The Us Needed A Nestor Kirchner

[Der-Lowe]

Who?
Néstor Carlos Kirchner (Spanish pronunciation: [%u02C8nestor %u02C8karlos %u02C8kir%u0283ner]; 25 February 1950 - 27 October 2010) was an Argentine politician who served as the 54th President of Argentina from 25 May 2003 until 10 December 2007.

Huh? But why?
Kirchner came into office on the tail of a deep economic crisis. A country which had once equalled Europe in levels of prosperity and considered itself a bulwark of European culture in Latin America found itself deeply impoverished, with a depleted middle class and malnutrition appearing in the lower strata of society. The country was burdened with $178 billion in debt, the government strapped for cash.
Shortly after coming into office, Kirchner made changes to the Argentine Supreme Court. He accused certain justices of extortion and pressured them to resign, while also fostering the impeachment of two others. In place of a majority of politically right-wing and religiously conservative justices, he appointed new ones who were ideologically closer to him, including two women (one of them an avowed atheist). Kirchner also retired dozens of generals, admirals, and brigadiers from the armed forces, a few of them with reputations tainted by the atrocities of the Dirty War.
During his first year of office, Kirchner achieved a difficult agreement to reschedule $84 billion in debts with international organizations, for three years. In the first half of 2005, the government launched a bond exchange to restructure approximately $81 billion of national public debt (an additional $20 billion in past defaulted interest was not recognized). Over 76% of the debt was tendered and restructured for a recovery value of approximately one third of its nominal value.

TLDR: Someone courageous enough to do what needs to be done, despite opposition for other political forces. He did all that (read above) with only 20% of the votes.

Just remember not to reelect him, or his wife, or his son, or anyone from his party.

IN THE MEANTIME IN GOTHAM CITY:
Bernanke:
"In sum, on its current economic trajectory the United States runs the risk of seeing millions of workers unemployed or underemployed for many years. As a society, we should find that outcome unacceptable. Monetary policy is working in support of both economic recovery and price stability, but there are limits to what can be achieved by the central bank alone. The Federal Reserve is nonpartisan and does not make recommendations regarding specific tax and spending programs. However, in general terms, a fiscal program that combines near-term measures to enhance growth with strong, confidence-inducing steps to reduce longer-term structural deficits would be an important complement to the policies of the Federal Reserve."

ie "Hey guys, apparently interest rates cannot go below zero. Can I get more stimulus plz?"
A bit late, aren't we? Might've made a difference when the first stimulus was passed.

[zephiran]

Government intervention?

I agree that an increased effort for stimulus measures in the US is needed, being on the outside looking in (I'm going to eat SOOOOOOO much shit for this later on in the topic, hoo boy! : D ) it seems the first stimulus was a step in the right direction - it just wasn't enough. Like you would have used Water Gun on Moltres instead of mofo SURF. And yes, economics IS JUST LIKE pokémon.

But yeah. Increased stimulus with a mostly sort-of libertarian congress? It's not going to happen unless people actually start wanting it, and they'll only want it when enough bad things have happened to them.

Actually, I think there's a BIGGER chance that some bright person DOES propose, and manage to enact, a banking reform for negative interest rates.

Though, here's an evil thought:

What if, say, the minimum wage was removed, and the labor unions were banned? That'd totally work, wouldn't it?

[Der-Lowe]

At 11/21/10 09:44 AM, zephiran wrote: But yeah. Increased stimulus with a mostly sort-of libertarian congress? It's not going to happen unless people actually start wanting it, and they'll only want it when enough bad things have happened to them.

Meh. NK won the elections with less than 20% of the vote, and passed historical reforms that were needed anyway, despite opposition. Obama won the elections by a landslide, and starting compromising right away. He needs the peronist view of "I won, you lost, I call the shots. Better luck next time" And if the economy had recovered, then he would've won the reelection with even a bigger margin, and made all the nay-sayers look like the idiots they are, and THEY would have to compromise, and start saying things like "Well, what we HAD ACTUALLY meant was..."

Actually, I think there's a BIGGER chance that some bright person DOES propose, and manage to enact, a banking reform for negative interest rates.

Though, here's an evil thought:

What if, say, the minimum wage was removed, and the labor unions were banned? That'd totally work, wouldn't it?

Collapsed wages would mean lower demand, would mean fewer jobs, a deeper recession, falling revenue, a higher deficit, more foreclosures, a weaker financial system. Moreover, falling salaries would mean falling prices, which would make debt in real terms higher, which would mean a negative wealth effect on debtors, falling consumption, and stronger recesssion. Falling prices means higher real interest rates, that would depress investment and consumption, making the recession worse.

Huzzah.

[zephiran]

At 11/22/10 08:04 AM, Der-Lowe wrote:

Obama won the elections by a landslide, and starting compromising right away. He needs the peronist view of "I won, you lost, I call the shots. Better luck next time" And if the economy had recovered, then he would've won the reelection with even a bigger margin, and made all the nay-sayers look like the idiots they are, and THEY would have to compromise, and start saying things like "Well, what we HAD ACTUALLY meant was..."

Oh god you just described the very, very wet dream that resides in my own little pinko heart. If only it could happen, if only...

At 11/21/10 09:44 AM, zephiran wrote:

Evil, evil things.

At 11/22/10 08:04 AM, Der-Lowe wrote:

Bad things.

Huzzah.

Huzzah indeed.

______________

I completely agree that Bammy needs to step it up a little and take a trip to the dark, serious, BATMAN kind of side. Problem is, I don't see him doing that now anymore with such low support - he's not a Nestor Kirchner, the only way he'd do it anyway would be if he had overwhelming popular support. Which he's never, ever going to get with a Socialist label in America. Shit, I'd marry the man if he was a bisexual mormon protestant lutheran atheist, but my kind of support doesn't mean much I'm afraid.

I'll go ahead and distort this citation from a paper I recently saw to suit my own ends:

"Now that the Senate has dropped the ball on Democrat legislation, at least one thing is certain: Trouble is on the horizon, so we might as well get familiar with it. In an economic recession, disaster is likely to be the norm, and the Obama movement needs to get used to that -- and to develop new ways to turn tragedy into action for change."

[Memorize]

It's amazing how you idiots still think Obama's policies are any different than the previous Administrations who helped put us in this ditch.

[aviewaskewed]

At 11/22/10 12:46 PM, Memorize wrote: It's amazing how you idiots still think Obama's policies are any different than the previous Administrations who helped put us in this ditch.

It's amazing you still don't actually read topics and just blather the same things over and over based on key words. Well no, it's not actually amazing anymore, just predictable.