With Less Than 2 Weeks Until The Elections ...

[Noesdeayer]

Brady;. Unfortunaely,or maybe not, you didn't include a little more of what El Queso said in your quote like,"....beause that's not what people here want". That is a key sentence.The majority of Argentines really don't want to change.That's why the Peronists win time after time
.1) Change = Risk =Possible Loss = Rejection.
2) Peronism = Protectionism = No Real Change =No Loss =.Good Choice.
" La abundancia malcria,la escasez educa". "Abundance spoils you,scarcity educates you".The country is so rich that it can almost stiffle the work ethic at least,for many Peronists in he gov't sector.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Brady;. Unfortunaely,or maybe not, you didn't include a little more of what El Queso said in your quote like,"....beause that's not what people here want". That is a key sentence.The majority of Argentines really don't want to change.That's why the Peronists win time after time
.1) Change = Risk =Possible Loss = Rejection.
2) Peronism = Protectionism = No Real Change =No Loss =.Good Choice.
" La abundancia malcria,la escasez educa". "Abundance spoils you,scarcity educates you".The country is so rich that it can almost stiffle the work ethic at least,for many Peronists in he gov't sector.

Actually, very few people want what ElQueso wants. Austerity, weak regulation, and tax cuts have failed miserably. Just take a look around.

Argentina has its problems, but having a government that seeks to keep the economic engine of the country going at all costs, even if it means high inflation, isn't one of them.

 

[camberiu]

Actually, very few people want what ElQueso wants. Austerity, weak regulation, and tax cuts have failed miserably. Just take a look around.

Argentina has its problems, but having a government that seeks to keep the economic engine of the country going at all costs, even if it means high inflation, isn't one of them.

http://youtu.be/GTQnarzmTOc

 

[semigoodlookin]

There are parts of the world where schools are still hard to come by, running water is a luxury, and decent healthcare is a dream.

There are parts of Argentina like this, no?

 

[sesamosinsal]

There are parts of Argentina like this, no?

Indeed. That's exactly my point. There is a lot of work to do, but not all of it is profitable for the private sector. Does it mean we shouldn't do it?

If you think that my point is that Argentina is some Utopia, you're missing the point. This place isn't perfect. There is a lot of corruption, and there is a lot of wasted money. Welcome to the real world. It also happens in the private sector. Measures must be taken to minimize wasteful spending and corruption, but both don't justify the argument that the state shouldn't be investing in infrastructure projects, social programs, etc.

 

[thorsten]

The difference is that is the private sector wastes resources, it either goes out of business or just reduces its own profitability, so only the stake holders are affected. If a government wastes resources, everyone is affected...
I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any kind of public spending or it should be reduced to the absolute minimum. The areas you mention (infrastructure, education, health care) all make sense, but in recent years there are so many public "investments" where money is just wasted, either for totally irrational reasons (like football) or by implementing measures that may sound reasonable (subsidies on electricity or gas for the poorer people) that basically have a reverse distribution effect, i.e., you are actually subsidising the top incomes the most.
In a perfect world, politicians would make a plan which formulates clear goals, proposes solutions and measures their implementation with regard to the defined goals. But that would lead to transparency, which is probably counter-productive to the actual goals of some people in power...

 

[camberiu]

The areas you mention (infrastructure, education, health care) all make sense,

In the Road to Serfdom, F.A. argues that it will never stay restricted to that. The state will always try (and succeed) in expanding its scope, until it eventually controls everything, either directly via overt central planning,or indirectly through, bureaucracy regulation and laws.

 

[citygirl]

Indeed. That's exactly my point. There is a lot of work to do, but not all of it is profitable for the private sector. Does it mean we shouldn't do it?

If you think that my point is that Argentina is some Utopia, you're missing the point. This place isn't perfect. There is a lot of corruption, and there is a lot of wasted money. Welcome to the real world. It also happens in the private sector. Measures must be taken to minimize wasteful spending and corruption, but both don't justify the argument that the state shouldn't be investing in infrastructure projects, social programs, etc.

But the thing is, I don't see the gov't investing in the infrastructure, educational programs, social programs (minus the subsidies) at all. I'll use my neighborhood as case in point. The road outside my house is listed as paved on maps. It's not. Apparently the company that won the bid to pave it just took the money and presumably split it with the politicians but it was never paved. Nor were any of the other streets around us. Now a few weeks ago - they did show up to pave the main streets in the neighborhood that everyone has been complaining about for years. Coincidentally it happened right before elections. And you better believe there were a lot of signs reminding people who did it. The public school around here is a joke. Roof with leaks, no books, shooting outside the school, etc. The public hospital - well it might be better than nothing - but not by much.

FWIW - I am an ardent supporter of monies being spent on education, healthcare, etc. Not only is it morally the right thing, it's also the right thing from a capitalistic perspective I want an educated workforce. I want a strong public health system. I want social programs that provide a safety net.

What I don't want is bread and circuses which is what I see happening here. The quality (and ranking) of education here is declining. The ability to deliver a decent public health care is becoming harder and harder. The infrastructure is failing (roads, power, etc) But don't worry - we'll give you entertainment, we'll patch up the streets right before the elections (and then ignore them again for the next 4 years), we'll introduce politics into school but we won't give you textbooks...

I don't know if any president could (or wants) to turn it around but it sure would be nice to see.

 

[sesamosinsal]

But the thing is, I don't see the gov't investing in the infrastructure, educational programs, social programs (minus the subsidies) at all.

You need to look around a bit more. There are many failures to note, but there are also lots of success stories from this government. For example: https://www.youtube....h?v=MVlncPuGBvE (Her story is also largely my partner's story... I imagine there are many others who share it)

 

[sesamosinsal]

The difference is that is the private sector wastes resources, it either goes out of business or just reduces its own profitability, so only the stake holders are affected. If a government wastes resources, everyone is affected...

I agree with everything else you said, but I disagree on this point. We are all affected by corruption, whether it's in the private or public sector. If it's in the private sector, then it surely affects the company's productivity, the amount of people it can hire, how much it can pay its employees, its taxable revenue, etc. Corrupt companies pay less, hire less, and produce less.

My suspicion is that the private sector is equally -- if not more -- corrupt as the public sector in most countries, including Argentina.