|
Chuck Boone posted:They picked up Caro in the same way that they picked up Yon Goicoechea and Carlos Melo, two other politicians who were arrested in the last half of last year by the SEBIN. In all three cases, the SEBIN caught the men just as they happened to have been driving around with rifles, C-4, as well as written plans to commit terrorist acts. El Aissami said that Caro was caught with a hit-list of opposition politicians who Caro and his terror cell were going to assassinate to blame on the government El Aissami is legitimately scarier than Diosdado. The man has Hezbollah connections, for god's sake.
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 02:13
|
|
You'd think the opposition would learn to be a little bit more discrete with where they write down their terrorist plans and who they give them to, but apparently not! 
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
So if El Aissami becomes president, would that finally finish the transformation of Venezuela into a kleptocracy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 09:25
|
|
|
I'd say that Venezuela has been a kleptocracy for a long while now. That process began really early in the Chavez presidency. After Chavez fired ~18,000 PDVSA workers in the aftermath of the 2002-2003 general strike, he replaced the leadership with lackeys and began the process by which he would quickly gain full control of the oil industry in the country including all of its income. What El Aissami's rise to the vice-presidency (and potential set-up to replace Maduro) would mean is a full transformation for Venezuela into a narco-state. Like that article I linked in my previous post says, all of the most powerful positions in the regime are now filled by people who are suspected of being directly involved in the drug trade. Maduro has yet to be personally implicated in drug trafficking operations, but we know that his two nephews (one of whom he raised as his son in his home) had diplomatic passports when they were arrested in Haiti in 2015 for conspiring to smuggle cocaine into the United States, and that they used the presidential hangar and runway at the Maiquetia International Airport in order to transport drugs out of the country undetected. In other words, the defining characteristic of the regime that Maduro has built and that El Aissami is now a shoe-in for taking over is not that it is extremely corrupt, but that it is essentially a front for drug trafficking. EDIT: Saladman posted:He got traded from the Syrian government's prison last year and he's back in the US, probably under the FBI/whatever intelligence agency's supervision and care, who in a grand stroke of irony, rescued him from being tortured to death. His real name is Kevin Dawes if you want to look up the story. Thanks for this info! What a guy. I remember watching a lot of his videos from Libya while he was there, but I stopped following his escapades. Chuck Boone fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
OK Venegoons, riddle me this: how come I'm seeing a shitload of amazing cakes and confectionery in bakeries but somehow I can't seem to buy a loaf of bread?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Tell me when Maduro steps his game up and has an empty city constructed on the Columbian border to show how happy and prosperous Venezuela is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
Vlex posted:OK Venegoons, riddle me this: how come I'm seeing a shitload of amazing cakes and confectionery in bakeries but somehow I can't seem to buy a loaf of bread? There are likely a combination of reasons at play here:
Playstation 4 posted:Tell me when Maduro steps his game up and has an empty city constructed on the Columbian border to show how happy and prosperous Venezuela is.  yesterday during his "state of the union" address, which he gave in front of the Supreme Court instead of the National Assembly (here is a clip). He said that any attack on Venezuela would result in a "continental war" to the death that would displace millions of people: quote:Maduro: Let sleeping dogs lie, because Rondon has not fought yet*. I'm only referring - only referring - to the enormous crisis, the tragic social and migrant crisis that would happen if the Bolivarian Revolution were to be broken, divided, destroyed, dislodged from power. There would be millions [of migrants], starting with our Colombian brothers who live with us here. Someone has to think about that, right? But Rondon has not fought yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
My point was more that if there are shortages, why aren't resources being put into necessary stuff instead of luxuries? I'm not saying a cake here and there is wrong or that Latin Americans can't have nice things, but this was a counter full of stuff that wouldn't look out of place in a Parisian patisserie. Meanwhile, no bread. In other news, I handled my first 5000 Bolivar note today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Vlex posted:My point was more that if there are shortages, why aren't resources being put into necessary stuff instead of luxuries? I'm not saying a cake here and there is wrong or that Latin Americans can't have nice things, but this was a counter full of stuff that wouldn't look out of place in a Parisian patisserie. Meanwhile, no bread. Well, they're forced to sell bread at a loss, so it doesn't make sense to dump all their resources into that. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do given the situation, but businesses have to make up costs somewhere, otherwise they'd be forced to close, and then everyone's a little more screwed. The people buying those cakes are basically subsidizing the losses the bakery has to incur by selling regulated products, because the government sure as hell isn't helping.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Vlex posted:My point was more that if there are shortages, why aren't resources being put into necessary stuff instead of luxuries? I'm not saying a cake here and there is wrong or that Latin Americans can't have nice things, but this was a counter full of stuff that wouldn't look out of place in a Parisian patisserie. Meanwhile, no bread. Remember that bread dough has to be left to rise for a significant amount of time, if they've only got space to store 50 loaves worth then that's all they can make.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Chuck Boone posted:He's not quite there yet, but he almost went full Not that anyone's keeping count, but that's yet another direct violation of the Constitution. Article 237 posted:Within the first ten days following the installation of the National Assembly, in ordinary session, the President of the Republic, shall present personally to the Assembly a message which will render account of the political, economic, social and administrative aspects of his or her administration during the past year Of course, he had his lackeys at the TSJ produce reams of legalese explaining that "to the Assembly" actually means "to the TSJ".
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Vlex posted:My point was more that if there are shortages, why aren't resources being put into necessary stuff instead of luxuries? I'm not saying a cake here and there is wrong or that Latin Americans can't have nice things, but this was a counter full of stuff that wouldn't look out of place in a Parisian patisserie. Meanwhile, no bread. There's a certain amount of bread they're required to have available by law, which is how much they bake because they gotta sell it at an incredible loss (Last I checked, the price of a 'pan canilla' is merely 100 bolivares). They make ends meet with pastries and cakes, as well as anything they sell that isn't regulated, which nets a much higher profit per kilo of flour or other ingredients used. The problem with the whole regulation business is that it's not even really a subsidy, they deliberately force businesses to sell at a loss, they're not reimbursed for said losses so to stay afloat they have to mark-up anything else that they can sell and isn't regulated. Those cakes probably cost like 20000 bolivares a piece.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
With the state of the economy and nation, it seems like Venezuela is coming to a halt. Who is going to be buying cakes? And tourists don't even dare come spend money anymore
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
let them eat cake
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
caberham posted:With the state of the economy and nation, it seems like Venezuela is coming to a halt. Who is going to be buying cakes? And tourists don't even dare come spend money anymore With some luck, that bakery happens to be close to a minister's home, and said minister happens to be throwing a party so they buy every cake they've got. They're not baking them to throw them away, there's somebody buying them. Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the Venezuelan crisis is how, to some people, it doesn't seem to exist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Basically the cake is bread for rich people because the rich people still cant get actual bread since its price controlled and sold at a loss and thus in short supply?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:let them eat cake This cake discussion is kind of surreal. I'm surprised no minister or Venezuela apologist has gone into a bakery and photographed the cakes and posted that. Actually that does remind me, I read on some venezuela apologist website about a year ago of a guy who went down there into some full grocery store in Caracas and posted how everything was available in large quantities and shelves were fully stocked. He even noted the prices of everything like "6 eggs, only 2500 BsF ($2)!! Why that's cheaper than I pay for free range eggs in the USA". I think that video got posted here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
New thread title: "Venezuela: Cake Chat ITT"  I wouldn't go as far as to say that rich people have replaced bread with cake in their diets, but there's still money in the country (in the hands of a very small minority). Aside from any "old money" that might have weathered the storm so far, you've also got to remember that corruption and theft are two-way streets: one person loses while another gains. In this case, millions are losing while a few are gaining... and buying cake with the proceeds, presumably. Saladman posted:This cake discussion is kind of surreal. I'm surprised no minister or Venezuela apologist has gone into a bakery and photographed the cakes and posted that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
I didn't mean to introduce cakechat to the thread, but now I'm glad I did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Chuck Boone posted:
I can chime in a bit here thanks to my friend who is still there and comes from a rich family. For any regulated products, his mom (who runs a well-off sports clothing store in the city) doesn't even bother trying at grocery stores anymore. She instead goes to the scalpers who are selling regulated products are a large-ish markup. And instead of buying what a normal family would purchase at a time, she buys in bulk if it's available. Because even the scalpers don't always have products. Like, a box of corn flour is roughly 10kg, which they charge BsF 100 000 for. She always buys two if they're available. It's basically a cycle of going to trusted scalpers/importers and being able to afford their insane markups and buying as much as you can because you never know when you'll be able to purchase it again, despite having plenty of money to do so. Edit: This BsF 100 000 price was from three months ago. He has no idea what she pays for now because they aren't on speaking terms. But one can assume it's gone up tremendously. Easily 150-200k now. The question I want to know is who the gently caress is keeping her sports clothing store afloat because apparently there are three other ones on the street/mall its located at. And in good news about my friend, his flight to leave for good is less than a week away. He'll be living in the States for a bit and then coming over to Toronto once documents arrive and school applications get finalized.  Final Edit: "For things like toothpaste, she hasn't had to buy any for a long time because she bought 500 tubes of two years ago and we're just using it up over time. A box of deodorant was BsF 20k late 2015. Box of menstrual pads two years back she is still using. Basically the rich survive because we bought everything a long time ago" Age of the Atomic Mom fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Jan 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
Peel posted:I was confused and alarmed by Chuck Boone's post until I scrolled back up and read 'Gilber Caro.' You're not the only one. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Age of the Atomic Mom posted:The question I want to know is who the gently caress is keeping her sports clothing store afloat because apparently there are three other ones on the street/mall its located at. I've been hearing this question a lot lately, particularly from my friends who live abroad and came to visit during the holidays. They keep up with the news, so they were surprised to see that most of the places where we used to hang out to eat, drink, and even shopping malls are still full. It's somehow at odds with the picture of a country with a poverty rate over 70% where there isn't enough food for everyone. The thing is, Caracas has over two million inhabitants. Yes, most of them are having a hard time, but of course there are a few thousand who aren't. They might work in companies where they get fat bonuses, get paid a percentage in dollars, or receive money from abroad. Plus, you always have the families of the boliburgeoise, who mostly live in Caracas. These are the people you see buying stuff in malls and eating out. It's not representative of Venezuela as a whole, but if you're hanging out in expensive areas, and more specifically, shopping malls, of course there are going to be people with money there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
thing about regulating prices is that we never gotten it to work even remotely well, which is kind of understandable in light of what a monumental task it would be calculate even one price "correctly" (like, to degree of having to solve for magnitudes more things than there are atoms in the universe, see mechanism design if you are interested)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:thing about regulating prices is that we never gotten it to work even remotely well, which is kind of understandable in light of what a monumental task it would be calculate even one price "correctly" (like, to degree of having to solve for magnitudes more things than there are atoms in the universe, see mechanism design if you are interested) It's also because the idea of there being an "ideal" price is flawed in principle, markets fluctuate, and you can't keep them from fluctuating by force. Any place that has "fixed" prices for any product also updates them very often to adjust for inflation, which is what Venezuela has failed to do and it's this, combined with the absurd amount of products being regulated, is the reason why you can't find so many foodstuffs, medicines and other items in Venezuela. Unsurprisingly, every attempt at regulating ANYTHING has resulted in black markets surging to serve the artificially inflated demand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:thing about regulating prices is that we never gotten it to work even remotely well, which is kind of understandable in light of what a monumental task it would be calculate even one price "correctly" (like, to degree of having to solve for magnitudes more things than there are atoms in the universe, see mechanism design if you are interested) Regulating prices can work, but it requires the government to be willing to actually subsidize the places selling the items when it becomes necessary (say if you want to ensure the price of a loaf of bread is $1 at all times, and the actual price a baker would need to sell at is $2, a government could give a $1 subsidy to the baker for each loaf sold). Venezuela apparently couldn't be bothered to do that. And at this point, they definitely can't even afford it anymore if they wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
A ton of countries have subsidies on food and even price controls. Switzerland—as libertarian a country as exists pretty much—has price controls on milk and many meats. Like for milk, farmers have to sell it for 65 centimes/liter. There are loopholes (like they can sell on their property or at farmer's markets, usually at $1.20/liter) and dairy farmers here constantly complain that they're being ruined by the government. I guess for whatever reason they were not literally ruined by the government's mandatory price controls, unlike similar farms in Venezuela. VVV: Interesting. Thanks for the economics lesson! Saladman fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Jan 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
The issue with price controls in Venezuela especially after 2012-2013 is that they no longer tracked the market value of the Bolivar and were priced versus a pegged currency that in no could be defended without massive amounts of support. As the value of the Bolivar decreased (through a combination of printing and then dropping oil prices by 2014), the Venezuelan government rather mysterious kept both the peg and the prices based on it which was complete fantasy. This only increased shortages of basic goods since they were price very very cheap (at least on paper) and created a black market. Other countries, many of them if not most non-socialist, have price controls but usually they keep prices attached in some regard to their market value. This may moderately restrict supply but often not enough to create shortages. Venezuela is a special case because how unbelievably stubborn the government was not to shift prices, hell they put even the Soviets to shame. That said, you pretty miserable situations (maybe not quite as miserable as Venezuela) even with floating prices. A good example of this Azerbaijan (which is as reliant on oil as Venezuela) which has to import most of its food but has no price controls. The Azerbaijani government desperately defended the Manat's peg to the point, like Venezuela, they used up their reserves and then eventually had float the Manat and its value dropped like a rock. While stores in Azerbaijan still have goods, people are becoming more desperate to afford them. They can see the goods, but they can't buy them. Ironically enough there is now a regular trade where Azerbaijans drive into Russian Daghstan to buy potatoes and other staples because they are relatively cheaper even with a devalued Manat. Russia itself went a third way, the Ruble was always floated but rather than use price controls or market prices then put an export tax on basic staples. This largely worked, and while it restricted a foreign market for agricultural products, it also cheap the domestic market cheap and in read supply. You can go to a store and buy a kilo of potatoes for about 20-30 cents. Basically, there were ways to accomplish some of what the Venezuelan government wanted to do but it was really their complete ignorance and unwillingness to change that put them into such a poor position even compared to a country like Russia which is far from a model state. Also, pegging your currency to the dollar is carries some real risks and can easily backfire if commodity prices change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
[url]https://twitter.com/ElyangelicaNews/status/821495194768068608 quote:Maduro: ... because then the right-wing writers start going, "no, the only way that we can improve relations is if we release el monstruo de Ramo Verde [literally, "The Monster of Ramo Verde", Maduro's nickname for Lopez]. Maduro must have had a lot of people asking him to free Leopoldo today, because he replied to the video right away. Maduro said that he was only "joking" last year when he acted really serious and said those things, and that there is actually no comparison between Lopez and Rivera because Rivera "never killed anyone" (  Lopez didn't either). Here's a bonus video from Caracas of at least a dozen people scrambling to eat whatever scraps of food they can find in a pile of garbage before the sanitation truck takes it away: https://twitter.com/vladimirpetit/status/821716900161982465 Chuck Boone fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
M. Discordia posted:It can be, and is, a lesson about both unchecked power in general and leftism. You don't have to rely on the words of right-wingers to identify Venezuela as an exemplar of a socialist state, you can just look at what every socialist group in the world was saying about Venezuela from 1998 to a year and a half ago. Real quick tip: people who are serious about political science and the analysis of states don't take the government's own word when deciding what kind of system is in use. Instead, it is evaluated on its merits. Dictatorships rarely relish in the title; that doesn't change what they are. I've never been a tankie socialist and never will be so the things they said about Venezuela mean honestly poo poo to me. I'm sure you have a decent point somewhere in your ranting but you push it too hard. Yes, this is the failure of a state that referred to itself as socialist. That doesn't tell me anything practical about how my politics should be in, for example, America. This guy absolutely knows what he's talking about, great post summing up the basics of the situation in actual terms: owDAWG posted:When reading about underdeveloped countries with ineffective government institutions with an unhealthy media landscape that has news organizations that lack journalistic integrity is we cannot look at these countries in terms of right or left. With the lack of effective government institutions most of the socialist programs fall victim to corruption and waste(Venezuela). With the lack of effective government institutions right wing governments tend to allow wealthy business owners to exploit workers(China). Without a healthy news landscape that has more than one source of media that has journalistic integrity leaders can misdirect the frustration of the people against their enemies(like North Korea in extreme cases or in mild cases far left/far right media in the US). Without healthy democratic institutions leaders can alter how the government operates to serve their needs instead of that of the people and turn the country into a patronage dictatorship like Venezuela and many African countries. Without an educated and properly informed middle class the people cannot seize the reigns of their own state to take it off the path to a failed state.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Your spiel about not taking governments own comments at face value is great except for the part where you totally ignore the comment you are quoting, which points out that countless international socialist groups identified Venezuela as a Socialist success for a whole decade, many even as late as 2013. Mainstream British media sites the Guardian and Independent were doing so up til then, as were several now-prominent British political figures such as Jeremy Corbyn and Dianne Abbot (British Labour Party officials). Different names and faces in the USA but same story. It says something about socialism and socialists that they chose not to see the writing on the wall at any point during the 2000's regarding Venezuela. This crisis was predictable but they didn't predict it and they deserve to be at least embarrassed about that. But mostly what we see nowadays is deafening silence, no-true-scotsman ("it was never socialist to begin with, even though we said it was for 13 years!"), conspiracy theories and/or taking the Venezuelan regime's nonsense at face value. Socialists will continue to be called out about Venezuela, they deserve to be because a lot of them haven't owned up to their own role in supporting the disaster from afar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Play posted:Real quick tip: people who are serious about political science and the analysis of states don't take the government's own word when deciding what kind of system is in use. Instead, it is evaluated on its merits. The government of Venezuela validates itself by calling itself socialist; it suppresses questioning by decrying opponents as imperialists; it justifies its behaviour to the people by claiming that it's implementing revolution. Socialism and its repeated false promises directly enable this destitution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
"This system didn't result in peaceful communal anarchy, so it's not real socialism!" "This raindance didn't cause precipitation, so it's not a real raindance!" About the time the communist bloc loving imploded on itself within a century of coming into existence and ruling over 2+ billion lives was the time to start packing your poo poo in. Either you end up taking the fast track to hell because you have true believers in late-stage socialism (e.g. Venezula's now canned finance minister who literally believes inflation is a capitalist psy-op myth) or you get the Chinese communist party which is very obviously just peachy running a 1.4 billion person company town under a different banner. So in conclusion, capitalism is non-optional.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 06:01
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
fishmech posted:Regulating prices can work, but it requires the government to be willing to actually subsidize the places selling the items when it becomes necessary (say if you want to ensure the price of a loaf of bread is $1 at all times, and the actual price a baker would need to sell at is $2, a government could give a $1 subsidy to the baker for each loaf sold). Venezuela apparently couldn't be bothered to do that. And at this point, they definitely can't even afford it anymore if they wanted to. Of course there is a broad range of what "regulating prices" means. On the one hand many countries subsidize and set minimum prices for products. This leads to inefficiencies, but may be politically and structurally desirable (because there are indeed other inefficiencies and dynamic concerns which a price/market system does not address.) But prices often serve as a scarcity signal, which is to what I was alluding here and which makes sense with the bread vs. cake example. One could try to regulate and set prices (ie set maximum prices) to accurately move with supply and demand concerns in a planned economy. This is difficult to impossible because of the concerns I voiced above, especially in an inflationary environment. Because already present price controls often lead to over- or under-supply of goods. This is not a huge deal when it comes to Milk or Bananas from French colonies etc. But it will be different for bread. Your example is more practical, in the sense that you have a very "dictatorial" approach of first determining what the optimal price is (where optimality is now independent of any scarcity concerns but rather a idealistic concept) and secondly, you attempt to subsidize producers to make up the difference between optimality and actual reality. This approach has downsides. Now your subsidy must solve the classic regulators problem of eliciting accurate information about costs of bread production. This is is costly (you will pay information rent to producers) so they will be oversubsidized. You can of course kick the can down the road and say that 2$ is the "optimal" cost for producing bread, but then you have to solve the information problem on input costs and so forth. So while these inefficiencies may be transparent in areas where production costs are static and homogeneous, this is probably not the case for bread in Venezuela, mainly because a) input inflation cost and b) differences in productivity. I mean a large industrial bakery is simply different from a small handmade bakery. Both have merits, however, and so you have to deal with distinctions. Btw, policy design in pretty much every political environment has shown that producers will NOT cooperate with you. Your policy has to be designed under the assumption people will shirk and bullshit. Haramstufe Rot fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Jan 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
Play posted:Real quick tip: people who are serious about political science and the analysis of states don't take the government's own word when deciding what kind of system is in use. Instead, it is evaluated on its merits. Dictatorships rarely relish in the title; that doesn't change what they are. I've never been a tankie socialist and never will be so the things they said about Venezuela mean honestly poo poo to me. I'm sure you have a decent point somewhere in your ranting but you push it too hard. Yes, this is the failure of a state that referred to itself as socialist. That doesn't tell me anything practical about how my politics should be in, for example, America. Two things, however. First, what people get upset about is not the actual concept of a socialist ideal, but rather the flip-flopping of leftist when it comes to Venezuela. Because iti is not the issue that Venezuela declared itself socialist and it thereby must be so. The issue here is simply that a large group of people have defended Venezuela as socialist and ideal, also on this board, up to the very point it became clear that Venezuela is a failed state. Then, in unison, they claim that Venezuela is not socialist and, worse, never was. For example, I read in D&D years ago that the only reason for Venezuela's then-existing problems were imperialist influence of the USA. Like literally this sentence. And now it is entirely clear that this is not the case. THIS is the issue here. Secondly, leftist are generally unable or unwilling to concede that any of the issues with socialist states were due to structural reasons of socialism. The only conceivable explanations considered follow the axiom that problems are unrelated to the socialism system. Now, there is a huge body of research on human interaction in diverse fields which suggests that there are good reasons why socialist countries are prone to corruption, inefficiencies and whatnot. The discussion of socialism on forums like these necessarily rejects or ignores this body of knowledge entirely! The only other group acting similar are extreme free-market proponents, but their academic, moral and intellectual merit is basically zero. I think I know exactly zero economists who believe that unregulated free markets are optimal in any sense. I have yet to hear a similar sentiment from a socialist. Which is, I believe, the reason why socialism as political system has not made any headway in the world and is now (again) officially extinct in practice. Any ideology unwilling to even address its flaws can never develop. Haramstufe Rot fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Jan 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
I think that there are two distinct issues happening here: 1) The question about whether or not chavismo represents "true" socialism, and 2) the fact that for many years, socialist parties and left-leaning folk in general were happy to voice support for Chavez and the Maduro regime (and some still do, but less so now than before). I think that the two issues are connected but also that we can look at them separately, and that the bitterness that some Venezuelans feel towards the left from the latter bleeds into their discussions on the former. Context is key here. It's easy for someone living outside of the country to see Venezuela under the PSUV as a kind of experiment that you watch through a microscope in your lab coat. You look at the sample in the petri dish and take down notes: the initial conditions appear optimal. The sample develops in an interesting way and appears to be doing relatively well. Then... it dies. "The experiment failed, and I'm ashamed to say that I once believed it would succeed". I don't think that this is necessarily a wrong viewpoint to take because it's grounded in your own subjectivity (i.e., a person living outside of the country literally looking in from the outside). However, Venezuelans who have lived in the country for the past 17 years have a viewpoint that is the polar opposite of that. They've personally experienced what it's like to live in a country that calls itself socialist every single day repeatedly, and they've seen the "Patria, socialismo o muerte" ["Motherland, socialism or death"] posters everywhere. This is why "this wasn't really socialism" is such a difficult pill to swallow for many Venezuelans, and why the context of your experiences and viewpoint matter. In any case, for what it's worth, the Socialist International has been very critical of the Maduro regime since at least 2014, although it's possible that they were vocal about their criticism prior to that year but I'm just not aware. In a bit of news, Henrique Capriles announced yesterday that the opposition march in Caracas scheduled for January 23 would try to reach the offices of the Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE) in the western, no-go part of the city. The last time that Capriles led a march to the CNE he spent about 20 minutes asking a National Guard soldier for permission to talk to his supervisor so they could get through the line of soldiers, and the crowd he was leading turn around and left him standing there waiting for the supervisor. It's going to be very interesting to see how many people actually show up to this march on the 23 since desperation is so high and confidence in the opposition leadership is so low.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:Of course there is a broad range of what "regulating prices" means. Of course, in the case of Venezuela, I really don't think it was a lack of information that was the issue or differences in productivity but that the government fundamentally did not want to acknowledge the fundamental devaluation that was occurring to the Bolivar and set prices that were in reality a complete fantasy to the market value of those goods. There was import subsidization occurring but it only would go so once set prices were minute fraction of their market value. Basically, the system is going to meltdown once the government just shuts out reality completely. Inflation was occurring but by defending the peg to the dollar there were "putting on a show" at tremendous cost. As for other systems, there is going to be gradual inefficiencies and cheating, the Soviet Union is useful example. Ultimately, by the 1970s the Soviets need high oil prices in order to subsidize their price system and its inefficiencies. That said, you can make an argument when a country like the Soviet Union was in an emergency situation for large parts of its existence and that the inefficiencies of price controls were a necessary part of doing business...at least for a while. I think there is a consensus that there are certain situations where price controls may be beneficial if not necessary but there are very clear dangers, especially when you add in something like a cult of personality, a hard dollar peg and a general lack of interest in paying attention to any of the data being sent to the government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 14:36
|
|
|
Chuck Boone posted:In a bit of news, Henrique Capriles announced yesterday that the opposition march in Caracas scheduled for January 23 would try to reach the offices of the Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE) in the western, no-go part of the city. The last time that Capriles led a march to the CNE he spent about 20 minutes asking a National Guard soldier for permission to talk to his supervisor so they could get through the line of soldiers, and the crowd he was leading turn around and left him standing there waiting for the supervisor. It's going to be very interesting to see how many people actually show up to this march on the 23 since desperation is so high and confidence in the opposition leadership is so low. I get the impression turnout is not going to be high. Unlike the last big protest in September (I think? time flies by) there's been no buzz surrounding this one. It doesn't come up in conversations, when I mention it people either don't know or don't care, etc. Of course, this is all anecdotal and I only have a small sample, but I get the feeling people really got fed up with the opposition after this past couple of months.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:First, what people get upset about is not the actual concept of a socialist ideal, but rather the flip-flopping of leftist when it comes to Venezuela. Because iti is not the issue that Venezuela declared itself socialist and it thereby must be so. The issue here is simply that a large group of people have defended Venezuela as socialist and ideal, also on this board, up to the very point it became clear that Venezuela is a failed state. Then, in unison, they claim that Venezuela is not socialist and, worse, never was. Exactly this. No one here is holding up Venezuela as an example of a socialist government because of what their government claims, just like no one here says Nazis are socialist (BUT LOL U LIBTARD THEY'RE NAME HAS SOCIALISM IN IT -- every Freeper) or North Koreans. They hold Venezuela up as a shining example of a socialist country because every serious leftist spent most of the past 20 years holding up Venezuela as the shining beacon of socialism in action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:Of course there is a broad range of what "regulating prices" means. Yeah actually administering a subsidy system is very difficult to get just right. The problem is Venezuela basically hasn't even bothered to do it more than a token amount. In real world price control via subsidy systems, what you'd expect to see is periodic adjustments in the subsidy spending, usually with each change being an over-correction beyond what's necessary at the moment to make up for the under-subsidy immediately preceding it. Over the long term this allows the various sellers to break even and make a profit in the long term even if they have to spend a quarter or two selling the price-controlled product at small losses and making the difference up by trying to sell non controlled items. That said, oversubsidization isn't usually too big of a problem when you're a country that has the money, and will correct itself over time anyway as adjustments in subsidies will happen slower than changes in actual costs. The US or Germany, for instance, totally has the money to decide "all regular milk will stay under $4 a gallon no matter where you are in the country" and eat those costs. Venezuela's refusal to diversify outside of oil, or even to build up a proper sovereign wealth fund during boom times that could later pay for diversification, prevents them from being able to afford it, but they weren't even trying to do it when they had the money. Something that's weird is that Maduro still refuses to do something like switching over to a full rationing system, as numerous countries across the political spectrum have done in emergency situations. There's a pseudo-rationing system for certain kinds of stores and products, but I guess he doesn't want his loyal lackeys to have to put up with what the masses have to put up with?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
I think the people who were defending the government of Venezuela were fools and I'm not counted among them. I also agree that capitalism is non-optional, the only question being how much we allow it to dictate our fates. However people like M. Discordia are trying to score points in a stupid binary game that only exists in their heads. They try to draw parallels between Venezuela and social democrats. Hating the way that Venezuela has done does not mean that one should support Trump. In fact, I would argue that Maduro has a lot more in common with Trump than he does with the liberals of the western world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
fishmech posted:Yeah actually administering a subsidy system is very difficult to get just right. The problem is Venezuela basically hasn't even bothered to do it more than a token amount. Switching to a full rationing system would be admitting there is an actual problem which Maduro and company seem extremely unwilling to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 23:01
|
|