Talk:Ricardo Lagos

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

change socialist to "social democrat" =

Lagos is socialist and member of the party for the democracy (is double-militant) and the ideologies of the partys now are socialdemocrat and socioliberal.

Dubiously true

There is not a single negative thing in the whole article about Lagos. All great praise.

I think that's a fair point, however he has been a very popular president with approval ratings around the 70% mark in recent years. My impression is that a lot of people who voted against him in the 2000 presidential election would freely admit that he has been a very effective president -- even Lavín himself. I'm sure something could be added to give a little balance although nothing comes to mind just now --GringoInChile 17:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pehaps that he was unable to narrow the income gap between rich and poor, which was, after all, his campaign slogan ("Growth in equality"). —Cantus…☎ 07:50, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some criticism regarding Lagos' stance on the environment.

id hardly say that EMOL is a good source for Lagos, considering that it is from El Mercurio, a journal that has long been in the hands of the rightist oposition (as it even got monetary support from the CIA in 1973), El Mercurio has for a long time been against all the things Lagos has done, this has been so much that the president himself sent a letter to El Mercurio, a letter that was taken very seriously. Lagos has been, in fact, a very good president, he is a great speaker and the results of his administration are there for us to look at. In a way, the oposition only has 2 things that Lagos couldnt accomplish, wich are delinquency and the gap between the rich and the poor (currently a 3.5% of the population gets the 60% of the income, wich means that the other 96.5% of the pupulation have live with the remainning 40%, this comes directly from the dictatorship of Pinochet). His slogan "crecer con igualdad", has in a way been accomplished, as numerous families have for the first time a family member going to university, somthing that never happened before. Lagos has bad points of course, to begin with, most of his administration is made up by socialists that are sons of mayor political geniouses (such as the old minister puccio, who was a political genious working for Allende, the new minister puccio, his son... well, he is not more stupid mainly because he doesnt get up earlier in the morning), the health issue was not "socialised" as many of the true socialists expected (the AUGE is a good plan, but its not as good as what Cuba has done with their medicine, for example), the education was also not "socialised", for the middle class it is somewhat a struggle to be in university, while for the lower class or the rich class is not really any struggle. While Lagos won narrowly, if elections were held again today, Lagos would win by a crushing mayority, the fact that Lavin was a horrible mayor for santiago would further push that result.

I personally think Lavín was a great mayor and I will vote for him on the upcoming elections. Despite the fact that Lagos was indeed a good president, he was clearly not a saint. El Mercurio's article is legitimate and the fact that not all are satisified with Lagos' stance on the environment should be metioned, your point of view notwithstanding. 200.119.238.45 21:48, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree with the subject, In wikipedia particularly, we should try to keep an Impartial position when writing article, it's supposed to give a wide perception of the Character (Lagos in this case), not just a Auto-Biographical point of view like the present article...

I'll try to write a new one and fix some of the problems...

Keep Wikipedia Runnign!! Regards Rkr2!

Deletion

WHY HAS THIS ARTICLE BEEN DELETED??!!!

Awkward statement

I think the following statement is very awkward and possibly misleading: "After obtaining his Ph.D. in the U.S., he annulled this marriage."

Why are these two points sandwiched together in one sentence? They are completely different facts that bear no relation to one another.

The meaning seems to be that he annulled his marriage BECAUSE he got his Ph.D. (and therefore had no further use for his wife), not that the two events occurred in chronological order.

I think this sentence represensts sloppy representation on wiki's part.

Furthermore, while reading the wikipedia entry on the 2005 Chilean election, it is glaring that the two female candidates received far more than the other male candidates combined. I truly feel that there is a pro-female bias here on wiki, and the sentence I included above would never have been attributed to a female, due to the popular and much cherished myth that women could not be capable of such a heartless act. (Anonymous)

First?

I found this: "He was Chile's first agnostic president." I doubt that it's true. What about Allende? What about the radical presidents in the 40's? DaniloVilicic 03:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)DaniloVilicic[reply]

Finally I deleted that statement. The first recognized agnostic presidents of Chile were the radicals. --DaniloVilicic (talk) 19:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]