There are three months left for the Primary, Open, Simultaneous and Mandatory Elections (PASO), and, ahead of that date, the pre-candidate for libertarian president Javier Milei presented his electoral proposal officially before the Justice this month, in which he proposes more than 60 reforms that will apply in case of winning the presidential elections this year.
Much has been said in the media and social networks about his ideology and the economist-turned-politician has visited numerous television and radio studios vociferating his plans, many of which worry more than one, due to his ideological radicalization, on the one hand, but also for being a voice of what is now known as “anti politics”. However, few really know what their economic proposals are.
In a context where The Argentine economy is very complicated and the inhabitants face the difficulty of living in a highly inflationary contextmany look with interest at those proposals that seem “magical” or disruptive of what has traditionally been done in Argentina, possibly based on the concept that “if we always do the same thing, the same thing will always happen.”
However, there are several concepts of Milei’s economic proposal that generate a lot of controversy in society, which are the four that attract the most attention?
A few days ago, the liberal deputy anticipated that, within the framework of a state reform, he intends to cut state spending on retirements and pensions, after a review of the Economically Active Population (EAP), and re-establish the Retirement and Pension Fund Administrators (AFJP)the system established in 1993 by the former president that was eliminated in 2008, after collapsed in 2007.
Let’s remember that, in that year, the AFJP, private companies that managed the pension system (which was optional) lose almost everything capitalized in the year.
-
Dollarization of the economy
Another proposal from Milei is to establish a currency competition that allows citizens freely choose the monetary system or the dollarization of the economy. This was a subject that was highly commented on publicly and that, according to what he told Ambit economist Ricardo Aronskind, “is a concept that aroused many unrealistic fantasies in people.”
As which? as the fact of go to collect in dollarsas if the salary, under these conditions, were not going to suffer further inflationary deterioration in that case, when what would really happen is that this inflation would become in dollars and food and products would have to be bought in that currency.
And it is that, as pointed out by the economist Martín Carro, dollarization is not the solution to the problems of the local economy. “What is proposed is to move all transactions to a currency that is scarce in Argentina, which would cause many difficulties because there are not enough dollars to sustain this dynamic,” he says. Likewise, he comments that, if we move in this direction, we would lose any possibility of conducting monetary policy.
In this way, Carro considers that “dollarization does not solve the structural problems of the Argentine economy and, due to the lack of dollars, it would have to be done with a ridiculously high exchange rate,” which would strongly index the economy.
-
End public health
Schedule all benefits and self-manage the service health Shared jobs with private health is another of the initiatives promoted by the La Libertad Avanza program, Milei’s party.
The economist expert in public administration Rafael Flores warns that a policy of this type would only deepen social inequality. “We would have a system in which those people with more economic resources could access health and the rest, since there is no public system, would be sentenced to death, in some cases, for reasons, perhaps salvageable, that would be aggravated by lack of care,” says Flores.
-
Elimination of the Coparticipation
A project of this type, according to Flores, requires a modification of the National Constitution, which makes its application almost impossible. However, if it were to be carried out, it ensures that “it would deepen the asymmetries between the provinces”.
The Federal Coparticipation is the system of constitutional rank whose purpose is to coordinate the distribution of the produced by the State at the federal level, by virtue of a delegation made by the provinces to the Nation,
Flores claims that the elimination of co-participation would generate very large differences between the provinces that can generate more resources and those that do not have that capacity. “And that, many times, responds merely to geographical issues,” she adds. For example, there are some that can produce soybeans and others that cannot; Some have oil and others don’t.
Milei, an angry expression
Aronskind considers that “the central thing about Milei is not the appeal to any type of argumentation, but, rather, to a mood of anger or resentment, which gives it popularity”. Likewise, it indicates that his political construction has a large media component.
And it is that, for example, Flores points out that “there is no way for them to advance on these types of issues that he proposes in a democratic and legal way because it requires the modification of very complex laws, for which it is very difficult to have a quorum.” But, nonetheless, that ensures that, even if one analyzes them from the theoretical point of view, “the effects that its application would have would be disastrous in terms of deepening inequalities”.
His conclusion is that Milei takes complex problems and proposes solutions, apparently simple, but inapplicable and that, “if they were to be implemented, they would have a very negative impact on the entire country”, aggravating the problems that he supposedly wants to come to solve.
Source: Ambito
