I think my issue is that you want to draw a definitive line in the sand. I agree that capitalism is an unhindered economy, however, I see that we can compare a free market with a less free market as policies and agencies are added. For instance, we can look at policy before and after its implementation and analyze its affects. To take a more nuanced perspective, although I dislike that word for some reason, maybe its because it’s used so often and many times by someone not nuanced. There is also a difference between the anarcho capitalist and the classical liberal. Both believe in capitalism, but one believes in absolute independence from the government while the other believes in some kind of guardrails set up by a central government, or at least, state governments.

Let’s take cronyism for example. It’s actually caused by big government and socialism. It is not a product of capitalism, because under capitalism, there would be no connection between the government and a corporation. Socialism is when someone, or business, gets money from the government. It’s also when the government regulates and manipulates the economy, although some of this falls specifically under fascism, in the end, it’s all socialism. If the government had no say in the economy, what good would collusion between a company and government be? None. The government wouldn’t have any power to do anything for the company.

So even if what you are saying is true, we can still gather evidence of free(er) vs socialist with the addition of the policies. Welfare vs none. Fed reserve vs none…I see you chose “modern” a half century or more beyond the Industrial Revolution, which most would consider the modern era. Even if we started from 1900 on, well within the modern era, we have plenty of evidence to strongly suggest capitalism is better. A vast majority of policies that took us from a mostly capitalist eocnomy to a socialist one started in the early 1900s. A TON of evidence and data to pull from that to build a stronger case. Well enough to definitely say capitalism was a success and we need to go back to it.

They call him right wing because he opposes a lot of climate change taxes and such because they are scams for the most part. He is against these diversity programs which cater to immigrants/refugees and other groups of people.

Yeah let's see what happens. We can say that countries that try to somewhat emulate capitalistic markets have done better than the government controlled markets, but every form of self-government we've tried so far has failed pretty miserably on a long enough scale. And the US is certainly trending toward economic insolvency at an alarming rate. Hard not to be agnostic at times.

I'm going to be skeptical of anyone who claims they can materially curb corruption and nefarious influences, since no one has ever been able to do that on a mass scale. It's like if someone said they will get money out of politics or implement perfect luxury gay space communism so resources are allocated with perfect efficiency. Those are just academic theories, not real life. Game theory is why Israel is calling all the shots.

LMAOOO I came in expecting to see llamafukker crying. Doesn’t disappoint


Good thing for Argentina. I hope he cuts and fires everyone like Trump should’ve done in 2017

That is a big question that I have wrestled with as well. Most of the economic theorists based in liberty don’t believe it can be done either. For instance, we can go back and see that Benjamin Franklin called for overthrowing a government at that point and starting it new again. Biblically, Christ teaches that what is corrupt must be “made new again”, and it is beyond repair. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said something to the affect of I wish there was a way to find someone, somewhere, that was responsible for evil, but evil is at the heart of every man. Which means, anyone at anytime can be corrupt, and there are a lot of men willing to do evil for a regime or self interest. Mises believed that no central government would ever be free of corruption and would all eventually lead to socialism/communism, and therefore the answer was no central government, which leads me to believe that only state and local governments were a solution.

I digress. I will admit, i do feel excitement over the prospect of liberty succeeding and becoming a global movement against the socialists and commies.

Leftists in Argentina are sobbing in the street lmao

basically this, but in espanol:

Who does this brah think he is with hair like this lmao.



The pendulum is swinging back the other way. Its over for libs.

2024 USA woth Trump, then 2025 Poilievre in Canada.

It sounds good in theory, but a libertarian approach to society is based on the collective morality and unity of it. That's why no one takes the USA idea of libertarianism serious. The idea that government is bad is ridiculous. It's the intention and who controls it, and how much control it as.

So if Argentina can get extremely tough on crime and then implement a huge cultural shift while lowering economic tolls via government taxation and banking, then it could go well. The other issue though is what do they do about corporations and market control? The "free market" isn't so free when you start thinking about who is going to employ people, the cost of goods, who makes what and who controls what. If anything, corporations are WAYYY more evil than most governments. Look at the stories about Coca Cola, United Fruit company, Chiquita, etc. Literally had their own armies in other countries, mercenaries, genocided workers if they revolted and got new workers so they didn't have to pay them more, etc.

Let's see what actually happens though and what ideas he can and will actually implement.

I was just reading that his opponent literally tried to buy the electorate by eliminating income taxes and giving out cash bonuses to pensioners just before the election, making his victory that much more impressive:

Lol at all the resident commies crying about this. Commies gonna commie


Adopting the USD is interesting, but why not go all the way and switch to a currency that's backed by gold?

They probably dont have the gold to back it.

I'm excited to see how this goes, we all have opinions and most economic opinions are backed by very little experimental data, it's mostly just deluded self interest. Like someone else said, Argentina don't have much to lose here so I kind of think that means they'll really do this. It will be good to see how it goes.

sometimes you need to roll the dice

Do you have the link to the full article.

Bribing 1% of their GDP is nuts.

Central planning is extremely corrupting. The idea of it is corrupting as well. Freedom is the only system that benefits everyone, it is the least corruptive. Keep in mind, Socialism, Fascism, communism etc. are not economic theories. People who advocate for then are not using economics in their arguments.

Inb4 he meets the same fate as Hitler and gaddafi

Good call out, should have worded it political theories instead of economic.

When you say freedom benefits everyone, do you literally mean everyone or everyone within your in group? Can you explain what you imagine a freedom system to look like in reality. Is there laws? Who makes the laws? How are they chosen? Are there any public services? Police at least? How are the public services funded? Who decides this? How? etc. Please, I am genuinely interested here and with an open mind.

I agree with most of what you say but real life is complicated and just because theoretically it makes sense doesn't mean we can state it as a fact about reality.

I personally think that moderate socialism is the best system but honestly I am not against free market libertarianism either. The thing with libertarianism is I think it needs to be committed to completely, there's no moderation of it, either you are free or you aren't.

I'm interested in how you avoid the problem of free market capitalism concentrating wealth in fewer and fewer people over time. Wealth inequality is a power inequality and power corrupts also. Do you outright reject that premise or do you see a mechanism to resist that tendency.

Democratic socialism aims to provide a mechanism to resist that tendency. It ensures that the majority of people can benefit by forcing decision makers to be held accountable at election time. In practice this doesn't always work well but I believe there are some examples of it working well.

Can you stopped being a racist for a minute?

In to see how this goes

Dumbest post ever."libertarian approach to society is based on the collective mortality" I don't think a dumber thing could be said. Honestly, I don't think you even know what libertarian means

Larping as an economist on a bodybuilding forum doesn't make you an economist.

Javier “Chad” Milei

They say he's a member of the world economic forum though and pro open borders? Anyone know?

oh look another "outsider" that's going to save the day lmao you people are gullible as ****.

can you stop talking to children on roblox?

so when will he start giving out free helicopter rides ?

Well Argentina has been horrible with the last government. Trying and voting for the same horrible policies would be the same as the definition of insanity. So let them try something new.

How are they going to reduce inflation if they tie in with the dollar, their exports are going to get raped as well?

Just a reminder that this Hebrew is angry because you said something positive about white people, and those hate facts are something the average Goldberg hates with a passion.

Nice try you desert gypsy chitbag!

This president sounds and looks insane, and I cant wait to see how this turns out. Argentina is such a mess they needed to do something radical like this

Its because they are using a lot of USD already, USD is already widely in circulation and most people accept it as a method of exchange. Regardless of what issues the USD may be having, its still the reserve currency and stable compared to the garbage they have now