this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
472 points (98.2% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2894 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DeadHorseX@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (9 children)

I'm not a libertarian, I'm a social democrat.

The last century has been a total and unmitigated disaster for Argentina. The two options Argentinians had in this election were:

  1. More of the same by the guy who oversaw inflation reaching 160% (100% chance of things getting worse)
  2. A total wild card (99.9% chance of things getting worse)

Unsurprisingly, they went for the latter. I don't think anti-libertarians get to gloat in this context, given it's the Argentinian establishment which has overseen one of the most remarkable examples of total state-collapse and economic failure in modern history.

[–] NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This makes a lot of sense if you pretend he didn't say or promise anything during the campaign.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

The calculation shouldn't be "chance of things getting worse", but "expected value of how much worse it'll get".

[–] ragica@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't actually know anything. But casually to me it looked like a choice between 160% chance of it getting worse and a 300% chance of getting worse. And it's not very surprising at all in these circumstances many go for the latter for all sorts of reasons (and delusions). But I don't actually know anything.

[–] DeadHorseX@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

You should probably read at least a little about Argentina's recent history before commenting then...

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago
  1. More of the same by the guy who oversaw inflation reaching 160% (100% chance of things getting worse)
  2. A total wild card (99.9% chance of things getting much worse)

FTFY

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's bad math. Yes, if you put the same people in office. There's nearly 100% chance that they will continue doing what they have been doing. Good or bad. But if you put a lunatic with a grudge against reality in office. Who is aligned, or would align himself with the people who caused the problem before. You have 150% chance that things will get worse.

[–] naharin@feddit.nu 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

You have 150% chance

This isn’t exactly the best math either.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Yes, it was a jab at the logic. Things can always get worse. Always. Change for the sake of change is a bad proposition. So now the people causing the problems before aren't in direct control. They have a go between patsy. Poised to push awful social oppression openly that they'd likely only thought about in wet dreams. And a large chunk of misguided populous supporting it. Because "it's different".

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Oof, yeah that's not a good choice.

[–] JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago

Mate one dude was hearing voices and talks with his deceased dogs...how can you say "wild card" with a straight face?

[–] MarcoPOLO@sh.itjust.works -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Argentina could've just gone for a new currency again

[–] DeadHorseX@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Wouldn’t solve anything.