Hacker News Reader

Comment by thrance | Hacker News Reader

Inflation is down and the economy is doing better, but what's the point when poverty rates just skyrocketed to over 50% of the population [1]? Will it "trickle down", like it never did anywhere?

Moreover, cutting public services as aggressively as Milei did is bound to hurt the economy in the long term, with less access to education, healthcare, worsening public transit... All things companies rely on the state to provide their employees.

If you need proof of the dangers of austerity, take a look at the UK. They reduced spending, but are they really better off?

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ceqn751x19no

View on HN

Several sources report more recent data showing a drop to 37-39%.

The picture in Argentina was not rosy before Milei took office, it was a country on the verge of hyperinflationary collapse. Given that starting position, IMO it’s remarkable how quickly things have turned around.

https://www.batimes.com.ar/news/argentina/expert-reports-say... https://x.com/marionawfal/status/1870100943418630363?s=46

My numbers are from December, did we really see a drop of 15% in a month? One of us has to be wrong, and I don't see many sources claiming your numbers, the X one you gave is clearly partisan, opening with "MILEI DELIVERS".

The article you cite is from September 2024. Where are you getting December?

The poverty rate above 50% of the population is something that happens when a country goes over several corrupt governments that steal everything the people have and put it in the hands of a handful of people that are always prepared to flee.

All those people failing to notice Argentina was poor before Milei got the presidency either have no idea what they are talking about or are malicious.

Now, yes, about worsening public services; Milei did the basic thing so the country can actually do something, the real test for his government is how he fixes those problems. (From the shit he talks, I would be in he not fixing anything, but if he actually acted like he talks he wouldn't have got inflation under control and would probably be already out of the presidency by now.)

When you note the increase in a statistic like poverty, you are implicitly taking into account the status of the country under its previous governance. That's how statistics work.

It was already baked into the cake because the previous administration spent something like 13% of GDP in its last year in order to win the election that they went on to lose. 13% of GDP's worth of malinvestment will increase poverty in due time, and that time was Milei's first year in government. In 2001 the Peronists left the next non-Peronist government a ticking time bomb, the next government (De La Rúa's)completely fumbled and had to end early, returning power to the Peronists. In 2023-2024 the Peronist plan was to repeat that experience. Unlike De La Rúa though, Milei seems to know what he's doing and so has been able to head off the putsch. It would be hard to push Milei out of power when his popularity right now is higher than his election winning percentage.

Also do keep in mind that in 2012 the Peronist government "intervened" the government's statistics department, and since then government stats were somewhere between unreliable and total fiction. Presumably that has changed now. Thus the poverty level before the election could have been understated, just as the inflation numbers then were.

Since the end of 2015 with Macri and then with A. Fernandez the statistic department is normalized and the numbers were quite good. (It's too optimistic to claim 100% accurate, but I don't remember mayor problems since 2015.)

Economical statistics don't work under fast inflation.

But if you believed a country bordering hyperinflation had less than 50% of the population in poverty, I have a bridge to sell you.

Which makes it the entire "yay libertarian" tone completely stupid.

It doesn't matter what the policy politics are. What's necessary is a non corrupt government.

The hyperinflation is invariably because of corruption, because when the corrupt steal everything and print money to keep the lights on temporarily.

Multifaceted shock changes like this smell of just another corruption shift. Deregulation is best accomplished by gradual reductions so all economic players have time to adapt. A shock shift probably means some insider is poised to cash in.

True libertarianism is insanity. Prohibition on murder and violence is a regulation. Use of currency is a regulation. The most libertarian unregulated market is illegal drugs, where mass murder and violence is used for business purposes.

Best of luck to Argentina.

Notice that his government hasn't been libertarian.

and the poverty wasn't high

"No true libertarian". Milei self-describes as an "anarcho-captitalist", and cosplays as "captain ancap", a hero of his creation. This is as close to libertarianism as we'll ever get. Libertarianism is an insane ideology for insane people, it thankfully can't be applied in reality.

"if he actually acted like he talks he wouldn't have got inflation under control and would probably be already out of the presidency by now"

Looks like today is the perfect day to keep repeating the things I've wrote.

Inflation is down and the economy is doing better, but what's the point when poverty rates just skyrocketed to over 50% of the population [1]? Will it "trickle down", like it never did anywhere?

This seems not true. The poor in countries with high gdp per capita are much better off than in countries with low gdp per capita. They are also better off than the poor were in prior times when those countries had lower gdp per capita. So some kind of trickling down must have happened.

It might be more convenient for your sense of moral indignation if it were otherwise but facts are facts.

This is some kind of mental gymnastics right there, I showed you poverty is rising and we're supposed to take it as meaning the people are richer for it?

Show me a single example of a country drastically slashing public spending and its citizens living better afterwards.

I don't know if they have inflation under control if, like TFA says, the locals tell him they drive to Chile to buy tires for less than half the price.

do you want cheap prices and empty shelves or high prices and non-empty shelves?

I think people want to buy food and not starve. So neither I guess?

It was at 40% when he started. A 10% increase is not good, but with the high inflation and other economical problems it was not clear that doing nothing would keep the poverty at 40%.

The most recent reports say that it's now at 37%, it's probably correct, but take all reports with a grain of salt.

It's silly to claim that austerity is dangerous. Dangerous compared to what? Argentina had reached the logical end state of socialism and literally run out of other people's money to spend. There was no more room to raise taxes or borrow so austerity was the only remaining choice.

Poverty statistics are meaningless. The numbers under previous administrations were heavily manipulated and don't provide a solid basis for comparison.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com