Javier Milei wins Argentina election

[CivicDuties]

ATG said:

BikeBikeBIke said:

CivicDuties said:

Of course there's a "difference"

Think you might want to run that one past some women. And then run for your life.

You can run it past whoever you like, but the point is self-evidently true. The onus is clearly on those of us who think it is OK to destroy a foetus to explain why. Saying "it's sufficiently like a kidney" doesn't cut it. Saying "I'm a woman" doesn't add anything to the weight of the argument.

I think you've messed up some quoting there and attributed things said to the wrong person.

Nobody said "it's sufficiently like a kidney". So no idea who you're quoting there either.

What I was pointing out was an interesting juxtaposition, in that Milei seems to think people should have sufficient agency over their own bodies that they should be allowed to sell internal organs, but not sufficient agency to decide if they want to continue with an unwanted or perhaps even dangerous pregnancy. It always seems to me far too much of a reductive argument to state baldly, as Bike did, that a foetus is a separate individual to the mother, and imply that is the only consideration which needs to be taken into account, when it is actually part of that woman's own body and can have such extreme influence on that body as to be fatal to the mother. Given those self-evident facts, removing a woman's agency over the foetus she is carrying is somewhat infringing upon the rights of the mother.

Edited by CivicDuties on Monday 20th November 11:32

[cirian75]

isaldiri said:

Digga said:

RichTT said:

No, because every time they try it kills millions.

Guess they just need to try harder.

What, again?

Harder than Stalin or Mao?

Well of course. 'True socialism' was failed in implementation by the flawed people in charge who became class traitors so it's obviously never the concept that's wrong.... the same kind of excuse is also regularly trotted out about 'true conservatism' or 'true capitalism' or 'true <whatever>' after all as to why their promise of an utopic paradise never actually happened.....

Its why its called the horseshoe.

They start with different, but end when they go hard far right or hard far left, they become mass murderous dictatorships.

[BikeBikeBIke]

ATG said:

BikeBikeBIke said:

CivicDuties said:

Of course there's a "difference"

Think you might want to run that one past some women. And then run for your life.

You can run it past whoever you like, but the point is self-evidently true. The onus is clearly on those of us who think it is OK to destroy a foetus to explain why. Saying "it's sufficiently like a kidney" doesn't cut it. Saying "I'm a woman" doesn't add anything to the weight of the argument.

Just to be clear I was feeding CDs own nonsense back to him after he conceded the point. I wasn't actually saying something as dumb as that myself.

[Mrr T]

ATG said:

Unfortunately the only vaguely sane candidates were eliminated earlier in the election so the final round was between two pillocks

There are very major problems with dollarising the economy. No one will lend you money anywhere near the rates they'll offer to Americans. If a US firm can borrow at 7%, an equivalent Argentine term might be able to borrow at 12%. How the hell is the Argentine firm supposed to compete with the American one when the cost of borrowing is so massively different? And what happens when Argentina's economy is on its arse and needs a looser fiscal stance while America's economy is on fire and the Fed is jacking up rates accordingly? And. Heaven forbid, what happens when Argentina engineers an inflationary bubble and needs higher rates to cap its inflation, but the US doesn't?

The reality is that the bond markets will see this policy as unsustainable and therefore they'll require a substantial risk premium to be paid on all Argentine dollar-denominated debt. And that right there is a vicious circle that dooms this policy.

In reality, I doubt he'll actually implement it.

There a much bigger problem than just the bond markets. That problem is who banks the government.

[CivicDuties]

Jesus Christ.

[RichTT]

Mrr T said:

There a much bigger problem than just the bond markets. That problem is who banks the government.

His main policy is abolishment of the central bank. Private banking only, dollarise when able. Government must spend within its budget, hence the promise to cut spending by an initial 15%.

[Countdown]

BikeBikeBIke said:

Isn't your kidney part of your own body whereas a fetus is the entirety of someone else's body.

So there is a difference.

It's way more logical than arguing it the other way round. If you're allowed to have a fetus removed you should certainly be allowed to have a kidney removed. Not so simple the other way round.

If it's "somebody else's body" why does a woman have to be forced to keep it inside HER?

[Randy Winkman]

GroundEffect said:

Just looks like every other idiotic populist.

Do you mean the hair?

[BikeBikeBIke]

Countdown said:

BikeBikeBIke said:

Isn't your kidney part of your own body whereas a fetus is the entirety of someone else's body.

So there is a difference.

It's way more logical than arguing it the other way round. If you're allowed to have a fetus removed you should certainly be allowed to have a kidney removed. Not so simple the other way round.

If it's "somebody else's body" why does a woman have to be forced to keep it inside HER?

You've conceded there's a difference. It's hard to imagine what difference you had in mind if it wasn't related to "somebody else's body".

[CivicDuties]

Has Fabricant bought a new wig and taken a flight to Argentina?

[RichTT]

Countdown said:

If it's "somebody else's body" why does a woman have to be forced to keep it inside HER?

The hard line answer is the idea that that human beings should take responsibility for the consequences of their actions and in other cases that since the unborn foetus cannot defend itself outside the mother that those rights should be enshrined in law.

[tuffer]

Alickadoo said:

Will he want to re-invade/re-possess the Falklands?

What with? Argentinian Armed Forces

[vaud]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

In 1900 Argentina was the 5th richest country in the world. But generations of bad govt had wrecked it.

Buenos Aires - The Paris of South America

TwigtheWonderkid said:

It's a shame. It's an amazing country with great people. and they love the English. They have a saying to describe someone who is very honest, "paga como un ingles", he pays like an Englishman.

True also for many countries. "Sense of fair play"

[Scootersp]

Randy Winkman said:

GroundEffect said:

Just looks like every other idiotic populist.

Do you mean the hair?

Did Wayne emigrate and make good!?

[rodericb]

F1GTRUeno said:

So in your OP you basically suggest the media are labelling him for no fair reason due to disagreement with his stance.

Then in this post give perfect reasons why they're labelling him as such.

Not sure why your OP was toned as such if you knew?

The media like to label like this as it can be grasped by the terminally dim so they know which side of the line to stand and thus work out which media organisations st is the yummiest.

[rodericb]

DeejRC said:

I’m pondering if the decision to sell one of your organs is left or right wing…
Personally I’d just go with: desperate.

At least you get some money. In some countries the government simply takes 'em.

[DeejRC]

rodericb said:

DeejRC said:

I’m pondering if the decision to sell one of your organs is left or right wing…
Personally I’d just go with: desperate.

At least you get some money. In some countries the government simply takes 'em.

Im not entirely sure that is a good baseline to mark yourself against...

[Dog Star]

cirian75 said:

Alickadoo said:

Will he want to re-invade/re-possess the Falklands?

Give it 6 months when he fails with the Argentinean economy just like everyone has before him.

This was right up there in the first things that crossed my mind when I saw this guy on tv. I think it’s a pretty nailed on certainty. He appears to be unhinged.

[Mrr T]

RichTT said:

Mrr T said:

There a much bigger problem than just the bond markets. That problem is who banks the government.

His main policy is abolishment of the central bank. Private banking only, dollarise when able. Government must spend within its budget, hence the promise to cut spending by an initial 15%.

One thing about most economists is they have no idea how money works. His main policy is simply impossible to implement. A government must have a bank account to receive taxes and other amounts and make payments. The central bank provides that account. Abolish the central bank and you would need a commercial bank to provide an account and no commercial bank would want the risk. As for trying to dollarise the economy. Then you need a bank with access to US dollar clearing so absolutely none of those banks would want to bank a government.

[vaud]

Dog Star said:

This was right up there in the first things that crossed my mind when I saw this guy on tv. I think it’s a pretty nailed on certainty. He appears to be unhinged.

With what though?

The Navy is old and largely not sea worthy. Something like 15 ships. No aircraft carriers,
They have 2 subs, neither are active.
The Airforce is very aged and all of the replacement deals are stalled or dead. In 2021 an analysis said that their operational capability was close to 0.
Plenty of troops, but you need to be able to land them...