“It’s a real shift worth celebrating, given that most investors did not have confidence in his ability to reduce the deficit just a few weeks ago. If anything, perhaps he’s going overboard in some ways.”
Javier Milei, Argentina’s newly elected libertarian and self-described “anarcho-capitalist” president, is embracing sweeping reforms to save the country’s struggling economy, even in the face of overwhelming obstacles.
Despite challenges arising from lawmaker opposition and a soaring inflation rate that has plagued the country for years, Milei’s “shock” adjustment actions have improved market and investor confidence both among the Argentinian population and abroad. Milei inherited a 140% inflation rate, an impoverished population and hundreds of billions in debt when he took office in December.
Milei acknowledged on the day of his inauguration that Argentina’s economy would temporarily get worse while he embraced “shock” adjustments to start making fixes.
“They have ruined our lives … There is no money!” Milei said during his inauguration speech. “Therefore, the conclusion is that there is no alternative to adjustment and no alternative to shock … this is the last straw to begin the reconstruction of Argentina.”
One of Milei’s first actions as president was to slash Argentina’s bureaucratic ministry from 18 to nine in a bid to reduce government spending, fulfilling a promise he made on the campaign trail, according to Reuters. Milei and his supporters saw several of the agencies as ineffectual and bloated with cash, including the Ministry of Transportation and Public Works, Tourism and Sports and the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, which were absorbed by other existing ministries, according to the CATO Institute.
Milei also allowed the value of the peso currency to plummet by 50% in December to reduce export costs while also increasing the import costs, according to The Associated Press. The goal is to close the trade gap, making Argentina a bigger global trade competitor and stem the flow of money leaving the country, which would increase the stockpile of its exhausted foreign currency reserves.
The eventual plan for Milei is to replace the peso currency entirely with the U.S. dollar, another promise he made on the campaign trail, according to NPR. The U.S. dollar is prized in Argentina because it is generally stable and holds its value longer than the peso.
Temporary tax hikes were imposed by Milei’s administration to reduce the national debt and start balancing the budget according to the AP. Argentina’s budget deficit currently sits at 3%, and Milei has promised to balance it this year, according to Reuters.
Milei sent an omnibus reform bill to Congress in December that would privatize state-owned companies and raise export taxes, and remove limits on bonds issued overseas and on debt restructure rules, according to Reuters. He also issued a separate presidential decree in December to deregulate Argentina’s economy.
These actions are already having positive impacts. Argentina’s monthly inflation slowed down to 15.3% in February, much lower than the spike in December, according to Reuter’s forecast. The country also saw a monthly budget surplus in January for the first time in over a decade.
“The Milei administration has inherited a steep stabilization task, but has already taken some important steps toward restoring fiscal sustainability, adjusting the exchange rate, and combating inflation,” U.S. Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen said during a press conference in late February.
Argentinian citizens have deposited over $2.3 billion in dollar-denomination banks since Milei took office, restoring the entirety of the banks’ losses from the last year and signaling that the population feels stability, as withdrawals typically increase during unsteady times, according to Bloomberg. Argentina’s bonds are at four-year highs and the country’s risk index has fallen to a two-year low, according to Reuters.
“The market is becoming very optimistic about Javier Milei’s conviction,” Javier Casabal, a Buenos Aires-based fixed-income strategist at Adcap Grupo Financiero, told Reuters. “It’s a real shift worth celebrating, given that most investors did not have confidence in his ability to reduce the deficit just a few weeks ago. If anything, perhaps he’s going overboard in some ways.”
Milei still faces several roadblocks. Inflation is still at record highs and poverty continues to consume much of the Argentinian population. Major provisions in Milei’s reform bill were blocked in early February by the country’s Congress, which he has referred to as a “nest of rats,” according to Reuters
Milei vowed to Congress during a speech on March 1 that he would “speed up” his reform plans, encouraging them to join his efforts but warning that he did not need them to accomplish his goals, according to Reuters.
“We won’t back down, we’re going to keep pushing forward,” Milei said. “Whether that’s by law, presidential decree or by modifying regulations.”
Milei’s government is now considering breaking up the reform bill and passing provisions separately through Congress, according to Reuters. He is requesting lawmakers to agree to a 10-point social pact, which would include negotiations in discussions on economic reform, by May 25.
Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.
President Trump on Thursday confirmed a sweeping new 35% tariff on Canadian imports starting August 1, citing Canada’s failure to curb fentanyl trafficking and retaliatory trade actions.
Key Details:
In a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said the new 35% levy is in response to Canada’s “financial retaliation” and its inability to stop fentanyl from reaching the U.S.
Trump emphasized that Canadian businesses that relocate manufacturing to the U.S. will be exempt and promised expedited approvals for such moves.
The administration has already notified 23 countries of impending tariffs following the expiration of a 90-day negotiation window under Trump’s “Liberation Day” trade policy.
Diving Deeper:
President Trump escalated his tariff strategy on Thursday, formally announcing a 35% duty on all Canadian imports effective August 1. The move follows what Trump described as a breakdown in trade cooperation and a failure by Canada to address its role in the U.S. fentanyl crisis.
“It is a Great Honor for me to send you this letter in that it demonstrates the strength and commitment of our Trading Relationship,” Trump wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney. He added that the tariff response comes after Canada “financially retaliated” against the U.S. rather than working to resolve the flow of fentanyl across the northern border.
Trump’s letter made clear the tariff will apply broadly, separate from any existing sector-specific levies, and included a warning that “goods transshipped to evade this higher Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff.” The president also hinted that further retaliation from Canada could push rates even higher.
However, Trump left the door open for possible revisions. “If Canada works with me to stop the flow of Fentanyl, we will, perhaps, consider an adjustment to this letter,” he said, adding that tariffs “may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship.”
Canadian companies that move operations to the U.S. would be exempt, Trump said, noting his administration “will do everything possible to get approvals quickly, professionally, and routinely — In other words, in a matter of weeks.”
The U.S. traded over $762 billion in goods with Canada in 2024, with a trade deficit of $63.3 billion, a figure Trump called a “major threat” to both the economy and national security.
Speaking with NBC News on Thursday, Trump suggested even broader tariff hikes are coming, floating the idea of a 15% or 20% blanket rate on all imports. “We’re just going to say all of the remaining countries are going to pay,” he told Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker, adding that “the tariffs have been very well-received” and noting that the stock market had hit new highs that day.
The Canadian announcement is part of a broader global tariff rollout. In recent days, Trump has notified at least 23 countries of new levies and revealed a separate 50% tariff on copper imports.
“Not everybody has to get a letter,” Trump said when asked if other leaders would be formally notified. “You know that. We’re just setting our tariffs.”
According to a study in Science Advances, over 90% of ocean plastic comes from just 10 rivers, eight of which are in Asia. The United States, by contrast, contributes less than 1%. Yet Pew treats all nations as equally responsible, promoting one-size-fits-all policies that fail to address the real source of the issue.
Just as people were beginning to breathe a sigh of relief thanks to the Trump administration’s rollback of onerous climate policies, the United Nations is set to finalize a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty by the end of the year that will impose new regulations, and, ultimately higher costs, on one of the world’s most widely used products.
Plastics – derived from petroleum – are found in everything from water bottles, tea bags, and food packaging to syringes, IV tubes, prosthetics, and underground water pipes. In justifying the goal of its treaty to regulate “the entire life cycle of plastic – from upstream production to downstream waste,” the U.N. has put a bull’s eye on plastic waste. “An estimated 18 to 20 percent of global plastic waste ends up in the ocean,” the UN says.
As delegates from over 170 countries prepare for the final round of negotiations in Geneva next month, debate is intensifying over the future of plastic production, regulation, and innovation. With proposals ranging from sweeping bans on single-use plastics to caps on virgin plastic output, policymakers are increasingly citing the 2020 Pew Charitable Trusts report, Breaking the Plastic Wave, as one of the primary justifications.
But many of the dire warnings made in this report, if scrutinized, ring as hollow as an empty PET soda bottle. Indeed, a closer look reveals Pew’s report is less a roadmap to progress than a glossy piece of junk science propaganda—built on false assumptions and misguided solutions.
Pew’s core claim is dire: without urgent global action, plastic entering the oceans will triple by 2040. But this alarmist forecast glosses over a fundamental fact—plastic pollution is not a global problem in equal measure. According to a study in Science Advances, over 90% of ocean plastic comes from just 10 rivers, eight of which are in Asia. The United States, by contrast, contributes less than 1%. Yet Pew treats all nations as equally responsible, promoting one-size-fits-all policies that fail to address the real source of the issue.
This blind spot has serious consequences. Pew’s solutions—cutting plastic production, phasing out single-use items, and implementing rigid global regulations—miss the mark entirely. Banning straws in the U.S. or taxing packaging in Europe won’t stop waste from being dumped into rivers in countries with little or no waste infrastructure. Policies targeting Western consumption don’t solve the problem—they simply shift it or, worse, stifle useful innovation.
The real tragedy isn’t plastic itself, but the mismanagement of plastic waste—and the regulatory stranglehold that blocks better solutions. In many countries, recycling is a government-run monopoly with little incentive to innovate. Meanwhile, private-sector entrepreneurs working on advanced recycling, biodegradable materials, and AI-powered sorting systems face burdensome red tape and market distortion.
Pew pays lip service to innovation but ultimately favors centralized planning and control. That’s a mistake. Time and again, it’s been technology—not top-down mandates—that has delivered environmental breakthroughs.
What the world needs is not another top-down, bureaucratic report like Pew’s, but an open dialogue among experts, entrepreneurs, and the public where new ideas can flourish. Imagine small-scale pyrolysis units that convert waste into fuel in remote villages, or decentralized recycling centers that empower informal waste collectors. These ideas are already in development—but they’re being sidelined by policymakers fixated on bans and quotas.
Worse still, efforts to demonize plastic often ignore its benefits. Plastic is lightweight, durable, and often more environmentally efficient than alternatives like glass or aluminum. The problem isn’t the material—it’s how it has been managed after its use. That’s a “systems” failure, not a material flaw.
Breaking the Plastic Wave champions a top-down, bureaucratic vision that limits choice, discourages private innovation, and rewards entrenched interests under the guise of environmentalism. Many of the groups calling for bans are also lobbying for subsidies and regulatory frameworks that benefit their own agendas—while pushing out disruptive newcomers.
With the UN expected to finalize the treaty by early 2026, nations will have to face the question of ratification. Even if the Trump White House refuses to sign the treaty – which is likely – ordinary Americans could still feel the sting of this ill-advised scheme. Manufacturers of life-saving plastic medical devices, for example, are part of a network of global suppliers. Companies located in countries that ratify the treaty will have no choice but to pass the higher costs along, and Americans will not be spared.
Ultimately, the marketplace of ideas—not the offices of policy NGOs—will deliver the solutions we need. It’s time to break the wave of junk science—not ride it.
Craig Rucker is president of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org).
