Printable View
[QUOTE=Dickhead]I don't give a shit if the truckers, the farmers, or the Seven Dwarves are blocking the roads; I would send in the military and / or the police to keep the roads open. Blocking the roads is fascism. It is not peaceful protest. Picketing the roads, talking to people at the toll booths, that is peaceful protest. Interfering with the food supply is blackmail.[/QUOTE]You would not if you where the one who ask them to be there. The K's ask them to block the roads.
[QUOTE=Tessan]You would not if you where the one who ask them to be there. The K's ask the to block the roads.[/QUOTE]That is why I should be president and not her. Plus my thighs aren't as fat.
Answer:
1. Replace the government with a real democratic option.
2. Reduce taxation in key areas - farming being one, transport taxes another, income taxes yet another.
3. Peg the peso to gold.
4. Balance the budget.
5. Increase government investment in education.
6. Fix the banking systems and allow for easier foreign investment and money movement.
7. Make it easier for foreigners to invest in argentina.
8. Over ten years eliminate corporate capital gains taxes. Institute a $800kUSD lifetime capital gains tax exemption for argentinians.
For a start.
[QUOTE=Tmontana]Answer:
1. Replace the government with a real democratic option.
2. Reduce taxation in key areas - farming being one, transport taxes another, income taxes yet another.
3. Peg the peso to gold.
4. Balance the budget.
5. Increase government investment in education.
6. Fix the banking systems and allow for easier foreign investment and money movement.
7. Make it easier for foreigners to invest in argentina.
8. Over ten years eliminate corporate capital gains taxes. Institute a $800kUSD lifetime capital gains tax exemption for argentinians.
For a start.[/QUOTE]Hi,
Actually, I believe that they have a budget surplus. How else is it that they have the funds to prop up the Peso? International borrowing? ROTFLMAO!
Thanks,
Jackson
"Peg the peso to gold." Now [b][i]that's[/i][/b] funny!
The K family will have to become more autocratic. The socialist governor [further to the left thaN THE k'S] of Santa Fe offers to mediate--Dona Cristina ignores him. This is not about the left vs the right, as Syd says: it is a grab for raw power and the $$ to finance the power grab.
The idea that the farmers may not economically be able to plant, is too frightening to consider. It takes three years of investment to produce a young cow for slaughter. If there is no profit to invest in the production of cattle, argentines will be eating Brazilian beef three or four years from now.
There is wealth enough in the campo to move 300,000. People to Rosario. Dona Cristina says, "let them eat cake" Unfortunately the cake may be baked with imported wheat, if they destroy the argo industries here.
This is not a good scenereo. Will the wealthy property owners, slaughter house owners and industrialists permitt the K's to do this? I dout it. Will the K's compromise at some point, I hope so.
[QUOTE=Jackson]Hi,
Actually, I believe that they have a budget surplus. How else is it that they have the funds to prop up the Peso? International borrowing? ROTFLMAO!
Thanks,
Jackson[/QUOTE]Central bank money is not supposed to be considered part of the government's budget. The central bank is not supposed to give or lend money to the gov directly. (This might not be true in Argentina, don't know their laws) The reason for this is the the central bank can create money, as much as it wants. If the government depends on this money, it will force the bank to create more and more money. This is what is happening in Zimbabwe where Inflation is now more than 2 million per cent per year according to Times ([url]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article4092397.ece[/url] Zimbabwe central bank just prints money, to pay gov bills.
The central bank had about 50 billion dollars in reserves before the farm strike. The reason they had so much, is that they where selling peso and buying dollars. They where trying to keep the peso weak. Their was also a trade surplus, mainly because of the farmers. The farmers had to change their Euros, and Dollars back into peso, when they got paid. The central banks foreign reserves grew. With Argentina's trade surplus, the peso should have been closer to 2.15 instead of 3.15 to the dollar. The Central Bank just kept selling peso for Dollars, and that's why they got to 50 billion before the strike.
The government says it has an $869 million dollar budget surplus this year, as tax income rose by more than 50 percent.
Don't know if the gov numbers can be trusted. I posted on 5-23 this.
[QUOTE=Tessan]The government says it has an $869 million dollar budget surplus this year, as tax income rose by more than 50 percent. Also that the central bank holds about 50 billion US dollars in reserves. They spent about a billion holding the peso, so it probably 49 now.
With these large budget surpluses, why is the governments dept load going up? It make no sense. I agree with Sidney, this gov is lying about inflation, so it can pay less on inflation-protected bonds, thereby stealing money from people who brought those bonds. Its lying about the poverties figures, since the gov. Calculates the poverty figure using 8% inflation. If you assume 20% inflation, poverty is way up in Argentina. Inflation is more like 30% , anyone who been here a while can see it. So Poverty is Way up.
So if the gov has such a large surplus, why is the dept load going up where is the money going? Anyone know? Or is it a lie?
Also with the Farm strike, gov income going to go down. Does not look good as of today. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Tessan]It is strange that the Argentine people will blame the farmers for the rotting milk, when the farmers want to sell it, and the truckers are not letting them. [/QUOTE]"Farmers" wanted to sell their milk, but not their wheat or soy (here we should discriminate between different type of farmers, since the ones selling milk are not necessarily the ones exporting soy) They did so to hurt the govt budget, so their attitude was far from innocent, hard-working guys who only want to work and obey the laws.
Andres
[QUOTE=Dickhead] Andrés, I totally respect your point of view. But why can't Argentineans stop fucking themselves? Why is such a relatively well-educated country so inefficient? I understand this whole idea of "losing face" but isn't it time to move on from that? Especially now with the global food situation. There is opportunity to be had and it seems to me that Argentina could have a narrow window of time to benefit from that, and it seems like they don't want to.
I am an "izquierdista" but if I were running the country I would send police / military force to keep the roads open. Closing the roads and fucking the general citizenry, I can't support it.[/QUOTE]The main issue being disputed here (some media and people mentioning it) is the ability of the government to levy taxes to the rural sector. Due to technological and business reasons, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the agricultural sector to evade taxes (just a little harder, not impossible)
The problem with sending the police / gendarmería / etc is that they then to go far beyond their mandate and the govt ens up paying the bill. Repression ate up the De la Rua presidency and hindered Duhalde to present to elections on 2003.
I guess that CFK will send the Gendarmería only after the credibility of the protestors decreases sharply.
Andres
[QUOTE=Argento]A leftist in the mode of Stalin! I enjoy your posts but give us a break. Your solution is pure fascism. The farmers are fighting for economic survival. [/QUOTE]That's plainly not true. Sales of SUV got a record high last February on Pergamino, Lincoln, Venado Tuerto and other farm districts. They are making A LOT of money now. Too far from being on the verge of bankrupcy.
[QUOTE=Argento]Remember that they are being taxed on receipts not profits and the retension impost is just the start. With all your learned talk on investment strategy and good retuns on capital, farmers tradionally have less than a 3% return on capital. Untill this boom in cereals throughout the world, Argentine farmers have been effectively without income. [/QUOTE]True, but after 2001/2002, many small and medium ones received a "lifevest" from the Banco Nación and avoided seizure. Not to count subsidized gasoil, and not to count their historical contempt to honour their fiscal obligations (unregistered employees, child labor, under-the-table sales, etc)
[QUOTE=Argento]Local inflation and poor export markets made them very uncompetitive. Remember there is no farm support here. That enabled US farmers to survive 2 decades of almost nil returns.[/QUOTE]Not true. There are actually subsidies to farmers in Argentina, and we actually live on a World food crisis that skyrocketed prices.
[QUOTE=Argento]So I guess as a stock invester, you would be more than happy to contribute 42% of any gross sales that you make out of your portfolio, and then if there were profits, pay income tax. All the other imposts that exist here but don't in the US still must be paid. [/QUOTE]Sure? The justice detected several criminal gangs made of AFIP employees, judges, farmers, etc, devoted to issue "loading cards" (cartas de porte) to ordinary people from very indigenous income so farmers can use them to avoid taxes. Not to count the 4 million tons of wheat that don't add up.
[QUOTE=Argento]If they don't win some common sense concessions, they will not be able to survive as producers of soy and will once again return to producing what gives them the best returns. And it won't be soy.[/QUOTE]Value of land doubled and even tripled during the last 2 years. Do you really believe that raising taxes from 33% to 45% would put them out of business? I do not.
[QUOTE=Argento]Remember that the roots of the Peronistas are in fascism, and under the Kirchners, the political selection process has been put under the control of the party infrastructure. So effectively you cannot get on a ballot without approval from the party machine.[/QUOTE]That's not true. First, people like Macri (not a peronista at all) can get into high level positions, something not likely on Mussolini's Italy. And second, guys like Schiaretti and Reutemann can voice up their disagreement inside Peronism (not my cup of tea at all, but complex enough to easily label it as fascism)
[QUOTE=Argento]Congress no longer has control of the money and budget. Individual freedom, not that it has ever been great in my experience, is steadily being eroded.[/QUOTE]Sure? How then happens that farmers can voice out their discomfort? How can newspapers like La Nacion and such continue to operate? Maybe your INTERESTS have been eroded, but that's another issue.
[QUOTE=Argento]The great farm rip-off is a device to enrich the political aims of the Kirchners and their crony capitalism mates such as Askenasy. Always remember that the end game here is the accumulation of wealth from corruption.[/QUOTE]That's the typical argument of the evader. He needs to dislegitimate the right of the government to levy taxes. Argentina is pretty corrupt, but at least some money from taxes goes to pay police officers, doctors, teachers, etc.
[QUOTE=Argento]And the Kirchners are carbon copies of their predecessors. The only changes to their people's prospects are negative. Poverty has increased by close to 2 million on their watch. And property crime has close to doubled.[/QUOTE]I don't buy the argument that "everything is the same". Kirchner isn't Menem, clearly (again another argument to justify criminal behaviors) Poverty actually decreased between 2001 and 2008 (other problems raised, but that's a different issue)
Andres
[QUOTE=Miami Bob]The K family will have to become more autocratic. The socialist governor [further to the left thaN THE k'S] of Santa Fe offers to mediate--Dona Cristina ignores him. This is not about the left vs the right, as Syd says: it is a grab for raw power and the $$ to finance the power grab.
The idea that the farmers may not economically be able to plant, is too frightening to consider. It takes three years of investment to produce a young cow for slaughter. If there is no profit to invest in the production of cattle, argentines will be eating Brazilian beef three or four years from now.
There is wealth enough in the campo to move 300,000. People to Rosario. Dona Cristina says, "let them eat cake" Unfortunately the cake may be baked with imported wheat, if they destroy the argo industries here.
This is not a good scenereo. Will the wealthy property owners, slaughter house owners and industrialists permitt the K's to do this? I dout it. Will the K's compromise at some point, I hope so.[/QUOTE]Look, I learned to be vary wary of what people say. I prefer, as a fake Agatha Christie's inspector, to find little clues that shed some true light.
"Farmers" (a very complex category) may claim whatever they want, but reality proves that.
- Capital and consumables expenditures boomed on the last 5 years on rural regions.
- Government offered small and medium farm companies to refund the extra tax only if their registered on the ONCAA. Of course, they have to prove that they are to day on fiscal obligations. Out of more than 62,000, only 114 registered.
Now, CFK didn't managed this issue properly and committed a lot of mistakes, but she was elected 6 months ago with more than 45% of votes, more than 20 points from Carrió. She is the legitimate president (many people may not like it, but that's reality) and has the right to set the economic policies of the federal government. Not convincing? Elections are 3 years away and voters will then be able to choose differently.
My take is that "farmers" cannot impose their policies through the legitimate way (elections) since all their really care about is their pocket and wouldn't get votes beyond some middle and upper classes. And since militaries (thanks God! Are out of the political picture, their only tools to get their way is financial pressure (such as the one they did with Alfonsín, but not useful now with strong reserves and huge fiscal surplus) or lockouts such as the current one.
Let's see how things evolve.
Andres
[QUOTE=Tessan]Central bank money is not supposed to be considered part of the government's budget. The central bank is not supposed to give or lend money to the gov directly. (This might not be true in Argentina, don't know their laws) The reason for this is the the central bank can create money, as much as it wants. If the government depends on this money, it will force the bank to create more and more money. This is what is happening in Zimbabwe where Inflation is now more than 2 million per cent per year according to Times ([url]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article4092397.ece[/url] Zimbabwe central bank just prints money, to pay gov bills.
[snip]
With Argentina's trade surplus, the peso should have been closer to 2.15 instead of 3.15 to the dollar. The Central Bank just kept selling peso for Dollars, and that's why they got to 50 billion before the strike. [/QUOTE]Central Bank money wasn't supposed to be freely available to the government. In fact, during the 90s, BCRA became "totally" independent. I say "totally" because most of its directory was filled with former bankers, so when the crisis hit, Cavallo and the successor of Pedro Pou tweaked the BCRA regulations and allowed to eliminate "encajes" (the minimum money banks have to leave on BCRA in order to face financial crises and have liquidity) and let banks transfer money abroad before the crash (I mean banks and all people directly and indirectly connected to banks or who had good connections)
That was a move to save banks as much as possible from the unavoidable crash that came in Dec. 2001. Such lack of independence helped Duhalde to freeze the BCRA act and intervene it back in 2002/2003.
Andres
[QUOTE=Andres]That's plainly not true. Sales of SUV got a record high last February on Pergamino, Lincoln, Venado Tuerto and other farm districts. They are making A LOT of money now. Too far from being on the verge of bankrupcy.
Andres[/QUOTE]It depends what you mean by record high sales. I remember hearing about the SUV sales, when I was watching the news in BA, but no one gave a number. CFK mentioned it in her speech I think. 1 more then the last high is a record. It really depends who's is buying the SUVs' and why. 4 wheel drive helps on dirt roads or off road. If it's large producers who make up less then 15% of farmers, it makes sense. It still means the smaller producers are getting harmed.
The best policy is to let people make money, to encourage more production, which will over the long run, increase gov revenues. Don't know what level of tax that is, but at 35% their where no protests.