General Augusto Pinochet brought an end to the artificial food shortage crafted by Allende's unsustainable price control policies. Allende either didn't know or didn't care about the differences between cost and price and prevented agribusinesses from covering costs and from re-investing into production improvements resulting in the food shortage. Allende's policies chased away commerce and promoted an unsustainable welfare state filled with massive protests and a trucker's strike protesting against the Marxist regime. As a result, Pinochet and the patriotic Chilean military kicked Allende's ass and removed his gang of Marxists from office and helped save the Chilean economy.

Also in the United States, there is no free market anymore. If you don't believe me, look at the thousands upon thousands of pages of rules and regulations that exist on the federal level alone and how the federal government used the backing of subprime loans to buy votes only to result in the financial crisis of 2008 and the current on-going recession. There were already enough basic criminal justice laws against fraud and false advertising along with over 10,000 pages of banking regulations along with enough enforcers in the federal government to enforce them and yet the incident still happened.

If you really believe Keynesian policies save economies, let me remind you that the only thing that ended the Great Depression in the United States was World War 2 and the aftermath that followed. Historians even acknowledge that Franklin D. Roosevelt's economic policies failed in terms of ending the Depression and that the only reason there was a decrease in business failures was because there were less businesses around later in his time in office to fail. Look at the US presidential election of 2012. Obama's policies were left-wing-leaning despite what liberals you were talking to in the US, Mexico, or the internet. Obama's policies included worse versions of Bush's policies and let me remind you George W. Bush was not this big conservative statesman that people thought he was going to be. Both Obama and Bush blew too much money on federal bureaucracy and they both did next to nothing to reign in on federal overreach. The big difference was that Bush was more fiscally conservative and actually helped end the original recession by enabling small business owners to reinvest more into domestically-made capital goods and domestic labor and let me remind you that most small businesses do NOT get the same tax protections as most corporations. That means that the profits before taxes generated by those businesses get treated by the IRS as the owners' personal taxable income even though the majority of those net incomes have to get reinvested back into the businesses.

As for policies that reek of left wing scandal, Obama was the one who gave out, through his attorney general Eric Holder and the BATFE, thousands of rifles, shotguns, and handguns to the drug cartels of your country who already had strong connections with corrupt law enforcement and military personnel that led to them getting heavily armed in the first place. Obama and Holder then tried to cover up the incident, Operation Fast and Furious, by blaming private civilian gun owners in the United States and the "Ma and Pa" gun shops until BATFE whistleblowers revealed the cover up. Bush never allowed the BATFE to send thousands of government-owned rifles, shotguns, and handguns over the Mexican-American border. That was Obama.

Also, there was the Solyndra scandal and the other scandals involving the so-called "green energy" companies in which the administration gave out over a billion dollars total in faulty loans in the name of "green energy" resulting in the companies' leaderships giving themselves huge bonuses and then declaring bankruptcy. That was fraud but they got away with it because those executives happen to be big pro-Obama donors. Then there was the Benghazi cover-up scandal.

Despite all of these scandals, crimes, and economic fallacies; the left wing in the United States re-elected Obama just because they wanted the government to force someone else at gunpoint to pay for their unnecessary abortions, their contraceptives even though condoms are quite cheap, and their cellphones. They acted as if you were against taxpayer subsidies for Planned Parenthood, then you were automatically against all abortions including rape-related and medically necessary ones. Also, they believed in the myth of "free universal" healthcare despite governmental delays and denial in essential medical procedures in other countries like the UK and Canada or the fact that Obamacare adds over 100 new federal bureaucracies to an already overly expensive centralized government or the fact that Obamacare includes an employer-health mandate that was inconsiderate to any smaller business that already provided decent coverage for employees and that was basically designed to involuntarily switch employees to lesser health plans because the fines are cheaper than the upgrade when combined with a downgrade.

If you want big names like celebrities that still worship Obama, look at the idiots at Hollywood like George Clooney. Regressive authoritarians? Last time I checked, it was the Keynesians, the Marxists, and the fascists that wanted centralized control over economies and people's lives. That has a strong resemblance to the Dark Ages and it was the Roman Empire that embraced the welfare state and fiscal liberalism. Ever heard of the phrase "bread and circuses?" Oh and in case you're wondering, the fascists supported state-controlled command-based economics including heavy regulations, mandatory associations of workers and "professionals," and even some forms of nationalization like that of weapons production, healthcare, and sometime automobile manufacturing. If you want to include National Socialism, read the 25 Points.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.htm

Last time I checked, it was the conservatives, the libertarians, and other free market-leaning economists that supported limited government and allowing the individual to have more legal control over his/her own life and family.

If your post truly represents your understanding of politics and economics or the understanding of politics and economics of most Mexican nationals (assuming you are one and not just simply staying there), it is no wonder why your country is in way worse condition than any other nation of North America.