Comments on: Argentina’s New Economic Reality http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/10/argentinas-new-economic-reality.html Information & Insight on Argentina Sat, 04 Feb 2012 22:30:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ramiro http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/10/argentinas-new-economic-reality.html#comment-666 Ramiro Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:40:49 +0000 http://www.argentinepost.com/?p=427#comment-666 "That's what she said" Any The Office fans out there???? Can't believe you guys don't watch that show! “That’s what she said”

Any The Office fans out there????

Can’t believe you guys don’t watch that show!

]]> By: taos http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/10/argentinas-new-economic-reality.html#comment-661 taos Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:43:55 +0000 http://www.argentinepost.com/?p=427#comment-661 Hey Jonhop, Thanks so much for your comments here! How fun to do a little philosophy. Thanks for the good logic, too. The argument you laid out here is valid, though I would argue not sound because premise 1 is, in my view, not true. But, as you said, this could be open to question and couldn't be proven deductively, I'd guess. (I'm not sure how'd you prove which kind of management strategies are most prudent.) Your syllogism also is a much better statement of what a logical argument using these ideas might look like. But, and this is key, the argument I argument I put forth was not my own, but what I believe to be the one CFK put forth, clumsily, in her speech. Your syllogism may very well represent CFK's logic, but I don't think it's representative of the argument she actually made while at the Council of the Americas. In any case, I'd say your syllogism certainly is a more plausible line of reasoning. Take care, and thanks again, Taos Hey Jonhop,
Thanks so much for your comments here! How fun to do a little philosophy. Thanks for the good logic, too. The argument you laid out here is valid, though I would argue not sound because premise 1 is, in my view, not true. But, as you said, this could be open to question and couldn’t be proven deductively, I’d guess. (I’m not sure how’d you prove which kind of management strategies are most prudent.) Your syllogism also is a much better statement of what a logical argument using these ideas might look like. But, and this is key, the argument I argument I put forth was not my own, but what I believe to be the one CFK put forth, clumsily, in her speech. Your syllogism may very well represent CFK’s logic, but I don’t think it’s representative of the argument she actually made while at the Council of the Americas. In any case, I’d say your syllogism certainly is a more plausible line of reasoning.
Take care, and thanks again,
Taos

]]> By: Zack http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/10/argentinas-new-economic-reality.html#comment-653 Zack Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:37:33 +0000 http://www.argentinepost.com/?p=427#comment-653 Taos, This is the most comprehensive, carefully argued analysis about Argentina I've seen in a long time - better than anything else out there. Very, very good piece. You're becoming my go-to guy on the place. Good work, Z Taos,
This is the most comprehensive, carefully argued analysis about Argentina I’ve seen in a long time – better than anything else out there. Very, very good piece. You’re becoming my go-to guy on the place.
Good work,
Z

]]> By: jonhop http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/10/argentinas-new-economic-reality.html#comment-650 jonhop Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:02:48 +0000 http://www.argentinepost.com/?p=427#comment-650 Premise 1 of your syllogism is wrong, since the question is whether Argentina needs a Plan B; not whether the US has or needs a Plan B. It therefore could be written as such, with a major premise first: 1. A 'plan B' is not needed if 'plan A' is working. 2. Agentina's Plan A is working Conclusion: Argentina does not need a plan B Whether the first premise is a universal truth or not, that is open to discussion. But I believe this syllogism best represents Fernandez's logic. Un saludo Premise 1 of your syllogism is wrong, since the question is whether Argentina needs a Plan B; not whether the US has or needs a Plan B.

It therefore could be written as such, with a major premise first:

1. A ‘plan B’ is not needed if ‘plan A’ is working.
2. Agentina’s Plan A is working
Conclusion: Argentina does not need a plan B

Whether the first premise is a universal truth or not, that is open to discussion. But I believe this syllogism best represents Fernandez’s logic.

Un saludo

]]> By: Ramiro http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/10/argentinas-new-economic-reality.html#comment-642 Ramiro Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:11:12 +0000 http://www.argentinepost.com/?p=427#comment-642 goes back to one thing I said in a comment to an old post in this blog: Argentina's consumption is high for the level of income of the average person because there is no confidence or trust in the Government when it comes to the banking and financial system. So people, those that have discretionary funds, will tend to want to get tangible items in exchange for those funds, rather than investing or saving for the future. Great post Taos, very well researched and reasoned. goes back to one thing I said in a comment to an old post in this blog: Argentina’s consumption is high for the level of income of the average person because there is no confidence or trust in the Government when it comes to the banking and financial system. So people, those that have discretionary funds, will tend to want to get tangible items in exchange for those funds, rather than investing or saving for the future.

Great post Taos, very well researched and reasoned.

]]>