[Milei WINS!] Javier Milei, Austrian econ. prof. & ancap, runs for president of Argentina

[acptulsa]

https://twitter.com/RealSpikeCohen/status/1728591002590454209

 

[ClaytonB]

Eliminate Argentina's central bank!!!

Replace it with America's!!!!

YES

 

[John-G]

We already talked about that. He's not replacing it with anything. Try reading a thread one time, see if you like it.



And your better ways are...? Selling it to foreigners and using the money to expand the presidential palace, perhaps? Giving it to non-union sewer workers and letting them learn how an airplane works as they go?

Are people merely hating on this guy because he's making it plainly obvious what a nasty old statist Trump really is?

Pump the brakes, this is a freaking airline, not a utility or communication infrastructure or some other hard to sell off entity. Yes, you sell it to the highest bidder (foreign or domestic) and use the money to reduce taxes or pay off debt. Govt airlines has to be the easiest type of govt company to sell.

I don't wanna hate him but the level of adulation liberty people are giving this guy before he even gets into office is shocking. Still on a wait and see, he has not yet given the airlines over to the worker but if he doesnt then I am out.

 

[acptulsa]

Yes, you sell it to the highest bidder (foreign or domestic) and use the money to reduce taxes or pay off debt.

And if his constituents, who paid to have it built, prefer it remain locally owned? And if the only Argentines who can afford it have either vanished or gotten put in prison? You think his first obligation is to pay off the money his predecessor borrowed from the IMG and deposited in a numbered Nassau account?

I don't think respectfully disagreeing will tarnish my libertarian bona fides too much. It's a revolution, kicking out corruption. His people have as much right to be named as creditors in this bankruptcy proceeding as any foreign bank. He's the only receiver in this receivership who has any reason to look after their interests.

And if all national debt all over the world was considered personal loans to Today's Dictator of the particular nation, based solely on his personal collateral, the world would be a better place.

 

[Matt4Liberty]

And your better ways are...? Selling it to foreigners and using the money to expand the presidential palace, perhaps? Giving it to non-union sewer workers and letting them learn how an airplane works as they go?

What to do with a state owned business is always a hard decision with no good outcome. There's always the case of trying to create a right from two wrongs. Being from a former communist country, I saw first hand what massive privatization brought. All the "former" communist politicians who all of a sudden became staunch "capitalists" sold the companies to their friends or whoever greased their pocket books the most for pennies on the dollar. No positives came from this for the citizens who were robbed in the first place for these state owned businesses to exist.

Far from a perfect solution, but the one I see as the best is for the state owned business to issue new shares and list them on a stock exchange. Make the government as silent of a partner and let the profits from the state's shares go back into the state's treasury. At least in theory, the people would be retaining some ownership and the profits would go back.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Yes, you sell it to the highest bidder (foreign or domestic) and use the money to reduce taxes or pay off debt.

Sounds like globalist cronyism to me ...

And your better ways are...? Selling it to foreigners and using the money to expand the presidential palace, perhaps? Giving it to non-union sewer workers and letting them learn how an airplane works as they go?

If his government keeps it or gives it to the employees, then he's a "socialist" of some kind.

If his government does anything else with it, then he's a "globalist crony" of some kind.

Or maybe both.

And the same thing applies (or will apply) when it comes to the central bank or any other issue.



(Ron Paul would have had to put up with the same kind of "damned if you do or don't" nonsense had he become POTUS.)

 

[acptulsa]

Far from a perfect solution, but the one I see as the best is for the state owned business to issue new shares and list them on a stock exchange.

And we don't know if he's taking a variation on just such a tack. I haven't seen any details on the deal yet. They're likely to get the honor of working cheap for a while, until the dust settles and the nation turns back into a destination. That constitutes an investment by itself, and may be necessary to keep the doors open. He can't get that from shoppers on the NYSE. If he can't keep the doors open, all there is left to sell the international market is used airplanes and tools, not a going concern.

Certainly there's something to be said for employee ownership; companies thrive when their owners know what the hell is going on.

 

[ClaytonB]

If his government keeps it or gives it to the employees, then he's a "socialist" of some kind.

If his government does anything else with it, then he's a "globalist crony" of some kind.

Or maybe both.

And the same thing applies (or will apply) when it comes to the central bank or any other issue.



(Ron Paul would have had to put up with the same kind of "damned if you do or don't" nonsense had he become POTUS.)

^ THIS

 

[Occam's Banana]

What to do with a state owned business is always a hard decision with no good outcome. There's always the case of trying to create a right from two wrongs. Being from a former communist country, I saw first hand what massive privatization brought. All the "former" communist politicians who all of a sudden became staunch "capitalists" sold the companies to their friends or whoever greased their pocket books the most for pennies on the dollar. No positives came from this for the citizens who were robbed in the first place for these state owned businesses to exist.

Far from a perfect solution, but the one I see as the best is for the state owned business to issue new shares and list them on a stock exchange. Make the government as silent of a partner and let the profits from the state's shares go back into the state's treasury. At least in theory, the people would be retaining some ownership and the profits would go back.

You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice.

State ownership of capital property is one of the defining characteristics of socialism.

It is ridiculous that someone who is divesting the state of state-owned assets is being accused of being some kind of "socialist".

I could not care less whether Milei privatizes the airline (or anything else) by auctioning it off the highest bidder or giving it to the present operators/employees as private citizens. The latter might even help limit or retard the ability of the politically-connected"oligarch" types to seize control of such formerly-state-owned assets (though some of their new operator/employee-owners might simply sell their stakes to those "oligarch" types, anyway).

 

[Occam's Banana]

Milei told La Nacion, “What do I propose? Argentina’s sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands is non-negotiable. The Malvinas are Argentine.

https://londonlovesbusiness.com/arg...alkland-islands-back-which-is-non-negotiable/

[... G]ranting - just for the sake of argument - that Milei did actually say, "Argentina has non-negotiable sovereignty over the Falklands" (or assuming, again arguendo, that this is not an inaccurate or uncharitable mis-translation of something else he said), the assertion that "non-negotiable means force will be used if diplomacy fails" simply does not follow. It can easily and merely mean that [Argentina's claim of] sovereignty over the Falklands is not something Milei would be willing to trade as a concession in any diplomatic rapprochement with Britain. Furthermore, that sense of "non-negotiable" (again, assuming a correct and accurate translation) is the far more reasonable and to-be-expected understanding of the term, given that Argentina is obviously in no position whatsoever to forcibly assert its claim of "sovereignty" with even the faintest hope of any effectiveness (let alone success).

You: "Non-negotiable means force will be used if diplomacy fails."

Me: ""[... T]he assertion that 'non-negotiable means force will be used if diplomacy fails' simply does not follow."

MIlei (in the second article you linked to ; see above): “It is clear that the war option is not a solution."

QED

The first article failed to cite the source of teh quote because it is something everyone in their country knows he said during his campaign.

LOL

By the same logic (read: "excuse for half-assed, piss-poor reportage"), "everyone in their country knows" he won the election - yet for some reason, the author &/or editor apparently felt it necessary to explicitly state that he had done so (while omitting any source for or citation of the statement the article was supposed to be about).

And Argentina has a much better shot at taking the islands now than last time because the UK military is withered and degraded since Thatcher's time.

All his claims that he wants to pursue a peaceful transfer are nonsense because there is no chance that the UK or the islanders will agree and Argentina has nothing to offer to change their minds.
If a peaceful transfer takes place it will be because the UK accepts some pitiful offer in order to avoid a war that is implied by even bringing the subject up.

You will let me know when the "withered and degraded" Brits tuck tail & flee from the mighty Argentine navy, won't you?

BTW - just out of curiosity, which do you suppose will happen first: Argentina's invasion of the Falklands, or their invasion of Russia?

Putin better watch out! If he doesn't toe Milei's line, Argentina might just invade Russia on behalf of Ukraine.

 

[acptulsa]

BTW - just out of curiosity, which do you suppose will happen first: Argentina's invasion of the Falklands, or their invasion of Russia?​

Gaza, of course. Of the three, the Palestinians are the biggest threat on the soccer field.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I’d have to imagine that the workers were fairly compensated for their work over the years, so I don’t see any reason for them to be favored.

A crazy idea off the top of my head is to distribute shares to all taxpayers, since it was funded by taxpayers in the first place. One share for every year that net taxes were paid to the government.

...The latter might even help limit or retard the ability of the politically-connected"oligarch" types to seize control of such formerly-state-owned assets (though some of their new operator/employee-owners might simply sell their stakes to those "oligarch" types, anyway).

Wide distribution of shares would help with that, although inevitably and eventually, the shares would end up in the hands of usual investors.

 

[ClaytonB]

BTW - just out of curiosity, which do you suppose will happen first: Argentina's invasion of the Falklands, or their invasion of Russia?

Official Milei Predictions List (will update over time):

• Milei is going to invade the Falklands
• Milei is going to send money/weapons/troops to Ukraine
• Milei is going to send money/weapons/troops to Israel
• Milei is going to invade the ME (since he's a "neocon" and that's the true definition of a neocon...)
• Milei is going to institute CBDCs
• Milei is going to "socialize" Argentine Airlines, or sell it to the oligarchs
• There will surely be MORE TO COME...

 

[John-G]

Sounds like globalist cronyism to me ...



If his government keeps it or gives it to the employees, then he's a "socialist" of some kind.

If his government does anything else with it, then he's a "globalist crony" of some kind.

Or maybe both.

And the same thing applies (or will apply) when it comes to the central bank or any other issue.



(Ron Paul would have had to put up with the same kind of "damned if you do or don't" nonsense had he become POTUS.)

Get a hold of yourself. You are now being unreasonable. The airline in question used to be owned by Iberia airways, they just recently nationalized. Sorry to break it to u, what he is proposing to do and thankfully hasn't done yet is something you would expect from an AOC.

You create an awareness campaign that airline would be sold in 12 months to the highest bidder, you then give everybody that wants to run it a chance to inspect the business and put in their offer. Heck, I don't even care if they put in a requirement like the Chinese used to do for the buying group be 51% plus local based. Do whatever you want to do but you sell it at the end of the day. Airlines are just about the easiest of govt properties to sell and if this man claiming to be an anarcho capitalist can't figure it out, then there is something wrong with him.

Also, I am 100% sure that Ron Paul would have come up with a 100x better idea on how to privatize the airline. This is AOC level thinking.

 

[John-G]

Official Milei Predictions List (will update over time):

• Milei is going to invade the Falklands
• Milei is going to send money/weapons/troops to Ukraine
• Milei is going to send money/weapons/troops to Israel
• Milei is going to invade the ME (since he's a "neocon" and that's the true definition of a neocon...)
• Milei is going to institute CBDCs
• Milei is going to "socialize" Argentine Airlines, or sell it to the oligarchs
• There will surely be MORE TO COME...

Milei said he was going to give away the state airline to the govt union workers. This is what the man said, nobody is slandering him here. The so called anarcho capitalist can't seem to figure out a way to privatize this public institution.

 

[John-G]

I’d have to imagine that the workers were fairly compensated for their work over the years, so I don’t see any reason for them to be favored.

A crazy idea off the top of my head is to distribute shares to all taxpayers, since it was funded by taxpayers in the first place. One share for every year that net taxes were paid to the government.



Wide distribution of shares would help with that, although inevitably and eventually, the shares would end up in the hands of usual investors.

Or just re privatize it and use whatever money he gets to run the govt. Yes, he claims to be an anarcho capitalist but he still gonna have some govt to run. Use the money gained from it to run the govt. I can imagine trying to redistribute the fund and avoiding fraud to cost a pretty chunk of the sale price.

Heck, call back Iberia airway and sell it back to them. Just about anything but this would be a better plan

 

[ClaytonB]

Milei said he was going to give away the state airline to the govt union workers. This is what the man said, nobody is slandering him here. The so called anarcho capitalist can't seem to figure out a way to privatize this public institution.

This is just blaming the victim. Until now, Milei has not worked in the public-sector (to my knowledge), so he has been a tax-paying private-citizen subsidizing Argentine Airlines along with all other Argentines not attached to the diseased tits of the state of Argentina. Let's take the government out of it and think it through. Suppose there is a private business that has been operating a racket for many decades. This racket has been stealing and fleecing from countless victims, most of whom did not file a complaint and have no documentation of how they were victimized, or by how much. They were able to get away with this by bribing the former corrupt President who has now died. A new President comes into power, and it is common knowledge that this business is corrupt and wholly criminal top-to-bottom, but the equipment, facilities, personnel, etc. are valuable assets and should not just be destroyed. What is he to do? If he just auctions it off to the highest bidder, it might go to one of the friends of the crooks who were running it all these decades. If he parcels it into shares and disperses it to the employees, people will accuse him of redistribution and "socialism". So, there's no good answer but the reason that there is no good answer has nothing to do with any flaw in the President himself but, rather, it is because it's a freaking criminal enterprise that has been fleecing people for many decades. Clearly, not all solutions are equal... some solutions are worse than others. But the absence of any good solution doesn't mean that the President is making a mistake by shutting down the criminals who currently run it, and somehow parceling out the valuable assets to be reused in a non-criminal fashion. That the victims themselves cannot be directly reimbursed is also not the President's fault, since no one filed a complaint (nor could have), and there is simply no "paper trail" that would allow the extortions and racketeering to be untangled and traced back to the original victims. So yes, selling it will necessarily involve "redistribution" but, once again, that's not the President's fault!

 

[Occam's Banana]

I’d have to imagine that the workers were fairly compensated for their work over the years, so I don’t see any reason for them to be favored.

A crazy idea off the top of my head is to distribute shares to all taxpayers, since it was funded by taxpayers in the first place. One share for every year that net taxes were paid to the government.

Wide distribution of shares would help with that, although inevitably and eventually, the shares would end up in the hands of usual investors.

I'd be fine with that, too.

Get a hold of yourself. You are now being unreasonable. [blarg-blarg blarg "AOC!1!!" yadal-yada-yada]

State ownership of capital property is one of the defining characteristics of socialism.

It is ridiculous that someone who is divesting the state of state-owned assets is being accused of being some kind of "socialist".

 

[John-G]

This is just blaming the victim. Until now, Milei has not worked in the public-sector (to my knowledge), so he has been a tax-paying private-citizen subsidizing Argentine Airlines along with all other Argentines not attached to the diseased tits of the state of Argentina. Let's take the government out of it and think it through. Suppose there is a private business that has been operating a racket for many decades. This racket has been stealing and fleecing from countless victims, most of whom did not file a complaint and have no documentation of how they were victimized, or by how much. They were able to get away with this by bribing the former corrupt President who has now died. A new President comes into power, and it is common knowledge that this business is corrupt and wholly criminal top-to-bottom, but the equipment, facilities, personnel, etc. are valuable assets and should not just be destroyed. What is he to do? If he just auctions it off to the highest bidder, it might go to one of the friends of the crooks who were running it all these decades. If he parcels it into shares and disperses it to the employees, people will accuse him of redistribution and "socialism". So, there's no good answer but the reason that there is no good answer has nothing to do with any flaw in the President himself but, rather, it is because it's a freaking criminal enterprise that has been fleecing people for many decades. Clearly, not all solutions are equal... some solutions are worse than others. But the absence of any good solution doesn't mean that the President is making a mistake by shutting down the criminals who currently run it, and somehow parceling out the valuable assets to be reused in a non-criminal fashion. That the victims themselves cannot be directly reimbursed is also not the President's fault, since no one filed a complaint (nor could have), and there is simply no "paper trail" that would allow the extortions and racketeering to be untangled and traced back to the original victims. So yes, selling it will necessarily involve "redistribution" but, once again, that's not the President's fault!

I am gonna get this out of the way, I am not asking for perfection from this guy. There are going to be more difficult decisions to be made in his first term, but this is not one of em. Most state-run airlines lose money and there is a long history of state-run airlines being privatized. Nigerian airlines at one point was privatized, the airline is still intact, serves the country but now no longer drains money from the taxpayers. If he not an expert on privatization, there is no issue with answering that your cabinet will come up with a plan to privatize it.

If AOC would have stated that he wanted to give say a state-run hospital to the staff, everybody here would condemn her for it. But somehow because this comes from Milei, there are people who are coming to defend him.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Or just re privatize it and use whatever money he gets to run the govt. Yes, he claims to be an anarcho capitalist but he still gonna have some govt to run. Use the money gained from it to run the govt. I can imagine trying to redistribute the fund and avoiding fraud to cost a pretty chunk of the sale price.

Heck, call back Iberia airway and sell it back to them. Just about anything but this would be a better plan

Would there be a corresponding tax refund for taxpayers?

While that may make sense for a member of Congress (or government) who sees it as a source of (one-time) revenue, it essentially rewards government for privatizing in the first place. It’s like telling the mafia to go ahead and sell all of it’s stolen goods, and keep the money.