[luzojeda]

Almost everyone I know and all newspapers I read here, in Argentina, do talk about that. The cost is an inevitable one when you reach 3 digits inflation. Hope we learn our lesson though we didn't in the 2000s when we brought inflation again.

To give anyone reading this perspective, Argentina had inflation for almost 80 years, only a brief pause in the 90s and then again since the 2003. What other way is there?

[marcosdumay]

> What other way is there?

Remember that inflation is something the government chooses to create. It's not some natural disaster.

The other way is to remove the power to create it from the executive leader and give it to some institution that is more stable.

[luzojeda]

Of course but once you have 3 digits inflation, what other way to reduce is there besides cutting the supply of money suddenly in a shock? People won't like it, I didn't like it either but the two other presidents tried various methods such as price controls and that didn't help, on the contrary.

[meiraleal]

There are alternatives. Brazil fixed the hyperinflation problem in a different way, maybe Argentina should copy it: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/10/04/130329523/how-...

previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9617710

[marcosdumay]

Brazil pretty much did a monetary shock by reducing the money supply. Just like Milei.

We did more stuff besides the shock. But we also had more inflation, and it was more persistent.

[marcosdumay]

If you have long-lasting inflation, you need some shock to cut it. But reducing the supply of money only does shock, it's keeping it constant over the long term that avoids inflation.

And well, price control never works. This is well known. It's also well known that Argentina's last few presidents were people that wouldn't let patently known and unavoidable facts get in the way of their policies...