Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum

Hugo Chavez RIP.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 51-75 of 306 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 11:54:07 GMT
Dan Fante says:
I didn't say you did compare NK to Venezuela, I said you mentioned it, which you did, despite you claiming that you didn't. I wondered what relevance North Korea had to a discussion about Chavez and Venezuela but, going off your last response, it doesn't have any relevance to it, so thanks for clearing that up.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 12:02:44 GMT
Chavez paid for the welfare programmes with the state run oil company's investment funds. Result: the oil industry declined, even though the country became more dependant on oil revenues which was possible only because of the rise in world prices. Inflation is much higher than SA/LA average (gov borrowed to finance welfare) and growth is only average despite having arguably the world's largest reserves of oil, albeit of a type that is difficult and expensive to extract and refine. Hence the need for coninuous large scale investment, however Chavez diverted this to welfare programmes to win the people's love. Which means that in years to come the people will get an equitable share of...NOTHING. Socialism in practice. God bless him, <<the world needs more like him>>not. RIP.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 12:08:20 GMT
I didn't say it did, did I. But it does have relevance immho because both countries are examples of Socialist fantasy lands. NK being a more highly developed version. Judging by your posts I can see why you don't see the relevance though.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 12:15:11 GMT
Dan Fante says:
I'm aware of what Chavez did but it would have made more sense if that had been your earlier reply instead of bringing up North Korea. And I'm far from a dyed in the wool communist but I can see how someone who used their country's resources to improve upon a deeply unfair society with huge inequities would make for a popular figure. I appreciate it's probably not a sustainable model but I'd rather someone like that than your typical political leader in his position who would've kowtowed to pressure from overseas and allowed a rich elite to live off the profits of the oil industry whilst showing virtually no concern for most of the populace. I'm sure the oil industry would've preferred things to be a little different but I seriously doubt the average Venezuelan would have seen much of the profits.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 12:16:04 GMT
Last edited by the author on 11 Mar 2013 12:19:48 GMT
Dan Fante says:
So you are comparing the two countries then? Make your mind up.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 13:54:13 GMT
NO not originally, but since you brought it up, YES I will - the two countries operate on the same basic principle.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:00:04 GMT
Last edited by the author on 11 Mar 2013 14:03:25 GMT
Dan Fante says:
And your point is?
The differences between the two are so vast that it's a facile comparison to make.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:04:44 GMT
<<it's probably not a sustainable model>> You're getting there. It's a guaranteed unsustainable model, unless the Venezuelan gov diverts resources from welfare programmes to investment in oil <<the average Venezuelan>> is not going to be seeing much of anything, other than inflation and decline. If world oil prices fall they will be in even deeper trouble, because Chav did nothing to develop the economy.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:05:32 GMT
In your opinion.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:06:28 GMT
My point is: they both operate fantasy economies.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:13:51 GMT
Dan Fante says:
A bit of a poor debating technique to take one small part of my post, which wasn't really what I was getting at, and ignoring the rest to be honest. But anyway, who says it has to be a sustainable model? By improving the literacy of a generation and raising it out of poverty, Chavez has arguably laid down the foundations for a future society where less of the money from the country's oil resources need to be diverted to social programmes. That initial step required huge investment but the schools and hospitals etc. are there for future generations (I'm not suggesting they won't need more money in the future of course). Also, it is virtually impossible to measure the good done by a basic education where none existed before and the way in which that will help parents to improve their children's educations in the home. And beforehand the average Venezuelan had nothing.
I don't deny Chavez was an imperfect leader but compared to most politicians he did a lot of good where his own country was concerned. All in all, one of the good guys in my view.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:14:59 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 11 Mar 2013 14:37:06 GMT]

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 15:06:35 GMT
I didn't say it has to be sustainable, did I? I said, Chavez's model was not sustainable, as we will see. In your own words <<it's probably not a sustainable model>>. A point worth commenting on immho, which is why I did so.

Which important bit of your post did I ignore?

Is there a debating rule that says I have to respond to every word you post?

I commented on what's happened: Venezuela paid for its welfare by starving its oil industry of investment, such that productive capacity fell, gov revenues only rose because oil prices rose. Now oil revs are insufficient so the gov is trying to pay for welfare by running deficits and borrowing. Lala Land. Result: highest inflation rate in Latin America.

You write about ifs and maybes.

We will see what <<foundations Chavez laid down>>.

Are you suggesting now 'the foundations have been laid', as you say, that there will be a change of policy? If so, other than wishful thinking, on what do you base your opinion? And what will it entail? A move to Capitalism?

Any signs of dynamic growth in Venezuela resulting from more education?

Can you cite any examples of Socialist economies, where welfare has brought about dynamic economic development?

And where do you reckon this new investment in the oil and other industries will come from?

Apart from diverting oil revenues from reinvestment in the industry to welfare, what foundations for economic development did Chavez lay? And any sign of them bearing fruit?

I have nothing against Venezuela pursuing the course they have, their choice. Just commenting that it won't deliver to people what they have been promised. Chav was not their messiah.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 15:37:31 GMT
Last edited by the author on 11 Mar 2013 15:45:37 GMT
Dan Fante says:
You make good points to be fair and inflation is high, yes, they'll have to do something about that, I agree. Probably by curbing spending. But the percentage of government debt as GDP is still low compared to the UK's and the EU's (present and future predictions). So who has the out of control, unsustainable fantasy economic policy then?
And I was trying to suggest the foundations have been laid for sustaining the improvement made to people's lives. If you don't see better literacy etc. as doing that we'll agree to differ.
And who says dynamic growth is the be all and end all? See the UK / EU / the west in general. Not doing so well with the old boom/bust model, are we?
As to judging Chavez, his own people love him on the whole and I think they're better ones to judge what has happened on his watch than we are.
Also, I would suggest a balance could be found whereby investment is made in the infrastructure needed to produce oil without totally cutting off social welfare.
I still don't see many similarities with North Korea by the way.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 16:09:35 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 16:11:01 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 16:34:42 GMT
Last edited by the author on 11 Mar 2013 16:58:43 GMT
Don't be silly Simone. Like the fantasy states you adore such as NK, Cuba and Venezuela produce sustained economic development.

The Chinese have fractional reserve banking too and they use the same techniques to manage their economy that the countries you call Capitalist do.

Venezuela's Socialist gov uses tricks like borrowing and printing money to give the illusion of creating something. All govs do it.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 16:42:59 GMT
Last edited by the author on 11 Mar 2013 16:57:41 GMT
And what is it I have claimed about Chavs Venezuela: that it's not sustainable, as events are showing and will continue to do so? No belief, just observation.

And your tunnel dearie: claiming that NK, Cuba, Venezuala govs are better for their people than those elsewhere.

How has the NK system helped the people? How has the SK system helped the people?

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 16:55:57 GMT
There you go again making it all up...all that you would like to see...be patient and you will see...

Btw, just how do you think this 'balance' will be found?

I didn't post a list of similarities with NK, did I?

I've not posted a defence of any of the things/places/systems you are now starting to judge Venezuela against, have I? There are plenty of places that are not run like Venezuela or the EU that are doing just fine.

I remarked earlier, imo, Venezuelans are free to do as they do. Anyone who thinks it's a viable model for economic development is deluding themselves, but its their inalienable human right to do so, imo.

Watch this space.

Posted on 11 Mar 2013 19:04:51 GMT
Spin says:
And some folk are wondering why the POLITICS forum has dropped off the "Most active" list...

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 20:43:59 GMT
Spinny,

Not you however.

You have a lot to answer for it seems.

Posted on 11 Mar 2013 23:27:50 GMT
D. E. Ortiz says:
Hugo Chavez.... started with good intentions... ended up becoming that which he hated. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts abosultely.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Mar 2013 05:28:18 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Mar 2013 05:29:54 GMT
As you will have noticed (or perhaps not) I showed a willingness to open up to new a belief about NK...you?...new beliefs....wwhayyy...looka inta the skya...a pigga with da wingys.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Mar 2013 08:58:14 GMT
Last edited by the author on 12 Mar 2013 09:15:40 GMT
Simone,
A fantasy economy is one where the gov says it can change basic principals of economics like:
pretending it is increasing real incomes by printing money but causing highest inflation in Latin America,
banning foreign investment in oil,
using profits from oil to raise incomes short term but starving the industry of investment so future income falls,
expropriating businesses and trying to run them as state concerns-result, hundreds of thousands of tons of food to rotting in warehouses because the state distribution system you have set up don't work,
create food shortages where previously there were none,
declare any person who has at least one hours paid work a month 'employed',
shut down thousands of businesses resulting in lower output, 30% unemployment, stagnation and recently falling GDP (worse than Greece another place practising fantasy economics)
reduce output of your only hard currency industry by 25%,
sack 20,000 oil workers leaving the industry without necessary skills, causing plants to close and blow up,
give oil to Cuba in exchange for doctors who soon run off to neighbouring countries along with other skilled workers and entrepreneurs,
become increasingly dependent on an industry that at the same time your policies have sent into decline, etc., etc.

All govs do fantasy economics dear, some more than others.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  politics discussion forum
Participants:  21
Total posts:  306
Initial post:  6 Mar 2013
Latest post:  29 Mar 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions