Yes the US is capitalist, but not laissez-faire capitalist, which is what your thinking of. Capitalism allows (because mercantilism is a part of it, and this is the basis of mercantilism) tariffs; capitalism also allows government intervention with price controls and monopolies- that is Keynesian economics, which is part of capitalism.


Did you read what I said? China is lacking the two biggest parts of socialism or communism! How can you ignore that? The U.S. isn't capitalist in the strictist sense, I will give you that for the sake of the argument, but at least we follow the major rules and characteristics of our system. Thats why we can be placed as capitalist. China cannot be accurately labeled communist, Marxist, whatever. They have their own system.



Uh, no. I just explained in my last two posts why China is not communist.

Yes, China is communist but not Marxist communist. Communism allows (because mercantilism is a part of it, and this is the basis of mercantilism), market-based economics as long as it conforms to both the ideology and (in Maoism) pragmatic considerations associated with international trade and industrialization.

China is a communist state with some features more commonly found in capitalist systems. What you've done here is create a straw man definition and then argue how it doesn't fit your straw man. It is no great feat of rhetorical skill to do this.

China is quickly moving away from (strict) Communism. It will emerge as a semi-capitalist dictatorship. The key elements of state ownership of the means of production is being torn down and even private property is becoming acceptable. Clearly this is where the rapid growth in China is – NOT in the Communist run enterprises that are left.

China at last allows private property

By Frank Ching, Special to The China Post
2007-4-04
Last month, the National People's Congress, China's parliament, adopted a landmark property law that grants equal protection to public and private property—a revolutionary move for a country that still calls itself socialist and is run by a Communist Party.

After all, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, in the "Communist Manifesto," declared: "Communist theory may be summed up in one sentence: Abolition of private property." And now, China's communist party has moved to elevate private property to the same level as public property
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/cp/opinion/fra...frank070404.htm

http://english.gov.cn/2006-12/20/content_474308.htm

Here is yet another update to this thread: Chavez threatens to nationalize banks

Yes I saw this today too. He is making it clear that his is calling the shots and dictating the terms, profits etc. The country will soon see a massive exodus of investment, and talent. Within a few years he will be nothing more than a Cuba with oil. And as that industry falls into neglect – as it did in Russia the country will spiral down and Chavz will proclaim himself dictator for life. .

Oh well I guess people who have seen this time and again need to get an education one more time. Communism/Socialism does not work – period.

What you've described here is authoritarianism which has had many problems as you know. Despite the fact that it is inconvenient to your thesis that communism/socialism doesn't work, China is still a salient example of a communist system that does work. That said, I absolutely agree that nationalizing banks is a very bad idea as it politicizes financial institutions -- all western economies have moved away from this in the past century. I also agree that Venezuela will increase the disincentive for foreign investment as it continues along this path. However, I disagree that it will necessarily follow Russia's path with regard to its oil industry. Venezuela is part of OPEC unlike Russia which means that there are certain export/production allocations set aside for Venezuela. Unless Venezuela's oil business becomes so inefficient that it loses money for every barrel of oil it produces, it would be very unlikely that this industry would fall into neglect.

I disagree. The part of China that is “working” is not Communist – it is free enterprise and even private property.

That said the government is extremely authoritarian and will remain that way IMO for the foreseeable future.

As the Chinese government sells off state owned businesses Chavez does the opposite by taking private enterprises. This is a doomed policy and the country will suffer for it. And you can bet that just as people start to see the man for what he is he will declare himself dictator for life.

Here's a funny question: what does any of this have to do with the topic at hand? Ok, maybe it's not so funny...

Government's have every "right" to nationalize assets. Always have and always will; in fact it was not so long ago that the United States nationalized airport security industry. Think the government would have said "gee, better check with our investors" if China had a financial stake in it?

It's bad economics and bad diplomacy, but Chavez is only doing what he is legally entitled to do. The global marketplace is "governed" by investments but there is no set of coherent and enforceable laws, just limited agreements (NAFTA, WTO) and resolution mechanisms. As a result this sort of behaviour goes on frequently (and has been happening for over a century.) Does it hurt U.S. interests? Most certainly, but it has nothing to do with Socialism in general (although obviously some of the specifics relate.)

How do we best respond and protect ourselves from this sort of behaviour? There are two effective mechanisms for influencing the behaviour of other states, military force and diplomacy (economic sanctions rarely work, and almost always require 'intervention' in the form of the other two methods.) Military force can influence an outcome, but rarely influences the underlying motives behind a certain kind of behaviour. Diplomacy is the best way to establish a common interest, and a common interest is always the best way to achieve a compromise.

Now obviously improving relations with Chavez is a challenge, and quite simply may not worth the trouble; his socialist policies will last only as long as he's able to stave off inflation and recession, and I give him two years tops... That being said, the United States has a long and well-documented history of intervention in areas of Central and South America, and most of it has been to the gross detriment of the people living there. Trying to 'make-up' for this past behaviour is the best way to defuse the anti-American sentiment which creates diplomatic tension, and prevents compromise and productive relationships.

All that being said, the reality of global politics is that America is no longer the dominant force it once was; a superpower yes, but one that's influence is increasingly contingent on it's ability to exercise that force.

You've inverted the problem on its head. Chavez' social agenda is sapping the vitality out of the oil industry. Given his prior history of lambasting northern partner's, Chavez is trying to loosen liquitity and investment and use state-run banks as an investment vehicle. This is the purpose of nationalizing the banks. Further, he has wants to implement an aggressive housing program according to his PROUT program. Oddly enough this program is similar to the fannie may, freddie mac subsidy programs where the state intervened to keep interest rates low.

Whether he inflates his currency to nothing and in debts his country remains to be seen. I'm going against UJ's premise of a run on the bank because Chavez' social agenda runs heavily on lucrative oil - or anything over 50 bucks a barrel which is needed to refine his heavy crude. I see oil at 80 dollars a barrel by next year and at 100 by 2010. If Chavez has influence over the banks, he'll ride in the saddle for a good long time.

I agree with you for the most part but I believe there is a third option which would be economic retaliation. You can be sure Mr. Chavez is keenly aware we are not just a big “oil” customer (but he does have the world market) but also a big gasoline customer – which is even more profitable. If he snatches any US companies we can just take CITCO.

Negotiating with a man who idolizes Fidel will be a challenge.

And the latest news is he is now in a fight with the steel industry. He IMO has taken control of the TV stations and media for good reason. He plans to take over soon (as dictator) and wants control of the economy and media.

The beginning of the end for Venezuelan economy has started.

Argentine group seeks to fend off Chávez threat
By Jude Webber in Buenos Aires
Published: May 7 2007 22:44 | Last updated: May 7 2007 22:44
The head of Argentina’s Techint Group, which includes Sidor, Venezuela’s biggest steel mill, is ex¬pected to fly to Caracas next week for urgent talks with Hugo Chávez after the Venezuelan leader threatened to nationalise operations there.
The meeting with Mr Chávez, whose renegotiation of oil contracts and abrupt revocation of the licence of a private television station is part of his vision of a 21st-century socialism in his oil-rich country, is said to have followed a telephone call from Argentina’s President Néstor Kirchner.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/c0bfd962-fcd7-11db...ws%3Fq%3Dchavez

Another update to the nationalization of Venezuela by Chavez:

Chavez shuts down commercial television station and replaces with state run station

From the article:








So for those of you supporting Chavez earlier in this thread.... Is this what you want our country to become?

Hey when you plan on being the “dictator for life” as I am sure he does you would not want a free press or airwaves would you.





It may be too late to stop this man – he has control and if the army stays with him he will crush, and murder any opposition.

Castro is no doubt proud and Communists everywhere can celebrate another victory over capitalism and freedom.

I would just nationalize their CITGO assets, and go beat them up if they give us a hard time. We should never capitulate to some tin-pot (all but) dictator from South America. He has been taunting us for many months and is not making many friends but for the Chinese, with whom he signed a direct barter deal for selling oil to China.

This is getting nuts in Venezuela now. Just two days ago I posted about Chavez shutting down RCTV. This is one of the last quotes I posted:



http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/...,485653,00.html

Now it seems Chavez has moved right onto Globovision. Once he has taken this small news channel off the air Chavez will have all opposition-sided stations.

Where's my cool Che Guevara shirt now.

A couple notes on the RCTV allegations,

One, the owner of RCTV Marc Grainier was connected to economic sabotage during the 2002-2003 coup attempt. Only now is Granier's involvment being put into the spotlight.
Two, RCTV played an active role by transmitting deliberately false information. Such action is easily considered above and beyond articulating dissent and could qualify as sedition.



Three, the ongoing negotiations between Chavez and RCTV are relevent because RCTV is not being closed out entirely and the history suggests a rather benign process involving alot of legal wrangling instead of a heavy handed shut-down of broadcast media.



Four, RCTV as a company is rife with communications infractions. This glaring omission is particularly nefarious given that Peru has done much the same thing. Shades of the Indian nuclear deal all over again.



What is disturbing is that RCTV has gone on record for accepting cash donations by the National Endowment for Democracy. Such a link speaks poorly about American aid organizations because we can now make a strong case for subversion and treason in what looks like an increasingly hostile takeover of a foreign ruler IE Coup attempt #2.

Apologist rhetoric if I have ever seen it. Talking as if this is some sort of isolated incident that was concocted by the US politicians just screams naivety. This is just part of the laundry list of government abuses that Chavez has perpetrated. Do we forget this?:

Rule by decree passed for Chavez


Wow, a revolutionary new "Enabling Law" that can further the ideals of Chavez. If only such progressive ideas were put into place before...oh wait: Enabling Act of 1933

If RCTV is guilty of sedition, than GLOBOVISION must be guilty of treason as well! I mean Chavez has promised to take care of them also! It appears he plans on ensuring that there will be zero criticism of his government or his policies. But i think that is going to become more difficult since Chavez's closure of RCTV was rejected by70% of Venezuelans.

Furthermore, please do not think that describing Chavez (or any leader for that matter) as "democratically elected" means that there is some sort of untouchable force field around him. As he has displayed (and as history has taught us), a democracy can trample the rights of the people just as quickly as any despot. When the legislature gave Chavez the power to rule by fiat, he in effect becomes a dictator because he can overstep the democratic process. So how about we wake up and smell the coffee? Chavez's Venezuela is a perfect model of what Friedrich Hayek and other classical liberals criticized socialism for. It requires a unified idea or goal that needs to be supported by the whole of society. Anyone disagreeing with that goal is regarded as an enemy of society. And as it becomes increasingly clear that the socialist utopia cannot be achieved through mere social cooperation, authoritarian measures become necessary in order to fulfill the dream.

My problem with all what you wrote is this: If that is true that RCTV has done all that (which is a concept I don't understand: A company can do no wrong: It would be people who work in that company who commit crimes....Would you close a TV Station in the US because some director did something?) then the case should be dealt with and decided in the courts of law. This didn't happen. Chavez decided to close the station without consulting anybody. Now that is a big PROBLEM.

Nobody has been formally accused of anything yet. There is no legal reason to close the TV; besides that, Chavez's government is giving as the main reason that RCTV is transmitting things which attempts with the "morals" of the country. If that were the case they should close all TV stations in Venezuela, beginning with VTV which is Chavez' propaganda station.

This was a political decision. RCTV is the only TV company which is capable to transmit nationally AND is opposition to Chavez. Globovision doesn't reach all the states in Venezuela and Venevision is playing along with Chavez. That would leave most parts of Venezuela with the option to watch only pro-goverment stations.

In short: Did anybody in RCTV do something against the law? then prove it in court and punish that person (or persons) if necessary....otherwise leave the station alone and leave to us (the citizens) the decision to change the channel if we don't like what RCTV is transmitting, like it has always being (By the way, 70% of the population don't agree with this closure). This is a bad precedence for the law (not the first one) and it says: whoever in power has the right to decide unilaterally what to do with organizations and/or people who don't agree with their ideology.

These are indeed bad times for my country!. I hope this nightmare will end someday!

Clearly Chavez intends to stifle the free press. Student lead demonstrations are heating up but in the end imo the Army will crush all protest and this country will go the way of Cuba to a repressive Communist dictatorship.


The “infractions” of RCTV is little more than an excuse to shut them down.



http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2007/05/29.html

The station will remain giftzahn, it is the license to Marc Granier that will be replaced.



Not quite. Currently the decision is being challenged not only in Venezuela's Supreme Tribunal of Justice, but will also be tried by the Inter-American Court for Human Rights. The legal reason was the active participation in the coup attempts and misinfornation which are currently being presented in court. Now if that isn't motivation, giftzahn what is?

652 infractions aren't enough to get a license pulled? For comparison's sake let's compare where a slip of the tongue landed Don Imus and he was just one guy. Remember the station will continue, just under different personnel.


Here is a primer on the history of bad blood between the station and the Chavez government. I gave you both sides of the arguement. You can judge for yourself which side you prefer.



This happens more frequently than you realize giftzahn, we've had some smaller french stations in Canada yanked because of poor audience and/or a shock jock who just wouldn't quit.


Well this rhetoric needed telling because the points I've highlighted were well known facts which were not commented on by MSNBC.

Ruling by decree was used mainly as a measure to nationalize the commodities and streamline the process in manner reminiscent of the 1970s Leder. Such actions are by no means isolated to Venezuala. They simply run counter to the deregulation trends in North America. I disagree with your hypothesis of correlating it with the Enabling Act primarily because the decree does not extend in the absolute manner you describe. This is a knee-jerk reaction and is insubstantial and trivial when compared to something as incredulous as Bush's signing statements. The latest fiasco seizes congress in the event of castrophy. Does ruling by decree sound so menacing now?

There is a wide divide between simply nationalizing areas of the economy and dissolving the opposition. When viewed from this perspective, who is further along the road to serfdom Leder? Hmm?

The unitary executive is the ultimate manifestation of the power grab. When Chavez insists on having the military refer to him as "commander in chief" you can get back to me okay? This unscrupulous expansion of power has been chronicled in scathing detail by Dr. Kelly and is by no means finished. What you've presented is smoke and mirrors.

If you insist on presenting poll statistics, I'll counter your supposed 70% opposition rate with one from Gregory Wilpert, who suggests that 80% of the 426 radio stations are opposed to Chavez yet somehow remain in business. If this is a nation wide crackdown on dissent, don't you think Chavez is off to a slow start?

Yes, the "station" will remain. A state-sponsored station will take its place and operate on RCTV's channel.



Stop right there. This is being challenged by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice? The very same Supreme Tribunal of Justice that issued the ruling by which the station was seized in the first place? The very same Supreme Tribunal that was written into the Venezuala constitution under the Chavez government and overwhelmingly filled with Chavez appointees? Well, there's a mercy. I wonder what they will have to say?



Yes indeed. Now there is some real legislative power.

Questions to be debated:

How should the US government respond if this takes place?
Do nothing. Chavez is doing a wonderful job at destroying himself. ANY intervention will only serve as an excuse for the eventual collapse (the standard 'blasted Capitalist Imperialists ruined the perfect utopian Socialist goal...without their interference it would have been a dream world'). I'm sure conspiracy theorists will still blame the CIA for some imagined nefarious underground queue, but nothing should be done to feed the rumors with any crubs of truth whatsoever.

Should we, in turn Boycott their oil company CITGO in the US?
The economic upturn of Venezuela is due entirely to the doubling of the price of oil in the past few years. It will not continue. I'm not sure buying more oil from the Middle East, rather than our primary supplier, will do anything other than harm us. They have plenty of other clients for their black gold.

What else can the US do to protect our private companies from uncompensated appropriation by Socialists, and US haters like Chavez?
Not much, aside from limiting business connections with those types of countries. In this case, some other nations have bilateral investment treaties with Venezuela, and they are filing lawsuits. We do not have one. Those countries with real, compelling legal arguments to sue still likely won't see a dime so why should our private companies which willingly took the risk?

Really?…That remains to be seen. First, in the case the RCTV begins transmission on cable, It would means for the majority of Venezuelans the same as if it were closed. Only the main cities have the luxury of having cable TV. So for the rest it is in practice a farewell RCTV for ever. THAT is, if it begins transmission at all. As of right now, the only thing that our courts did decide very quickly was to give the government the right to use all of RCTV’s transmission equipments, which the network needs to transmit themselves (I am not an TV expert, so I don’t know for sure).

Expropriation is also being considered.

Sorry, It is difficult to find links in english. My information is in spanish.




Yes! But it is not because Chavez wanted it so. It is being tried in that international court because diverse groups in Venezuela felt (and feels) threatened enough to try that instance. After all, to try in our own courts nowadays is so difficult, because nothing (or very little) against Chavez or the government (which is one and the same) goes through or is decided in favour of the one introducing the cases.

I’ll tell you what will happen when and if the Inter-American Court of Human rights decides against our government:

Chavez will say something like this: That imperialistic court is paid by the US/CIA/whatever. Let ignore whatever they say. I know that because that is the only excuse he gives for all our problems –

*There is no food?---Supermarkets’ owners are paid by the CIA.
*Are students protesting because of RCTV's situation? – They are of course paid by the CIA. Etc.,etc.




652? Says who? When was that proven by our courts? There has not been any legal trials or decisions. That is what justice is for, isn’t it?, That is what bothers me the most – What are our laws for? Do we have to accept now that everything will be decided politically? Don’t think so.






This is not some small TV network with no or poor audience. This is the oldest and most watched TV station in Venezuela, which is why so many people are/were against this move.

On the other side, you have given two sources.
1.)A News site which has always been Pro-Chavez.: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com. Moreover, it is an opinion piece - what makes what they write facts.
2.) Another opinion piece of the Guardian newspaper, which I don’t know what kind of ideology has. In any case I notice that one of the people who wrote that article was Rod Stoneman who directed “the Revolution Will Not Be Televised”. Not a person who I trust to be very impartial to Venezuela and its problems. (There is a big controversy with this film and what happened at that time).

Once more: If RCTV or its directive did something against the law - go to the courts and decide with the law. It hasn’t happened and it gives many of us the idea that at the end, law is not important anymore.



I’m from Venezuela…..I prefer legality, the application of law instead of open political decisions. Chavez wants to decide alone everything: what we have to watch or do. I and many other people don’t want that. I guess I already chose my side.




First of all, Radios are currently in the same situation as TV networks. 100 of 156 AM radio Licenses have not been renewed even though legalities have already been done long ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if those stations fear that license renewal depends on what they transmit or not. I hope it is not the case….but fact is, radios’ licenses are still not renewed and nobody knows when and how they will be.

I don’t believe anything that comes from somebody who has anything to do with http://www.venezuelanalysis.com. Gregory Wilpert is editor of that site.

As of now, this is the map of TV networks in Venezuela:

VTV – Pro Chavez
TELESUR – Pro Chavez
VIVE – Pro Chavez
CMT – Pro Chavez
Tves – Let’s see how long till it gets openly Pro Chavez


Venevision – (seems to have a deal with the government)
Televen – let’s say it is neutralized – mild pro-Chavez, once in a while weak critics.

Globovision – Pro –opposition (but doesn’t transmit nationwide)

Meridiano – No news
Vale TV – No news

So that’s it - Poor government - so under represented. I would say people in Venezuela watch more TV than listening to the radio. VTV which is supposed to be for all Venezuelans (our taxes keep that network) is just a propaganda station which is as bad as RCTV and it won’t be close any time in the future.

I don’t care about polls made by non Venezuelans who happen to defend an agenda without having to live in the country where the person they so dearly defend is governing.

You know what: I didn’t even watch RCTV much. But they took my right and that from others to decide to change that channel if we wanted and that is why you have people protesting in the streets since the beginning. I hope those protests last to at least remind our new god, that Venezuela is not always going to be his toy to play with. Sadly, since oil prices are so high, our economy will keep Chavez in charge for awhile. He will be safe while people have some money to spend.


Sorry for any grammar mistakes!.

Facts ae a funny thing...because they can support a lie just as easily as they can a truth. What I mean is simply that you and I can look at the same facts and draw entirely different conclusions. This is one of those cases.



How incredulous can we be? You are comparing the Bush signing statements to Chavez's fiat rule? Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of Executive signing statements (which is a practice nearly as old as our republic mind you), but there is a stark difference between the two. Furthermore, the directive that places power in the hand of the executive in the case of a catastrophe is an obvious move, its not a George W, Bush creation. Its the same reason that the Legislative Branch has no powers over the management of a war. You can't have Congress having up or down votes on whether to take a hill or execute an air strike. If a worst case scenaro occurs, such as a dirty bomb in a major city, or a massive earthquake, the Executive is the only branch capable of providing what is necessary. Finally, there is legal precedent for the signing statements and judicial oversight. Chavez on the other hand has free reign to effect the economy, energy, and defense sectors...with hopes of even more power. Its not apples and oranges here...its apples and a t-bone steak.



Which perspective is this? Venezuela was given 4s by FreedomHouse in the areas of Civil and Political rights. Chavez is eroding basic property rights with nationalizing formerly private business and he is silencing opposition by replacing a critical television station with a pro-government station that shows "moral" programming. Please do not insult me by arguing that a Venezuelan is more free than an American.



So, you bring up George W. Bush's actions in a topic on Venezuela and Hugo Chavez...and you accuse me of presenting smoke and mirrors? I do not know where you got the idea that I was a fan of Bush. I am not going to sit here and defend some of the things he has one because I think he has eroded American liberty greatly. But please do not think for a second that this translates into me making some sort of connection between him and Chavez.


RCTV had Venezuela's largest viewership counting 10 million of Venezuela's 26 million people as viewers of its programming. All those other stations could have been showing the weather for all we know.

And now we bring you more from Venezuela:

Chavez demands supporters to give up extra possessions



*Emphasis mine.

At this point I think the U.S. should pull all of its business interests from Venezuela.

Yeah, Chavez is sounding more and more megalomaniacal every week. Nevertheless, he's got a huge amount of popular support in Venezuela.


I think this should be the decision of the corporation doing business in Venezuela, don't you?

He had a huge amount of popular support.

Story

Trouble- I have no problem diliking GW intently - but he is no Hugo Chavez, and GW is being put in check, very hard right now, with a major turnover in lawmakers. He is about to lose it all in 2008 for his entire party, IMHO.

Chavez, on the other hand, IS killing off the very checks that put GW in check (though, to be fair- the republican court is equally stacked, as were both houses, he has had dictatorial powers, and has had more poeple tortured than Chavez- so, GW CAN be quite a bit worse than Chavez in other areas-)

Chavez is consolidating power so he CAN'T be removed by a majority of hiw former constituents- a very, very important "trump" card in this debate!

Thanks for the link. Very interesting. However, the poll doesn't show a lack of public support. It just shows that 51% (within a 4.7% margin of error) think he's a dictator. Dictator != unpopular.

Oopsie Sleeper- I just checked out the poll very closely-I would have to say, for the record, that it is VERY VERY flawed- why? It is a telephone poll!

Most of Chavez support comes from the overwhelming majority of houses without, you know, phones?

If they come up with a cluster style survey, or something like it- I will concede the point- but they really need to do better than that!

I have always been of a mind sleeper that socialism creeps in when corporate greed runs amok. When you end up with a very, very large populations of "have nots" and a very small, very corrupt, "haves"- then you have a recipe for savvy leader, under the guise of "justice for the little poeple", that can gain the trust of those poeple- then you have a recipe for a new kind of corruption.

IN the end- if Chavez's main source of support- the poor, if thier lot improves- Chavez will be a hero to the majority of his poeple for a long time.

If it gets worse- he will have to become ver autocratic with the military's help and it will soon degenerate into a Kleptocracy like any other banana republic with an endless series of coups and corrupt CIA backed leaders

There was a coup attempt against a very popular leader- Chavez- and it failed. They are lucky he didn't have them all rounded up and hung for treason- as it should be- anymore than coup attempts in the US would be treated any differently?

I am not saying what Chavez is doing is right, or good for Venuzuala- I am saying that corporate corruption and exploitation have made it quite easy for Chavez to do what he does, and the US has made it worse, since we are now pretty much viewed as the evil imperialists of the world.

You don't have to make excuses for defending Chavez CR. It's your right to do so.

I didn't know you were for distribution of wealth, that is all. I mean heck you have more than one bike, don't you? According to Chavez, he would demand you give your bike to somebody who does not have one. Just sayin..

Boy- you sure read my note a little different than I did- wow- I missed the part where I was supporting Chavez?

Listen- I think he is running the country into the ground, and I am not for any leader that squelches personal liberties.

I am saying, that typically, in my studies- there is a mechanism that leads to this kind of leadership- and it generally starts from not paying attention to a large segment of the population.

My personal belief is that Milton Friedman is generally right about the greatest freedom in a society comes from Capitalism- I don't agree with his fairly pie in the sky assesment of your typical CEO being some moral dude that is a benevolent leader thinking of the employees and general long term health of the company.

You look at the last 100 years of social upheaval, in the lens of 20/20 hindsight, you think "man, tey screwed this one for themselves"- from Cuba to Iran, it is corrupt rich dudes that lead to the same thing that is begining in venuzuala-

A rich portion of the society, much smaller than the lower class, was being ignored. Now all Venuzuala will pay the price it seems, correct?

I think Chavez is bad for Venuzuala- but he didn't get there for no reason!

Oh really? You making stuff up again, CR? Care to source this claim? Nevermind..... Just keep making stuff up, if nothing else, it's entertaining.

Actually, phone use in Venezula is quite high and has been for oh, maybe the past 15 years or so. From this article from 1994, we can read the following on cell phone use in Venezula.......





Now, maybe things have changed since Castro Jr, er.... Chavez has taken over, but there was a whole lot of celling going there back in 1994.


Aquilla

OMG man, what is your disdain for people who become successful running a company. If I am reading this right you are blaming what Chavez is doing on rich business types. Because if the rich people had never been in the country in the first place then Chavez would have never been put into power. Why don't we just start telling women they are getting raped because they are dressing too provocatively.

As it was already noted by Aquilla, there is not a shortage of cell phones in Venezuela. They are cheap enough for most people to have one. Even if not, I suspect everybody would have one anyways - I don't know how accurate it is nowadays but even people who lived in Barrios (the poor communities in my country) used to have TV Set, VCR, Stereos and whatever you would imagine one house can have except maybe enough food for the family, then you see, some consider our culture kind of a show-off one (at least it was so in times when our economy was one of the strongest economies in Latin America -in the seventies- and we were known as the it’s-cheap-give-me-two-people).

So I don't see any problems with making phone polls. I would have liked more people interviewed though. 903 People! How strange a number! (I don't like odd numbers, haha)

I would like to put that poll in context. It was a poll done by "Hinterlaces", a relatively new poll company which has gotten a good reputation since its foundation due to their good predictions of our elections outcomes. The Poll was done to determine how the people reacted to Chavez closing RCTV (or not renovating its license, however you want to see it) and the students protests which began afterward. This are the poll results - translated by me, I didn't find the original:

Students' Protests Continuation :

Agree- 61%
Disagree - 36%

¿Is US Imperialism behind the protests?

No - 65%
Yes - 21%
Don't know/No answer - 10%

¿Is there a conspiration to overthrow Chavez?

No - 65%
Yes - 25%

¿The students' protests?

are democratic and have the people's support - 74%
are not democratic and don't have the people's support - 22%

¿President Hugo Chávez acts …?

Like a dictator 51%
Like a democrat 31%
No reply 18%

Opinion about the new Channel: TVes:

unfavorable - 45%
Haven't seen it - 29%
Favorable - 26%

These results don't surprise me at all. This is maybe the first of Chavez actions affecting a directly a big part of the population - angering anti- and pro- Chavez crowds alike; after all Soup operas have a level of holiness in Venezuela you can not even begin to comprehend and RCTV happens to be a big producer of them.

I want to answer the questions of this debate, since I haven't done so:

Chavez has threatened to nationalize US assets as part of taking over their Telephone company.

Questions for the debate:
How should the US government respond if this takes place?

The US government should do nothing about it (It already took place however and you didn't do anything, so this question is already a little bit out of date). Anyways, I think every country should have the right to nationalize things but only if it is something that will affect positively the country. Chavez doesn’t do that. He nationalizes to control and use for his benefit. What he already does with PDVSA, he wants to do with the companies and institutions in strategically important areas (telecommunications, banks, military, etc.)

Should we , in turn Boycott their oil company CITGO in the US?

My opinion as a foreigner: Are there not US citizens working there? Is Citgo not paying US's Taxes? Seems like nonsense to me. Why would you want to punish people who doesn't have anything to do with Chavez decisions since for me there is not doubt about it - It is Chavez 's decision alone. Independency of Thinking in Venezuela's government is the lowest since we got rid of our last dictatorship back in the times of Perez Jimenez.

What else can the US do to protect our private companies from uncompensated appropriation by Socialists, and US haters like Chavez?

I don't know. I haven't heard about any uncompensated appropriation. For all the Chavez's tough anti-american talk, Business with the US is as strong as ever --- that is, it is only talk and not actions --- and so far he has had the money to pay whatever there is to pay to make what he wants. This questions would be interesting to answer if and when Venezuela's treasure is depleted and Chavez doesn’t have the money to buy a name for him in the World's history. One more thing: I don't believe that Chavez is a socialist. He sells himself as one and has lobbies around the world to sell that idea.


Chao!

Sleeper- I have a great disdain for publically traded or any large multi-national corporation- they are inherently easy to corrupt- because there is no incentive to be good, and lots to be bad. But that is a side debate I suppose.

Giftzahn- I will accept your polling figures, you have no reason to lie to me, and I concede your point- it appears that Chavez has even angered his base on this issue- and I hope he listens instead of trying to become more dictitorial, for Venezuela's sake.



Venzuela has a very good chance of becoming a "first world" country, competing against other countries in a sane and capitalist manner, if Chavez doesn't squander your oil wealth.

Right here in Alaska, we have had a HUGE scandal with the oil companies bribing local lawmakers to lower taxes for them, and they are now going to jail!

Funny thing though- the oil company executives plead guilty- but are NOT going to jail, and thier company is still allowed to operate in this state!

It shows how horribly, horribly corrupt large, resource based corporations are, even when they are already raking in BILLIONS in profit- they still think it is not enough!

I am hoping that Chavez has some damned sense and realizes that the small business capitalits is what makes America, to some degree, more immune to this- I believe the American economy is still stable because it has, at it's core, the small businssman/woman-

if he doesn't make it impossible for someone to make a profit- and it is just fancy words and little action- perhaps Brazil will pull out of this idiocy and have a much brighter future.

I agree but there is little chance Chavez will pull back. He is in a love in with Castro and is now claiming the US is planning to “invade” Venezuela!!! This scare tactic is classic when the ruler wants to take control to “save” the country and will get him support if anyone actually believes this nonsense.

Bottom line seems to be he will, very soon, need to crush the growing opposition and this will send Venezuela into the usual Socialist tail spin from which they will not recover for decades.

Very sad for the people there.

“Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez, says he is in possession of intelligence showing that the United States plans to invade his country.
In a BBC interview, Mr Chavez said the US was after his nation's oil, much as it had been after Iraq's.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4359386.stm

Ted- man, I just noticed I put in my post "brazil"- Damn American ignorance!

That being said- hmm, sounds like Chavez IS taking from the GW playbook- you know, making up some big scare to stay in power

Ya sure CR – nice joke.

Bottom line is that soon if you speak out in that country you may disappear – permanently.

Oh well – people who ignore history have to learn the hard way and Venezuela is about to learn about Socialism first hand.

CR, it looks like you're suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome again. Bush did not "make up" Islamofascism. As Ted said, Hugo is cribbing from Fidel's playbook, not GW's.

However, I will grant you permission to holler from the rooftops "I told you so" if GW doesn't leave the White House come January 2009.

Nobody truly knows what is going on in Venezuela because the media reports it, and the media present the view of the business interests. If I've learned anything from studying politics its that things are usually the exact opposite of what they are presented as being. People are seeing Chavez as a dictator, chances are he's probably very democratic. The stories that come out about Venezuela are that there is massive opposition to Chavez, but then he wins elections by a landslide. He overcame a coup attempt through popular support. Let's face it, he's popular in his country.

As far as his economic plans are concerned, they are working in relative terms. Half his country was in poverty before he won his first election. The poverty numbers have decreased since he's been in power. So for all the naysayers out there, you have to admit he's doing better than his predecessor with communist/socialist economic policies. "It doesn't work!" Well, it's working.

This makes no sense. While I agree that Chavez is no dictator (as of yet), he is an autocrat. While the media is composed of corporate entities, this doesn't mean it is biased towards other corporate entities. Finally, stating "because something is reported one way, then it must be the other way" is one of those meaningless statements in the absence of evidence.


Agreed. Chavez is popular. He will continue to be popular as long as he delivers what the people want. However, when his popularity inevitably slides, then we will see if he's a true populist (and steps aside) or he's a dictator.


His economic policies consist of him nationalizing business assets and giving them away (at least partially so) to his various supporters/interest groups. Simply taking these assets without incentives for continued economic growth *will* inevitably fail. He is essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul. He can get away with it because Venezuela has so much oil. Oil, while a wonderful source of income, is not something to pin your entire economic future upon.

He is popular with the very poor and will remain so until the economy tanks, investors run and civil liberties dry up. Then he will no longer be “popular” just the dictator.

Any one who thinks just robbing the “rich” and carving up and handing out their land will solve all problems is living in the Socialist dream world.

The wakeup call is perhaps 2 years or less down the road – then even the oil money will not save this economy

Interesting response Ted and Logophage. I just don't understand what you have against helping out the poor. Logophage, your response is most troublesome, you write: "He will continue to be popular as long as he delivers what the people want." Isn't this what the leader of a country is supposed to do? Our President is not giving the people what they want and he has the lowest approval ratings that he can get. The only way his approval ratings could tank any lower would be if he urinated on Reagan's grave. Other than that, he can't get lower than 27%-29%. Yet in Venezuela, there is Chavez, whose popularity is over 60% and you want him out of there because he quote "delivers what the people want." It's almost like you are rooting against him so that his people will suffer, more than they already do. And neither of you will make the concession that he has helped more people than he has harmed. Maybe you two are just too stubborn to admit that Chavez has made his country a better place to live.

What do you want from Chavez? Do you want Chavez to support American business interests in his country if that means his population will suffer in poverty? If you could present a wish list of things you want from Venezuela/Chavez, what would they be? I would love to hear your answers.

Note that while you harp on the Bush approval rate – Congress is lower.

As far as Chavez what I am saying is that he will certainly be ‘popular” among the “poor” (a vast majority) as long as he is delivering. How long he can do this is the issue. Obviously the country has had corruption issues and needed change but “Socialism” as practiced by Fidel will not give anyone including the poor long lasting benefits. Worst of all it appears he is moving, as Fidel did, to install himself as ruler for life – thus when things do go bad he will be un removable.

Do I want him to be a capitalist? Of course and this is what is best for his people – rich and poor. All I would want from him is to allow democracy, freedom and capitalism. That means you should not “nationalize” businesses or industries. He should not confiscate land unless it was fraudulently obtained. He should not muzzle the free press.

He is doing all of this. Is this what you feel is right for the country barnaby?


If he goes hard Socialist – history tells us the countries economy goes in the tank and everyone loses. Is this what he was elected to do?

Time will verify this.