https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/23/business/javier-milei-argentina-dollerization-explainer/index.html

Such a move would effectively disband Argentina’s central bank, handing the reins of monetary policy — that is, the power to set interest rates and print more money — over to the US Federal Reserve. The Fed would continue to set the cost of borrowing based on the needs of the US economy, not Argentina’s.

Milei has argued that surrendering autonomy to Washington is a necessary step to instil discipline into Argentinian policymakers. It would mean Argentina would no longer be able to print money.

  • Infamousblt [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anarcho.

    Wants to give his country’s monetary policy over to the world’s largest imperialist superpower.

    Does he know what ‘anarcho’ means? I don’t think he do

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Wants to give his country’s monetary policy over to the world’s largest imperialist superpower.

      Its such baby-brained econ 101 thinking.

      “Guys, Argentina has an inflation problem because we have a chronic shortage of consumer goods too many pesos. If we just switch to a currency that is also in short supply then, we’ll transform into an export market that ships off even more of our scarce consumer goods we’ll keep prices low.”

      econony

    • ikiru@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I haven’t gone out of my way to investigate, but the funny thing is that they say “self-professed anarcho-capitalist” in articles like this one yet everytime they link a reference it doesn’t have any proof he identifies that way.

      This article doesn’t even link to a reference for that claim. It’s possible he does identify that way and I haven’t encountered a solid reference, but I think it’s just propaganda to create hysteria over and muddle the waters over the meaning of anarchism.

        • ikiru@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          All right, I guess he probably does identify as a braindead anarcho-capitalist then but my point still stands that all the articles I’ve read at least haven’t linked any proof when mentioning it.

          He is now officially the Anarcho-Leader.

          I hope he and Guaido can work together to turn their countries around.

            • ikiru@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not trying to argue about it, but it’s not as if everyone has followed Milei’s career to know this as a well-known fact and it’s not uncommon to have a citation when you put something in “quotations” like this as if the person in question literally said it.

  • UmbraVivi [he/him, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    libertarian

    “Milei has argued that surrendering autonomy to Washington is a necessary step”

    Fellas is it freedom to completely surrender to a foreign power

  • LeylaLove [she/her, love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is there anybody from Argentina here? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this subject. I work in kitchens, I’m able to listen to some analysis from the people I know from a given country, but I’ve never met someone from Argentina so I don’t have any inside views besides for a few generalizations they made about South America. I know that a decent amount of the South American population sees the US as somewhat of a providing father figure to the continent. I HATE HATE HATE the war on drugs, however America’s authoritarian enforcement of foreign drug laws is the closest thing to fighting the undebatably evil cartels that some of these people will ever get. Yes many people hate the war on drugs, but the cartels having power is undebatably the worse evil. At least America has to pretend to not be draining a nation of its valuable aspects, the cartels will just take it as brutally as they can when they can. And the cartels are rich enough that these South American countries can’t even dream of paying their cops enough not to be corrupt. Taking the power of a competent sociopath like America who can give them some temporary shit over the power of an untrained normal human who will make sure they own shit. Even if the justification is just someone that supports appeasing the West, it gives more valuable info than I’d get just googling it.

    However, this seems like pure Western appeasement that I’m not even sure would work. Argentina adopting USD as currency would give the US more control over Argentina. First off, I don’t think Argentinian people support it. While I don’t know anybody from Argentina specifically, but all the people I know from other South American nations are always skeptical at best about the US controlling their nation period. South Americans generally speaking, seem to widely value national self-determination. Logically speaking, I don’t know how Cuba and Venezuela would be able to succeed in their worst moments if national self-determination wasn’t a consistently held value amongst the people they rule over. Unless adopting USD would have advertisable effects on the population’s material conditions, I don’t see this going anywhere. However, assuming leaders like Bolsonaro infected other nations of South America, it could be a surprise that citizens pick the instant comfort of picking the west instead of the long term stability that comes with owning their country.

    However, the American perspective is completely tied up with lithium. Belt and Road Initiative isn’t perfect, but it’s almost ALWAYS a better choice than letting America take over. Any nation south of America that isn’t 1000 and 1 percent submissive to the United States is at risk at becoming the next “war on terror” so America can keep pumping out cheap battery powered devices. There’s a reason that even though Mexico has been 1000 and 2 percent submissive to the US, republicans are still talking about declaring war on Mexico. They claim it’s to fight the cartels, but it’s really just for lithium control that has already been yielded to China.

    This sounds like another Guaido, where nobody but the west is actually going to support this, but the west won’t shut up about it.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      This sounds like another Guaido, where nobody but the west is actually going to support this, but the west won’t shut up about it.

      He’s made it to the run-off election and is polling less than 10-pts from the frontrunner Massa, in a climate where “throw the incumbents out!” is boiling over. These are the same conditions that gave us Bolsonaro in Brazil. The hard-right outsider running as an “anti-corruption” candidate becomes the protest-vote for an increasingly agitated popular base.

      Far from the Guaido situation, where a Venezuelan back-bench MP was coronated President by the US State Department, this guy has a very real chance to win the election outright.

      • Emanuel
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, tbf Bolsonaro came first in the first round of the election back in 2022. Milei could turn things around, but there’s at least this key difference between candidates. He has to overcome that lead and that’s no small feat.

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, tbf Bolsonaro came first in the first round of the election back in 2022.

          Fair. Milei isn’t the front-runner like Bolsonaro was in '18 or '22. But the dynamic is comparable.

          I think he gives off guaido vibes more because of the extensive media coverage. The US financial sector is absolutely creaming itself at the possibility of a Milei presidency (nevermind how likely he is to fulfill his campaign promises).

          He has to overcome that lead and that’s no small feat.

          There’s a standing belief among western pollsters that Massa is at his ceiling of support and all the third-party voters will consolidate around Milei. No idea if that bares out. But its definitely possible.

          • Emanuel
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Milei isn’t the front-runner like Bolsonaro was in '18 or '22. But the dynamic is comparable.

            I actually meant 2018, lol. Brain fart.

            There’s a standing belief among western pollsters that Massa is at his ceiling of support and all the third-party voters will consolidate around Milei. No idea if that bares out. But its definitely possible.

            I really hope that’s just propaganda. Though I’ve come to expect some really bad things from South American voters since this last fash-conservative wave of elected candidates.

    • RNAi [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m an Argie, I refuse to talk about it cuz mental health reasons. I didn’t read the rest of your post yet.

      • LeylaLove [she/her, love/loves]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you for this response because this really tells me all I need. I didn’t want to assume that this guy was a real candidate in a country I don’t live in. Didn’t want to treat a western prop fringe candidate as real if there wasn’t any reason to. But if this wasn’t a real issue in your nation, I don’t think you would have responded at all.

        How are you feeling outside of politics friend? You have great comments, I always get excited when I get a notification that says you left a comment. Hope you’re doing as well as possible

        • RNAi [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Kjjj, okay that was a bit overreact, but yeah up until now I didn’t wanted to believe it being something real cuz c’mon how stupid the people can be.

          The two candidates for the ballotage are this disgusting gnome and a slimmy neolib dipshit that the succdems surrendered their whole fucking party to. So it’s either a shit candidate or apocalypse hastened by your local incel. So it’s the 2016 yank elections but worse.

          What are the chances of this cum goblin to win? High, there’s some hope, but sadly high.

          Whose fault is all this? The succdems, for their incompetence and unwillingness to do cool things, like lining up every single Clarin journalists (our local private media conglomerate) against a wall. They should have done that back in 2013 anyways.

  • Kaplya@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I hate to say this, but just like Ayn Rand, what I appreciate about the libertarians is that at least they are transparent about their sinister goals.

    My frustration is with the BRICS alternative. After the euphoria of talks about dedollarization last year and how BRICS could take up the mantle, we are now slowly waking up to the uncomfortable fact that they (BRICS) are essentially doing the same dollarization process, just with extra steps.

    During the BRICS summit a couple months ago, the BRICS New Development Bank confirmed that while they are increasing local currency borrowing to 30%, Dollar funding will continue to dominate, CFO Maasdorp says. Similarly, the vast majority of Belt and Road projects also have their debt denominated in dollar.

    What this means is that even with Argentina joining BRICS, functionally the outcome is the same: dollarization of the world by China and BRICS, or to put it in a more direct way, America is using China/BRICS to build a global supply chain for itself and will reap the fruits of all these infrastructure/industrialization projects as its “free lunch”. (This likely stems from the fact that many of their economists are also educated from the neoclassical economics schools in the West and have been indoctrinated with the same faulty understanding of how the monetary system works).

    So long as the BRICS alternative cannot figure out how to dedollarize, America will continue to win. And as I have been emphasizing over and over on this site, dedollarization is where the true battle lines that will be drawn between the neoliberal financialized West and the industrializing Global South. After nearly 2 years, the results have been nothing but disappointing.

    • BynarsAreOk [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      What this means is that even with Argentina joining BRICS, functionally the outcome is the same: dollarization of the world by China and BRICS, or to put it in a more direct way, America is using China/BRICS to build a global supply chain for itself and will reap the fruits of all these infrastructure/industrialization projects as its “free lunch”. (This likely stems from the fact that many of their economists are also educated from the neoclassical economics schools in the West and have been indoctrinated with the same faulty understanding of how the monetary system works).

      If I want to criticize BRICS countries is exactly because none of them are leftist, its the “we hate America so lets be friend and we can help each other” club led by China and Russia. There are solutions to the Argentine situation, but to put it bluntly, it requires a revolutionary government so they’re fucked for now.

      With that said, what I quote from you, I don’t understand your argument at all.

      How is the US going to benefit from China’s supply chains when the vast majority of these countries primarily trade with China not the US? China is their #1 trading partner and if you are arguing that the US just imports industrialized goods anyway, well that is the whole point of the current China vs US conflict isn’t it?

      The US already admits the Chinese industry leads the world and at some point the steady supply of cheap industrialized goods will stop, primarily tech goods from Taiwan but a lot more as well. Even worse still is Tesla/Apple losing precious market share(and a huge chunk of their global revenue) to BYD/Huawei among others. It is incredibly notable why the Huawei achievements means independence from US tech manufactures or worse, competition from Chinese companies in the global market. The US fears the incoming reality of people buying Huawei phones instead of Apple/Samsung shit(honestly already a reality in the global south given the price differences). I mention phones but eventually it could be everything from CPU to cars. Everything else is already Chinese anyway.

      But also the US itself is so paranoid about containing China that they don’t even want to consider peaceful coexistence, the exact process you describe, the US calmly reaping the benefits of a more developed global south is in direct contradiction to their goal, driven by imperialist necessity, of containing China and really everyone that opposes them.

      In that context you are talking here as if the year is 2006 or something. The US will definitely not benefit from BRICS expansion. The key point is whatever supply lines exist will be used to make Chinese products from Chinese companies in Chinese factories, America will not be involved and will not benefit from this. This is the foundation of the current conflict and why the US is losing their shit.

      But even beyond all of that my own theory is people underestimate climate change. The current global trade “status quo” was already shown to be extremely fragile due to COVID and even the “Ever given”/Suez canal obstruction, the latter lasted for only 6 days and was still devastating. Another global supply shortage and the US economy goes to shit.

      The idea that the US and even to some extent China(and their socialism plans) will continue to reap the benefits of large scale international trade is just wishful thinking at best and delusional at worst, to some extent all our discussions are meaningless if we consider solving climate change wont happen.

      • Kaplya@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        In good faith, it is this line of thinking from the anti-imperialist left that scares me the most.

        The key to defeating US imperialism is dedollarization, and China/BRICS/BRI are doing anything but that. I had a lot of hopes last year with all the talks about dedollarization, but you’ve probably noticed that not much radical solutions are being brought up during the BRICS summit in August. Why? Because everyone has now realized how difficult it is to dedollarize, and BRI/BRICS+ are doing exactly the opposite by dollarizing the world.

        To understand this, we need to go back to the beginning (I will simplify it as much as possible to save space here).

        1. China opens itself up for foreign capital and uses its tremendous advantage of cheap labor to become the world’s manufacturing center.
        2. China accumulates huge amount of US dollar (created out of thin air by the Federal Reserve), which after accounting for imports, has no use for them, so they recycled the dollars back into US treasuries to earn interests
        3. Around mid-2010s, China finally realizes that the persistent accumulation of dollars is literally just collecting junk papers. So, how to make good use of those dollars that you’ve now realized are just junks? The Belt and Road Initiatives (BRI) as vehicle for lending out their huge dollar reserves to build infrastructure and industrialize developing countries across Asia and Africa. (Chinese businesses and workers get to work, and the participating countries get tangible capital investments, a win-win cooperation)
        4. Since loans for BRI are mostly dollar-denominated, this means that the debtor countries now have to earn US dollars to repay their Chinese creditors
        5. Where to earn US dollars? While many countries have dollar reserves that they can use to purchase these goods, they have to earn it first by selling real goods/services (created for their own labor and national resources) to America. In contrast, since America is the currency issuer of the dollar, it can simply “print” however much it wants out of thin air. This gives America a huge advantage over every country that holds the dollar.
        6. Naturally, the only place where the BRI debtor countries can earn enough dollars to pay back their Chinese creditors is by… you’ve guessed it… selling their goods to America.

        BRICS is effectively doing the same thing, and now it has been expanded to 11 countries, which means more countries are being dollarized as they finance projects to build infrastructure and industrial capacity, even though the terms are much better than the IMF with low interests and doesn’t demand privatization.

        The end goal is the same: America gets free lunch by using China/BRI/BRICS+ to industrialize the Global South.

        I’ve seen anti-imperialist bloggers claiming that the “true underlying goal” of the BRI is to flood America with cheap goods from all the recently industrialized BRI countries to destroy domestic American industries. Well, if that’s really what the Chinese planners are thinking (and I sincerely hope this is not the case), then they’re in for a big surprise: America wants to be flooded by cheap goods from the BRI/BRICS countries. America has no intention of re-industrialization and it does not give a damn about de-industrializing itself to push wages even lower for American workers.

        So, why might the Chinese (or other BRICS+ countries) think this might be a good idea? For one, many of their economists have been educated in Western neoclassical school of economics, which have indoctrinated them to a faulty understanding of how the monetary system works. The neoclassicals (neoliberal adherents) still believe that the US couldn’t simply “print” so much money because of its enormous national debt. Well, Covid proved this completely wrong: the Fed balance sheet went up from $4 trillion to a gigantic $8.5 trillion (!!) since the Covid pandemic in 2020 (Figure 1). America absolutely has the capacity to keep “printing” the money to get free lunches from everyone, as the BRI/BRICS+ countries continue to be industrialized and need to sell their goods to earn US dollars to pay back their Chinese creditors.


        Figure 1. Fed balance sheet as of October 2023

        The real question is how can the world actually dedollarize? We can brainstorm a few scenarios but none of them are ideal/clean, because the system is setup in such a way that anyone who wants to decouple from America will have to pay a high price for it. Almost every “good” scenario demands that China forgives hundreds of billions of their dollar loans to the developing countries, which they had accumulated over the decades with their own labor and resources.

        For example, China can use its dollar reserves to pay off the African continent’s dollar debt ($850 billion), then flood Africa with RMB in order to replace the dollar as the reserve currency in the region. However, this requires that China to give up its role as a net exporter country and run a trade deficit with Africa - this means that China has to buy more goods from Africa than they sell them to. And it doesn’t look like China is ready to do this anytime soon because the inevitable outcome is the deindustrialization of China itself.

        This was the fate of America trying to sustain the Bretton Woods system from 1944-1971 as the global reserve currency (Triffin’s dilemma) and running a persistent trade deficit ultimately resulted in the deindustrialization of America during the process.

        Since none of the BRICS+ countries wants to run a trade deficit (they all want to be net exporters), the US dollar remains the most viable reserve currency that none other can simply replace. There have been a lot of movements of bilateral trade using local currencies (for example, Russia and China) in the last year but this isn’t a major axis of dedollarization. First, trade only accounts for a small proportion of the dollar usage, the vast majority of the dollar is in investment and as financial instruments. Second, many commodity price indices still remain in dollar, even though countries trade using their local currencies. These efforts shield the respective countries from US sanctions but they don’t solve the deeper problems about dedollarization.

        For example, Russia tried to do this last year and sold a huge quantity of oil to India and collected so much Indian rupees that they literally don’t know what to do with them, since the only way they can use the rupees is to purchase Indian goods, of which there is not a lot of options for the Russians. Now they’re asking the Indians to pay in Chinese yuans, and the Indians refused. This is why everyone uses and prefers US dollar.

        And finally, I do want to clarify that I fully support the goals of BRI and BRICS+ efforts to bring a more equitable and fair economic system to the Global South. However, it needs to be reminded that they are up against an opponent that has every advantage in the fight and is not afraid to play dirty at all. Radical solutions need to be found before this window of opportunity closes. I will be the first to admit that I don’t know how to solve this very difficult problem, and can only hope that the experts from the BRICS+ alternative know what they’re actually doing.

        • What_Religion_R_They [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Forgive my naivety, but why must countries repay the dollar debts in kind? Can’t they mutually agree to repay in yuan?

          Another point, if America further deindustrialized, isn’t that a net advantage for China? It doesn’t matter if America reaps all the rewards of treats produced in the global south, the outcome is that the means of production are not with them.

          • Kaplya@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Forgive my naivety, but why must countries repay the dollar debts in kind? Can’t they mutually agree to repay in yuan?

            This question is how are they going to find the yuans in the first place? China wants to be a net exporter country and run a current account surplus, which means unlike the US dollar, there is never going to be enough yuans floating around for everyone to store as reserve currency, and this means the only way to earn those yuans is to export your goods and commodities to China. But as I have said, since China wants to be a net exporter country, you are also directly competing with Chinese industries and workers - why would China buy your stuff instead of their own?

            America doesn’t have this problem because it is a net importer country and runs a current account deficit. It can keep “printing” dollars as needed to import stuff, which also means a vast liquidity for others to store as a reserve currency. This is why many countries decided to take on the loans in dollar in the first place.

            This is not to say there aren’t loans in yuan, there are but not nearly enough to challenge the deep investment market of the dollar.

            Another point, if America further deindustrialized, isn’t that a net advantage for China? It doesn’t matter if America reaps all the rewards of treats produced in the global south, the outcome is that the means of production are not with them.

            The answer to this is ideological in nature. America believes that it can retain its hegemony simply through financial means while fully deindustrialized, whereas China believes that the means of production that produces tangible goods/services (industrial capital) is the real stuff that matters.

            As Michael Hudson has always said, the conflict between US and China is not so much a geopolitical conflict but when understood at a higher level, an ideological one between finance capitalism and industrial capitalism, and only the latter could create the conditions to transition into socialism.

            This is where the battle lines are being drawn as the US and China ramp up toward their ultimate showdown. I cannot tell you which side will prevail but we will likely find out the answer in our lifetime.

  • LeZero [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Damn, how many of those freaks do they got down there??

    I remember a recent story about an american libertarian sicko who emigrated to Chile and shot a gun at protestors on the street

  • regul [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s my understanding that, owing to the extreme inflation, the US Dollar is widely accepted in Argentina already.