Thread: Argentine Economy
+
Submit Report
Results 736 to 750 of 1942
-
06-04-09 12:59 #1207
The slippery slope
That $250 is the "freebie" the crack dealer gives you the first time in order to get you hooked.
It is tough to refuse if it's just sitting there on the dining room table when you open your mail. Hmm.$250. I could buy an ipod, have one room in the house painted or perhaps donate it to Acorn. But then you start thinking about STIMULUS. That $250 today is approximately AR$925 which could be put to stimulative uses such as (approximately) 13 half hour trips to 343 Uraguay, 9 half hour visits to 1707 Ste Fe, 3.7 hour sessions (cola included) at 1633 Junin, or 1 night out at Madahos. Hard to pass up that little "gift" sitting there when you think of what you could do with it. All of which seems very stimulative. Until you look deeper.
Out of one US tax dollar, less than 5% is spent on programs such as this. Therefore, at best, that $250 started off as $5,000 (AR$18,500) in the hands of the taxpayers, from whom it was extra-constitutionally confiscated. Had it been left in the hands of its righful owners (not according to BHO) it would translate into 264 half hour trips to 343 Uraguay, 185 half hour visits to 1707 Ste Fe, 74 hour sessions (cola included) at 1633 Junin, or 20 night out at Madahos. Now that is what I would call stimulus. So much so, that no more stiumulation would be needed (at least for a little while)
The only thing that gets really stimulated in the first case is the expansion of government. There is no defensible logic (consitent with the Constitution) whereby it makes sense to run dollars through the government apparatus in order to give it back to the 'taxpayers' so that they can spend it to stimulate the economy. Americans love to spend, leave a dollar with an earner and you will get a $0.95 of spending (accounting savings) give a dollar to the government and you will lose $0.95 in the bureacracy and get $0.05 of actual spending.
-
06-04-09 10:17 #1206That's Capitalism at work and I applaud it!
Originally Posted by Damman
Suerte
-
06-03-09 20:45 #1205The check is in the mail! Originally Posted by QuakHunter
Damn Quak, you did not get your check? Hell, you have got to get on this band-wagon before it quits playing: "Money For Nothing." Returned to Gringo Land Sunday, and there it was.
In all honesty, did think it was a little ridiculous, but what is an old fart like me to do? Take the money and run.
-
06-03-09 20:09 #1204The fact that you would actually admit you took $250.00 in stimulus money demonstrates the point that the "Judeo Christian Work Ethic" is declining. Originally Posted by Damman
The fact that you are willing to invest it in education means you still have hope.
When you start asking for more because the government cheese is running low is when you are a liberal.
Please send your $250.00 to Quakhunter Online University.
-
06-03-09 18:22 #1203
QuakHunter / Sidney: Help
My politics and economic beliefs are all screwed up. Plus, QuakHunter's definition of "Judeo-Christian work ethic" is really throwing me for a loop. Can you two suggest a good re-education camp for me? I got my stimulus money, ($250.00) so cost is not a problem.
Thanks
-
06-03-09 16:49 #1202
There is no recession yet in Australia, pretty impressive if you ask me :)
Does anybody know when the figures for foreign arrivals in Ezeiza for the month of April are published by INDEC?
-
06-03-09 10:23 #1201Very simply, there is an inherent disincentive for work as a result of the giveaway / bailout programs and the redistribution of hard earned gains to others. Why work when you can get it for free or if the guy next to you is getting the same while doing less? Check out the mortgage rescue plan for a start. And don't read it on the web, talk to someone with a job making his payments and getting behind. Originally Posted by Black Shirt
This is only one example.
Sid, since I was supporting your point did I interpret the intent of your comment?
-
06-01-09 22:42 #1200You should have just stopped there and 98% of the folks on this board would have agreed with you. Originally Posted by Joe Hernandez
-
06-01-09 21:10 #1199The EU, USA, Brazil, Argentina and Australia are the largest producers of beef and in that order. Largest exporter by volume is Brazil followed by Australia and then the USA. By dollar value, Australia is the largest exporter followed by Brazil and then the USA. Mad cow has restricted USA exports to Japan and South Korea, the two best markets for premium beef. Brazil produces a breed not suited to the premium Asian markets. Australia has picked up the markets lost by the USA. Argentina is restricted to exporting boned-out beef due to foot and mouth disease and due to export taxes, poor production methods, export restrictions and unreliable supply, are no longer competitive. Originally Posted by TejanoLibre
Argento
-
06-01-09 19:52 #1198Argentinian people eat meat. Originally Posted by TejanoLibre
Argentinian meat becomes more expensive due to the lack of supply and more expensive import of meat.
Basic foodbasket for poor people (actually all people) become more expensive.
Hunger and poverty will increase.
This is pretty basic because it's a bit more complicated then that but once the supply is decreasing and the demand does not change this will lead to higher prices and with higher prices the poor suffer more.
Argentina offcourse can export the high quality meat and use that money to subsidize the asado of the poor but this can't be maintained with falling demand.
A similar thing is happening with the supply of the fuel and natural gas
-
06-01-09 19:40 #1197The people in Argentina are the number (1) consumers of beef per capita in the entire world. Originally Posted by Joe Hernandez
About 68 kilos per person per year!
That's a shitload of beef per day. Red meat!
I can't see the corelation between fighting poverty and eating cows but maybe you can explain your thoughts to us.
I'm about to cook (3) kilos of stew meat to make some Texas Chili.
Yesterday I made the BEST burgers in BA and Saturday night I ate an entire Lomo ala Crema Champignon!
So yes, for the past (4) days it has been pure beef baby! Although Saturday night's meal would be considered underaged beef!
I guess it was ¨VEAL ¨?
Argentina is not the number (1) producer of beef in the world, actually it is number (3) behind Brazil and Australia, but it is the number (1) consumer!
I have read that 10% of the country's total production is exported.
Fuck the rest of the people in the world!
Let them eat cake!
The damned Argies export the best quality and leave the shit that falls on the floor to us!
TL
-
06-01-09 06:49 #1196
Does anybody know that Argentina soon does not produce enough meat to cover there own needs?
And what does this do to the fighting of poverty?
-
05-31-09 15:18 #1195
Raise taxes on electronic imports
-
05-29-09 20:16 #1194
Economic slowdown hammering Argentina.
Construction drops 3% in April.
Construction fell three percent in April year-on-year, accumulating 2.7 percent decline since the start of the year, the INDEC statistics' bureau reported.
Nevertheless, construction activity grew 3.6 percent from the previous month, according to the agency, which was partly explained by seasonal effects. The decline of construction, which is often used as an index to estimate evolution of the economy in the mid-term, has become noticeable as the country is hammered by the deceleration of the national economy.
Private reports forecast the Argentine GDP might not grow at all in 2009.
According to the INDEC; construction permits in the 42 most representative districts in the country increased 22.7 percent compared to the period of the previous year.
BA Herald.
Not to bad so far!
-
05-29-09 17:27 #1193Argento: With all due respect, I think you're proving our point. Originally Posted by Argento
If Australia had a policy of breaking up large holdings and encouraging small settlers, then it would be similar to the U. S. way back when the West was won. Ultimately, those small settlements in the US were consolidated, as well. Today, the corporate megalith farm is quite common, just as you say it is in Australia today. Still, the point remains that at one point it was broken up into smaller chunks.
You can say that the small farm system "failed" in Australia, just as you could say it "failed" in the United States, at least from the perspective that we no longer have a predominance of small farms. Personally, I wouldn't call this failure as much as I would say that it simply didn't perpetuate itself forever. Regardless, you then say that Australia today is a strong economy. Say what you want about the U. S. but it is still the economic superpower of the world today.
Far from disproving the points made earlier, it sounds to me like the Australia example underscores those points. I don't personally know much about how Australia was colonized, or how its government dealt with expansion. But, if it was as you say in the paragraph above, I don't think you're refuting the point about feudalism by pointing to Australia.
Reply With Quote
Posting Limitations
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
