frustrates them. People see politicians (primarily on the right) who deregulate industry for the benefit of industry and watch as these industries fuck up without any risk or downside because the country's treasury will cover any loss and no matter that it hurts the general population while the Billionaires increase their wealth and the executives use bailout money to give themselves extremely generous bonus that are paid for by the average taxpayer. Frustrating. Examples of this (that I'm most familiar with having lived in the US at the time) are the banking crisis and the housing crisis where deregulation caused massive failures and those responsible for the failures received massive government bailouts which they used to give themselves massive bonuses. A current example can be seen in the US with the Autoworker's strike. While the rich were giving themselves bonuses the workers were making sacrifices and taking paycuts because they were told it was necessary to keep the business from failing. Now that the car companies are making massive profits they would like for things to go back to how they were before they were asked to unilaterally make sacrifices which affected their pay and benefits. Maybe you don't agree, but all of this is frustrating for someone living paycheck to paycheck and being told that getting any kind of cost of living adjustment is out of the question because the company just can't afford it/it would hurt profitability. Why is it Billionaires need the support of people who aren't rich? Why do some claim to be Billionaires yet ask the average person living paycheck to paycheck to send them money? It sounds to me like they want the support because they'd rather have a general population who thinks they deserve to be rich and believe that they are the victims who are being stolen from as opposed to people doing something about the frustrations that they cause those they exploit.

1-Billion-vs-1-Million-Visual.jpg

Jeff Bozos of Amazon has $185 Billion
bct2knyiojh71.jpg
if-you-worked-every-single-day-making-5000-day-from-the-time-Columbus-sailed-to-America-to-the...png
epi.ceo_.pay_.jpg
Banks-took-the-money-the-American-people-gave-them-and-used-it-to-pay-themselves-huge-bonuses.jpgAt-the-end-of-the-day-average-people-are-going-to-be-the-ones-that-are-gonna-have-to-pay-for-a...jpg

Obviously I'm not buying into this whole pity-party for the rich because they're supposedly the victims of theft and not the perpetrators and instead let's blame the poor and working class. The fact that Billionaires exist is a sign of an unhealthy society with a system built on exploitation. No one becomes a Billionare without exploting average people and no one needs a Billion dollars. And as long as there are obscenely wealthy who obtained their wealth through exploitation, the exploited are going to be frustrated and listen to the people you consider to be leeches who are taking advantage of that frustration instead of asking why it is that people are so frustrated and feel the need to turn to these leftist leeches (hint: it's because the rich and their political mouthpieces aren't helping them, they're screwing them).

End rant.
 
Corruption is part of the system and so it doesn't really matter who's in charge or what their ideology is. Even if they enter with the best of intentions they'll most likely become corrupted at some point. Some prefer Macri and think Kristina is more corrupt and have the receipts to make their case. With others it's the reverse. Sadly, everybody's right. Even sadder is that corruption is probably not only the fault of the system, but a part of human nature itself and thus unavoidable. As long as there's an angle to be played and an unfair advantage to be had someone is going to take that shortcut in the same way that a power vacuum will quickly be filled.

I asked my mother in law about a week ago if she was familiar with what is going on in Guatemala with the unrest due to the fact that the corrupt govt. which lost in the recent free and fair elections doesn't want to leave and so won't verify the results which has people on a general strike and demanding the resignation of the Atty. General (or whatever title) who's in charge of the verification. Before she gave an opinion she wanted to know the ideology of the govt. who is refusing to turn over power. I feigned ignorance, said I don't know, and then asked "What does it matter what their ideology is? The important thing is that they lost in a free and fair election, refuse to turn over power, and the people, justifiably, are extremely pissed off about it." She still wouldn't give an opinion without first knowing if the govt. was from the right or the left, which I'm positive would have determined her opinion. The old it's okay if they share my ideology but the same actions are absolutely heinous when they don't share my ideology. I dropped the subject.
 
I thought most countries in the world had financial instruments like that. Was a law broken, is this before the courts?

Do you realize that they stole virtually all of the IMF money borrowed? A lot, if not all of the IMF money left Argentina not long after it arrived, and we are still on the hook for the money. Please explain how that was beneficial to the people of Argentina.
 
This is one of those loaded questions like, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

Certainly corruption in government is a serious problem in Argentina, and every other nation in South America. But the politicians here are small-minded, kak-handed amateurs compared to the ones in North America and Europe. In my own hometown of San Diego, CA there were three major corruption scandals in the years leading up to my departure. The one involving what happened to the land when the Navy closed down NTC was worth 100 million dollars, at minimum. But I won't go into detail about that because it would be off-topic.

The point is that corruption is a constant in Argentina. Bajo Cero did a good job of tersely summarizing the corruption of Macri earlier in this thread. But any stick will do to beat an ugly dog, and so people like Anti get up on their favorite hobbyhorse and rant & rave against Cristina - Peronism - whatever scandal du jour is in the news right now. And they've been doing that for years, and it's always the same. And they do it randomly in any thread, on any subject.
It seems you are so habituated to the phenomenon of corruption that you assume that it is a fixture that must be tolerated in Latin America and in Argentina. However, that complacency largely mirrors that of many Argentinians. The fact remains, however, that that same corruption (or culture of corruption) is the source of the problems. I find their complacency hard to understand. On the other hand, I do appreciate more than ever how those who do understand the nature and extent of the problem would feel helpless to change it. Let me also add that I have gained a totally different perspective on the Dirty War than I had when I got here eight years ago. I have much more sympathy with its origins, although I am opposed to the violence that ensued. That was wrong. However, the Peronistas have also destroyed lives and they are doing so today in their contemporary incarnation. I don’t want to equate torture and murder with corruption, but the grinding poverty that so many Argentinians know and will know if the corruption persists (and there is no sign that it won’t) is a kind of torture and slow death all its own.
 
Last edited:
Corruption is part of the system and so it doesn't really matter who's in charge or what their ideology is. Even if they enter with the best of intentions they'll most likely become corrupted at some point. Some prefer Macri and think Kristina is more corrupt and have the receipts to make their case. With others it's the reverse. Sadly, everybody's right. Even sadder is that corruption is probably not only the fault of the system, but a part of human nature itself and thus unavoidable. As long as there's an angle to be played and an unfair advantage to be had someone is going to take that shortcut in the same way that a power vacuum will quickly be filled.

I asked my mother in law about a week ago if she was familiar with what is going on in Guatemala with the unrest due to the fact that the corrupt govt. which lost in the recent free and fair elections doesn't want to leave and so won't verify the results which has people on a general strike and demanding the resignation of the Atty. General (or whatever title) who's in charge of the verification. Before she gave an opinion she wanted to know the ideology of the govt. who is refusing to turn over power. I feigned ignorance, said I don't know, and then asked "What does it matter what their ideology is? The important thing is that they lost in a free and fair election, refuse to turn over power, and the people, justifiably, are extremely pissed off about it." She still wouldn't give an opinion without first knowing if the govt. was from the right or the left, which I'm positive would have determined her opinion. The old it's okay if they share my ideology but the same actions are absolutely heinous when they don't share my ideology. I dropped the subject.
I could not disagree more with your premise that it would not matter who is in charge. It could make a huge difference if someone with vision were able to make the judiciary incorruptible, and to make the politicians accountable. Today, politicians here and their cronies operate with complete impunity.

One of the things I like to share with friends in the US is that La Nacion publishes both the official exchange rate and the blue rate. They are really amused by this. Then I tell them about how the retail banking system is broken here and that a shadow banking system has replaced it, and that is also the mechanism through which one transfers dollars, which is a totally corrupt system but has the support of the crooks who run this country.
 
Yes, that was corruption because they flew usd we didn't have. They took loans for 100 years in order to do money flight. Plus Macri kept the exchange rate very low but increased the tall he owned and many other public services he owned until 3000%. So, he made 3000% more profit and he bought usd very cheap and sent them abroad to pay fake debts to his own off shores.
Vicentin was a good example. They gave all the usd they had at Banco Nacion to Vicentin whose owner, guest what, was Macrista. He flew that money and left the company in bankruptcy.
Meanwhile we have this hiperinflación caused by the artificial debt created by Macri and the artificial lack of usd created by Macri.But for you this is not corruption. Right!

Very well said, Bajo! You have a talent for summarizing things well.
 
Since you mentioned both Europe and stealing from the rich let's go back to when Europeans first arrived in the new world and review what actually happened and how it's the basis for all that's happened since. I remember learning about this in grade school.

The one sentence definition is that the wealthy class in Europe sent over their agents who took over the land from the indigenous, brought over enslaved Africans in chains to work the land, and then sent all varieties of minerals and agricultural products back to Europe - Triangular Trade. That's just the economic impact. There's also the destruction of cultures which were replaced with European cultures. I remember travelling through much of Mexico and when you go site seeing it was normal to get a two-fer - part of the original temple (or other site of cultural significance) of the indigenous and the centuries old church the conquerors/agents of the wealthy class built on top of it's ruins so there was no mistaking who was boss and who all the resources (land and people) now belonged to.

View attachment 9154

Politicians feed off people's frustration because, surprise, a lot of people are frustrated and are open to someone who at least claims to speak for them as opposed to someone who speaks for the rich. The way I see it, ever since rich Europeans came to the new world they are the ones who polarized society between rich and poor (or at least continued it, since the conquered had their class structures as well). They are the ones who stole, not from other wealthy people, but the people who were already living here since long before the rich Europeans arrived. If today leftist politicians are feeding off people's frustration and leeching it's because society has created and long maintained a system based on exploitation that also creates a situation where it frustrates average people who are not only left out, but told to appreciate their shitty existences. No surprise that a abstract carrot and concrete stick is used to reinforce this. Be a good and obedient servant to your master now and you will be rewarded in the afterlife for your obedience and subservience. You say we are missing people who value the right things. I see people on the left talking about values such as dignity and basic human rights whereas the only value I see the rich valuing is wealth and they don't care how they obtain it, what kind of negative effect it has on the environment (the Amazon is another perfect example of the rich exploiting the poor in the insatiable pursuit of wealth), or people. The weird thing, to me, is that so many people who are not extremely wealthy or even rich choose to support them while vilifying the people who are actually much closer to them in status. Those who the right wing populists feed off of frustrations and do their leeching because as much as they say they're "fighting for you" they never lower their taxes, fix their roads, end corruption, or fulfill any other promises that will benefit anyone but other rich people. When the wannabe rich say "he fought for us" it usually means that he validated their hate because he (it's usually a he) hates the same people they hate and sadly that's all they think they need. Maybe they act/vote in such a way because they figure that one day they too may be wealthy enough to benefit from all the governments give the rich; Socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the rest of us.

There's no need for anyone to be a Billionaire. Billionaires wouldn't exist but for a system that allows them to exploit those frustrated people you mentioned. People see the pay disparity between the average worker and CEOs, how the disparity has been growing, and, no surprise, it frustrates them. People see politicians (primarily on the right) who deregulate industry for the benefit of industry and watch as these industries fuck up without any risk or downside because the country's treasury will cover any loss and no matter that it hurts the general population while the Billionaires increase their wealth and the executives use bailout money to give themselves extremely generous bonus that are paid for by the average taxpayer. Frustrating. Examples of this (that I'm most familiar with having lived in the US at the time) are the banking crisis and the housing crisis where deregulation caused massive failures and those responsible for the failures received massive government bailouts which they used to give themselves massive bonuses. A current example can be seen in the US with the Autoworker's strike. While the rich were giving themselves bonuses the workers were making sacrifices and taking paycuts because they were told it was necessary to keep the business from failing. Now that the car companies are making massive profits they would like for things to go back to how they were before they were asked to unilaterally make sacrifices which affected their pay and benefits. Maybe you don't agree, but all of this is frustrating for someone living paycheck to paycheck and being told that getting any kind of cost of living adjustment is out of the question because the company just can't afford it/it would hurt profitability. Why is it Billionaires need the support of people who aren't rich? Why do some claim to be Billionaires yet ask the average person living paycheck to paycheck to send them money? It sounds to me like they want the support because they'd rather have a general population who thinks they deserve to be rich and believe that they are the victims who are being stolen from as opposed to people doing something about the frustrations that they cause those they exploit.

View attachment 9156

Jeff Bozos of Amazon has $185 Billion
View attachment 9157
View attachment 9160
View attachment 9155
View attachment 9158View attachment 9159

Obviously I'm not buying into this whole pity-party for the rich because they're supposedly the victims of theft and not the perpetrators and instead let's blame the poor and working class. The fact that Billionaires exist is a sign of an unhealthy society with a system built on exploitation. No one becomes a Billionare without exploting average people and no one needs a Billion dollars. And as long as there are obscenely wealthy who obtained their wealth through exploitation, the exploited are going to be frustrated and listen to the people you consider to be leeches who are taking advantage of that frustration instead of asking why it is that people are so frustrated and feel the need to turn to these leftist leeches (hint: it's because the rich and their political mouthpieces aren't helping them, they're screwing them).

End rant.
You make a lot of points that I agree with, although I would add that the downtrodden turn to the left here in Argentina because the so-called left exploits their pain, which it has largely caused, in order to get re-elected, then once back in power it continues its corruption. The problem here is that none of the politicians who advocate reform — on the right or left — touch the topic of corruption, which is evidently like a third-rail. Even this Milei, with all his brashness, says little about corruption. He worked for one of the billionaires for many years as his own in-house economist. I would be curious if this man were the lone billionaire who somehow made his fortune here without relying on bribes. There is only one billionaire that I know of who was truly self-made, Marcos Galperin, the founder of Mercado Libre, which was funded by US venture capital (Hicks, Muse).
 
Back
Top