Venezuela continues to sink in misery

[specinho + 467]

7 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

 

Russia and China will get their money or equivalent back in one form or another. The Venezuelaen will sadly get nothing. 

uuhhhh.......... Russia and China pump in money to revive the not moving economy no? Jobs would be created and some Venezuelans would be fed no?

But.. pardon me.... not sure if i understand correctly that DEMOCRACY is the culprit that turned Venezuela into bad shape??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela#Independence_and_19th_century

Quote:" 

The discovery of massive oil deposits in Lake Maracaibo during World War I^[54] proved to be pivotal for Venezuela and transformed the basis of its economy from a heavy dependence on agricultural exports. It prompted an economic boom that lasted into the 1980s; by 1935, Venezuela's per capita gross domestic product was Latin America's highest.^[55] 

When the junta unexpectedly lost the election it held in 1952, it ignored the results and Pérez Jiménez was installed as President, where he remained until 1958............. In the government of Pérez Jiménez, Venezuela's debt grew more than 25 times and went from 175 million to more than 4,500 million bolivares in just 5 years"...........

[Manfred Kruger + 40]

US refiners import about 70% of Venezuelan oil exports. The US could easily topple the Maduro regime without firing a single shot by embargoing Venezuelan oil imports. Without that oil revenue, which is not reaching the population anyway, Maduro would loose the ability to pay the thugs and cronies that keep him in power. That option has been considered several times but the refining lobby has prevailed. Maybe now that Russian supersonic nuclear bombers are stationed in Maiquetia political considerations may prevail over economic interests.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

16 hours ago, specinho said:

uuhhhh.......... Russia and China pump in money to revive the not moving economy no? Jobs would be created and some Venezuelans would be fed no?

But.. pardon me.... not sure if i understand correctly that DEMOCRACY is the culprit that turned Venezuela into bad shape??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela#Independence_and_19th_century

Quote:" 

The discovery of massive oil deposits in Lake Maracaibo during World War I^[54] proved to be pivotal for Venezuela and transformed the basis of its economy from a heavy dependence on agricultural exports. It prompted an economic boom that lasted into the 1980s; by 1935, Venezuela's per capita gross domestic product was Latin America's highest.^[55] 

When the junta unexpectedly lost the election it held in 1952, it ignored the results and Pérez Jiménez was installed as President, where he remained until 1958............. In the government of Pérez Jiménez, Venezuela's debt grew more than 25 times and went from 175 million to more than 4,500 million bolivares in just 5 years"...........

The reason that Venezuela is where it is today is due to mismanangement first under Chavez and especially under Maduro. 

But this is besides the point - I was merely saying that Russia and China couldn't care less about people dieing. They are just trying to do just enough to make sure that they get as much as possible back from the loans they made. 

NB! I really think that this thread should focus on the suffering in Venezuela. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

12 hours ago, Manfred Kruger said:

US refiners import about 70% of Venezuelan oil exports. The US could easily topple the Maduro regime without firing a single shot by embargoing Venezuelan oil imports. Without that oil revenue, which is not reaching the population anyway, Maduro would loose the ability to pay the thugs and cronies that keep him in power. That option has been considered several times but the refining lobby has prevailed. Maybe now that Russian supersonic nuclear bombers are stationed in Maiquetia political considerations may prevail over economic interests.

Would this work or would it not just make the situation even more dire? Serious question. 

[Rodent + 1,424]

2 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Would this work or would it not just make the situation even more dire? Serious question. 

That's hard to tell, but I can't see how much more dire the situation can get for the people of Venezuela. They are not seeing any oil revenues anyway.

The US needs heavy Venezuelan oil, especially since pipeline issues restrict how much we can get from Canada. Push Canada to build one of those pipelines and this becomes easier to implement.

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

3 minutes ago, mthebold said:

“What us Venezuelans are living through is denigrating.”

We've known for many decades that that's how it goes when you vote for socialism, so suck it up buttercup. 

That's inappropiate. People are dying. 

@Rodent 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

10 minutes ago, mthebold said:

“What us Venezuelans are living through is denigrating.”

We've known for many decades that that's how it goes when you vote for socialism, so suck it up buttercup. 

Paul, that was just totally inappropriate.  You are better than that. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, mthebold said:

 

 

 

 

I've noticed three things about the world:
1)  It complains incessantly about American intervention, which makes it difficult for us to fix problems.
2)  It keeps supporting socialism - despite socialism's incredible death count - while denigrating America's system. 
3)  It happily takes our money, moral objections to our system notwithstanding. 

America can solve all of these problems by simply refusing to interfere.  Let South America get a taste of Russia and China; I don't expect they'll like it.  Let those who create totalitarian regimes suffer the consequences; their deaths will serve as a warning to others.  When the dust settles and millions have fallen, the world will come crawling back to America, begging for our "interference" - and we'll have the luxury of writing any terms we choose free of international criticism.

Paul - you cannot seriously be so callous as to say that you would shrug your shoulders to the deaths of millions of Venezuelans  - so that you can "write terms"?   That is not what Christianity is about. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 minutes ago, mthebold said:

 

It's entirely appropriate; what's inappropriate is pretending these people didn't bring it upon themselves.  It's even more inappropriate to enable the spread of deadly, infectious ideologies by preventing people from seeing the consequences. 

We have nearly a century of evidence and more than 100 million deaths proving that this is how socialism ends - yet people continue to vote for it.  Even worse: they denigrate those who prefer small government.  However kind and gentle Venezuelans may appear, they created a monster.  That must have consequences, if only to serve as a warning to others. 

I'll add a bit about myself, since I recognize most of you may lack my experience with suffering and death: no one outside your friends and family actually cares about you.  All the wailing and gnashing of teeth about poor people in 3rd world countries is pure virtue signaling; nary a finger will be lifted on their behalf.  How do I know this?  Because I saw the gaping chasm between what Americans say about veterans and how they actually treat veterans - and that's an issue that affects their personal security! 

Also, death and suffering happen every day.  It's neither a tragedy nor is it worth emotional distress; it's just life.  If you want me to believe that you care about a specific problem, show me proof that you're investing personal resources in that problem.  Show me that this problem, specifically, is high enough on humanity's priority list to warrant your personal sacrifice.  Until then, your virtue signaling means nothing.

I am sorry that you have become so bitter.

Part of being Christian is to be humble. It would be entirely inappropriate for me or anyone else to "virtue signal" with some list of personal sacrifice  (which as a practical matter comes down to sending money to the poor). I don't propose to "virtue signal," and candidly it is tasteless to demand that of anyone.  

Again, I am very sorry that you have become so bitter.   I would certainly agree that, at least since Vietnam, American soldiers have been shabbily treated.  It is and remains a stain on the flag.

[Refman + 207]

7 minutes ago, mthebold said:

 

It's entirely appropriate; what's inappropriate is pretending these people didn't bring it upon themselves.  It's even more inappropriate to enable the spread of deadly, infectious ideologies by preventing people from seeing the consequences. 

We have nearly a century of evidence and more than 100 million deaths proving that this is how socialism ends - yet people continue to vote for it.  Even worse: they denigrate those who prefer small government.  However kind and gentle Venezuelans may appear, they created a monster.  That must have consequences, if only to serve as a warning to others. 

It's easy to blame the voters, but the problem being that many of the people who voted in Socialism, did not have the education to realize they were being scammed and were sending the country into the toilet.

[Mike Marcellus + 157]

36 minutes ago, mthebold said:

Other People's Money(TM)

Oh really?  You have the trade mark on OPM!  You bastard! Ha!

In seriousness, I can't agree with you more, It's an unfortunate situation, and it's reasonable to assume that China would love to foreclose on Ecuador's loans, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/06/reuters-america-ecuador-seeks-to-renegotiate-china-debt-does-not-rule-out-imf-moreno.html Venezuela after that, and whomever else is ignorant enough to think a creditor like China cares for anyone but themselves.  The terms are written to only end up with confiscation of the collateral.  In this case that collateral is their children's future opportunities.

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

Paul - you cannot seriously be so callous as to say that you would shrug your shoulders to the deaths of millions of Venezuelans  - so that you can "write terms"? 

Jan,YOU are better than this.  Goading him when you know he's not bitter.  His practical, matter-of-fact, presentation is different than most people, yes. But, most everyone else tries so hard to prove that they care.  I believe he cares, and I believe he couldn't care-less if you or I approve of his opinion.

With that said, I still enjoy what you write.

Cheers

[jkn 0]

On 12/10/2018 at 3:17 PM, Jan van Eck said:

If Americans were to start with the Monroe Doctrine, the logical extension of that is that it is now way past time to enter Venezuela, arrest Maduro, and use whatever means necessary to stabilize the society.  

Moving past that proposition, as a practical matter there is now a huge moral crisis unfolding in the Western Hemisphere.  It is perfectly apparent that Venezuela is being run by thugs, and the people, being disarmed, have no practical way of removing Maduro.  And since Maduro has no obvious exit strategy, at least one that ensures he remains alive, he will continue to grind the country into a total pulp. 

I thus maintain that the occupation of the Eastern third of the country, using the US military, is the logical starting point. Once food and diesel fuel for electricity is brought in, the hospitals and government entities started up and functioning, and the locals have work (albeit for the Americans) and get paid in dollars instead of valueless Bolivars, the bordering communities will ask, or beg, to be brought into the sphere of influence, and the new control of the country will spread Westward until it reaches Caracas.  At that point, Maduro sees the writing on the wall and heads for Cuba.  Have a nice day, Mr. Maduro.  The Cubans can put him to work as a bus driver on the Matanzas run.

Occupation of Venezuela would be very long and expensive project (Iraq, Afghanistan).  Instead refugees from Venezuela should be helped.  Something similar than EU does with Turkey: "The EU is to speed up the allocation of €3bn ($3.3 bn; £2.3 bn) in aid to Turkey to help Syrian migrant communities" 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union–Turkey_relations#EU-Turkey_deal_on_migrant_crisis

That's done to prevent refugees entering EU.  Turkey also needs that money to take care of refugees.

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, jkn said:

Occupation of Venezuela would be very long and expensive project (Iraq, Afghanistan).  Instead refugees from Venezuela should be helped.  Something similar than EU does with Turkey: "The EU is to speed up the allocation of €3bn ($3.3 bn; £2.3 bn) in aid to Turkey to help Syrian migrant communities" 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union–Turkey_relations#EU-Turkey_deal_on_migrant_crisis

That's done to prevent refugees entering EU.  Turkey also needs that money to take care of refugees.

 

The primary problem with "helping refugees" by the millions is that the neighboring countries really would prefer that the refugees all go back home.  Those countries, including Northern Brasil, all have their own problems, which they (unsurprisingly) see as pressing. They don't have the money, and they don't have the land. So: what to do with all the refugees?  

Reader JKN also thinks that an "occupation" of Venezuela would be a very long project.  Yes, there is that risk, but I suggest it is smaller than you might imagine.  Venezuela is a country in economic crisis, not a war zone  (at least, not yet).  Judging by the histories of France and the Netherlands after WWII, you would be looking at perhaps a year. What Venezuela needs is regime change, and there is no logical way for that to happen outside of pushing Maduro out.  

Reader Mike says:  "We are not invited, so we stay home."  OK, so we stay home.  Besides, who is going to "invite" the OAS or the USA in?  Maduro?  Not likely.  There is no longer any viable prospect of invitation, as the society has crumbled. It is basically in oblivion.  

At one time, before Oil, Venezuela was an agricultural society.  And a decent argument can be made that it should attempt to model itself on that old form, so that it becomes self-supporting.  Can that be done?  Yes, it can. Oil ended up destroying the agricultural base, as the work force abandoned agriculture, instead buying from outside and selling oil at a large markup. Call it the "oil disease."  

At some point the oil is going to be pumped again, there is just too much of it for the world to leave it in the ground.  Everybody knows that.  So the real issues is: how do we get from here to there, and who will be siphoning off the wealth?  And as that conundrum cannot be answered in the context of Venezuelan society, it may well be that the better option is for Venezuela to forget about that oil for a generation, and go back to agriculture and re-establish its societal institutions.  

One thing is for sure:  there is still a world of hurt awaiting the people of Venezuela. 

[JunoTen + 118]

The best thing that could happen to Venezuela would be for oil to become worthless. Oil has been the undoing of that country, because it has masked the destructive effects of the socialist policies for so many years. Now the leaders of that country still think they can keep this broken system if they can get the oil operations running again, preventing any real reform. Reform will happen when they need to reform, and that is when the price tanks for an indefinite period of time.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

23 hours ago, Manfred Kruger said:

US refiners import about 70% of Venezuelan oil exports. The US could easily topple the Maduro regime without firing a single shot by embargoing Venezuelan oil imports. Without that oil revenue, which is not reaching the population anyway, Maduro would loose the ability to pay the thugs and cronies that keep him in power. That option has been considered several times but the refining lobby has prevailed. Maybe now that Russian supersonic nuclear bombers are stationed in Maiquetia political considerations may prevail over economic interests.

We need to question Putin's real motives for sending those aircraft.  Is he hoping to incite major conflict?  Who know what goes on in that man's head, but he is not a dummy.

[jose chalhoub + 388]

Maduro and his cronies have turned Venezuela into the Cuba of the modern era, a puppet state of Russia and China and a little too of Iran and Turkey to flex muscles against the U.S. since he knows he is strangled on all sides (colombia, brazil, guyana and the caribbean) so he is all full in since he knows he's fucked up so he is kinda garrisoned in venezuela without much of alternatives left. What a mess definitely. 

[jose chalhoub + 388]

On 12/10/2018 at 1:22 PM, Jan van Eck said:

Tex:   the "common people" have been disarmed, and have nothing to start a revolution with.  It is unrealistic to expect starving people to throw their bodies against the guns of the regime just to make some point about the purity of revolutionary thought.  Thy also have to focus on their families and children.  As Rodi (above) point out, this is exactly why the civilian population can never surrender their firearms to the State  (although there is not much chance of that in Michigan).   As to the Venezuelans, yes there are guns in  the Caracas slums, but those guns are in the hands of criminal gangs, who are apolitical and instead focused on kidnappings and robberies.  Not quite the stuff of revolution. 

Bottom line:  outside force is required. 

good points indeed Jan and many thanks for starting such a quite interesting discussion on my country in pain. I dont think thugs armed and sponsored by Maduro will ever back him against any foreign intervention ever. 

[Rodent + 1,424]

PDVSA'S NELSON MARTINEZ DIES IN CUSTODY AFTER CHARGED IN 2017 WITH MAKING FAULTY DEALS WITHOUT GOVT APPROVAL, INCLUDING REFINING DEAL FOR US-BASED CITGO.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

We need to question Putin's real motives for sending those aircraft.  Is he hoping to incite major conflict?  Who know what goes on in that man's head, but he is not a dummy.

He does that specifically to mess with Trump's head, and to let the US know that it should stay away from the invasion of Crimea and the conflicts with his shadow troops in the Donbas.  It is a bit of "in your face," and it has succeeded in enraging the US military establishment. 

One interesting aside would be: what would be Putin's response if those aircraft were "hit" in a flash attack on that airfield?  

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

8 minutes ago, mthebold said:

 

Personally, I'd do it right now, but I tend to be a direct person - the social effects of which we've all seen on this forum.  Imagine me running foreign policy, and you'll have a pretty good idea of how the international community would react to the US entering Venezuela uninvited.  

Paul, I do admire your candor!  

Introspection remains a rare gift.  

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

24 minutes ago, mthebold said:

One tries.

It does raise an interesting question though: does the fact that I'm self-aware make my behavior better or worse? 

Depends on which shoulder occupant you listen to, I suppose.   

[John Foote + 1,135]

On 12/10/2018 at 7:51 AM, Rodent said:

this this is why people must refuse any and all attempts to be disarmed.

The rational that a homeowner can be armed to defend himself against the government vanished long ago. In the days of muskets, even carbines, perhaps individual and home grown militias could literally fight the government with weapons. Today it's not viable. In Iran's revolution the military was unwilling to slaughter for the Shah. 

Clearly the US, or almost any country with a Navy and Marines, could invade and win easy enough, and would probably be initially very well received. Establishing a functioning governance is quite a different beast and is 180 out from the American First mantra that helped put Trump in the White House. 

[SERWIN + 749]

Reading the second story makes it sound almost like they believe that it is not any of their country's fault, but the fault of the western nations(we all know who that means) and nothing to do with their own decisions. Can this train of thought actually be true there? They have been BS'd by the government to believe there is someone else at fault for all their problems? So sad.... I still say it's none of our business and we should stand by and wait for the eventual fall.

[SERWIN + 749]

And I am really a supporter of isolationism, we need to work on our own problems for a decade and get them worked out before we go elsewhere and try to tell others what to do, jus sayin.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Never seen that all summarized and put into words in such a way.  Kudos!  And thanks.  Many of your points are punch-yourself-in-the-nose obvious; AFTER reading your words.