But I'm not really a fan of the idea of "shock therapy", it is the same sloppy thinking as gets people in to messes. We'll note that China, bone-fide economic miracle, seems to have had a strategy of using charter cities (eg, Shenzhen). That seems less disruptive and probably about as effective as anything else; quarantine the old rules geographically and set up experiments with new rules to figure out what works. Let people move to low-tax regions on their own terms when they think it is better than their current state. Sharp changes are super risky, people do need time to re-learn how to survive in a competitive economy. And just because your ideology is sound doesn't mean your policies will magically be good.
I literally don't understand why people keep insisting on using one policy across entire countries. It is patently obvious that politicians aren't good at figuring out the best policy from the legislature. They need to experiment.
I think people underestimate the effect of East-West Germany or North-South Korea style examples for making a point about which policies work better. It is clearly no mystery what policies generate wealth. The US has had this figures out for a while now, you just need to look at the different states to figure out what policy mixes work. I bet that is politically inconvenient for the people pushing destructive policy so they then try to bring their ideas in federally.
But what about the long term trends? Aren't those KPIs falling for decades now. Is this really something new?
When I look at the Peso/Dollar rate:
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=argentina%20peso%20usd
It's in decline for over 20 years.
Can you really blame a new president on not stopping this in two months?