Some quick messages. If there are layers of uncertainty in this choice, one of those thin surfaces is pretty neat to conceive. Aside from the election of thirds and the question of the runoff, what underlies, what appears, is a question that unfolds, a question that has given birth to a much larger one.
Because in recent weeks, it has become clear that the question is no longer whether or not a stabilization plan is needed.. On the other hand, the doubt that could be revealed in the next few hours is What type of stabilization plan will be applied and who will pay the cost of said reform. That is the question that seeks an answer.
The proposals, all
It is likely that, if we leave aside the debris of the poor electoral debate, we will be left with a few ideas for each candidate. It is unfair reductionism. Each one can be characterized.
The minister Massashore up salaries, freeing up the export apparatus, lowering public spending progressively through lower subsidies to certain sectors and the need to rediscuss the agreement with the IMF. Bullrichby his alterego Melconian, the issue of zero deficit, partial deregulation, exchange rate splitting and the forging of legal bimonetarism. Mileireset the monetary systemchange regime, cut public spendingState reform, education, deregulation of the capital account, etc.
Thus, one might think that the question is no longer whether or not the economy needs a stabilization plan, since all candidates have one in their portfolio, but how to face it. And although we are closed, it is worth thinking.
Grandma’s jewelry
Within this scheme, from the certainty that a stabilizing plan is needed that reorders the financial variables, another question arises: Does the next president need to completely change all the public and economic policies applied until now?
It is useful to think then about a no minor detail: It seems that Argentina does not have a major macroeconomic problem, but rather a short-term liquidity problem. You need dollars.
Variables such as production, employment, consumption, and investment have recorded important performance in recent years. The lack of dollars and the exorbitant debt policy in the immediate past have strained the administration of public spending, triggering inflation to unprecedented levels. The malpractice in the management of the Central Bank promoted by the co-government with the IMF has done the rest. The question is: what plan is needed?
Lithium, oil and gas
Here the time variable is more important. Because it could be thought that both the agro-export complex – in 2024 without drought – and the exports of critical minerals and hydrocarbons could return a strong income of foreign currency.. And that this vital injection of resources could serve to consolidate economic sectors that take pressure off external restriction.
Is it worth privatizing YPF to offset part of current public spending, when the real problem is that the economy needs foreign currency income and the expansion of the economic matrix linked to the export sector? Again: if there is one thing that is certain, it is that a stabilization plan is needed, whoever wins. This plan must address the financial, the currency, build credibility, release the productive factors. But does it need a wave of privatization and absolute deregulation of markets? Do you need a silly status? Valuable hours to think about it.