Argentina’s libertarian president, Javier Milei, is the lucky winner of $40 billion that Donald Trump managed to conjure from thin air. Less lucky are the Americans who rely on the government programs Trump has gutted to be able to “save” that sum.
Argentina’s libertarian president, Javier Milei, is the lucky winner of $40 billion that Donald Trump managed to conjure from thin air. Less lucky are the Americans who rely on the government programs Trump has gutted to be able to “save” that sum.
These were the strawmen arguments I was referring to in your previous comment.
This is to tell that such actions are of fundamental importance for the US government and population. If the US had no strong influence over other countries, it’s economy would be way worse and its people in worse conditions. As such, to sustain such level of wealth it is necessary for the US to perform actions such as this one to maintain and gain influence over other countries. To be able to use their natural resources as if they were American, to reap the benefits of their people working in their countries.
This is what I meant to say. This action is reasonable for the US under the system it is currently working in. To make sure I made no mistakes, I searched what a straw men argument is. From what I understood it refers to refuting an argument by sustaining something unrelated. I do not believe what I wrote is unrelated. The fact that this action has been done to acquire influence in Argentina is what I’ve been writing the whole time.