No. It is. Do you need me to paste links to the actual small-print of those (so-called) “trade agreements” the US manipulates 3rd world countries into signing?
You know… the ones where the US dictates that it’s criminally insane and mentally diseased “free market” ideology should take precedence over the needs of the people living inside those countries? So here… let me fix your little statement for you:
nd keep your word to guive stability to you economy to attract investorscapitalist looters and pillagers.
Is this starting to gel or do I have to draw you a picture?
Changing the language doesn’t change the output. You can call it whatever you want. But its a fact that a modern economy needs to participate in the global markets. Ite either that or self reliance (which means no oil, no smartphones, no imports generally). I am supposing that you dont want the second one.
From this the only conclusion is that a country needs to produce something and be competitive, and the easiest way to do that is with investment.
All those things are facts. Now, are there alternatives? Obviously, for example, France’s economy is in big part goverment run with success. But for that you need to maintain a competent government which in Argentinas I think we can agree that it is not the case.
So, you either establish a more or less free market with a bit of stability, or you have a competent gov. The IMF thinks the first is easier, and so it recomends it.
With that said, obviously some government intervention is needed and social policies are usually good, but to maintain those you need money, and sadly, you cant just print it (Again, Argentina is a great example for that).
You are perfectly correct - no matter how you dress it up, neliberal capitalism will deliver the exact same results neoliberal capitalism has always delivered.
and be competitive,
Competitive at what? Impoverishing their own people to make billionaire parasites richer?
But for that you need to maintain a competent government which in Argentinas I think we can agree that it is not the case.
I don’t know about that… how long ago was France ruled by a CIA-approved fascist dictator?
So, you either establish a more or less free market with a bit of stability,that is inherently unstable
FTFY.
The IMF thinks the first is easierbetter for US neocolonialism
FTFY again. Good thing for you I don’t charge you for editing, eh?
and sadly, you cant just print it
Nobody bothers just printing money these days… it’s literally just data. And yes… it’s simply exists as that. An invention that can be made and unmade.
Ok, you cant print it indefenetly (saying the opposite is just ignorant). Also, it can be better for neocolonialism and for the country, its not mutually exclusive.
And, can I as you how do you expect a country to buy oil, chips, planes, etc? A genuine question. If you dont export anything how do you convince other countries to guive you stuff?
When I say globally competitive I mean having something that other countries pay you to make, thats it. And why? So that you can then pay them to guive you stuff.
No. It is. Do you need me to paste links to the actual small-print of those (so-called) “trade agreements” the US manipulates 3rd world countries into signing?
You know… the ones where the US dictates that it’s criminally insane and mentally diseased “free market” ideology should take precedence over the needs of the people living inside those countries? So here… let me fix your little statement for you:
Is this starting to gel or do I have to draw you a picture?
Changing the language doesn’t change the output. You can call it whatever you want. But its a fact that a modern economy needs to participate in the global markets. Ite either that or self reliance (which means no oil, no smartphones, no imports generally). I am supposing that you dont want the second one.
From this the only conclusion is that a country needs to produce something and be competitive, and the easiest way to do that is with investment.
All those things are facts. Now, are there alternatives? Obviously, for example, France’s economy is in big part goverment run with success. But for that you need to maintain a competent government which in Argentinas I think we can agree that it is not the case.
So, you either establish a more or less free market with a bit of stability, or you have a competent gov. The IMF thinks the first is easier, and so it recomends it.
With that said, obviously some government intervention is needed and social policies are usually good, but to maintain those you need money, and sadly, you cant just print it (Again, Argentina is a great example for that).
You are perfectly correct - no matter how you dress it up, neliberal capitalism will deliver the exact same results neoliberal capitalism has always delivered.
Competitive at what? Impoverishing their own people to make billionaire parasites richer?
I don’t know about that… how long ago was France ruled by a CIA-approved fascist dictator?
FTFY.
FTFY again. Good thing for you I don’t charge you for editing, eh?
Nobody bothers just printing money these days… it’s literally just data. And yes… it’s simply exists as that. An invention that can be made and unmade.
Ok, you cant print it indefenetly (saying the opposite is just ignorant). Also, it can be better for neocolonialism and for the country, its not mutually exclusive.
And, can I as you how do you expect a country to buy oil, chips, planes, etc? A genuine question. If you dont export anything how do you convince other countries to guive you stuff?
When I say globally competitive I mean having something that other countries pay you to make, thats it. And why? So that you can then pay them to guive you stuff.