• 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
      ·
      8 minutes 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.