• iopq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    Let me guess what you said about 10% inflation in the US

    Now imagine 200%

      • iopq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The inflation concerns me more than the slight contraction in the economy. If the country is stable and the currency is stable, that will encourage investment and help people in the long term.

        Argentina has tried redistributive policies and it has caused huge problems for the economy. The man got elected promising to fix the inflation and he already did it.

        https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/argentina-inflation-dips-locals-dare-hope-worst-is-over-2024-12-11/

        He can’t just go back on his election promise

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You still didn’t answer my question.

          60% poverty is not a “slight contraction in the economy.”

          • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 minute ago

            Not the person your debating with, and normally I agree with the famous Mr Squid.

            In this case I disagree - im not fully knowledgeable on Argentina specifically, just economic application. The problem with inflation is that it harms your entire population - and its horrific when its out of control. 60% poverty (don’t know if this is total, increase or increases since these measures came out, very different discussions) is easily obtainable when a significant amount of your population are already close to the poverty line and even a small change comes into effect.

            Regarding the cost of human lives, and assuming he’s not Trump levels of econ knowledge, its a balance between putting this 60% in poverty now to get a handle on inflation now, or that 60% in poverty due to inflation indefinitely until you put them and more people in poverty.

            Anything that increases government spending, including social support services, infrastructure spending, unemployment support would increase GDP and work directly against disinflation measures.

            Its cold, it sucks, but the logic and theory are there. Sometimes the best thing you can do is cause the least long term harm.