Faced with so many crises, where is the country headed?
By Maria Herminia Grande
Alberto Fernández, still without a conviction from the Justice system but from society, leaves politics without desire, hurting democracy. Also Peronism, although it is not alone in this. Men and women who commit crimes should be judged for it, not for their ideological garb. Violence, corruption, do not have political parties. Peronism is not – it does not figure in its genesis -; neither corrupt, nor violent. As it does not figure in the genesis of the UCR, of Socialism, of LLA, etc.
The respect (80% of support in 2020) that Alberto Fernández managed to achieve with the Olivos party was seriously hurt. He fell very low, exposing brutal contradictions between his words and actions. He was the most federal Buenos Aires citizen: his government was only for the AMBA. He was the reincarnation of progressivism. Today he appears seriously questioned by the Justice, for crimes of corruption and gender violence. As for the latter, the Justice has intervened directly, and must have well-founded evidence given that it prohibits him from leaving the country and imposed a perimeter restriction. He proclaimed honesty as his main value, the Justice suspects and investigates whether or not he belonged to a corruption scheme through insurance. He has been left with great political orphanage, both La Cámpora and a large part of Kirchnerism have condemned him before the final ruling of the Justice.
This columnist insists that if certain organizations do not function, their management must be changed, not closed.
Now, what we cannot and should not fail to point out and/or ask is: where is the country going?
So far, the enormous and unfair effort of the most vulnerable sectors of society is going towards supporting the financial sector. And even on the latter, economists like Domingo Cavallo maintain that it will not work without devaluing. The terrible thing is that the national government is not interested, or at least does not put emphasis on, production, which does not stop falling. Scientists are with their arms tied, that is to say, our pioneering and world-respected science is groggy. 60% of university professors’ salaries are below the poverty line. Argentina is not only running out of doctors, but also of university professors, of scientists. 80% of Argentine children live in poor homes. What population will we have in 10 years? Who will take care of the legion of people who are left by the wayside in the meantime, waiting for the recession to pass, generating employment again? Who will take care of today’s unemployed, of today’s empty plates, of those who had to go live on the streets? The project that addresses this situation has not yet appeared.
Meanwhile, the government is desperate to get the SIDE to approve $100 billion in reserved expenses. If they do, who will be in charge of managing them and with what objective?
The Central Region has virtuous structural conditions. Today it is joined by three high-profile governors. But it must transform its economic dynamism into political power. Political scientist Federico Zapata believes that if the Region does not achieve a political offer conceived in national terms, the problems will continue to repeat themselves. “The way out of the 2001 crisis implied the emergence of the political hegemony of the AMBA: Kirchnerism in the province, Macrism in the city. It was seen in the subsidies, in the economies that were favored and those that were penalized. This model prevented new social outbreaks, but it did not generate a sustainable social economic dynamic in Argentina.” Zapata points out that the difficulty of the Central Region is the lack of a national narrative that brings together and unifies, and that is done with a lot of politics and national leadership.
With the advantage of a President Milei without a vocation for internal political construction, but rather international.
Santa Fe has managed to get Minister Luis Caputo to approve the taking of international loans, and that those from the IDB and the World Bank that the nation does not accept, can be received by the province.
There is also a national government policy that benefits Santa Fe, which was discussed with Secretary Juan Paso of the production area, regarding irrigation works to expand productive lands and provide stability in the face of water stress.
In the dairy sector, Santa Fe agreed through BICE to a line of credit for the sector at a 0% rate, subsidized by the Government of Santa Fe. Producers who take out these loans, aimed at productive investment and the acquisition of machinery, will be able to repay them in liters of milk. This is the first time this has been done and BICE is thinking of repeating it with other productive sectors.
The presence of President Milei at the Palermo Rural Exhibition was a gesture that the sector greatly appreciated. With expectations deflated by the removal of withholdings on soybeans mainly, the announcement of the removal of withholdings on poultry and milk, as it was known this week, was considered. But it does not move the sector to liquidate what it has in the silos, as the government needs. By the way, an important businessman in this sector with institutional responsibilities, told Infobae that they have commissioned a work to evaluate how a 5% removal of the soybean withholding would impact the increase in price and how much the government would earn in taxes. “In soybeans, for a production of 50 million tons, 51% remains to be marketed. In corn, for a total supply of 49.9 million tons, 2023/24 campaign, 45% remains to be marketed*
SANCOR
The ATILRA union has signed an agreement with the company for the return to work within the scope of the mandatory conciliation arranged by the Ministry of Human Capital. The Secretary General Héctor “Etín” Ponce told Infobae: “We trust in the construction of a sustainable future, based on the decisions that the company makes and that we will support, as we have been doing; although sometimes it is difficult to reconcile the interests of the company with the interests that we must defend. As a sign of support, I remember that workers have been receiving lower salaries than the rest of the activity and we have not been receiving contributions from the company. Important investors are needed. Large companies that know the business and have broad shoulders, otherwise the big players, I see it here in the world, phagocytize the industry. I belong to the International Food Union, and I see how the industry at an international level is falling into the hands of a few. Finally, I want to clarify that we have also spoken with international investors, and it is not true that we have had preference for any of them*
