US regime change in Venezuela

[Andy836]

I would have though that the country with the largest oil reserves in the world would have enough leverage with the largest consumer in the world. In fact, I would have thought they would be bestest mates.

If socialism was any good someone somewhere would have implemented it and others seeing how good it was would have implemented it. Guess what? It's a scam and nowhere has it worked and any countries that have tried it have failed.

So there you have it people, Socialism....the road to serfdom indeed!

I wouldn't be so harsh. Just like Venezuala was overly dependent on oil receipts, Ireland is overly reliant on MNCs. If some shock drove MNC taxable profits overseas then Ireland would be in deep do-do. Venezuala suffered from operational leverage driven by expanded current account spending on its social programs - recurring costs - Ireland is in the same boat - very little of Irish expenditure can be curtailed in a downturn without huge political upheaval.

 

[Firefly]

I wouldn't be so harsh. Just like Venezuala was overly dependent on oil

Oil took a dive but has recovered. And with the largest supplies there's no excuse..it's still the most important trading commodity. Don't think the Saudis ran out of toilet paper either...

 

[TheBigShort]

Just like Venezuala was overly dependent on oil receipts, Ireland is overly reliant on MNCs

A very good point.

 

[TheBigShort]

Oil took a dive but has recovered. And with the largest supplies there's no excuse..it's still the most important trading commodity. Don't think the Saudis ran out of toilet paper either...

Not this time, but they came close last year.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-relationship-with-the-us-sours-a7333461.html

 

[Andy836]

Oil took a dive but has recovered. And with the largest supplies there's no excuse..it's still the most important trading commodity. Don't think the Saudis ran out of toilet paper either...

Did you even read the link in my previous post?

Their oil infrastructure is crippled having been starved of investment under socialist govts.
Venezulan breakeven is $50 to $70 - WTI is not $50 but they're not even getting that now as their are issues with their purities.
Saudi breakeven is approx $4. Saudi Aramco is probably the best capitalized company in the world - the Saudi govt has never come in and sacked 75% of the workforce.
On top of this Venezuela's largest customer is now self sufficient with only a small number of US gulf refineries still running heavy crude from Venezuala (the largest being CITGO which is owned by PDVSA although their purchases have to be at market prices due to their credit agreements).

 

[TheBigShort]

It's quite the rant, but to some of your points

When it's pointed out that globalresearch.ca is run by a nutjob and extreme left wing conspiracy theorist, the OP defends by saying "Of course, that's the whole point, research." Nice "research"!

It was alleged that the author is a 'nutjob'. It suits you to swallow that line. I merely linked an article that he wrote that goes to the source of issue in Venezuela.
An economic war between the sovereignty of the people and who they choose to lead through democratic means, and corporate interests of the US, over the vast oil reserves.
Nothing to do with socialism or capitalism.

We have revisionism :
All this is Maduro's fault...Saint Chavez, the great leader did only good.

You need to stick the facts as to what was posted and stop misrepresenting what was said.

We have revisionism :
Things were dandy until the big, bad USA came along.

Again, you need to read the content of the posts. It would help if you took an objective view of the issue. A wiki entry posted up clearly points to Venezuela being an economic basket case long before Chavez arrived.

Sure, wasn't Saint Chavez freely elected?

I don't think he was a saint, but I think it is recognized that he was freely elected.

Course he was, he was promising his people the sun, moon and stars and for a while we have able to give it to them. But as happens all socialists, he eventually run out of other people's money!

Shock! Horror! Politician promises something and doesn't deliver, my word!
The idea of economic sanctions is to cripple a countries finances.

This time it's Maduro who is a totalitarian. Other times / countries, it's Central Planning, a dictator or maybe even something else. The key point here is that it's not and never is the fault socialism!

He is taking extreme measures to consolidate power. Amounting to a totalitarian regime, similar to say Saudi Arabia - minus God.

I would have though that the country with the largest oil reserves in the world would have enough leverage with the largest consumer in the world. In fact, I would have thought they would be bestest mates.

Used to be, while the resources of the country were being stripped bare and the ordinary working was being left impoverished.

I've attached another article published during the Chavez era which clearly points to an attempted coup by the US of the democratically elected government of Venezuela.

http://cepr.net/publications/op-eds-columns/media-falls-short-on-iraq-venezuela

Why would the US want to overthrow the democratically elected government of Venezuela, but not say, the totalitarian regime of Saudi Arabia?

 

[Andy836]

A very good point.

Maybe but it doesn't support anything you said.

The reason Venzuala is in the mess it is today is purely down to the Chavez & Modura govts stripping PDVSA's of all its cash flow and spending it on their social programs and nationalizing everything that moved. That is not the fault of the US or neoliberals etc

 

[TheBigShort]

The reason Venzuala is in the mess it is today is purely down to the Chavez & Modura govts stripping PDVSA's of all its cash flow and spending it on their social programs and nationalizing everything that moved. That is not the fault of the US or neoliberals etc

Where did I say the incompetence of Chaovez or Modura was the fault of US or anyone else?
If we stick to the topic title, and the subsequent article linked to it, anyone can see that the topic is not about socialism nor capitalism. It is about an economic war between the sovereignty of the people and their elected representatives (who purport to be socialist but now are engineering a totalitarian regime) and the corporate interests of the US, backed by US covert (attempted coup) and overt (economic sanctions) actions of US (purporting to be democrats and free)
As much as it is easy to point out the deficits of so-called 'socialist' states like Venezuela, what isn't as apparent, to some at least, that the economic system we live in is neither capitalism nor democratic. It is a system of plunder and profit, destroying the environment, of perpetual and unsustainable debt, maintained by complicit governments and banking cartels and defended by US military industrial complex.

 

[galway_blow_in]

Oil took a dive but has recovered. And with the largest supplies there's no excuse..it's still the most important trading commodity. Don't think the Saudis ran out of toilet paper either...

oil is only slightly above $50 per barrel , it was over $100 for several years up until 2014

 

[galway_blow_in]

Did you even read the link in my previous post?

Their oil infrastructure is crippled having been starved of investment under socialist govts.
Venezulan breakeven is $50 to $70 - WTI is not $50 but they're not even getting that now as their are issues with their purities.
Saudi breakeven is approx $4. Saudi Aramco is probably the best capitalized company in the world - the Saudi govt has never come in and sacked 75% of the workforce.
On top of this Venezuela's largest customer is now self sufficient with only a small number of US gulf refineries still running heavy crude from Venezuala (the largest being CITGO which is owned by PDVSA although their purchases have to be at market prices due to their credit agreements).

break even for the saudis is far higher than $4 , during the lows of early 2016 , the kingdom had to issue debt such was the pressure they were under with low oil prices

perhaps you are referring to the cost of extraction ?

 

[Andy836]

break even for the saudis is far higher than $4 , during the lows of early 2016 , the kingdom had to issue debt such was the pressure they were under with low oil prices

perhaps you are referring to the cost of extraction ?

Correct. They issued debt to fund their govt budget deficit, not to bridge extraction losses.

 

[Sarenco]

Where did I say the incompetence of Chaovez or Modura was the fault of US or anyone else?

BS

Your original thesis was that the impoverishment of present day Venezuela was down to "a cartel of bankers, aided and abetted by compliant governments and protected by the US Military Industrial complex."

With respect, that is a complete fantasy.

Let's be clear what we are talking about here - a fertile country with vast natural resources where the bulk of the population are now malnourished and there has been a near complete break down in law and order. A country with an economy and standard of living that surpassed that of many Western European countries fifty years ago that is now on the brink of a humanitarian crisis, due almost entirely to the grotesque maladministration of the Chavez/Modura regime.

Repeating (frankly ridiculous) slogans or citing conspiracy theorists and ideologues to support your thesis does not change reality.

 

[TheBigShort]

BS

Your original thesis was that the impoverishment of present day Venezuela was down to "a cartel of bankers, aided and abetted by compliant governments and protected by the US Military Industrial complex."

With respect, that is a complete fantasy.

Let's be clear what we are talking about here - a fertile country with vast natural resources where the bulk of the population are now malnourished and there has been a near complete break down in law and order. A country with an economy and standard of living that surpassed that of many Western European countries fifty years ago that is now on the brink of a humanitarian crisis, due almost entirely to the grotesque maladministration of the Chavez/Modura regime.

Repeating (frankly ridiculous) slogans or citing conspiracy theorists and ideologues to support your thesis change does not change reality.

Of course that is a complete misrepresentation of everything said before.
Read the topic title and the associated links. I'm using Venezuela as a typical example of how the free market democratic capitalist system is a myth. I could have used Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc but that would be too easy.
It has nothing to do with socialism, Francois Hollande was a socialist, Syriza in Greece are socialist (and no they didn't collapse the Greek economy, a collaboration of banking cartels and right-wing governments did), the British and Irish Labour parties profess to be socialist. There are numerous organizations throughout Europe that profess to be socialist. I'm not aware of any professing to install totalitarian regimes. Are you?

A country with an economy and standard of living that surpassed that of many Western European countries fifty years ago that is now on the brink of a humanitarian crisis, due almost entirely to the grotesque maladministration of the Chavez/Modura regime.

That is quite the bogus proclamation. The notion that a country with such a high standard of living would then in turn vote for something completely radical as the Chavez government is bogus.
What drives people to socialism is living in an impoverishment state and having no future or no stake in the society they live in. In a democratic socialist republic it is a re-balancing of economic wealth generated from the resources of the State through the workers labour.
You are ignoring, quite deliberately no doubt, that Venezuela was an economic basket case long before Chavez.
It's an economic war, plain and simple.

 

[TheBigShort]

Duplicate

 

[galway_blow_in]

Correct. They issued debt to fund their govt budget deficit, not to bridge extraction losses.

Your still way off with that $ 4 breakeven oil price

 

[Purple]

What drives people to socialism is living in an impoverishment state and having no future or no stake in the society they live in.

The same thing drives people to fascism and other forms of oppressive governments. The fallacy here is that the people who replace the bad guys must be the good guys. The reality is almost always that the people who replace the bad guys are the other bad guys.
Yes, the USA has waged an economic war on Venezuela and the reason for that is primarily the same as the reason they support the viscous, totalitarian oppressive regime in Saudi Arabia; they need to ensure that the dollar remains the world's reserve currency. That can only be done by ensuring that oil continues to be traded in dollars. The two major oil producers who talked about moving away from the dollar were Venezuela and Iraq. One was invaded and the other was the subject of a CIA backed attempted coup. So, the USA and it's sanctions are all about the economic interests of the USA. That shouldn't surprise anyone; as General DeGaulle said, countries do not have allies, just interests. Therefore the USA is no different to anyone else, us included.
Now, on to why Venezuela has collapsed; in part it is due to sanctions and the pressure the USA exerts through the banks it influences but with the resources Venezuela has that should only be a minor inconvenience. Make no mistake; it is to a very large extent, the author of it's own destruction.

 

[Sarenco]

Of course that is a complete misrepresentation of everything said before.

No BS, it's not.

I quoted you verbatim because I've noticed from other threads that you have a tendency to shift your position when challenged without acknowledging same.

Your original position was that Venezuela's difficulties, and I quote, were due to "a centralised command 'trickle-up' economy run by a cartel of bankers, aided and abetted by compliant governments and protected by the US Military Industrial complex."

Again, that is complete nonsense. Venezuela's difficulties are almost entirely due to the maladministration of the Chavez/Modura regime.

That is quite the bogus proclamation.

No BS, it's not.

It is a verifiable fact that fifty years ago Venezuela had an economy and standard of living that surpassed that of many Western European countries.

Was the election of Chavez preceded by a challenging economic decade? Yes.

Was that challenging period even remotely similar to the current pitiful situation resulting from the regime of Chavez and Modura? Not even close.

Let's be honest BS, this is yet another case where reality just doesn't match your agenda. So, yet again, you are inventing another reality.

 

[TheBigShort]

The same thing drives people to fascism and other forms of oppressive governments. The fallacy here is that the people who replace the bad guys must be the good guys. The reality is almost always that the people who replace the bad guys are the other bad guys.

It's quite amazing really, at no point in this thread or any other thread have I advocated the 'socialist' policies of Chavez or Madoru or Soviet Russia, NK, China etc. Central command economies, totalitarian systems etc are undemocratic and as has been pointed out ad nauseoum have failed.
The prevailing view therefore is that free, or open markets, in a capitalist system is the best way to progress societies and generate wealth etc - again no issue there. I have repeatedly advocated capitalism. The difference as I see it is that capitalism is an economic ideology, socialism is a political ideology. Capitalism is the best way to generate and create new wealth, socialism decides the best way to redistribute that wealth, through democratic means, which in turns offers the best platform to exploit and capitalise the resources of the earth is an ethically and environmentally sustainable way.
The problems arise in capitalism when undue or disproportionate levels of wealth created through the capitalist system is centralised and is under the control of too few people, or too few institutions. In the US, EU it's the central banks and the banking cartels protected by US military complex, NATO, with elections that serve as nothing more than window dressing - doesn't matter who you vote in, they all fall into line with the system. If they don't, their economies will suffer the fate of Venezuela, Cuba etc.

Yes, the USA has waged an economic war on Venezuela and the reason for that is primarily the same as the reason they support the viscous, totalitarian oppressive regime in Saudi Arabia; they need to ensure that the dollar remains the world's reserve currency.

Agree, it's not democratic. It is a policy aligned to totalitarianism.

That can only be done by ensuring that oil continues to be traded in dollars.

Agree, it's not an open market.

So, the USA and it's sanctions are all about the economic interests of the USA. That shouldn't surprise anyone; as General DeGaulle said, countries do not have allies, just interests. Therefore the USA is no different to anyone else, us included.

True, I agree entirely. It's all about self-interest. Problems arise when my self-interest conflicts with your self-interest. Democracy can, should resolve that, but not in itself, social policy is pivotal too. As such I am an advocate of a democratic socialist republic - the wealth of the state, generated from the resources of the state distributed in accordance to the needs of the state.
The current 'free' or open market capitalist system in its current format, a perpetual debt based system, is destined to fail again and again, centralising all wealth in the control of the few, leading to conflict and war. That's fine if you are sitting on the right side of it, call it 'market value', 'free trade', whatever...it is guaranteed to lead to conflict.

Now, on to why Venezuela has collapsed; in part it is due to sanctions and the pressure the USA exerts through the banks it influences but with the resources Venezuela has that should only be a minor inconvenience. Make no mistake; it is to a very large extent, the author of it's own destruction.

The US has been traditionally Venezuela biggest trading partner. Some 24% of its GDP is attributable to trade with the US according to tradingeconomics.com. It's easy to see how the US can bring Venezuela economy to a grinding halt if it is not happy with the outcome of democratic elections or the policies implemented by that government.
That is not to say a 'socialist' government cannot or do not implement policies that don't work, but that can be said of any form of government in any state.

 

[TheBigShort]

I quoted you verbatim because I've noticed from other threads that you have a tendency to shift your position when challenged without acknowledging same.

Granted, when I spoke of this capitalist system I was not referring exclusively to Venezuela. The 'trickle-up' system applies to Ireland too. Venezuela is the case study, but granted, having re-read the OP I can see how you construed it to be exclusively about Venezuela.
The topic is about regime change. That is neither a democratic policy nor an ideology associated with an open market capitalist system.

 

[Purple]

True, I agree entirely. It's all about self-interest. Problems arise when my self-interest conflicts with your self-interest. Democracy can, should resolve that, but not in itself, social policy is pivotal too. As such I am an advocate of a democratic socialist republic - the wealth of the state, generated from the resources of the state distributed in accordance to the needs of the state.

How would a democratic socialist republic reduce the chances of exactly the same issues of self-interest occurring?
How would a democratic socialist republic reduce the chances of the centralisation of wealth and it being under the control of too few people? History has shown us that a political elite is just as dangerous as a banking or business elite, maybe more so as their is no counter-balance.

I think the problem with your proposition is that a democratic socialist republic will be inherently more ethical than what we currently have. I see no reason why that would be the case.

To me the solution is more international laws and courts so that disputes between countries can be arbitrated in the same way that disputes between citizens can be. The USA is the biggest block to that but they are certainly not alone. In that context the current rise of Nationalism is frightening as Nationalism inevitably leads to war.

Again, we agree on the problem but differ on the solution and, with respect, I think your ideology is stopping you from seeing the root causes.