Let's look at the current one, which is neither a liberal nor Austrian plan but a conventional stabilization plan. And why do I say this? First, because the Minister of Economy probably doesn't even know who Böhm-Bawerk, Mises, or Hayek are. The Minister of Economy is a JP Morgan type, like the entire economic team that tried to maintain a fixed dollar from the beginning after a devaluation. The exchange rate lagged, and the dollar is obviously cheap. I'm not saying this to argue about the exchange rate level, but because it's cheaper to vacation in Brazil than to go to the Atlantic Coast. They tried to maintain a cheap dollar, suppressed wages, low pensions, and public spending with a hellish contraction. This has been done twenty times in Argentina. How are prices going to rise like this? When I was Minister of Economy, I said I could lower prices at the cost of a massive recession, an opening up of imports, the destruction of the productive apparatus... well, that's how stabilization can be achieved. The thing is, the result, in structural terms, in social and labor matters, is what we're seeing. This doesn't mean that these plans implemented at every moment in time have the same significance. When they implemented it in the 1990s, for me it was practically the same plan as back then, the world was free trade. There was the Washington Consensus, the End of History, the End of Ideologies... Today, however, we have a protectionist and nationalist world, as we see in the heart of the West. What is the United States doing today, in 2025? Protectionism. Donald Trump says,"I want cars produced in the United States, to protect national industry and national workers, to improve industrial wages." This stabilization plan for Argentina, then, goes against the grain of history.