-The statement is not harsh, it is realistic. We have a duty as an opposition to warn. As for the word bomb, let’s say that the adjective is relative. We will not discuss a semantic issue. What the table of Together for National Change did here was to warn of what is an open secret: when one speaks to the markets, to public opinion in general, everyone knows that this economic situation is unsustainable and that supports only in a transition hosting a super-stock like never before in history, the handling of imports and people buying foreign exchange insurance and not treasuries to protect against a 100% gap and a devaluation when there are less than $5 billion in net reserves. Economic policy decisions are not prosecutable, like the future dollar with which Cristina Kirchner has been accused, in my opinion it is not a crime, but it is economic policy malpractice because it goes against the will to get out of this trap which is Kirchner’s model. If you want to continue with the same set of K rules, of course you can continue and have other days and years of stagflation.
Why don’t you do it now? Right now? Why wait for the government to change? Why not close the gap already? They are waiting for the bomb to explode in the hands of the next government and it is a sign of government weakness to ask the opposition to govern.
– Rubinstein led the budget project with a deficit last year, and we approved it. We warned that the program was unsustainable because it involved a level of local debt issuance that was disproportionate to the size of the internal market. Even so, we gave credit to the government.
– On the contrary. We want to minimize the financial crisis that the government is preparing. We voted in favor of the IMF deal when Máximo Kirchner voted against it and said it had to be blown up. We voted on the budget. What more responsibility can you ask for? Alvarez Agis talks about bullfighting 2019 after PASO. I wasn’t in the executive at the time, but it was Kirchnerism that forced Juntos to stockpile and restructure the debt, thus avoiding doing the dirty work they didn’t want to do. Today we can only tell the truth because keeping silent would mean endorsing what they are doing.
– Indicates a future crisis. To be silent is to be complicit in the crisis that Argentines will inherit after giving the government a lot of credit.
– A real correction of the public accounts, reduce the exchange rate gap and generate more exports.
– It’s changing the model. The current model is out of stock
– The way the government is doing, there is no way it will stabilize the situation. Today we are in June 2022, before Martín Guzmán left, and that crisis erupted in the government.
– No. The bomb is now being left with the Argentine people and what you have to do is reduce it. What we see is a government that instead of shortening the bomb, widens it. You don’t want to pay consequences for negligence but consequences are inevitable. The problem is that the model is sold out and no one dares to utter the fatal phrase “the king is naked”.
– It’s a lie that the debt is in pesos. They issue dual bonds, linked to the dollar or to inflation. This is not a question of getting into debt in pesos or dollars, but of granting exchange insurance. Logical, companies must increasingly cover the risk of devaluation, with a 100% gap and a trap they want us to believe: that all this is maintained and in this way the government gets away from these problems.
– NO.
– Does the program with the IMF help?
– The IMF is acting contemplatively and in my opinion lamely about where this government is going. But he accompanies him because he has a duty of care and is focused on him.
Source: Clarin
