- Joined
- Mar 8, 2012
- Messages
- 2,294
- Reaction score
- 427
speak American.
He did speak American....south AMERICAN
speak American.
The funny thing is that they put Sanders as an example of socialism but then talk about government spending growing faster than tax revenue which is pretty much Republicans since Reagan.
Brazil was actually doing great on 2008 because at that time China started to focus on them and buy all their iron ore, oil, chicken paws, meat and soy.They also gloss over the role of the 2008 financial crisis, which definitely wasn't caused by "socialism".
...buy hey, it's "Prager University"*.
*not actually a university, we just think it makes us sound more respectable.
Brazil was actually doing great on 2008 because at that time China started to focus on them and buy all their iron ore, oil, chicken paws, meat and soy.
Their economic debacle started in 2013
Lula, the popular but now jailed president from 2003-2010, said in 2008 that the crisis would hit like a Tsunami the west but would be only a small wave in Brazil, and he was right, GDP still grew during that time.Brazil was actually doing great on 2008 because at that time China started to focus on them and buy all their iron ore, oil, chicken paws, meat and soy.
Their economic debacle started in 2013
I said above the GDP didn't drop, that was based on World Bank data, but regardless it was close to 0.Yeah? The video gives the numbers for 2008-2015.
The IMF also seems to disagree with you.
After the global financial crisis, it looks like it tracks with oil prices.
I said above the GDP didn't drop, that was based on World Bank data, but regardless it was close to 0.
The graph is titled "Variation of the Brazilian GDP"
the 2008 crisis effect was very small. It just doesn't explain why we lost over 3% in 2015 and 2016, while the rest of the world kept growing.
Prager University is a joke, I'm trying to expand the discussion.2015-2016 is outside the scope the video discussed.
However I'd say it was commodity prices by the looks of it.
Prager University is a joke, I'm trying to expand the discussion.
So the fact that the US government had a quota of subprime mortgages that lenders had to give out (growing in percentage of total loans annually) had nothing to do with it. Which is the government’s doing.They also gloss over the role of the 2008 financial crisis, which definitely wasn't caused by "socialism".
...buy hey, it's "Prager University"*.
*not actually a university, we just think it makes us sound more respectable.
So the fact that the US government had a quota of subprime mortgages that lenders had to give out (growing in percentage of total loans annually) had nothing to do with it. Which is the government’s doing.
But hey... ignore that fact
So it was like that. 2008 they were fine, 2009 they took a hit and then China came to the rescue.Sure. I'm always amused by the idea that neoliberalism will end corruption. Too bad Pinochet died before prosecution.
So it was like that. 2008 they were fine, 2009 they took a hit and then China came to the rescue.
And yes, if the government doesn't have money or companies, there is not corruption.
If there is no government, there is not corruption.
Before I was discussion with Rod and he implied that the Chicago boys in Chile have nothing to do with Chile being now the only not shitty country in Latinamerica because the growth was mediocre when Pinochet was in power.
At least I think he seems to acknowledge that Chile was going the Venezuelan road if Allende was allowed to keep in power.
The people that came to power after Pinochet didn't make significant changes in the Chicago boys economical policies, including healthcare, social security, infrastructure, public bids etc. They have been keeping these kind of stuff more or less the same way that the way Pinochet economic team let them... Maybe it has something to do with Chile's actual progress...
Also, trowing any government that is backed for the man clapping in this video is a good thing to do:
Is there a developed country with more wealth inequality than Chile?
I don't care about inequality. I care about poor people not being poor anymore. I have HUGE wealth inequality compared to Jeff Bezos, but I'm doing alright myself. It would not be ethical to put a gun in Bezos head and tell him to give me part of his money because there is a huge gap between us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentage_of_population_living_in_poverty
Only 10% of chileans live under USD 5.50 a day. That's way better than other socialists countries in latinamerica like Brazil 19.4% and Bolivia 25%... The only country better than that in Latinamerica is Argentina but their economy is sinking right now because the government is huge there. And when a goverment is huge, the corruption is huge also. Specially in Latinamerica.
So yeah, economic liberalism takes more people out of poverty than socialism. I'm ok with that. Is a shitty idea to take money from rich people only because there is a big gap between them and me.
Social justice is not just. Correcting wealth inequality is theft. And theft is bad. Let's care more about taking poor people out of poverty, and less about rich people having too much money. The only problem is when government has too much money. It destroys everything.
I do not think neoliberalism has anything to do with it. But a politician of any brand that doesn't claim there is a huge conspiracy by the judiciary to frame him is a step up. What will help against corruption are laws and an efficient judiciary.Sure. I'm always amused by the idea that neoliberalism will end corruption. Too bad Pinochet died before prosecution.
I do not think neoliberalism has anything to do with it. But a politician of any brand that doesn't claim there is a huge conspiracy by the judiciary to frame him is a step up. What will help against corruption are laws and an efficient judiciary.
The party that lost was floating around the idea of giving a presidential pardon to Lula, because why not.
Justice minister in Brazil is not a judiciary position FWIW, despite the name. Judiciary positions are filled by public examination, not political appointment, except in the supreme court.A truly independent judiciary is even more important than their efficiency when it comes to tackling corruption. Bolsanaro's first moves in appointing Sergio Moro justice minister wouldn't fill me with confidence on that point.