When Javier Milei decided to create the Ministry of Human Capital, it was not merely a symbolic gesture or a randomly chosen name. It was an explicit and profound tribute to Gary Becker, one of the most influential economists of the 20th century. The President himself has repeated this in several speeches: “The Ministry of Human Capital is a tribute to Gary Becker.” He recently added, “they should put up a statue of him in front of the Ministry.”
At the inauguration of the Human Capital Training Center, created at the initiative of Minister Sandra Pettovello, Milei detailed that in his apartment in Abasto, he had a huge painting of Becker deriving the intertemporal Slutsky equation, that he kept all his books, and that the idea of this ministry is undoubtedly a tribute to his theory. In an article published long before he thought of becoming president, on January 1, 2014, in his column for Infobae titled “Human Capital and Economic Growth,” he wrote verbatim: “Theodore Schultz pointed out the importance of human capital and its contribution to economic growth, which was formalized and tested by Gary Becker and embodied in a bisectorial growth model (where both physical capital and human capital are accumulated) by Hirofumi Uzawa, who made the time dedicated to education the main determinant of the rate of technological progress (PTF).” This is fundamental; the time and quality of time dedicated to higher education are decisive for our future development.
Becker, in his book Human Capital (1964), left us one of the most powerful and practical ideas of modern economics: education is not a social expense or an abstract right. It is an investment. Individuals and countries invest time, effort, and resources in training because it generates a stock of skills, knowledge, and capabilities that increase productivity, future income, and overall economic growth.
Becker clearly distinguished between general training (which serves any company or sector) and specific training (which adapts to a particular job). The key is that this investment must have a positive return: the benefits (higher salaries, greater productivity) must exceed the costs (cost of study materials, study time, lost opportunity to work). When the return is low or negative, we are not creating human capital; we are destroying it. That is exactly what we are seeking to apply in the reform of Argentine higher education.
This is not just a budgetary issue. It is about ensuring that every peso the State invests in national universities generates more quality human capital, more prepared graduates, and more growth and sovereignty for the country.
Look at the numbers we have been working with: the average cost per graduate in national universities during 2024 was 52.3 million pesos, this updated average cost must be calculated per year and per graduate. And the average time to graduate in many careers is around 9 or 10 years, even reaching in some cases up to 12 years. These data are not for criticism, but to understand where there is room for improvement: if we want public university to be a true investment in human capital, we must align incentives so that students finish on time and in the right manner, that the careers respond to the strategic needs of the country, and that resources are used with maximum efficiency.








