MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Cristina Fernandez back in court: Judge decides inhibition on her properties
Former Argentine President Cristina Fernandez on Wednesday filed a complaint against the judge who recently opened an investigation into allegations she defrauded the state as part of her government's handling of the dollar futures market. Fernandez, who governed Argentina from 2007 to 2015, filed the complaint against judge Claudio Bonadio after appearing in his court in connection with the case. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesSuch a shame that she's being harassed and pursued by investigators. Still, she has nothing to worry about because everything was legal and above board. Wasn't it? I seem to recall that this board constantly returned to the subjects of the disparity between her income and her “declared” assets, the information about bags full of cash being carried to underground vaults at her properties, the flights of Tango 01 carrying bags of cash to tax havens. I'm sure it can all be explained!
Jul 07th, 2016 - 08:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Glad to see the Argies grow a pair and investigate this lout. Like Chavez she has likely embezzled a billion dollars or more. Jail for her and fat Maximo is the acceptable outcome.
Jul 07th, 2016 - 12:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Down they go!!!
Jul 07th, 2016 - 12:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Enrique Massot...Where are you now?...still protecting your “leader”?
Jul 07th, 2016 - 01:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0President Macri desperately needs distraction when the country is aching under his painful economic adjustment.
Jul 07th, 2016 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Several judges have issued injunctions prohibiting the application of horrendous utility bill increases--Argentines are being poisoned by carbon monoxide from using charcoal to heat their homes--and the government is now seeking a Supreme Court ruling quashing all those injunctions at once.
The dollar future operation was an act of government not subject to common justice--only in Macri's Argentina. On top of that, it could only work for speculators if Macri resulted elect and decided to devaluate the peso--something he had promised not to do it if elected.
The real kick is who benefited--and benefited they did--from the alleged maneuver: powerful corporations such as the Clarin group and wealthy individuals close to the Macri government.
Again, the problem for Macri is how to implement a program of subtracting wealth from the majority of the population to the benefit of a wealthy minority--in the context of the Constitution.
In the past, such massive transfers of wealth were achieved with support from the tanks and troops on the streets, killing and maiming large numbers of Argentines.
Macri, instead, is forced to rely on the complicity of members of the judiciary and the mainstream media.
As Prat-Gay said in typical gangster style, “the dirty job is almost done” and “president Macri was courageous to spend his political capital” on this heartless re-appropriation through economical measures.
@5 “ ....horrendous utility bill increases...”
Jul 07th, 2016 - 02:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The difference between the cost of one cup of coffee per month earlier, and the price of three cups of coffee per month afterwards.
When the cost of utilities is almost nothing, it encourages waste. Which is precisely what was happening with the nearly-free electricity rates earlier.
The Spanish-language press had a history of criticising the Kirchner rate structure for its absurd levels of subsidy. In the following article we see that over a million residences in Bs As paid about US$0.65 a month for electricity. Another 1.4 million paid between US$0.66 and US$1.62 a month. Now do the arithmetic and multiply those by 3 to get typical current rates and we see that electricity is still nearly free.
Pa que el reekie entienda:
“Factura de luz más barata que un café”
http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2015/08/05/actualidad/1438801014_193534.html
“Un millón de hogares de Buenos Aires pagan por una factura de la luz hasta 0,65 dólares por mes, es decir menos que lo que vale un alfajor, la golosina preferida de los argentinos. Otros 1,4 millones de casas abonan entre 0,66 y 1,62 dólares por mes, o sea, menos de lo que cuesta un café solo en los bares porteños. Un millón de viviendas paga por la electricidad entre 1,62 y 4,34 por mes, casi como una botella de tres litros de Coca-Cola.”
Reekie again rising to defend the indefensible, in the most mendacious argentine manner. Que viva el mentirismo.
#5 “President Macri desperately needs distraction...”
Jul 07th, 2016 - 05:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just because you are so easily distracted and bought by a choripan doesn't mean that this is Macri's approach.
“...horrendous utility bill increases...”
Just curious, had any power cuts recently?
“...an act of government not subject to common justice...”
So, it is legal if the government does it?
“the problem for Macri is how to implement a program of subtracting wealth from the majority of the population to the benefit of a wealthy minority”
Well, if he wanted to do that he could have simply carried on doing exactly what CFK did because she was remarkably effective at that! But he clearly isn't doing what CFK did.
“In the past, such massive transfers of wealth were achieved with support from the tanks and troops on the streets, killing and maiming large numbers of Argentines.”
CFK, instead, was forced to rely on the complicity of members of the judiciary and the mainstream media by using bribes, threats or suiciding.
“As Prat-Gay said in typical gangster style, “the dirty job is almost done””
...presumably meaning that the corrupting influence of the K gangsters had almost been cleaned up. Good news, surely?
“president Macri was courageous to spend his political capital” so he's tidied things up and cleared the decks for future improvements. Again, good news?
All rgs lie.
Jul 07th, 2016 - 05:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All hogs must be allowed to gorge at the rg government trough of graft.
@5
Jul 07th, 2016 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The dollar future operation was an act of government not subject to common justice”? “if Macri resulted elect and decided to devaluate the peso--something he had promised not to do it if elected¨”?
FALSE STATEMENTS
During the last months of CFK the amount of dollar insurance sky-rocketed from the regular U$D 5.000 millions to U$D 18.000 millions. This insurance was originally developed to assure comex operations but the CBRA (during CFK government) operated it as a regular investment. Basically, to reduce the preasure over the USD dollar. In addition, the law forces the CB to assure the dollar at AT LEAST (never below) the cheapest private operations of the same nature. In NY this insurance were agreed at AR$ 15 but the CBRA decided to insurance them at AR$ 10.- So, there is a clear violation of the law.
In addition, the ver last week of CFK the pasive of the CBRA was U$D 63.000 millions backed by only U$D 25.000 millions. Not devaluating the argentine currency will mean a hiper-inflation and another big financial crisis.
So, summing up, the new and “just arrived” government was forced to devaluate the peso. In addition, Macri had told (in several interviews) that he will stop with the “dollar clamp” (something that CFK denied it existed).
Reekie: “.....horrendous utility bill increases...”
Jul 07th, 2016 - 06:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Under the Kirchnerista governments, essentially people in the Bs As province were not paying their electricity costs. ”Paying“ US$1 to $3 a month is not even beginning to cover the costs.
What's one of the first things that a typical leftist-populist government does to seduce the masses? Promises of things ”for free.“
And naturally the clueless media in the West picked up ”increases of 300 percent! OMG!! “
If they had instead published ”Argentines will be forced to pay up to US$9 a month for electricity! OMG!! ” --- then a few might have realised what tools they are.
There is no almuerzo gratis. In 2014 more than 12 percent of the national budget was used to pay energy subsides. Electrical power generation infrastructure and capacity have decayed as those services were money-losing businesses.
Unfortunately, this is a common feature of the Sudacamerican countries. In the southernmost region of Chile, Magallanes, the people receive natural gas that is subsidised by about 80 percent. Just as in Argentina where there are insanely high subsidies for energy, there is massive energy waste. In Punta Arenas (latitude 53 deg S) it is not uncommon for homes and offices to have no effective insulation, but the gas heaters are blazing away in rooms at nearly 35 degrees C in midwinter.
Reekie still wants us to believe that the big bad wolf is stealing candy from children.
Hear, hear the chorus arguing against the hated “subsidies.”
Jul 07th, 2016 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Come on people. To read your righteous outcry one could assume the whole thing is made up.
We still need to read statements such as Martillazo's at #10 claiming that Chileans at Punta Arenas heat their rooms at ”nearly 35 degrees Celsius!!! (95 F), which is akin to a martillazo on the pinky!!
Still, your hero Macri will pay a price for his lack of social sensitivity--but what do you care?
No matter what, even if islanders and other free market white knights won't give a hoot about it, some areas--some individuals or businesses are worse off than others--the “tarifazo” is a problem in today's Argentina.
According to La Nación, the Federal Court of La Plata declared today null and void Energy Ministry resolutions allowing increases in gas bills and ordered them rolled back.
Earlier this week the same happened in Córdoba, where the courts ordered to roll back the costs to March 31 and ordered franchisee Distribuidora de Gas del Centro (Ecogas), not to disconnect the service to users not paying the increase.
Some days ago, Chubut went to court to expand its previous claims that gas bill increases are unconstitutional and asked that increases of as much as 400 per cent for residential users and up to 500 per cent for commercial and industrial clients be annulled.
“This occurs at a sensible time,” La Nación notes. “On one side, the Government attempts to establish new prices, while on the other hand there is an outcry against the bill increases and the inflation.”
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1916324-la-justicia-anulo-el-aumento-del-gas-en-la-provincia-de-buenos-aires
Oh, but I forgot. La Nación has surely been infiltrated by Kirchnerists.
I doubt that you (Reekie) could find Punta Arenas on the map, and have certainly never been there in winter. I go there almost once a month. As a result, I have a pretty good idea of the effects of the heavy subsidies and the resulting waste that comes when consumers pay almost nothing for their heating gas.
Jul 08th, 2016 - 12:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Reekie's allegations are a splendid indictment of the inability of Argentines to manage an economy, where a monthly gas bill that was about US$3 and changes to US$9 a month (pretty much the average residential situation in Bs As), becomes a “constitutional” issue (there is nothing in the Argentine constitution that deals with limiting the authority of the executive branch to establish and regulate tariffs, nor is the judiciary given the authority to regulate tariffs, though Kirchnerist appointees will certainly allege otherwise). Further evidence of the inability and unwillingness of Argentina to actually manage its economy, as Peronism continues to assure the descerebrados that they deserve everything free free free!!
And you wonder why I laugh at this toy country?
Free cake for all!
Jul 08th, 2016 - 12:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeekie?
#12 Marti!
Jul 08th, 2016 - 01:45 am - Link - Report abuse 035 degrees Celsius!
Noooo I am frying only at the thought of it. Can we settle for 25? (that's quite a stretch already).
Thank you for my laugh of the day.
Reekie, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that you should fry.
Jul 08th, 2016 - 03:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0Now find Punta Arenas on the map. Now visit Punta Arenas in midwinter. In the shops where the workers are not the ones who pay the heating bills (particularly the women) , you will find many places where you will indeed fry.
There is a larger world than that of your tiny argentine experience.
#15 Marti Llazo
Jul 08th, 2016 - 04:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0Now come on, Marti! You blew it and you know it. The ridiculous number you put forward to justify your theory--people heating places at 35 degrees C because gas is soooo cheap--is just too high for comfort--it does not matter whether you frigging pay or not. People's comfort zone is 20-25 and that's it.
Trying to cover your gaffe, you are now talking about my “tiny” argentine experience--and you really don't know s...t. I've been in my home country from south end to north, in many places not as a tourist--lived and worked. Got to know my country people and love them. I've enjoyed Chilean hospitality in beautiful Punta Arenas too and also been in Rio Grande and Ushuaia at a time when crossing el Paso Garibaldi was quite an experience. I've been eating mangos in Posadas, Misiones, and so on. So don't bragg about others' experiences.
Reekie, if you have never been to Punta Arenas in winter to experience the tendency to grossly overheat offices and residences, then your claim is worthless.
Jul 08th, 2016 - 01:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@16 Enrique..I'm still waiting for your reply.
Jul 08th, 2016 - 03:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you going back to your usuall attitude of ignoring me?..I know it is hard to reply but your lack or arguments is more than evident. o
#18 pgerman
Jul 08th, 2016 - 07:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Never despair.
Judge Claudio Bonadio, who was taken away the AMIA investigation after keeping the file in his desk without changes for five years, accumulates scores of judicial irregularities in his CV. He went after Cristina with no denunciation was against her, but because “she ought to know.”
As evidence, the maverick judge has:
A few newspaper clippings, a twit and the opinion of a couple economists enemies of Kirchnerism.
If Bonadio applies the same criteria he does in regard to the “dolar futuro,” he should no doubt be after minister Prat Gay and Central Bank president Federico Sturzenegger for the loss of U.S. $5 billion through loans to several commercial banks. He should also investigate the cost to the State of the very high interest rates the Central Bank is paying to prevent the dollar from going up in value --something estimated at U.S. $160 billion.
However, the actions of the diligent Menem-appointed judge are clear to anybody in Argentina, that is, they are politically motivated and aim to benefit someone in particular--in the current case, the Macri government, who desperately needs distraction at a moment of turmoil for his six-month old, devastating government.
@19
Jul 08th, 2016 - 11:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Enrique, please, do not try to divert the focus of the discussion. It is not about Prat Gay or Federico Sturzenegger or, even, not about Mauricio Macri, They can be corrupt people. I won't defend them at all.
We are discussing about CFK and her responsibility in the dollar insusance affair.
During the last months of CFK the amount of dollar insurance sky-rocketed from the regular U$D 5.000 millions to U$D 18.000 millions. This insurance was originally developed to assure comex operations but the BCRA (during CFK government) operated it as a regular investment bought by regular companies not related at all with exportations or importations. In addition, the law forces the BCRA to assure the dollar at AT LEAST (never below) the cheapest private operations of the same nature. In NY this insurance were agreed at AR$ 15 but the CBRA decided to insurance them at AR$ 10.- So, there is a clear violation of the law.
In addition, the ver last week of CFK the pasive of the BCRA was U$D 63.000 millions backed by only U$D 25.000 millions. Not devaluating the argentine currency will mean a hiper-inflation and another big financial crisis.
Please, I would like to read your opinion about these tow issues. The increase of the amount of the insurance and the chances of not devaluating the argentine peso.
#20 pgerman
Jul 11th, 2016 - 08:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0It is true that the Kirchnerist government created the conditions for the Banco Central to lose money. However, for such losses to happen, a devaluation needed to be decided, and that decision was made by the Macri government.
Your contention that a devaluation needed to be made is shared--obviously--by Macri, but again, it was a political decision as much as an economical one.
Cambiemos officials including Prat Gay denounced former Central Bank president Vanoli, and then negotiated a cancellation of some of the agreements--and their renewal at 12.05 to 12.55 pesos.
After that agreement took place, the Macri government eliminated exchange controls, plunging the peso by 40 per cent and bringing the dollar to 13.75 pesos--that is, an exchange rate higher than agreed upon, which caused the Central Bank losses.
Who benefited? No CFK, no Axel Kicilloff or Vanoli.
Large banks, main consulting firms, investors, foreign companies and particularly corporations linked to the main officials of the Macri government won the jackpot.
If the politicians are not in power for fattening their offshore accounts; they are wasting time!
Jul 11th, 2016 - 01:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Reeko, Since you didn't answer my question at #7 “Just curious, had any power cuts recently?” I assume that the answer was no and you didn't want to share the good news that charging realistic rates for energy was already allowing some improvements in service. :-)
Jul 11th, 2016 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For about 70 percent of the electricity users (residential accounts) in greater Bs As, the increase in monthly rates is less than 80 ARS, or less than about US$5.50 Yes peronismo is trying to make a constitutional issue out such tiny tariff increases.
Jul 11th, 2016 - 07:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh, and those in lower economic conditions receive publicly funded electric service ( the so-called “ tarifa social” which means zero payment for the first 150 kWh/month).
And still they complain.
23 Zaphod
Jul 12th, 2016 - 12:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Look. I know the CFK government left flaws in the country's energy supply. However, at this point of the Tarifazo brought up by Macri it's a bit rich to brag as you do. Come on. Are you suggesting that “charging realistic rates for energy” has already allowed energy providers to solve their structural shortcomings and produce some “improvements in service?” That would be quick, wouldn't it?
@24 Marti
“And still they complaint.”
Hear, hear again the stern lecturer telling Argentines they must just pay and shut up.
Newsflash to you, MartiMacri Neocon: This tarifazo has prompted social unrest and several judges across the country have reminded Macri he just can't do whatever he wants. All consumers have been told not to pay up the natural gas bills.
Macri is holding to his guns and wants the Supreme Court to quash all those “maverick” judges and let the increases stand.
However, in his haste to do what the energy corporations asked, Macri forgot a small detail of which you are also unaware:
Before allowing for increases in utility bills, public hearings must be held. It's a consumers' right enshrined in the Constitution.
Why Macri refuses to have those hearings? Is perhaps because the companies will be then forced to open their books and justify the increases?
“Yes peronismo is trying to make a constitutional issue out such tiny tariff increases.”
My gosh. You really have no idea of what's going on--but get all chirpy when s..t happens in Argentina. Get some real news and then we can talk again.
#25 “Look. I know the CFK government left flaws in the country's energy supply. ”
Jul 12th, 2016 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Good that you recognise that.
“... it's a bit rich to brag as you do. Come on. Are you suggesting that “charging realistic rates for energy” has already allowed energy providers to solve their structural shortcomings and produce some “improvements in service?””
I wasn't bragging, or suggesting anything, merely asking the question. I am genuinely curious. However, you still haven't answered the question.
“ That would be quick, wouldn't it?”
It would, and it would be unrealistic to expect them to fix all of their problems overnight but it is entirely possible that charging realistic rates for energy could allow allow energy providers to rapidly solve some “low hanging fruit” problems that have indeed produced some improvements in service.
It was a simple question that you aren't answering. Why not?
If the service had got worse you'd have been complaining about it and blaming Macri. If the service was the same, then (as you say) these things take time. However, if the service had indeed improved you would avoid answering the question and deflect because you don't want to give any credit to Macri, you may even be incredulous that things could improve so quickly.
On the available evidence, the latter scenario seems most likely. :-)
Apart from boosting spending for state universities by 500 million pesos, growing the economy by 0.5%, helping Siemens announce the intention to provide us with 6,000 jobs, releasing the dollar clamp, starting the process of paying off our international debts which was a hole dug ever deeper for him by the previous administration's refusal to comply with their contractual obligations, stopping INDEC from lying about how bad we were doing, paying the pensioners, reducing inflation and reducing the number of power cuts, what did Macri ever do for us?
An article from the pro-Peronist Buenos Aires Herald, in 2014. Note the impact that the excessive energy subsidies had (and still have) on the national budget, and how this has contributed to high inflation in Argentina. Observe also the devaluation of the argie peso since this article was written (dollar now hovering at about 15 ARS) -- and remember that such devaluation effectively makes that imported natural gas even more expensive for Argentina, while resulting in less revenue to actually pay for it. In effect, also less money for infrastructure.
Jul 12th, 2016 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The mismanagement of the energy sector lies at the root of the government´s economic woes. Importing fuel contributes to the drainage of Central Bank reserves, since fuel has to be paid with actual dollars. This drainage in turn generates uncertainty regarding macroeconomic stability, and fuels speculation regarding a future devaluation, feeding the rise of the black market dollar, currently trading at almost 12 pesos. At the same time, the government allocates public funds to buy fuel and pay for energy subsidies to keep prices low. This accounts for 2.6% of GDP, half of the overall fiscal deficit..... Since Argentina has no access to credit, this deficit is being funded by transfers from the Central Bank to the treasury, which leads to an increase in the money supply and fuels inflation and furthers macroeconomic instability and demand for dollars by the public. Finally, the government has imposed energy rationings on private sector companies, which stalls production in key sectors and harms economic growth and job creation.”
From Argentina's own government CONICET, on the inefficiencies that result from such enormous subsidies: “ Since 2002, subsidies have kept the prices of this fuel between 9 and 26 times lower than regular prices in other countries. ...In cold areas [in Argentina] , heating uses several times more energy than locations in Europe with a similar climate. ”
26 & 27
Jul 12th, 2016 - 10:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Blaming the previous government as both writers above do and choose draconian measures hitting hard the population aren't working--not for the citizens, for president Macri or for the utility companies.
A few days ago I suggested Argentines were hit with horrendous utility bill increases, and the contention was it was peanuts.
Well : Citizens sought judiciary intervention, and judges across the country told Macri the increases were excessive and had been decided without required public hearings.
Now, before its request to the Supreme Court is heard, the government has somehow backtracked and placed 400 per cent limits to the increases.
For the white knights of the free market, however, what the people may say doesn't count--as long as what the fan spreads doesn't reach them.
400 percent of nothing is still nothing.
Jul 13th, 2016 - 01:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Of course the present government is seeking a solution that will provide both wider acceptance and some way of reducing the billion or so dollars spent annually on subsidies for energy that is largely wasted because it remains so cheap even after these tiny increases.
The prevailing opinion that I am hearing from the court decision is that the judiciary has no role in establishing tariffs, only in assuring that some sort of pre-increase public meetings are held. There is no obligation to accede to the suggestions (or more likely demands) of those attending the public meetings. So next month we are likely to see pro forma public meetings and a provisional cap limiting increases to a factor of four, but that still means that natural gas will remain still heavily subsidised, still exceedingly cheap, and still inefficiently used (read: grotesquely wasted).
Even with the 400 percent increase in gas tariffs, Argentines still get their gas for much less than Chile, Uruguay, and Brazil. And most other countries as well. But still they complain. Because getting something for nothing has long been the Peroncho motto.
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1917772-la-argentina-tiene-la-tarifa-de-gas-mas-baja-de-la-region
-----
“Pasar de pagar $70 a pagar $300 no es demasiado aumento, es una salida a cenar”
(“Going from paying US$5 to paying US$20 [for a month's gas bill] is not too large an increase, it's like going out to eat”)
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1917772-la-argentina-tiene-la-tarifa-de-gas-mas-baja-de-la-region
And still they whinge.
Reekie,
Jul 13th, 2016 - 05:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Given that the news story relates to fraud and you have deflected to power supply (and still haven't answered my question), I shall attempt to bring the topic bag to the story of CFK and her cronies stealing money from you.
Did you see the video of the nuns helping Lopez with his bags of money?
http://www.bubblear.com/complicit-nuns-sister-ines-called-in-for-questioning-regarding-jose-lopez-scandal/
Given the apparent involvement of members of the RC church in assisting with money laundering, maybe questions should be asked about CFK's relationship with the pope?
Apparently it has been suggested that one of the nuns in the video might be CFK in disguise! LOL
In the news:
Jul 13th, 2016 - 06:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0De Vido, CFK's former planning minister who was responsible for rail transport, has been indicted for his alleged negligence involving the deaths of 51 people in a rail accident in 2012.
Among other indictments for De Vido, which include the investigation into De Vido's role in the fraud surrounding an airline (Lafsa) that never had any planes or made any flights, but consumed enormous amounts of public funds.
A true Kirchnerist.
#31 Marti
Jul 13th, 2016 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Distraction urgently needed!
Marti and Zaphod look more and more like a PR operatives trying to divert attention while the Macri government painfully seeks an exit from its utility bills fiasco, after the courts quashed natural gas increases across the country.
At #29, Marti tries hard conveying the frivolous saying of officials--debunked by the courts and ridiculed by citizens--that the increases are “the equivalent of a couple pizzas.”
At #30, Zaphod brings in the nuns and Lopez story.
Meanwhile, Macri throws salt on the wound by telling Argentines to put on warm clothes when at home. “If you are in shorts and barefoot at home, you are consuming too much energy,” he said.
The Supreme Court (unsuspected of Kirchnerism) was asked by the government to quash a federal court ruling supporting citizens and has now given the government 10 days to come up with detailed information on how the increases ranging from 400 to 1,700 per cent were decided and whether the government had applied a principle of gradualism taking into account the users' economic capabilities.
Meanwhile, Marti, (as Clarin), continue to focus on previous government officials' alleged corruption.
Incidentally, a story made headlines a few days ago about alleged CFK security boxes in the Santa Cruz Bank buck was quickly revealed false--And Cristina, now a common citizen, is suing legislator Margarita Stolbizer for using information illegally obtained and wrongly interpreted to sustain her denunciation).
“the users' economic capabilities.”
Jul 13th, 2016 - 09:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0-- The current government previously indicated the “social tariff” whereby low-income users receive publicly funded electrical supply up to a certain number of kWh.
It was indicated in today's media in Argentina that subsidies for energy use up 38 percent of the national budget. So if one is wondering why there is so little money available for infrastructure, education, law enforcement, and other normal government activities, it is largely because under the Kirchner subsidy scheme, even those who could easily afford to pay for the actual costs of their energy, were instead receiving enormous subsidies. How very curious that the judiciary did not take up the matter of the lack of consideration for “users' economic capabilities” under the Kirchner regime.
#33 Marti
Jul 14th, 2016 - 04:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0“How very curious that the judiciary did not take up the matter of the lack of consideration for “users' economic capabilities” under the Kirchner regime.”
Ah Marti, Marti...The Kirchnerism did not perpetrate anything like this Tarifazo.
You missed the point, reekie. Actually many of the points.
Jul 14th, 2016 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!