Tous les forums
Mince un copain de Wakrap élu à la tête de l'Argentine
17/01/2024 à 17h25
wakrap écrivait:
------
> Vous n'arrivez pas à comprendre que la vie privée est privée, et que avoir des
> idées, n'implique pas de vouloir les imposer à tous.
bin l'interdiction de l'avortement si c'est pas imposer son idée aux femmes je sais pas ce que c'est... en tous cas la c'est pas du troll. si t'es libertarien t'es pour le droit a l'avortement.
apres moi je suis pour l'interdiction des moyens de contraception car ca va a l'encontre de la liberté des gamètes et contre les antibiotiques car c'est contre le droit des bacteries.
17/01/2024 à 17h37
Hokusai écrivait:
-------
> wakrap écrivait:
> ------
> > J'ai adoré l'update de la définition de socialisme: passer du controle des
> > moyens de production au controle de nos vie.
>
> oui enfin pour quelqu'un contre l'avortement, c'est a se tordre de rire .
> "libertarien" lol
Si tu considères que la vie démarre à partir du moment où le foetus est viable, l'avortement à partir de 25 semaines est un meurtre.
Si tu considères que la vie démarre à partir du moment où il y a un embryon, l'avortement est un meurtre.
Si tu considères que la vie démarre à l'accouchement, l'avortement n'est pas un meurtre.
Ce qui est amusant, c'est de considérer qu'il n'y a aucun débat philosophique à avoir sur cette question et qu'elle est nécessairement tranchée.
17/01/2024 à 17h39
Hokusai écrivait:
-------
> wakrap écrivait:
> ------
> > Vous n'arrivez pas à comprendre que la vie privée est privée, et que avoir des
> > idées, n'implique pas de vouloir les imposer à tous.
>
> bin l'interdiction de l'avortement si c'est pas imposer son idée aux femmes je
> sais pas ce que c'est... en tous cas la c'est pas du troll. si t'es libertarien
> t'es pour le droit a l'avortement.
>
> apres moi je suis pour l'interdiction des moyens de contraception car ca va a
> l'encontre de la liberté des gamètes et contre les antibiotiques car c'est
> contre le droit des bacteries.
La question n'est pas une question d'interdiction mais de loi. On peut tout autant dire que ceux qui sont pour l'extension de l'avortement au delà du texte de Simonne Veil sont tout autant contre la loi sur l'avortement que ceux qui sont totalement contre. Et tu as des personnes qui ont pratiqué des avortement qui sont contre l'extension de la loi ou la remise en cause de la clause de conscience qui y est introduite.
Car à un moment, il faut aussi bien que quelqu'un fasse les avortements et son droit mérite tout autant d'être respecté que celui des femmes.
On a des personnes qui sont pour le suicide assisté mais qui sont contre le fait de permettre à une personne de se suicider seul et qui parlent de respect de la volonté des personnes en l'empêchant de se suicider seul.
17/01/2024 à 17h44
Hokusai écrivait:
-------
> wakrap écrivait:
> ------
> > Vous n'arrivez pas à comprendre que la vie privée est privée, et que avoir des
> > idées, n'implique pas de vouloir les imposer à tous.
>
> bin l'interdiction de l'avortement si c'est pas imposer son idée aux femmes je
> sais pas ce que c'est... en tous cas la c'est pas du troll. si t'es libertarien
> t'es pour le droit a l'avortement.
>
> apres moi je suis pour l'interdiction des moyens de contraception car ca va a
> l'encontre de la liberté des gamètes et contre les antibiotiques car c'est
> contre le droit des bacteries.
enfin, tu devrais lire les bases du droit pour les nuls, même un gamin de 10 ans est capable de comprendre que certaines choses nécessitent un minimum de cohérence, donc n'ayant pas 10 ans, tu trolles.
17/01/2024 à 17h49
Pour la liberté des gamètes ?
C est possible, j en ai bien connu qui étaient contre la pipe.
Bon , elles n étaient pas libertines non plus .
T es con quand tu t y mets , Hoku .:-))
17/01/2024 à 19h32
enlaye écrivait:
------
> Pour la liberté des gamètes ?
> C est possible, j en ai bien connu qui étaient contre la pipe.
> Bon , elles n étaient pas libertines non plus .
> T es con quand tu t y mets , Hoku .:-))
va sur le fil des prothésistes y en a qui veulent coller des emax !!!! et bonne annee au passage.
17/01/2024 à 21h55
Hokusai écrivait:
-------
> enlaye écrivait:
> ------
> > Pour la liberté des gamètes ?
> > C est possible, j en ai bien connu qui étaient contre la pipe.
> > Bon , elles n étaient pas libertines non plus .
> > T es con quand tu t y mets , Hoku .:-))
>
> va sur le fil des prothésistes y en a qui veulent coller des emax !!!! et bonne
> annee au passage.
je teste en zircone avec la panavia cement universal. Images avant et après collage
5654_a_20240117_095406.jpg
5654_20240117_095406_1.jpg
5654_a4_20240117_100831.jpg
18/01/2024 à 04h40
la on touche le fond... cette voiture c est une geely... c est l equivalent de coller un autocollant de guevara sur une buick
18/01/2024 à 05h52
Euh, c'est avoir un tee shirt ou un autocollant Guevara le soucis, pas la Buick.
Sinon, ce pays a quand même un très très bon point, des bouffeurs d'écolos rotis avec une première place qui ne se dément pas.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1715195344575762761
18/01/2024 à 08h31
Quoi, tu vois un problème de cohérence à acheter une voiture moins cher car subventionnnée par des travailleurs communistes? C'est simplement du cynisme comme beaucoup ici quand ils achètent de l'électrique et en profitent sur le dos de ceux qui paient les taxes sur les autres énergies.
La différence c'est qu'il est plus facile de se foutre du chinois que de son voisin, généralement, mais pas pour tout le monde.
18/01/2024 à 21h02
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/the-president-of-argentinas-rallying
Summary of Javier Milei’s speech in Davos 2024 (in 20 quotes)
1: "Today I am here to tell you that the western world is in danger, and it's in danger because those who are supposed to defend the values of the west are co-opted by a vision of the world that inexorably leads to socialism, and thereby to poverty."
2: "Unfortunately, in recent decades, motivated by some well meaning individuals willing to help others, and others motivated by the desire to belong to a privileged class, the main leaders of the western world have abandoned the model of freedom for different versions of what we call collectivism."
3: "We are here to tell you that collectivist experiments are never the solution to the problems that afflict the citizens of the world, rather they are the root cause."
4: "The problem with neoclassical (economists) is the model they love so much does not match reality, so they attribute their own mistakes to the supposed market failure, rather than reviewing the premises of their model."
5: "On the pretext of the supposed market failures, regulations are introduced, which only create distortions in the price system, preventing economic calculation, and therefore, also prevent savings, investment, and growth.".
6: "Not even supposedly libertarian economists understand what the market is, because if they did understand it, they would quickly see that it's impossible for something alone the lines of market failure to exist."
7: "Talking about market failure is an oxymoron, there are no market failures, if transaction are voluntary the only context where it can be a market failure is coercion, and the only one that is able to coerce is the state."
8: "Faced with the theoretical demonstration that state intervention is harmful, and the empirical evidence that it has failed, the solution proposed by the collectivists is not greater freedom but rather greater regulation. Greater regulation which creates a downwards spiral until we are all poor, and the life of all of us depend on a bureaucrat sitting somewhere in a luxury office."
9: "Given the dismal failure of collectivist models, and the undeniable advances in the free world, socialists were lead to change their agenda. They left behind the class struggle based on the economic system, and replaced it with other supposed social conflicts, which are just as harmful to life as a community, and to economic growth."
10: "Today's states don't need to directly control the means of production to control every aspect of the life of individuals. With tools like printing money, debt, subsidies, control of the interest rate, price controls, and regulations to correct the so called market failures, they can control the lives and fates of millions of individuals."
11: "They say that capitalism is evil because it's individualistic and that collectivism is good because it's altruistic, of course with the money of others."
12: "Those who promote social justice, they advocate the idea that the whole economy is a pie that can be shared in better ways, but that pie is not a fixed given, it's wealth that get generated in what Israel Kirzner for instance calls a Market Discovery Process."
13: "If the state punishes the capitalists when they are successful, and gets in the way of the (Market) Discovery Process, they will destroy their incentives and the consequence is that they will produce less, and the pie will be smaller, and this will harm society as a whole."
14: "Collectivism, by inhibiting the (Market) Discovery Process and hindering the appropriation of discoveries, ends up binding the hands of entrepreneurs and preventing them to provide better goods and services at a better price."
15: "Thanks to free enterprise capitalism, the world is now living its best moment, never in all of mankind's or humanity's history there has been a time of more prosperity than today. Today's world is more free, more rich, more peaceful, and more prosperous than in any other time of human history. And this is particularly true for those countries that respect economic freedom and the property rights of individuals."
16: "The capitalist, the successful entrepreneur, is a social benefactor, who far from appropriating the wealth of others, contributes to the general well-being of all. Ultimately, a successful entrepreneur is a hero."
17: "Libertarianism is the unrestricted respect for the project of life of others, based on the non-aggression principle, in defense of the right to life, to liberty, and to property. With its fundamental institutions being: Private property, markets free from state intervention, free competition, the division of labor, and social cooperation. Where you can only be successful by serving others with goods of better quality at a best price."
18: "The impoverishment produced by collectivism is no fantasy, nor it is fatalism, it's a reality that we in Argentina have known very well for at least 100 years." "We have lived through it, and we are here to warn you about what can happen if the countries in the western world -that became rich through the model of freedom-, stay on this road to serfdom."
19: "We come here today to invite other countries in the western world to return to the path of prosperity. Economic freedom, limited government, and the unrestricted respect for private property, are essential elements for economic growth."
20: "In concluding, I would like to leave a message for all entrepreneurs and business people here, and for those who are not here in person but are following from around the world:
Do not be intimidated either by the political caste nor by parasites who live off the state. Do not surrender yourself to a political class that only wants to perpetuate itself in power and keep their privileges.
You are social benefactors, you are heroes, you are the creators of the most extraordinary period of prosperity we have ever seen. Let no one tell you that your ambition is immoral. If you make money, it's because you offer a better product at the best price, thereby contributing to the general well-being. Do not yield to the advance of the state. The state is not the solution, the state is the problem itself. You are the true protagonists of this story.
And rest assured that starting today, you can count on Argentina as an unconditional ally.
Long Live Freedom, Dammit!"
“Who is Robert Malone” is a reader supported publication. Please consider a subscription to support our work.
Type your email...
Subscribe
The full transcript:
The conclusion is obvious. Far from being the cause of our problems, free trade capitalism as an economic system is the only instrument we have to end hunger, poverty and extreme poverty across our planet. The empirical evidence is unquestionable. Therefore, since there is no doubt that free enterprise capitalism is superior in productive terms, the left-wing DOXA has attacked capitalism alleging matters of morality. Saying, that's what the detractors claim, that it's unjust. They say that capitalism is evil because it's individualistic and that collectivism is good because it's altruistic, of course with the money of others. So they therefore advocate for social justice.
But this concept, which in the developed world became fashionable in recent times, in my country has been a constant in political discourse for over 80 years. The problem is that social justice is not just and it doesn't contribute either to the general wellbeing. Quite on the contrary, it's an intrinsically unfair idea because it's violent. It's unjust because the state is financed through tax and taxes are collected coercively. Or can any one of us say that they voluntarily pay taxes? Which means that the state is financed through coercion. And the higher the tax burden, the higher the coercion and the lower the freedom.
Those who promote social justice, the advocates, start with the idea that the whole economy is a pie that can be shared differently. But that pie is not a given. It's wealth that is generated in what Israel Kirzner, for instance, calls a market discovery process. If the goods or services offered by a business are not wanted, the business will fail unless it adapts to what the market is demanding. If they make a good quality product at an attractive price, they will do well and produce more. So the market is a discovery process in which the capitalists will find the right path as they move forward. But if the state punishes capitalists when they're successful and gets in the way of the discovery process, they will destroy their incentives and the consequence is that they will produce less, the pie will be smaller and this will harm society as a whole. Collectivism by inhibiting these discovery processes and hindering the appropriation of discoveries ends up binding the hands of entrepreneurs and prevents them from offering better goods and services at a better price.
So how come that academia, international organizations, economic theory and politics demonize an economic system that has not only lifted out of extreme poverty 90% of the world's population, but has continued to do this faster and faster? And this is morally superior and just. Thanks to free trade capitalism, it is to be seen that the world is now living its best moment. Never in all of mankind's or humanity's history has there been a time of more prosperity than today. This is a true for all. The world of today has more freedom, is rich, is more peaceful and prosperous. And this is particularly true for countries that have more freedom and have economic freedom and respect the property rights of individuals. Because countries that have more freedom are 12 times richer than those that are repressed. And the lowest decile in terms of distribution in free countries are better off than 90% of the population of repressed countries. And poverty is 25 times lower and extreme poverty is 50 times lower. And citizens in free countries live 25% longer than citizens in repressed countries.
Now what is it that we mean when we talk about libertarianism? And let me quote the words of the greatest authority on freedom in Argentina, Professor Alberto Benegas Lynch Jr. Who says that, "Libertarianism is the unrestricted respect for the life project of others based on the principle of non-aggression, in defense of the right to life, liberty and property. Its fundamental institutions being private property, markets free from state intervention, free competition, the division of labor and social cooperation. As part of which, success is achieved only by serving others with goods of better quality or at a better price." In other words, capitalists, successful business people are social benefactors, who far from appropriating the wealth of others contribute to the general wellbeing. Ultimately, a successful entrepreneur is a hero.
And this is the model that we are advocating for the Argentina of the future, a model based on the fundamental principles of libertarianism. The defense of life, of freedom and of property. Now, if free enterprise capitalism and economic freedom have proven to be extraordinary instruments to end poverty in the world and we are now at the best time in the history of humanity, it is worth asking why I say that the West is endangered. And I say this precisely because in those of our countries that should defend the values of the free market, private property and the other institutions of libertarianism, sectors of the political and economic establishment. Some due to mistakes in their theoretical framework and others due to a greed for power are undermining the foundations of libertarianism opening up the doors to socialism and potentially condemning us to poverty, misery and stagnation.
It should never be forgotten that socialism is always and everywhere an impoverishing phenomenon that has failed in all countries where it's been tried out. It's been a failure economically, socially, culturally and it also murdered over 100 million human beings. The essential problem in the West today is not just that we need to come to grips with those who even after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the overwhelming empirical evidence, continued to advocate for impoverishing socialism. But there's also our own leaders, thinkers and academics who are relying on a misguided theoretical framework, undermine the fundamentals of the system that has given us the greatest expansion of wealth and prosperity in our history.
The theoretical framework to which I refer is that of neoclassical economic theory. Which designs a set of instruments that unwillingly or without meaning to ends up serving the intervention by the state's socialism and social degradation. The problem with neoclassicals is that the model they fell in love with does not map reality, so they put down their mistakes to supposed market failures rather than reviewing the premises of the model. On the pretext of a supposed market failure, regulations are introduced which only create distortions in the price system, prevent economic calculus and therefore also prevent saving, investment and growth.
This problem lies mainly in the fact that not even supposedly libertarian economists understand what the market is. Because if they did understand, it would quickly be seen that it's impossible for there to be something along the lines of market failures. The market is not a mere graph describing a curve of supply and demand. The market is a mechanism for social cooperation where you voluntarily exchange ownership rights. Therefore, based on this definition, talking about a market failure is an oxymoron. There are no market failures. If transactions are voluntary, the only context in which there can be a market failure is if there is coercion. And the only one that is able to coerce generally is the state, which holds a monopoly on violence.
Consequently, if someone considers that there is a market failure, I would suggest that they check to see if there's state intervention involved. And if they find that that's not the case, I would suggest that they check again because obviously there's a mistake. Market failures do not exist. An example of these so-called market failures described by the neoclassicals are the concentrated structures of the economy. However, without increasing returns to scale functions, whose counterpart are the concentrated structures of the economy, we couldn't possibly explain economic growth since the year 1800 until today. Isn't this interesting? Since the year 1800 onwards, with population multiplying by eight or nine times, per capita GDP grown by over 15 times. So there are growing returns which took extreme poverty from 95% to 5%.
However, the presence of growing returns involves concentrated structures, what we would call a monopoly. How come then that something that has generated so much wellbeing for the neoclassical theory is a market failure? Neoclassical economists think outside of the box. When the model fails, you shouldn't get angry with reality but rather with the model and change it. The dilemma faced by the neoclassical model is that they say they wish to perfect the function of the market by attacking what they consider to be failures. But in so doing, they don't just open up the doors to socialism but also go against economic growth. An example, regulating monopolies, destroying their profits and destroying growing returns automatically would destroy economic growth. In other words, whatever you want to correct, a suppose market failure inexorably, as a result of not knowing what the market is or as a result of having fallen in love with a failed model, you're opening up the doors to socialism and condemning people to poverty.
However, faced with the theoretical demonstration that state intervention is harmful and the empirical evidence that it has failed couldn't have been otherwise. The solution to be proposed by collectivists is not greater freedom, but rather greater regulation. Which creates a downward spiral of regulations until we're all poorer and the life of all of us depends on a bureaucrat sitting in a luxury office. Given the dismal failure of collectivist models and the undeniable advances in the free world, socialists were forced to change their agenda. They left behind the class struggle based on the economic system and replaced this with other supposed social conflicts which are just as harmful to life as a community and to economic growth. The first of these new battles was the ridiculous and unnatural fight between man and woman. Libertarianism already provides for equality of the sexes. The cornerstone of our creed says that all humans are created equal. That we all have the same unalienable rights granted by the creator, including life, freedom and ownership.
All that this radical feminism agenda has led to is greater state intervention to hinder the economic process, giving a job to bureaucrats who have not contributed anything to society. Examples, ministries of women or international organizations devoted to promoting this agenda. Another conflict presented by socialists is that of humans against nature. Claiming that we human beings damage the planet, which should be protected at all costs. Even going as far as advocating for population control mechanisms or the bloody abortion agenda. Unfortunately, these harmful ideas have taken a stronghold in our society. Neo-Marxists have managed to co-opt the common sense of the Western world. And this they have achieved by appropriating the media, culture, universities and also international organizations. The latter case is the most serious one probably because these are institutions that have enormous influence on political and economic decisions of the countries that make up the multilateral organizations.
Fortunately, there's more and more of us who are daring to make our voices heard. Because we see that if we don't truly and decisively fight against these ideas, the only possible fate is for us to have increasing levels of state regulation, socialism, poverty and less freedom. And therefore, we'll be having worse standards of living. The West has unfortunately already started to go along this path. I know to many it may sound ridiculous to suggest that the west has turned to socialism. But it's only ridiculous if you only limit yourself to the traditional economic definition of socialism, which says that it's an economic system where the state owns the means of production. This definition, in my view, should be updated in the light of current circumstances. Today states don't need to directly control the means of production to control every aspect of the lives of individuals. With tools such as printing money, debt, subsidies, controlling the interest rate, price controls and regulations to correct the so-called market failures, they can control the lives and fates of millions of individuals.
This is how we come to the point where, by using different names or guises, a good deal of the generally accepted political offers in most Western countries are collectivist variants. Whether they proclaim to be openly communists, fascists, Nazis, socialists, social Democrats, nationalists, socialists, Democrat Christians or Christian Democrats, neo-Keynesians, progressive, populists, nationalists or globalists. At bottom, there are no major differences. They all say that the state should steer all aspects of the lives of individuals. They all defend a model contrary to that one which led humanity to the most spectacular progress in its history.
We have come here today to invite the rest of the countries in the Western world to get back on the path of prosperity, economic freedom, limited government and unlimited respect for private property, essential elements for economic growth. And the impoverishment produced by collectivism is no fantasy nor is it an escapable fate. But it's a reality that we Argentines know very well. We have lived through this, we have been through this, because as I said earlier, ever since we decided to abandon the model of freedom that had made us rich, we have been caught up in a downward spiral as part of which we are poorer and poorer day by day.
So this is something we have lived through and we are here to warn you about what could happen if the countries in the Western world that became rich through the model of freedom stay on this path of servitude. The case of Argentina is an empirical demonstration that no matter how rich you may be or how much you may have in terms of natural resources or how skilled your population may be or educated or how many bars of gold you may have in the central bank, if measures are adopted that hinder the free function of markets, free competition, free price systems, if you hinder trade, if you attack private property, the only possible fate is poverty.
Therefore, in concluding, I would like to leave a message for all business people here and for those who are not here in person but are following from around the world. Do not be intimidated either by the political class or by parasites who live off the state. Do not surrender to a political class that only wants to stay in power and retain its privileges. You are social benefactors, you're heroes, you are the creators of the most extraordinary period of prosperity we've ever seen. Let no one tell you that your ambition is immoral. If you make money, it's because you offer a better product at a better price, thereby contributing to general wellbeing. Do not surrender to the advance of the state. The state is not the solution, the state is the problem itself. You are the true protagonists of this story. And rest assured that as from today, Argentina is your staunch, unconditional ally. Thank you very much and long live freedom, dammit.
19/01/2024 à 06h50
C'est pas Francisco d'Anconia, mais le coeur y est.
https://academiebitcoin.fr/francisco-danconia-sur-largent/
19/01/2024 à 11h00
Milei qui va au WEF (en avion de ligne commercial) pour leur expliquer qu'ils doivent se foutre leur globalisme socialisant dans le fion, c'était beau
19/01/2024 à 21h02
l'IA est impressionante.
Ici son discours intégral retravaillé où tu as sa voix les mouvememnts des lèvres et évidemment les mot en français.
Nous allons vers un monde étonnant avec tout ceci.
https://twitter.com/actujaviermilei/status/1748404817171566892
19/01/2024 à 21h54
C'est un peu une révolution intellectuelle.
en dehors du discours de Milei au forum, en interne c'est étonnant de voir même les journalistes envoyer chier les syndicalistes.
Les gens y croient, carajo!
https://twitter.com/BowTiedMara/status/1748435184070823995
24/01/2024 à 12h43
wakrap écrivait:
------
> l'IA est impressionante.
> Ici son discours intégral retravaillé où tu as sa voix les mouvememnts des
> lèvres et évidemment les mot en français.
> Nous allons vers un monde étonnant avec tout ceci.
>
> https://twitter.com/actujaviermilei/status/1748404817171566892
Sauf que l'Argentine n'a jamais été une puissance mondiale comme il le dit.
On va juste vers un monde de post-vérité
24/01/2024 à 13h56
En 1913, l'argentine était devant la france en terme de pib par habitant...
24/01/2024 à 14h15
king_zoulou écrivait:
-----------
> En 1913, l'argentine était devant la france en terme de pib par habitant...
Oui 12ème
L’une a grimpé et l’autre a dégringolé
Dans un autre post de wak milei dit que dans 35 ans l’argentine redeviendra la première puissance mondiale
Et comme tu le cites en 1913 l’Argentine etait a son apogée économique
c'est le redeviendra qui m'interpelle
24/01/2024 à 15h14
Olieve écrivait:
> Sauf que l'Argentine n'a jamais été une puissance mondiale comme il le dit. On va juste vers un monde de post-vérité>
Si, après guerre qd l'économie occidentale était à genoux.
--
Schooner For Ever
24/01/2024 à 15h25
croc1765 écrivait:
--------
> king_zoulou écrivait:
> -----------
> > En 1913, l'argentine était devant la france en terme de pib par habitant...
> Oui 12ème
> L’une a grimpé et l’autre a dégringolé
> Dans un autre post de wak milei dit que dans 35 ans l’argentine redeviendra la
> première puissance mondiale
> Et comme tu le cites en 1913 l’Argentine etait a son apogée économique
> c'est le redeviendra qui m'interpelle
Peut-etre un problème de traduction ?
Moi je l'ai entendu dire qu'il voulait que dans 35 ans l'argentine redevienne une puissance mondiale de premier plan.
24/01/2024 à 16h43
king_zoulou écrivait:
-----------
> croc1765 écrivait:
> --------
> > king_zoulou écrivait:
> > -----------
> > > En 1913, l'argentine était devant la france en terme de pib par habitant...
> > Oui 12ème
> > L’une a grimpé et l’autre a dégringolé
> > Dans un autre post de wak milei dit que dans 35 ans l’argentine redeviendra
> la
> > première puissance mondiale
> > Et comme tu le cites en 1913 l’Argentine etait a son apogée économique
> > c'est le redeviendra qui m'interpelle
>
> Peut-etre un problème de traduction ?
> Moi je l'ai entendu dire qu'il voulait que dans 35 ans l'argentine redevienne
> une puissance mondiale de premier plan.
tiens c'est le 1er lien de wak
https://twitter.com/actumileifrance/status/1742157693882679590
deuxieme
https://twitter.com/i/status/1748404817171566892
original
https://www.casarosada.gob.ar/informacion/discursos/50299-palabras-del-presidente-de-la-nacion-javier-milei-en-el-54-reunion-anual-del-foro-economico-mundial-de-davos
Cuando adoptamos el modelo de la libertad – allá por el año 1860 – en 35 años nos convertimos en la primera potencia mundial, mientras que cuando abrazamos el colectivismo, a lo largo de los últimos 100 años, vimos como nuestros ciudadanos comenzaron a empobrecerse sistemáticamente, hasta caer en el puesto número 140 del mundo