Venezuela's president admits economy has failed

[dismal]

Venezuela's president admits economy has failed

CARACAS (AFP) -
Under-fire Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro admitted his economic model has "failed" in the wake of food and medicine shortages and public service paralysis, such as Tuesday's power failure that affected 80 percent of Caracas.

"The production models we've tried so far have failed and the responsibility is ours, mine and yours," Maduro told his ruling PSUV party congress, as Venezuela looks to tackle chronic inflation the International Monetary Fund predicted would reach one million percent this year.

"Enough with the whining... we need to produce with or without (outside) aggression, with or without blockades, we need to make Venezuela an economic power," he added late Monday, with the country grappling with a four-year long recession.

"No more whining, I want solutions comrades!"

The socialist government has over recent years nationalized various industry sectors such as cement and steel, expropriated hundreds of businesses, including supermarket chains, and lately brought in the army to control street markets to guard against rising prices.

It has also fixed prices on various goods and imposed a monopoly on foreign exchange.

http://www.france24.com/en/20180731-venezuelas-president-admits-economy-has-failed

Well, comrade, I've given it some thought and here's the solution that seems to work for what ails you:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

Just get ta fuck out of the way.

 

[Trausti]

Damn it. This wasn't real socialism. Venezuela needs maybe 100,000 more dead and then the unicorn will deliver utopia.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It's lucky that this wasn't real communism, so that socioeconomic model isn't invalidated in any way, shape or form by this unrelated failure.

 

[untermensche]

What happened in Venezuela happened after Chavez was dead.

Nothing he did was the cause of it.

The people that he picked to carry on his work instead reverted to pure theft and corruption.

Nothing but run-of-the-mill corruption.

Like you see in capitalist Mexico and capitalist Haiti and capitalist Guatemala.

 

[Trausti]

What happened in Venezuela happened after Chavez was dead.

Nothing he did was the cause of it.

The people that he picked to carry on his work instead reverted to pure theft and corruption.

Nothing but run-of-the-mill corruption.

Like you see in capitalist Mexico and capitalist Haiti and capitalist Guatemala.

Yet people in those countries are not starving. Even “corrupt” capitalism is better than socialist utopia.

 

[untermensche]

What happened in Venezuela happened after Chavez was dead.

Nothing he did was the cause of it.

The people that he picked to carry on his work instead reverted to pure theft and corruption.

Nothing but run-of-the-mill corruption.

Like you see in capitalist Mexico and capitalist Haiti and capitalist Guatemala.

Yet people in those countries are not starving. Even “corrupt” capitalism is better than socialist utopia.

Guatemala has the fourth-highest rate of chronic malnutrition in the world and the highest in Latin America and the Caribbean. Currently, approximately 50 percent of Guatemalan children under five years of age are stunted due to chronic food insecurity. Within indigenous areas, nearly 70 percent of the population is chronically malnourished.

https://www.usaid.gov/guatemala/food-assistance

10 Facts About Hunger In Haiti

100,000 children under five suffer from acute malnutrition while one child out of three is stunted, or irreversibly short for their age.

https://reliefweb.int/report/haiti/10-facts-about-hunger-haiti

At least 10 percent of the population in every Mexican state suffers from inadequate food access. In nine states, the percent of those living in food-insecure households reaches between 25 and 35 percent. Further, more than 10 percent of residents in seven Mexican states are categorized as being seriously food insecure.

http://www.borgenmagazine.com/what-to-know-about-hunger-in-mexico/

Hunger in these countries is a chronic problem that has gone on decade after decade.

It must be nice in that dream world you're living in.

 

[SimpleDon]

Venezuela's president admits economy has failed

CARACAS (AFP) -
Under-fire Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro admitted his economic model has "failed" in the wake of food and medicine shortages and public service paralysis, such as Tuesday's power failure that affected 80 percent of Caracas.

"The production models we've tried so far have failed and the responsibility is ours, mine and yours," Maduro told his ruling PSUV party congress, as Venezuela looks to tackle chronic inflation the International Monetary Fund predicted would reach one million percent this year.

"Enough with the whining... we need to produce with or without (outside) aggression, with or without blockades, we need to make Venezuela an economic power," he added late Monday, with the country grappling with a four-year long recession.

"No more whining, I want solutions comrades!"

The socialist government has over recent years nationalized various industry sectors such as cement and steel, expropriated hundreds of businesses, including supermarket chains, and lately brought in the army to control street markets to guard against rising prices.

It has also fixed prices on various goods and imposed a monopoly on foreign exchange.

http://www.france24.com/en/20180731-venezuelas-president-admits-economy-has-failed

Well, comrade, I've given it some thought and here's the solution that seems to work for what ails you:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

Just get ta fuck out of the way.

The socialist government of Venezuela has been proven to be spectacularly incompetent at managing the economy in a system, socialism, which more than anything else relies on competent management.

So the possible forms of economies that have been tried in Venezuela over the last forty years have failed to find a solution to the problems of an economy that depends entirely on oil, 90% of its exports when the price of oil drops to one half of what it was before. Socialism wasn't able to do it and neither was the IMF and World Bank approved oligarchy whose failures to do the same produced the popular backlash that first elected the socialists.

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

Or is "just get ta fuck out of the way" all that you have?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

A country having an abundance of oil is like playing Sim City with all the cheat codes on.

But if your economic system is stupid enough, you can still lose.

 

[untermensche]

What specifically was the economic model in Venezuela post-Chavez?

Did they forbid private ownership of production?

 

[dismal]

Venezuela's president admits economy has failed

CARACAS (AFP) -
Under-fire Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro admitted his economic model has "failed" in the wake of food and medicine shortages and public service paralysis, such as Tuesday's power failure that affected 80 percent of Caracas.

"The production models we've tried so far have failed and the responsibility is ours, mine and yours," Maduro told his ruling PSUV party congress, as Venezuela looks to tackle chronic inflation the International Monetary Fund predicted would reach one million percent this year.

"Enough with the whining... we need to produce with or without (outside) aggression, with or without blockades, we need to make Venezuela an economic power," he added late Monday, with the country grappling with a four-year long recession.

"No more whining, I want solutions comrades!"

The socialist government has over recent years nationalized various industry sectors such as cement and steel, expropriated hundreds of businesses, including supermarket chains, and lately brought in the army to control street markets to guard against rising prices.

It has also fixed prices on various goods and imposed a monopoly on foreign exchange.

http://www.france24.com/en/20180731-venezuelas-president-admits-economy-has-failed

Well, comrade, I've given it some thought and here's the solution that seems to work for what ails you:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

Just get ta fuck out of the way.

The socialist government of Venezuela has been proven to be spectacularly incompetent at managing the economy in a system, socialism, which more than anything else relies on competent management.

So the possible forms of economies that have been tried in Venezuela over the last forty years have failed to find a solution to the problems of an economy that depends entirely on oil, 90% of its exports when the price of oil drops to one half of what it was before. Socialism wasn't able to do it and neither was the IMF and World Bank approved oligarchy whose failures to do the same produced the popular backlash that first elected the socialists.

Well, the good news, I guess, is they don't produce all that much oil any more. The bad news is oil is back up - and is now something like 3.5X what it was when Chavez first took power. Doesn't seem to be helping given the first bit though.

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

Or is "just get ta fuck out of the way" all that you have?

Did you miss the part where I specifically answered that? Here it is again:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

While you may think less oil production is good, it seems like destroying a nation's capacity to produce things like food is actually bad.

 

[SimpleDon]

The socialist government of Venezuela has been proven to be spectacularly incompetent at managing the economy in a system, socialism, which more than anything else relies on competent management.

So the possible forms of economies that have been tried in Venezuela over the last forty years have failed to find a solution to the problems of an economy that depends entirely on oil, 90% of its exports when the price of oil drops to one half of what it was before. Socialism wasn't able to do it and neither was the IMF and World Bank approved oligarchy whose failures to do the same produced the popular backlash that first elected the socialists.

Well, the good news, I guess, is they don't produce all that much oil any more. The bad news is oil is back up - and is now something like 3.5X what it was when Chavez first took power. Doesn't seem to be helping given the first bit though.

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

Or is "just get ta fuck out of the way" all that you have?

Did you miss the part where I specifically answered that? Here it is again:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

While you may think less oil production is good, it seems like destroying a nation's capacity to produce things like food is actually bad.

Yes, as I said the oligarchy that preceded Chavez was booted out because they couldn't navigate the slide in oil prices in the 1980's. Chavez enjoyed a honeymoon period of rising oil prices that masked his incompetence. But the socialists couldn't handle the drop in prices starting in 2014. Socialism is a very poor economic system in the very best of conditions, in the worse they preform worse than almost any other system. I agree with you on this point. I am not defending either socialism or oligarchy. I am trying to find out what do think is a system that would be able to handle these circumstances.

Why do you think that I believe that it is a good thing to produce less oil and food? What statement of mine lead you to believe this? Of course I don't believe this.

So get the fuck out of the way is all that you have. You have told us what you wouldn't do, and you are correct, those are very good things not to do, but you have no idea what to do. Correct?

I will ask my question again that you didn't answer,

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

 

[dismal]

Well, the good news, I guess, is they don't produce all that much oil any more. The bad news is oil is back up - and is now something like 3.5X what it was when Chavez first took power. Doesn't seem to be helping given the first bit though.



Did you miss the part where I specifically answered that? Here it is again:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

While you may think less oil production is good, it seems like destroying a nation's capacity to produce things like food is actually bad.

Yes, as I said the oligarchy that preceded Chavez was booted out because they couldn't navigate the slide in oil prices in the 1980's. Chavez enjoyed a honeymoon period of rising oil prices that masked his incompetence. But the socialists couldn't handle the drop in prices starting in 2014. Socialism is a very poor economic system in the very best of conditions, in the worse they preform worse than almost any other system. I agree with you on this point. I am not defending either socialism or oligarchy. I am trying to find out what do think is a system that would be able to handle these circumstances.

Why do you think that I believe that it is a good thing to produce less oil and food? What statement of mine lead you to believe this? Of course I don't believe this.

So get the fuck out of the way is all that you have. You have told us what you wouldn't do, and you are correct, those are very good things not to do, but you have no idea what to do. Correct?

I will ask my question again that you didn't answer,

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

These are the dramatic events that trashed their economy. Stop doing them.

A decline in oil prices is not the problem. Oil prices are 3.5X what they were when Chavez took over. The reasonable question would be why the increase in oil prices since then hasn't resulted in burgeoning national wealth. The answer is they destroyed the economy's productive capacity.

Think of it like this: If you're beating yourself on the head with a hammer, the solution is stop beating yourself on the head with a hammer.

 

[Horatio Parker]

I don't follow Venezuela too closely, but I know they peg their currency to the dollar. Their peg of course is a fantasy. But it enables politically connected insiders to obtain cheap dollars and turn huge profits importing commodities.

That might be a start.

 

[dismal]

I don't follow Venezuela too closely, but I know they peg their currency to the dollar. Their peg of course is a fantasy. But it enables politically connected insiders to obtain cheap dollars and turn huge profits importing commodities.

That might be a start.

That'd be: don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange

 

[untermensche]

Can you guys fix capitalist Mexico, Haiti, Indonesia, and Guatemala?

They have been suffering like Venezuela for decades.

 

[Ford]

Well, the good news, I guess, is they don't produce all that much oil any more. The bad news is oil is back up - and is now something like 3.5X what it was when Chavez first took power. Doesn't seem to be helping given the first bit though.



Did you miss the part where I specifically answered that? Here it is again:

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

While you may think less oil production is good, it seems like destroying a nation's capacity to produce things like food is actually bad.

Yes, as I said the oligarchy that preceded Chavez was booted out because they couldn't navigate the slide in oil prices in the 1980's. Chavez enjoyed a honeymoon period of rising oil prices that masked his incompetence. But the socialists couldn't handle the drop in prices starting in 2014. Socialism is a very poor economic system in the very best of conditions, in the worse they preform worse than almost any other system. I agree with you on this point. I am not defending either socialism or oligarchy. I am trying to find out what do think is a system that would be able to handle these circumstances.

Why do you think that I believe that it is a good thing to produce less oil and food? What statement of mine lead you to believe this? Of course I don't believe this.

So get the fuck out of the way is all that you have. You have told us what you wouldn't do, and you are correct, those are very good things not to do, but you have no idea what to do. Correct?

I will ask my question again that you didn't answer,

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

Don't nationalize various industry sectors, don't appropriate hundreds of businesses, don't send troops into the street to control prices, don't fix prices on various goods, and don't impose a monopoly on foreign exchange.

Also, stop printing so much money.

These are the dramatic events that trashed their economy. Stop doing them.

A decline in oil prices is not the problem. Oil prices are 3.5X what they were when Chavez took over. The reasonable question would be why the increase in oil prices since then hasn't resulted in burgeoning national wealth. The answer is they destroyed the economy's productive capacity.

Think of it like this: If you're beating yourself on the head with a hammer, the solution is stop beating yourself on the head with a hammer.

Continuing your analogy, now you have a gaping head wound. Will simply stopping the beating heal the wound? No. For that you need a specific course of treatment. Don asked (basically), "so Dr. dismal, what do you think should be done to treat this massive head trauma?"

Your answer is "stop having head trauma!"

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The socialist government of Venezuela has been proven to be spectacularly incompetent at managing the economy in a system, socialism, which more than anything else relies on competent management.

So the possible forms of economies that have been tried in Venezuela over the last forty years have failed to find a solution to the problems of an economy that depends entirely on oil, 90% of its exports when the price of oil drops to one half of what it was before. Socialism wasn't able to do it and neither was the IMF and World Bank approved oligarchy whose failures to do the same produced the popular backlash that first elected the socialists.

What economic system do you, dismal, think could adapt to such a dramatic economic event?

Or is "just get ta fuck out of the way" all that you have?

Socialists are always incompetent at managing the economy because they try to spend too much on the people without understanding that plenty of money has to be folded back into the sources of the money.

As for surviving their exports being cut in half--they were in the same boat before their experiment with socialism and it wasn't catastrophic. They blew up because of the socialist destruction of the economy. (And, of course, the looting that always accompanies socialism.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What specifically was the economic model in Venezuela post-Chavez?

Did they forbid private ownership of production?

Same as under Chavez: Decree prices that were not economically sustainable. When businesses couldn't do it they were nationalized. They still couldn't do it.

 

[untermensche]

What specifically was the economic model in Venezuela post-Chavez?

Did they forbid private ownership of production?

Same as under Chavez: Decree prices that were not economically sustainable. When businesses couldn't do it they were nationalized. They still couldn't do it.

Prove it.

A bunch of generalities is all you ever can muster.

Show me, with evidence, exactly what was happening under Chavez, and, with evidence, what was happening after he died.

What we know for a fact is the collapse did not occur when Chavez was in power.

 

[Axulus]

What specifically was the economic model in Venezuela post-Chavez?

Did they forbid private ownership of production?

Same as under Chavez: Decree prices that were not economically sustainable. When businesses couldn't do it they were nationalized. They still couldn't do it.

Prove it.

A bunch of generalities is all you ever can muster.

Show me, with evidence, exactly what was happening under Chavez, and, with evidence, what was happening after he died.

What we know for a fact is the collapse did not occur when Chavez was in power.

You cling to a false hope, a false religion. It is incredibly sad. Chavez set the groundwork for the subsequent corruption and economic collapse (in fact, much corruption occurred under his watch), while using propaganda that it was all done for the poor. This is quite clear.

The evidence is demonstrated here:

An Empty Revolution: The Unfulfilled Promises of Hugo Chávez

Neither offcial statistics nor independent estimates show any evidence that Chávez has reoriented state priorities to benefit the poor. Most health and human development indicators have shown no significant improvement beyond that which is normal in the midst of an oil boom. Indeed, some have deteriorated worryingly, and official estimates indicate that income inequality has increased.The “Chávez is good for the poor” hypothesis is inconsistent with the facts.

Tons of evidence follows in the paper (written in 2008, well before his death and the economic collapse, from a former Chavez supporter no less):

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/75...20.1257507357.1533198653-247878799.1533198653

I can't help but feel this part was directed specifically at you, unter:

The American journalist Sydney Harris once wrote that “we believe what we want to believe,what we like to believe,what suits our prejudices and fuels our passions.” The idea that Latin American governments are controlled by economic elites may have been true in the nineteenth century, but is wildly at odds with reality in a world in which every Latin American country except Cuba has regular elections with large levels of popular participation. Much like governments everywhere, Latin American governments try to balance the desire for wealth redistribution with the need to generate incentives for economic growth, the realities of limited effective state power, and the uncertainties regarding the effctiveness of specific policy initiatives. Ignoring these truths is not only anachronistic and misguided; it also thwarts the design of sensible foreign policies aimed at helping the region’s leaders formulate and implement strategies for achieving sustainable and equitable development.

It would be foolhardy to claim that what Latin America must do to lift its population out of poverty is obvious.If there is a lesson to be learned from other countries’experiences,it is that successful development strategies are diverse and that what works in one place may not work elsewhere. Nonetheless, recent experiences in countries such as Brazil and Mexico, where programs skillfully designed to target the weakest groups in society have had a significant effect on their well-being, show that effective solutions are within the reach of pragmatic policymakers willing to implement them. It is the tenacity of these realists—rather than the audacity of the idealists—that holds the greatest promise for alleviating the plight of Latin America’s poor.

Read the whole thing if you dare to have your delusions challenged. It will be painful but I promise it will be educational as well.