South Am Javier Milei. Here we go again.

Remove this Banner Ad

Chief said:
Here's where it gets cray cray: cashed up people buy those houses at rock bottom, then rent them back to the victims of
Click to expand...

The average European does not want to live under Islam. When you walk down the street and the disgusting Muslim "call to prayer" is blasted every 3 hours what choice do they have. Every time you call a moderate who doesn't want to obey Islam "far right" you lose. So keep it up :)
 
Chief said:
Dude. What happened to you that you can't even stand the sound of someone singing?

Do you feel the same way about church bells?
Click to expand...

Muslim call to prayer isn't singing. If you had to listen to it 5 times a day on your street you would agree but you are insulated
 

Log in to remove this ad.

BigPond101 said:
Muslim call to prayer isn't singing. If you had to listen to it 5 times a day on your street you would agree but you are insulated
Click to expand...
Oh yeah it would annoy me.

Where is the one you have to listen to?
 
Also I have to listen to one of these multiple times a day:

Sleepy Moon GIF by CBeebies HQ


I bet some of them have Muslims in them! Controlled by a Muslim pilot who wants to convert the non-Muslims he flies over every day! I notice they fly over in the evening too, probably in a plan to disrupt my non-Muslim enjoyment of non-Muslim TV shows and make me pray to his God!
 
CM86 said:
Now this could be misinformation, as I've not been able to confirm it in anyway. Just floating rumours.

Is there any truth to Javier Milei having a Michael Jackson-esque relationship/friendship/interactions with young children and animals?
Sleepovers etc.
In terms of animals, specifically a dog.


I'm assuming it's not true and it's just hateful lies hoping to be spread by idiots like me.
But I thought I'd ask people in this thread who might know more about him than I do.
Click to expand...



I don’t want to say the stereotype about libertarians is always true, but…
 
Johnny Bananas said:
I'm referring to economists that people pay attention to, not ones who are ignored by everybody outside academia.


I'm all for austerity in the form of much higher taxes on the rich and on corporations. I'm not for austerity in the form of reduced public welfare spending per capita, unless it's some dream society where poverty and homelessness and healthcare are all so well taken care of that they won't be a problem even with reduced spending.

If austerity is applied to public hospitals and many people can't get a life-saving operation because they can't pay for it themselves and the public system is banked up, then yes, austerity is always bad for those people. If austerity is applied to pharmaceutical subsidies and people have to choose between buying their medication or buying food because of poverty, then yes, austerity is always bad for those people. If austerity is applied to an economy that is already on its knees, and many people are thrown out of work, can't find another job and loss their homes, yes, austerity is always bad for those people. And I care more about that than numbers on a balance sheet.
Click to expand...
who the austerity is aimed at is a different question. I was just discussing austerity in general. Ironically Milei's latest fiscal package involved taxes on wealthy people and was going to deliver a surplus but then the austerity was watered down by the parliament with offsetting tax reductions for the wealthy. I.e. less austerity then the original plan and more money to the rich. I gather that is not what you are after?

Also you understand though that inflation effects poor people and the unemployed most of all right? Its not just about budget balance sheets. If your unemployed and prices are rising by 250 percent (compared to 5 per cent) then your savings run down much more quickly forcing you into homelessness more quickly. I.e. high inflation negatively impacts workers if their wages are lagging price increases but it utterly destroys people without work and forces them into poverty. And this is before we even get into the negative long term ramifications for standards of living of persistent high inflation that destroys investment and capital accumulation for workers to use. I.e. in the end persistant high inflation results in the rich moving their assets overseas and all those who remain becoming poor regardless of whether they have jobs or not. The unemployed get hit hard first but then everyone loses.

A 2 year period of elevated unemployment of 10-15 percent and unemployment then falling back below 5 percent and inflation falling back below 10 percent is a hell of a lot better for poor people then a 15 year period of 250 percent inflation and 7 per cent unemployment. Not to mention there are a lot less poor people and more midddle class people in the first scenario as time progresses.

However, the only reason austerity should be employed is if there is rampant inflation. Governments should be providing as much services as they can up until the point that inflation starts to rise above target bands. This should be the goal of governments rather then maintaining fiscal deficits. I infact advocate for completely getting rid of fiscal debt (i.e. just stop pretending it exists). Governments should just print money and spend as much as they can up until the point that inflation rises above target bands. The failure of politicians (not economists but politicians) was that they dont understand that its inflation that should curb the cap on fiscal spending and not fiscal debt. Economists have a lot less power then you think. Economists have no control over fiscal spending. None. Go see how the labor government completely ignored the henry tax review despite being the ones who initiated it. Economists have some control over monetary policy but not as much as you think. There are far too many business heads on central bank boards. And frankly the economists who are there are too old and stuck in a 1970s mentality.
 
Last edited:
Seeds said:
who the austerity is aimed at is a different question. I was just discussing austerity in general. Ironically Milei's latest fiscal package involved taxes on wealthy people and was going to deliver a surplus but then the austerity was watered down by the parliament with offsetting tax reductions for the wealthy. I.e. less austerity then the original plan and more money to the rich. I gather that is not what you are after?

Also you understand though that inflation effects poor people and the unemployed most of all right? Its not just about budget balance sheets. If your unemployed and prices are rising by 250 percent (compared to 5 per cent) then your savings run down much more quickly forcing you into homelessness more quickly. I.e. high inflation negatively impacts workers if their wages are lagging price increases but it utterly destroys people without work and forces them into poverty. And this is before we even get into the negative long term ramifications for standards of living of persistent high inflation that destroys investment and capital accumulation for workers to use. I.e. in the end persistant high inflation results in the rich moving their assets overseas and all those who remain becoming poor regardless of whether they have jobs or not. The unemployed get hit hard first but then everyone loses.

A 2 year period of elevated unemployment of 10-15 percent and unemployment then falling back below 5 percent and inflation falling back below 10 percent is a hell of a lot better for poor people then a 15 year period of 250 percent inflation and 7 per cent unemployment. Not to mention there are a lot less poor people and more midddle class people in the first scenario as time progresses.

However, the only reason austerity should be employed is if there is rampant inflation. Governments should be providing as much services as they can up until the point that inflation starts to rise above target bands. This should be the goal of governments rather then maintaining fiscal deficits. I infact advocate for completely getting rid of fiscal debt (i.e. just stop pretending it exists). Governments should just print money and spend as much as they can up until the point that inflation rises above target bands. The failure of politicians (not economists but politicians) was that they dont understand that its inflation that should curb the cap on fiscal spending and not fiscal debt. Economists have a lot less power then you think. Economists have no control over fiscal spending. None. Go see how the labor government completely ignored the henry tax review despite being the ones who initiated it. Economists have some control over monetary policy but not as much as you think. There are far too many business heads on central bank boards. And frankly the economists who are there are too old and stuck in a 1970s mentality.
Click to expand...
What should have more value.

The direct labour that creates a product.
Or.
The indirect influence that can increase or influence the value or a producte?
 
Yesterday was the most important day in the history of Argentina, the congress voted 37 - 36 to give Milei the power to enact his democratically elected promises

While they voted leftists set fire to cars and threw Molotov cocktails at police outside the congress building. Milei actually called on the police to stand down so everyone could see the violence and evilness or the left. This was the turning point and brought congress into his favour. Possibly the smartest political move of all time, using the hatred of the lefts hatred and bile against them.

The 36 - 36 tie breaker being broken. A basic translation: "After decades of misery the people of Argentina deserve a chance at life despite what people like Cheif think"




Riots

 
BigPond101 said:
Milei actually called on the police to stand down so everyone could see the violence and evilness or the left. This was the turning point and brought congress into his favour. Possibly the smartest political move of all time, using the hatred of the lefts hatred and bile against them.
Click to expand...
So he told public servants NOT to do their job so he could gain political advantage.

And you support that.

Crazy stuff.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BigPond101 said:
"After decades of misery the people of Argentina deserve a chance at life despite what people like Cheif think"
Click to expand...
Also, this is up there with being mentioned on the Aunty Donna podcast.

#soproud
 
Chief said:
So he told public servants NOT to do their job so he could gain political advantage.

And you support that.

Crazy stuff.
Click to expand...

"If your enemies are making a mistake don't get in their way" This is one of the oldest war tactics in history older than Sun Szu art of war

I'm going to a sanitation anti drug and alcohol at the foot of the Andes mountains in providence far away, I'll be back in a year, I love you all, life is hard but there is a meaning to your suffering, goodbye I see you 15 of June 2025
 
I left rehab and accepted the fact I will be dead of drug addiction within 3 years I don't mind just wanna tell a funny story

The communist president of Colombia uploaded a video anti Israel and Milei attacking non stop. Milei supporters took the video and replaced the audio with "Shoot to thrill" by AC/DC. It quickly became the most popular video in the history of Argentina social media and has made Milei more popular than ever. Another backfire for the commies

 

Remove this Banner Ad

South Am Javier Milei. Here we go again.

Similar threads

Chief
USA Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his role in the Trump government
2
Replies
36
Views
972
Not Important
N
N
USA Kamala Harris Concedes. God Help America
292 293 294 295 296
Replies
7K
Views
175K
Goroyals22
Goroyals22
CrazyJoeFevola
The impending Sinn Fein government in the next Irish Republic election, 2025.
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
Johnny Bananas
Johnny Bananas

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top