What's Macri's Unusual Video Leaves Naked | justporno.tv …

The word of the moment is "relief".

This is how the government presents its improvised "package" of measures to hide (until the elections) the devastating effects of the "structural" program that fails every day in its attempt to control exchange rate volatility.

"We all need help", Mauricio Macri himself asks the chosen family to film the most transparent product of Durán Barba's team. "Yes, a relief, is very important," remarked the housewife in trouble to whom the president apologized for being worried again about her visit. Has the situation reached such a point that the couple has already been tested in another propaganda and repeats its role as a secondary actor, with its included grandchild, in a bad saga of the usual role of the young? Antonia whose rozagante presence had immediately destroyed the credibility of "everyone," including the multi-million dollar presidential family, needs this "relief."

The woman who receives Macri has learned her role in a hurry. He begins by confessing the problems caused by the president's first visit ("After her, people believe …"), but he immediately focuses on his role of representing the "needy". "It's hard to get the basics, the rent, the bills of all that comes (" the super "blows the chair and she then resumes), the super who is crazy." At this point, the visitor can begin his teaching work with an initial salary: "What hurts us the most is inflation," he says. And immediately he reveals his recipe. "We have done everything that the countries around us, Uruguay, Colombia and Peru have done.Over time, they have conquered.Why is it not going to be good for us? ", he wondered as if it was not the same question that all the Argentineans ask themselves three years ago without the government answering it. And at that moment, Macri comes back with relief and faces a summary of the official announcements.

The monotonous tone of the description of the measures does not seem to convince the woman and the president then emphasizes that for a few months (until the elections) "we asked the mobile companies not to increase the prepaid lines, did you you an advance payment? " , I have already unsubscribed, "the hostess took the bet.Macri then tests the price agreements with 16 companies and the woman decides that, to convince someone, it is necessary to raise the tone and interrupt : "These places that put the price they want!" "We dreamed of it, some measures that give the impression of being for someone." We know that everything is played out in the future, but in the present, we needed to hear something like this. "It is clear, long ago, if this has ever been the case, that the government is not announcing any measure that" believes in any way that this is for you ".

What the protagonist of the video ignores, is that it has just spelled out the contradiction behind the announcements of yesterday. All the measures adopted are "temporary palliatives" intended to make the "present" more bearable (until the elections) and are condemned to be abandoned as soon as the "future" (after the elections) arrives. The only package is to arrive in October and then, if they manage to win, continue with the momentum, as Macri promised, with the same program co-directed with the IMF which sinks the country.

If the purpose of the "package" was to improve the living conditions of the majority and that he was so quick to conceive of it, it is impossible to understand why they did not have it previously applied. What did it take to wait so close to the elections, who was risking such a drop in polls? The answer is simple The measures, however modest as "palliative", go against the official discourse as a whole and none of those who are in charge of implementing them believe them, starting with the president. This casts doubt on how successful they are in their implementation and ultimately bring "relief" to overwhelmed voters, but guarantees that they will be dropped as soon as the IMF finds that they endanger the payment of the debts which their rescue proposes to guarantee.

It is equally instructive to see that, in order to hide the disaster that has led to the country, the government must resort to measures that have always been described as "populist". The same thing happened when the IMF forced them to replenish their retention reserves in the countryside, in order to mitigate some of the tax disaster they had caused with uncontrolled debt. But those who delude themselves with a "trick" (as some radicals claim) should keep in mind that even the incorporation of Guillermo Moreno into the government would not produce the desired effect.

When the governments of Néstor or Cristina Kirchner adopted some of these measures, they went in the general direction of their policies, they reacted to their vision of the behavior of economic actors, starting with banks and companies. If they were announced as transient, there would be no major contradiction if they would later become permanent.

The opposite of what is presented today.

The official lamentations about "commercial disloyalty" are laughable, having repeatedly reiterated that any state intervention on prices only serves to tie the market forces that stabilize the economy. Even if their intentions were serious, how would they manage to control the values ​​set by the companies as "discount", having insisted until the exhaustion of recent weeks? How could they discuss their costs if they dismantled all official dependencies to know them? How would they promote the popular mobilization needed to ensure that promises of stability are kept, however moderate?

None of these matters makes sense because the government does not believe in any of its announcements and is not willing to defend them beyond October, and almost certainly not before. In fact, the only measure that really matters is the generalization of ANSES credits for the weakest. Well, look, it offers poor families who follow the same path as the one chosen by the government in its early years: irresponsible debt. We know how it ended: in a default (not yet received due to the IMF bailout), in another devaluation and in the sharp fall in income of employees and retirees. Nothing predicts that the credits currently being paid by the families will eventually be better, but the government has taken the precaution of establishing it, much to the relief of the unwary, that they will start paying them after the elections.