[Dr. Shon Thomson]

So, you have no problem taking the property of others without compensation?

Would you have a problem if the US were to seize Citgo in response?

Matt

[Swidemaiskikemu]

So, you have no problem taking the property of others without compensation?

Would you have a problem if the US were to seize Citgo in response?

Matt

When California going back to Mexico?

What if they bribe officals to gain that property at grossly under market value?

[cokLoolioli]

I find it ironic that you guys all flip a shit over Chavez consolidating power, but nary a word about Putin.

Maybe thats because this is a thread about Chavez? Im sure if you go back to when Putin was in the news youd find the same reactions.

[AdvertisingPo]

So, you have no problem taking the property of others without compensation?

Would you have a problem if the US were to seize Citgo in response?

Matt

The difference is, Chavez makes no pretense about trying to turn Venezuela into a socialist type state.

The United States, however, claims to be a relatively lassaiz-fare free market system.

[Dr. Shon Thomson]

Theft is theft, whether driven by ideology or greed.

Matt

[AdvertisingPo]

Theft is theft, whether driven by ideology or greed.

Matt

And whether or not it is sanctioned by law?

[Dr. Shon Thomson]

Retroactively sanctioning the theft of someone else's property does not make it right.

Matt

[HaroldMY]

Blaming the poverty of dictatorships on "evil" corporations is trendy left-wing garbage. Most of the income they have is from oil; the people of Venezuela avoid starvation purely because of income that comes from "evil" capitalists. Their own corrupt and stupid leftist regimes fail at even the most basic level to allow for the development of a healthy economy, and loot their own treasuries.

Your sympathy for this abusive fool is absurd. He makes life miserable for his own people - but because he is far left and hates Americans and corporations, you "sympathize" with him. Ludicrous. Anti-Americanism is like a narcotic that gets in the way of intelligent and reasonable observations.

I wonder if you would be willing to live in a nation run by one of the many sleazy, scheming leftist dictators who have destroyed so many economies in South America since the days of the Perons in Argentina? I certainly would not. Would you?

First of all. Corporations are not "evil".
They are supposed to do whatever they they can get away with, to make money, and make their stockholders happy.
Therefore, it is left to the authorities in the area, to set the rules, under which they can operate, and make sure, that they stay in line.


Second, Venezuela is NOT a dictatorship. There have been free elections.


Third. If corporations have had a lovely time, paying of a small elite, to get the entire rights of the wealth of a hole nation, It is not theft, to say:

Times have changed gentlemen, and from now on you either start paying what you are collecting, or you leave.


Fourth. Why do you think, that Chavez was elected by a vast majority of people, living in poverty?
Probably because, they can now see some of all that oil money, also going their way for the first time.

The rest is a little difficult, to take seriously


Jen

[masaredera]

He's proposing theft of Electricidad de Caracas.

Perhaps the US should reciprocate by seizing all of Citgo's assets in the US and giving them to AES?

Also, for all the Chavez fans out there, how do you like his latest step toward dictatorship?



Matt

If thats a step toward dictatorship (and it certainly may be) than how do you like living in a dictatorship, Matt?

Andrew

[Dr. Shon Thomson]

Pray tell, how does the President legislate by decree?

That's what Hugo is working on.

Matt

[masaredera]

Pray tell, how does the President legislate by decree?

That's what Hugo is working on.

Matt

CIA black sites, rendition flights, domestic spying, targeted assasinations, domestic propoganda, lying to the nation to start a war, and just tonight, totally ignoring the will of the American public. You can't get much more anti-democratic and authoritarian than that.

Andrew

[sarasaraseda]

This thread is funny.

Chavez is running the country for his people (thus his popularity). He open a recent history book and while corruption is rife in Latin America, it was world corporations which were paying...

His stance has not been mild mannered... But either has the respouse (which has been idiotic from the Bush Administration). They definately knew of a coup to get rid of him and might hand a in it..

Venezula is an Oil country. And as usual takes precedence over non Oil countries. Chavez doesn't have a army or the wish to invade neighbours. He has never threatened the Americain people. He stated openly that he thinks the Bush Administration are assholes(not a exclusive club). He threw out companies which openly brided there way in to exploit venezula resources. He reversed stupid privatisation polices which have not worked in the country (Look at Railtrack in UK they did the same).

He has shared the wealth with the poor. And to top it off he has one of the fastest growing GDP in the world...

And he doesn't give a royal rats ass what some foriegn goverment thinks of him and is not afriad to say it.

So would I vote for the guy... Not prefect by any means but better than his predessors

Well, you are close - this thread isn't funny, but this POST certainly is.

Nothing is more absurd than the spectacle of left-wingers who become infatuated with dictators who hate Americans and denounce capitalism. Of course, these same leftists would never, under any circumstances, actually live in these dictatorships. They enjoy the results of evil capitalists while forming fan clubs praising these clowns who have done all they can to keep their own people in poverty.

Give his wealth to the poor! That is garbage.

[Dr. Shon Thomson]

CIA black sites, rendition flights, domestic spying, targeted assasinations, domestic propoganda, lying to the nation to start a war, and just tonight, totally ignoring the will of the American public. You can't get much more anti-democratic and authoritarian than that.

Andrew

Typical. The thread is about Chavez, but as usual you can only trumpet "Bush Bad! Bush Bad! USA Bad! Bush Bad!"

Sad.

Matt

[ehib8yPc]

So, you have no problem taking the property of others without compensation?

Would you have a problem if the US were to seize Citgo in response?

Matt

who are the "others"? how they got the property?
you think that 3 or 4 foreign investors have more rights than 25 million venezuelans? who gave these people the right to "own" the wealth of 25 million venezuelans? the 25 million venezuelans have the natural right to own every piece of their land for their own benefit and interests. you are always defending the right of a very few people (rich corporations) against the rest 99.99% (specially of foreign investors against the native population). don't you know that the privatization of public companies is a disaster of huge proportions in latin america? why? because the main goal of private corporations is to make profit no matter what (in argentina it was a luxury to call from one city to another because the telephone company was in private hands). That is why Argentina went down the drain because everything was privatized and the WB and IMF pushed the governemet to cut social expenses, cut cut cut... they just care about how they can squeeze every penny out of every pocket, they only cared about the profits.

[sarasaraseda]

who are the "others"? how they got the property?
you think that 3 or 4 foreign investors have more rights than 25 million venezuelans? who gave this people the right to "own" the wealth of 25 million venezuelans? the 25 million venezuelans have the natural right to own every piece of their land for their own benefit and interests. you are always defending the right of a very few people (rich corporations) against the rest 99.99%. don't you know that the privatization of public companies is a disaster of huge proportions in latin america? why? because the main goal of private corporations is to make profit no matter what. That is why Argentina went down the drain because everything was privatized and the WB and IMF pushed the governemet to cut social expenses, cut cut cut...in favor of these private corporations who did not care about social problems , they only cared about the profits.

Your comments regarding Argentina are not only wrong - they are exactly the opposite of the truth. At the beginning of the 20th century, when Argentina had free markets and was an "evil" capitalist nation, it was one of the ten wealthiest nations in the world. Under the left-wing dictatorships that began with the Perons, the economy collapsed. It has never fully recovered. The attempts to re-introduce some free market policies have been partly successful, but they have not reversed the decline.

If you are going to promote an anti-capitalist agenda and defend leftist dictators, you have to at least attempt to use facts and data to support your views.

[ehib8yPc]

Your comments regarding Argentina are not only wrong - they are exactly the opposite of the truth. At the beginning of the 20th century, when Argentina had free markets and was an "evil" capitalist nation, it was one of the ten wealthiest nations in the world. Under the left-wing dictatorships that began with the Perons, the economy collapsed. It has never fully recovered. The attempts to re-introduce some free market policies have been partly successful, but they have not reversed the decline.

If you are going to promote an anti-capitalist agenda and defend leftist dictators, you have to at least attempt to use facts and data to support your views.

Argentina was the poster child of the IMF and WB. 13 years latter it was bankrupt to the bone and in a chaotic situation never seen before, Argentina had never seen such despair and agony. I remember how people used to cook and fry dogs and cats because they could not afford a piece of bread for their children, suicide rates went up by 200%....google Argentina and read the history instead of Ronald Reagan-Margaret T. propaganda

[AdvertisingPo]

Your comments regarding Argentina are not only wrong - they are exactly the opposite of the truth. At the beginning of the 20th century, when Argentina had free markets and was an "evil" capitalist nation, it was one of the ten wealthiest nations in the world. Under the left-wing dictatorships that began with the Perons, the economy collapsed. It has never fully recovered. The attempts to re-introduce some free market policies have been partly successful, but they have not reversed the decline.

If you are going to promote an anti-capitalist agenda and defend leftist dictators, you have to at least attempt to use facts and data to support your views.

How woefully misinformed.

The IMF recommended policies drove Argentina nearly to the brink of economic ruin. In 2001 Argentina defaulted on it's debt payments. The IMF, for years, as Camille said, urged Argentina to privatize privatize privatize, and cut cut cut. This plunged many Argentinos into poverty, and is the reason that they have a gini index of .52.

What Camille doesn't know, or forgot to mention, is that the IMF also convinced Argentina to peg it's Peso to the US Dollar. To KEEP it there, Argentina had to borrow billions of dollars FROM the IMF. This only increased their foreign debt. Argentina was forced to roll over it's debt.

In 2003, Argentina cut a hard deal with the IMF. Using a nice big gift of oil money from Chavez, Argentina payed off the debt it owed to the IMF. It is still mired in debt to the Paris Club, and owes Chavez a favour, but they are by no means in such dire straits as they were in 2001 under Menem.

Kirchner claims that the rapidly increasing economy (one of the best south of the Rio Grande) is due to ignoring, or even directly contradicting IMF recommendations, and all evidence points to this being true.

Another thing that is important to remember. Not all leftists in Latin America are the same. On one side, you have the the extremist, close minded, radical leftists: Chavez, Morales. On the other you have progressive, open minded, future-oriented leftists: Kirchner, Lula Da Silva. Somewhere in the middle sit Correa, and, despite his past, Ortega.

Kirchner =/= Chavez.

[sarasaraseda]

How woefully misinformed.

The IMF recommended policies drove Argentina nearly to the brink of economic ruin. In 2001 Argentina defaulted on it's debt payments. The IMF, for years, as Camille said, urged Argentina to privatize privatize privatize, and cut cut cut. This plunged many Argentinos into poverty, and is the reason that they have a gini index of .52.

What Camille doesn't know, or forgot to mention, is that the IMF also convinced Argentina to peg it's Peso to the US Dollar. To KEEP it there, Argentina had to borrow billions of dollars FROM the IMF. This only increased their foreign debt. Argentina was forced to roll over it's debt.

In 2003, Argentina cut a hard deal with the IMF. Using a nice big gift of oil money from Chavez, Argentina payed off the debt it owed to the IMF. It is still mired in debt to the Paris Club, and owes Chavez a favour, but they are by no means in such dire straits as they were in 2001 under Menem.

Kirchner claims that the rapidly increasing economy (one of the best south of the Rio Grande) is due to ignoring, or even directly contradicting IMF recommendations, and all evidence points to this being true.

Another thing that is important to remember. Not all leftists in Latin America are the same. On one side, you have the the extremist, close minded, radical leftists: Chavez, Morales. On the other you have progressive, open minded, future-oriented leftists: Kirchner, Lula Da Silva. Somewhere in the middle sit Correa, and, despite his past, Ortega.

Kirchner =/= Chavez.

Woefully misinformed indeed - and you managed to ignore almost all of my post.

The IMF is hardly a capitlaist tool. They hold to left-wing vision and conservative tools, which often produce failure - or disaster. I am not a fan of the IMF - no conservative is.

The disaster in Argentina goes back to the Perons. The IMF banadaid was a failure. That has nothing to do with the transformation needed for the economy to work.

[AdvertisingPo]

Woefully misinformed indeed - and you managed to ignore almost all of my post.

The IMF is hardly a capitlaist tool. They hold to left-wing vision and conservative tools, which often produce failure - or disaster. I am not a fan of the IMF - no conservative is.

The disaster in Argentina goes back to the Perons. The IMF banadaid was a failure. That has nothing to do with the transformation needed for the economy to work.

The economy IS working.

And why blame everything on the "left wing dictators" starting with the Perons?

What about the Generals?

[ehib8yPc]

The economy IS working.

And why blame everything on the "left wing dictators" starting with the Perons?

What about the Generals?

Yeah,let's talk about those fascist "catholic monks" called the Junxta Militar and their 1976 coup ...the argentinian income dropped to a 1930's level in 1977 and never recovered..and poverty increased from 6% (1975) to a whooping 37% by 1982...wow...how evil was Peron and Evita..hehehaha! you got to laugh!