Originally posted by no1marauderTry coming up with an unbiased source instead of making others do the hard work!
Can you find somewhere in wikipedia (apparently the only reference source you are familiar with) that refutes the economic numbers cited?
Though I do think people are generally doing better than under the corrupt right-wingers that preceded him, if socialism is really his goal he is miles away from the Scandinavian model, currently the closest thing to socialism the world has to offer.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI did the "hard work" of actually finding a source that gave economic numbers regarding what has happened in Venezuela in the last 10 years. Because those numbers look good for Chavez, that makes the source "biased" according to the idiots here!🙄 Of course, they can't refute the numbers, so it is necessary to resort to an Ad Hominem argument. Having dealt with you and zeeblebot on this forum before, I expect nothing better.
Try coming up with an unbiased source instead of making others do the hard work!
Though I do think people are generally doing better than under the corrupt right-wingers that preceded him, if socialism is really his goal he is miles away from the Scandinavian model, currently the closest thing to socialism the world has to offer.
No, in 10 years Chavez hasn't been able to turn a corrupt, aristocratic state into Sweden. That makes him "evil" in your demented opinion.
Originally posted by no1marauderThat doesn't make Chavez a democrat.
I did the "hard work" of actually finding a source that gave economic numbers regarding what has happened in Venezuela in the last 10 years. Because those numbers look good for Chavez, that makes the source "biased" according to the idiots here!🙄 Of course, they can't refute the numbers, so it is necessary to resort to an Ad Hominem argument. Having dea ...[text shortened]... corrupt, aristocratic state into Sweden. That makes him "evil" in your demented opinion.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraHow's the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean as a source? Their 2007 report Social Panorama of Latin America states on page 10:
Try coming up with an unbiased source instead of making others do the hard work!
Though I do think people are generally doing better than under the corrupt right-wingers that preceded him, if socialism is really his goal he is miles away from the Scandinavian model, currently the closest thing to socialism the world has to offer.
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reduced its poverty and extreme poverty rates
by 18.4 and 12.3 percentage points, respectively, between 2002 and 2006. Thanks to rapid
GDP growth and the ongoing implementation of broad social programmes, in 2006 alone the
poverty rate was lowered from 37.1% to 30.2% and the indigence rate from 15.9% to 9.9%.
This swift pace of progress considerably brightens the prospects for further reductions in
poverty and significantly increases the feasibility of meeting the first target associated with
the first Millennium Development Goal, which is analysed in the following section.
http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/30309/PSI2007_Sintesis_Lanzamiento.pdf
Originally posted by no1marauderWell, it is a biased source. Would you trust Fox News figures on the performance of Republican presidents?
I did the "hard work" of actually finding a source that gave economic numbers regarding what has happened in Venezuela in the last 10 years. Because those numbers look good for Chavez, that makes the source "biased" according to the idiots here!🙄 Of course, they can't refute the numbers, so it is necessary to resort to an Ad Hominem argument. Having dea ...[text shortened]... corrupt, aristocratic state into Sweden. That makes him "evil" in your demented opinion.
The main objections I have against Chavez are his poor diplomatic skills, his unconstuctive rhetoric against other leaders and his hostility towards private enterprise. Also, Venezuela is not a representative parliamentary democracy and Chavez should try to make it so.
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't know much about this particular commission, but at least it sounds more credible.
How's the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean as a source? Their 2007 report Social Panorama of Latin America states on page 10:
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reduced its poverty and extreme poverty rates
by 18.4 and 12.3 percentage points, respectively, between 2002 and 2006. Thanks to rapid
GDP growth and th ...[text shortened]... ing section.
http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/30309/PSI2007_Sintesis_Lanzamiento.pdf
Originally posted by KazetNagorraHow is it a "biased" source? Cuz wiki says so? If Fox News presented figures regarding the economic performance of the US during a Republican presidency, I'd look at them and if they came from a reliable source and were unrefuted, I, unlike you, would believe them rather than hanging on to a prejudiced, uninformed opinion.
Well, it is a biased source. Would you trust Fox News figures on the performance of Republican presidents?
The main objections I have against Chavez are his poor diplomatic skills, his unconstuctive rhetoric against other leaders and his hostility towards private enterprise. Also, Venezuela is not a representative parliamentary democracy and Chavez should try to make it so.
How is Venezuela not a "representative parliamentary democracy"? Because Chavez's party keeps winning the frequent elections there?
You really seem remarkably ignorant of what is going on in Venezuela.
Originally posted by zeeblebotOf course, Chavez is a popularly elected President, not a "leftist dictator" but you wouldn't expect a rag run by David Horowitz and publishing weekly columns by nut job Ann Coulter to bother with facts that get in the way of propaganda (I particularly like their video "Jimmy Carter's War Against the Jews"😉.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=34bf1ee4-f535-4fd4-a22a-9d1161ca8216
The UN’s Dictator Tour 2006
By Jacob Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, September 25, 2006
...
Unmentioned by the Journal was the CEPR, and Weisbrot in particular, are longtime apologists for leftist dictators, most prominently Hugo Chavez. Evidence ...[text shortened]... ent co-directors Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot in 1999, according to the organization's website.
I think the CEPR which has on its advisory board two Nobel prize winners in Economics, Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz, is a slightly more reliable source for economic data regarding the nation of Venezuela than FrontPage Magazine.
Originally posted by no1marauderhttp://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-02-11-chavez_N.htm
How's the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean as a source? Their 2007 report Social Panorama of Latin America states on page 10:
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reduced its poverty and extreme poverty rates
by 18.4 and 12.3 percentage points, respectively, between 2002 and 2006. Thanks to rapid
GDP growth and th ...[text shortened]... ing section.
http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/30309/PSI2007_Sintesis_Lanzamiento.pdf
Goods dwindle as oil drops in Venezuela
Posted 2/11/2009 7:49 PM
By Chris Hawley, USA TODAY
If you want beans, pasta or milk, you're out of luck at the El Barquero Supermarket in Caracas, Venezuela.
"Lentils, grains — you almost can't get them," purchaser Jose Rodriguez said by telephone. "We're always having shortages of one thing or another … and you can't import them because the government controls it all."
Such is life in President Hugo Chávez's Venezuela, where the country's fortunes have largely traced the price of oil — from a relative bonanza as recently as last year, when crude went for more than $140 a barrel, to the current reality of rising poverty, crime and food shortages as the oil price plummeted to about $40.
The trends are linked because Venezuela, the No. 4 supplier of oil to the United States, relies on crude revenue for about half of government spending. That could spell an uncertain future for the free health clinics, new public universities and foreign aid programs (including free heating oil for some Americans) that Chávez has created while trying to forge an anti-U.S. bloc of socialist countries in Latin America.
...
Inflation runs above 30%. Chávez has implemented price controls, but many producers have reacted by choosing not to sell their goods below what they consider fair cost — resulting in shortages of staple foods. The government has put strict controls on the buying and selling of dollars in an effort to prop up its currency, the Bolivar.
Crime is rising. The country's murder rate soared from 25 per 100,000 people in 1999 to 48 in 2007, according to the Venezuelan Program for Education and Action in Human Rights.
Kidnappings during the first nine months of 2008 doubled from the year before, from 182 to 366, the group reported.
...
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/11/chavez-venezuela-oil-opinions-contributors_0211_raymond_fisman.html
Venezuela's 'Shell' Game
Raymond Fisman, 02.11.09, 03:46 PM EST
Hugo Chavez turns to Big Oil.
...
The answer is that the Venezuelan government has signed a contract that spells out the terms under which Shell is to make its investment. This includes the royalty rate--say 1% of Shell's revenues from the project--and a host of other conditions: Must they hire local employees? Does Shell lease or own the land the pipeline is built on? Are local investors given an ownership share in the project?
But the world is a complicated, unpredictable place, so despite thousands of pages of lawyerly text outlining the agreement, there will always be a way for Chavez to put the squeeze on Shell. For example, who would have foreseen the massive run-up in oil prices last year? Should the contract be renegotiated as a result?
And this is all assuming that Chavez chooses to honor the contract in the first place--in Venezuela, Chavez's word is the law, so he can (and has) changed agreements with oil companies on a whim. One percent royalties? Why not make it 16% instead? Shell has already spent its billions, so from the company's perspective going forward, a smaller share of revenues is better than no revenues at all. For Chavez, the storyline of fighting against the pillaging ways of foreign investors always plays well to the masses.
But now go back a step--given that Shell knows Chavez isn't as good as his word, why should they invest in the first place? They're willing to do so at the agreed-upon 1% royalty fee, but not the 16% rate they fear for the future.
As a result, Shell doesn't make what could have been a profitable investment, and Venezuelans don't get the investments they need to get rich, all because their government can't commit. This is what economists refer to as the hold-up problem--Shell is "held up" by Chavez after making irreversible investments.
Nations that have solved this hold-up problem--by honoring contracts and showing concern for their future reputation among potential investors--have attracted investment and gotten rich. The ones that haven't remain poor. In 1970, people in Finland and Venezuela earned about the same on average. Now a Finn earns three times (ppp) to six times (nominal) more than his Venezuelan counterpart.
Originally posted by zeeblebotYes, it is standard Western elite wisdom that countries like Venezuela can only develop if they turn their economy over to foreign rich guys. Obviously, that holds little interest for the people in Venezuela.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/11/chavez-venezuela-oil-opinions-contributors_0211_raymond_fisman.html
Venezuela's 'Shell' Game
Raymond Fisman, 02.11.09, 03:46 PM EST
Hugo Chavez turns to Big Oil.
...
The answer is that the Venezuelan government has signed a contract that spells out the terms under which Shell is to make its investment. This incl ...[text shortened]... rns three times (ppp) to six times (nominal) more than his Venezuelan counterpart.
So far, Chavez has abided by his agreements and by international law regarding expropriation of national resources. If I recall correctly, there is one binding arbitration case pending. So this is just another article from the US business press filled with distortions and outright lies regarding Venezuela. Par for the course.
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Sunday_Reflections/Venezuelas-choice-Chavez-forever-or-no-more-39576942.html
Venezuela’s choice: Chavez forever or no more
By Alexander Boyd, Sunday Reflections Contributor
- | 2/14/09 6:32 PM
...
Chavez’s domestic and international defenders claim the Socialist Revolution has indeed revolutionized people's lives, with state-spending sprees bringing cheap energy, free healthcare and schooling for everyone in the barrios, the slums.
“A trip to one of many new community facilities showed how millions of people have been given access to a new free healthcare system, including dentistry. Illiteracy has been eliminated to UNESCO standards,” said Chavez fan and former London Mayor Ken Livingstone recently.
Never mind that healthcare has been free in Venezuela for over 40 years and that UNESCO denied Venezuela’s literacy claims.
The numbers we do have paint a very bleak picture of social disintegration and economic chaos. Inflation is the highest in Latin America, at over 30 per cent, with prices for the bare necessities increasing at over 50 per cent.
Crime is rising fast and murders are 2.5 times higher since Chavez took office in 1999, the respected US journal Foreign Policy says. Caracas is now the murder capital of the world, worse even than Johannesburg or Sao Paulo. Poverty is still rampant and official figures are, at best, suspect.
When faced with such problems in the past, the government would simply throw money at them. But now with oil prices down around $40 a barrel, even if briefly, and with more than 90 per cent of export revenues coming from petroleum, the government’s hostility to business has left the country addicted to petrodollars but short of a fix.
Having kicked out most of “Big Oil,” the pressure is on Venezuela’s state-run oil company, PDVSA. But a culture of mis-management and political manipulation is making things difficult.
Production has fallen by a quarter of what it was a decade ago. The company’s debts--over $10 billion by one estimate--are mounting. Workers and contractors complain of unpaid salaries and unpaid invoices.
PDVSA said in January that Venezuela produces 3.3 million barrels-per-day. Bloomberg estimates the figure at 2.32 million, while OPEC put it at 2.34 million in its May report.
With nowhere else to turn, Chavez has invited the multinationals back. But, having had their contracts breached in the past, these companies are understandably hesitating.
With the list of demands for state handouts growing ever larger, but without the cash to pay for them, Venezuela’s damaged credit rating is coming back to haunt El Presidente.
Chavez wants Venezuelans to believe they are under attack from external enemies: "I believe Obama comes with the same stench,” he said at a political rally in January, referring to George W. Bush, whom he once accused of smelling of sulphur, like the Devil.
But his real enemies are right there in Venezuela, protesting in the streets: “spray them with gas and dissolve any disturbance,” he said last month.
...
Originally posted by no1marauderlet's see how many companies are tempted to invest in Venezuelan infrastructure this time. it was such a good deal last time, why shouldn't they try it again?
Yes, it is standard Western elite wisdom that countries like Venezuela can only develop if they turn their economy over to foreign rich guys. Obviously, that holds little interest for the people in Venezuela.
So far, Chavez has abided by his agreements and by international law regarding expropriation of national resources. If I recall cor ...[text shortened]... usiness press filled with distortions and outright lies regarding Venezuela. Par for the course.