Guatemalan libertarian activist speech.

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Rod1, May 14, 2018.

  1. Possum Jenkins

    Possum Jenkins Cultural Marxism Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,222
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    Annihilating Western Civilization
    The whole deregulation, privatization, and greater freedom for corporations part. Approximately 8 of the 10 points.



    Yes, and that 40% are still going to say that corruption is bad, public funds should help out people, all the rest. Again, this something that is pretty much meaningless. Institutions should be independent? Yeah, no crap. It's like saying "I'm for world peace."




    And this is the big problem when dealing with a set of very broad suggestions and treating them like the 10 Commandments.

    For example, the tax reform part. It asks for "moderate tax rates." WTF does that mean? The rich ALWAYS think their taxes are too high, whether they're in Sweden, the US, Chile or Nigeria. It also asks for "oversight of financial institutions." Who gets to determine how strong this oversight is? I'm sure Goldman Sachs and Bear Sterns swore up and down that they were up to their neck in oversight prior to the 2008 crisis.

    It's just more right-wing orthodoxy. Privatize everything, deregulate, increase profits and growth... oh yeah, and if there's some money left over, build a little hospital somewhere so the poors don't get antsy and start messing up our country clubs.



    That's right, because privatization is a huge component of the Washington Consensus (at least the one that's most meaningful) and privatizing Codelco has never even been in the cards and even ultra-right Pinochet wasn't crazy enough to try to pull that off.

    Again, Chile is a mixed bag. Large state expenditures are what made its poverty the lowest and its education the highest in the region. It also has a state-owned enterprise as its main economic driver. At the same time, it's also very business-friendly.

    And the Washington Consensus can be a mixed bag as well. If you undermine or only very superficially touch upon the privatizing and deregulation parts, but emphasize the social spending part, it can be halfway social-democratic.
     
  2. Possum Jenkins

    Possum Jenkins Cultural Marxism Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,222
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    Annihilating Western Civilization
    Depends what you mean by "economic freedom."

    Many hard-liners would say that raising taxes, instituting capital controls, and increasing labor union participation greatly hinders economic freedom. Yet Chile did all those things in the post-Pinochet era:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Chile#Concertación_era_(1990–2010)
     
  3. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    42,614
    Likes Received:
    27,199
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    Wait what? which country and regime specifically? because you are talking out of your ass there.

    Because people are too dumb and disconnected to common sense, since when is the solution to bad governance to expand said bad governance instead of first cleaing the governance and then expanding it?

    1.- Except is not really that broad. Moderate taxes as in taxes that wont force people to go towards the shadow economy.

    2.- Oversight of financial institutions usually are led by politically independent institutions with civilian and political overseers.

    1.- Privatizations are asked for because most latin american state corporations are on the red and the liabilities are pushed then towards public debt. It has never been asked to privatize profitable ventures, like airports, ports and the such.

    2.- Deregulation is basically ease of doing business, not things like dropping waste on rivers.

    3.- Increase profits? how is that the government jobs

    4.- It actually asks for countries to spend in healthcare and education since these are proven to increase productivity and general welfare.

    Privatization is a "huge component" because most state companies were run on the red and were a big public debt liability, not to mention state monopolies that robbed these countries of comparative advantage.

    Codelco has never ever been in the cards simply because Codelco was and is profitable so its not a liability.

    Chile is not a mixed bag, it has consistently scored way above other latin American countries in the "ease of doing business" index of the WB and the "Economic Freedom Index" by the Heritage Foundation.

    And no, Chile has one of the lowest if not the lowest tax burden in the OECD and some of the lowest public spending as percentage of the GDP.

    Chile does well compared to other latin American nations, simply because its much more wealthy than other latin American nations.

    Privatizing and deregulation doesnt means what you think it means, US politics are a special kind of retard so they twist a lot of valid terminologies to their own ends.

    In poor countries "regulation" usually means in how many bureaucrats are going to need to be bribed because otherwise they will close down my legitimate business. It doesnt means something like "throw toxic waste do the drain" which still happens under "heavily regulation" due to poor law enforcement and bribes which are encouraged by a selective enforcement of draconian laws in the first place.
     
  4. Possum Jenkins

    Possum Jenkins Cultural Marxism Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,222
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    Annihilating Western Civilization
    Peru with Fujimori starting in 1992, Argentina throughout the 90s, Venezuela with Perez.

    For more:

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/4538928?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0094582X9802500609?journalCode=lapa

    Pretty puzzling that you're fawning over neoliberalism like it's this exciting new approach that hasn't been tried. Are you from 1978 and just arrived on a time machine or something?


    1. I guess it could be that. It could also focus on the taxes of big business under the ol' guise of "let's attract foreign investment!"

    2. Ok


    1. As you point out in #3, increasing profit isn't the government's job. The government's job is to provide services for its citizens so transportation and utility companies being in the red isn't really an issue if they're providing good services. Obviously, some are far too in the red that they do need some sort of private influence. But this should be a case-by-case scenario. The WC doesn't care about that and just says "privatize all!"

    2. Clearly it can be both. A company could argue that environmental regulations are so stifling that they harm their ease of business.

    3. It's not, but that's what they policies are geared towards. Increase the profit of big corporations = increase overall GDP

    4. It mentions it, but it's completely up in the air as to how much it should be emphasized. Again, EXTREMELY broad.


    So it should be case-by-case instead of a wholesale "privatize state enterprises" right? Glad we're in agreement.


    Yes, it has that now, but it didn't in the early 90s when it was trying to rescue itself from Pinochet's rule. Increased public spending is what decreased poverty and improved education.



    Yeah, but deregulation means the same thing everywhere: free reign to do whatever the hell you want. The most ruthless and/or powerful thrive.

    Improve the type of regulation being done is, of course, the answer. Getting rid of regulations themselves isn't.
     
  5. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    42,614
    Likes Received:
    27,199
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    Menem is your example of fiscal conservatism and strong rule of law? LOL. Why not call Putin a neoliberal once you are at it?

    And Fujimori was, compared to his predecessors, a complete economical success, the criticism of his rule is because of repressions of left wing guerillas, not the economy.

    Except that big business can usually bribe his way off paying their due, so in the end the fiscal burden falls into the middle class that cant bribe their way off and isnt part of the shadow economy.

    1.- Absolutely not, the WC wasnt about privatize all, there is nothing about "muh small government" only about, keeping a healthy balance book.

    2.- Except that's not what happens in practice, if a company is corrupt it will merely bribe the officials in charge of keeping it in check while still dumping toxic waste.

    3.- Increase GDP = increase your taxable base = increase your spending on social services.

    4.- Its not broad, the WC was about latin American countries not running their countries to the ground in debt, so it was geared towards increasing productivity and general health and education increase productivity.

    You got a paper or something?

    That would be true in a country with strong rule or law and institutional independence.

    Do you honestly think Putin and his cronies cares about whats written in Russian law when doing anything at all?
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2018
  6. MacDuffle

    MacDuffle Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card Yellow Card

    Joined:
    May 28, 2015
    Messages:
    9,919
    Likes Received:
    17,495
    Location:
    Aberdeen, in Exile
    thread is f*cking excellent, good work boys
     
  7. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    42,614
    Likes Received:
    27,199
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    I dont think you can have a decent economy with planned labor.

    I think they miss the good old days because they controlled half of Europe, central Asia and were a world power.

    But the more responsibilities taken from them, there will be more free time to find new things to do and monetize.
     
  8. Possum Jenkins

    Possum Jenkins Cultural Marxism Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,222
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    Annihilating Western Civilization
    Nope

    [​IMG]


    The 90s also saw the biggest wave of Peruvian emigration in its history. Fujimori was an absolute disaster for the country.

    Actually, not for everyone. He "opened up" the economy so a few sectors did well. The vast majority did horrible though. You know, standard neoliberal stuff.


    So you're saying corruption is harmful and should be eliminated? Great, everyone on the planet is in agreement with this. It's not an ideological issue.


    1. It sure seems like a blanket, "privatizing is better" mandate. https://journals.gmu.edu/newvoices/article/viewFile/14/14

    2. Same as before: corruption is harmful and should be eliminated. Sorry, but the WC can't take credit for that groundbreaking thought.

    3. Basically trickle down, huh? The rich get richer and everyone benefits either through larger tax base or through the jobs they create. Again, you seem to have jumped on a time machine but let me break it to you: it was tried and it doesn't work!

    4. Yeah, and in practice it created misery. So much so Argentina and Brazil kicked the IMF out, Chavez and the Kirchners were elected.


    http://www.memoriachilena.cl/602/w3-article-94306.html


    So countries should have a strong rule of law and institutional independence. No kidding.

    Once again, this isn't an ideological issue.
     
  9. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    42,614
    Likes Received:
    27,199
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    What is that chart even supposed to represent?

    Fujimori inherited a country with a massive recession and drove it back into the black, and its not like Fujimori was spending a lot on education, healthcare and respecting institutions.

    He focused on macroeconomic stability above all else and then ran a government in an authoritarian way.

    Everyone thinks that we should lose weight, but some people propose running, other propose going to McD.

    1.- For the reasons i stated before, increasing efficiency and competitiveness.

    2.- When people say "corruption must be eliminated" they are actually saying you need solid, independent institutions to serve as checks and balances and the rule of law must be respected.

    3.- Trickle down is fiscal policy, not economic policy, you clearly cant think outside of your pampered American universe where things you take for granted simply dont exist in a lot of other places in the world.

    Increasing GDP (through an stable macroeconomy) is the number 1 effort for any country willing to increase the quality of life of its constitutents, its such a no brainer that it shouldnt even be up to discussion. You cant "redistribute the wealth" if there is no wealth in the first place.

    4.- Lula never kicked the IMF out and he followed market oriented policies like his predecessor.

    Silva and his cabinet followed in part the lead of the previous government,[40] by renewing all agreements with the International Monetary Fund, which were signed by the time Argentina defaulted on its own deals in 2001. His government achieved a satisfactory primary budget surplus in the first two years, as required by the IMF agreement, exceeding the target for the third year. In late 2005, the government paid off its debt to the IMF in full, two years ahead of schedule.[41] Three years after the election, Lula had slowly but firmly gained the market's confidence, and sovereign risk indexes fell to around 250 points. The government's choice of inflation targeting kept the economy stable, and was complimented during the 2005 World Economic Forum in Davos.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_Inácio_Lula_da_Silva#Economy

    So Lula was a "neoliberal".

    That article says that up to 2006 public education is quite poor compared to private education.

    It is, its one of the oldest there is.

    The whole strongmen get shit done vs democracy prevents the rise of tyranny.
     
  10. Rygu

    Rygu Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2015
    Messages:
    4,653
    Likes Received:
    10,805
    Location:
    Langley B.C.
    I'd hit that.

    That's all that really matters.
     
  11. Bamboozled

    Bamboozled Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2018
    Messages:
    1,763
    Likes Received:
    2,372
    Location:
    Intrepid Traveler
    LAST I CHECKED THIS WAS AMERICA AND WE DONT CARE ABOUT GUATEMALA

    (gonna watch tho I just wanted to type that)

    1 minute in, she's bangable would wife on her current stance.

    2 minutes in I think this chick is American, definitely wanna wife her now.

    Her discussion economic freedom in Europe is something people don't talk about. She's 100% correct on this

    @Rod1 Hook me up bro. I know youre in Mexico, but hook a brother up
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2018
  12. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Red Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    11,018
    Location:
    Finland
    Say that to all the successful empires that were built on top of institutional slavery.

    I don't think the lower class citizens really care that much about it. In fact there's some groups in Russia who wish to abolish the federation entirely.

    To them, the Soviet Union was just preferable to the collapsed robber baron capitalist society of 90's. There was a semblance of order and meaning to people's lives. Once USSR went down, it was just a bunch of thugs picking your pockets.

    Wasn't necessarily any different back in the day, but atleast the process was a whole lot more sophisticated.

    Whoever said anything about free time?

    It's not like China allows the Chinese to have any hobbies. Outside of those that are also pre-determined.
     
  13. Possum Jenkins

    Possum Jenkins Cultural Marxism Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,222
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    Annihilating Western Civilization
    Did you forget Spanish all of a sudden? The chart is pretty clear.

    You say he was a resounding economic success despite the fact that he did basically nothing to the poverty rate (on top of being an authoritarian and quasi-dictator). It's hard to call an administration a success when you do nothing poverty levels.

    And yes, he focused solely on macroeconomics... which is the problem with neoliberalism. Macro numbers look good, SOMETIMES GDP goes up, but poverty doesn't change and most people are still miserable.



    What are the drastically different routes to eliminating corruption that you, the Guatemalan, the WC propose that haven't already been advocated for?

    (Note that I said "advocated for" and not "done")


    1. WTF? That doesn't address my response. The WC gives blanket privatization recommendations even though many state enterprises are running just fine. The WC is wrong.

    2. No one's arguing against that either. And the WC shouldn't be credited for that either.

    3. Explain how it's different then.

    4. He kicked them out in 2005 after he paid them off:

    And then, Lula kicked the International Monetary Fund to the curb when Brazil paid the $15.5 billion it owed them in December 2005.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrap...new-leadership-may-need-it-back/#77c32d279185

    Corruption scandals and the Brazilian right's relentless attacks are what did him and his administration in. But he was far from neoliberal. Obviously he had to play along in many areas (he's not a Maoist that wants to blow everything up and start again) but in the ideological continuum, he was clearly center-left.




    Good thing that's not what we're discussing.

    You wanted proof that Chile greatly increased spending on education, and I provided it.



    Caudillismo has been a property of both the right and left in Latin America in the past. Pinochet, Videla, Fujimori vs Velasco, Chavez.

    But nowadays very, very few people actually want strongmen that control all institutions.
     
  14. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    42,614
    Likes Received:
    27,199
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    The chart doesnt defines what poverty means, nor how is it measured, are you trying to tell me that there was only 20% poverty in Peru in the 60s? im sure that's less than in the USA at the time.

    Strong independent institutions and rule of law.

    1.- Yet there was no pressure to privatize anything that was profitable, the fact that even during the Chicago Boys years Chile still retained the copper mines is proof of that.

    2.- When you advocate towards the concentration of power in the hands of a few caudillos and when you claim that only a caudillo can properly express the "will of the people" then you are certainly against checks and balances and thus pro-corruption.

    3.- How am i supposed to explain the obvious? lets talk enviromental regulation, how is the EPA in any way or form related to how many taxes business pay? Denmark is 3 in the ease of doing business index.

    Denmark has around 50% income rate a 25% VAT and 22% corporate tax rate, those are pretty heavy taxes for the country that ranks 3 in the ease of doing business index.

    On the other hand "neoliberal" Macri's Argentina ranks in the 117 spot, yet that doesnt prevents dishonest people like you claiming that Denmark is a "socialist paradise" and that Argentina is a "neoliberall hell".

    No, you didnt, you said that Chile didnt developed until they started spending a lot on education, never provided what "a lot" actually means (in terms of GDP %) when asked about it, you provide an article that points out that federal funding of public schools in Chile is pretty poor.

    The fact is that Chile is one of the worst of the OEDC when it comes to public education spending up into the 2010s.

    https://centroestudios.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/100/2017/06/2016-CHL.pdf

    They make up the difference with private spending, thats why Chile also has a lot of difference in performance between public and private students.

    https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisainfocus/48482894.pdf

    Thats what facts look like.

    Yes, and she criticizes caudillism on both sides, you simply assumed that she is a right-winger.
     
  15. Possum Jenkins

    Possum Jenkins Cultural Marxism Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,222
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    Annihilating Western Civilization
    But the chart doesn't compare the US to Peru, it compares Peru to Peru.

    Whatever flawed system it's using, it's using it for all time periods. And it demonstrates that Fujimori was a disaster.

    That's right, so all those proponents of weak institutions and rule of chaos can shut the hell up now.

    1. So they went against a key part of the holy, vaunted WC. Good on them.

    2. So those 14 people that still advocate for caudillos can shut up now. Great.

    3. WTF does this have to with trickle down? I asked you to explain the difference between "fiscal policy" and "economic policy"


    Read the damn thread again. You correctly said that Chile spends little on education in comparison to other OEDC countries. Then I said that that's the case now, but not back in the 90s when Chile did spend a lot. Then you asked for proof.

    So I gave you an article that explicitly said Chile raised spending in education during the 90s.


    She's fawning over neoliberal policies, has a book called "Como hablar con un progre" (nice rip off of disgusting right-winger Ann Coulter's 2004 book, by the way), so assuming she's a right-winger is pretty logical, I'd say.

    But whatever she is, actually supporting caudillismo is pretty much dead now. Chavez was the last one. And no, Evo isn't one. He rose through the ranks of long-standing indigenous and farmers movements.
     
  16. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    42,614
    Likes Received:
    27,199
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    It doesnt points out methodology or any measurable thing whatsoever, its a completely out of context chart based on nothing i can read up and argue against.

    Yet you claim that Fujimori who dissolved Congress and the Peru SC was following a WC formula.

    Its not a key part, its probably one of the least important part.

    You guys simply think its the "holiest part" because its the only one that corrupt right-wing authoritarians follow and for the wrong reasons.

    Cool, so bring the numbers of the 90s, you made the claim so you bring the numbers, the article you pointed out didnt.

    Yet she identifies as liberal and criticizes right wing governments too, if you saw the second video she jokes that she will have to write a book "How to talk to a conservative" after disagreeing with the European right-wingers in the show. She also criticizes Trump and the American right on social issues.

    And no, Chavez isnt the last one, Maduro, Correa, Ortega and yes Morales is one of them. AMLO styles himself as one too.
     

Share This Page