Quote :

"Chavez, who is running for reelection in December, has used oil income to finance social programs for the poor"

when i first read it i was like, "sounds like a good thing to me", but then part of me was like well idk, this might be a shady character or something

but using oil money for the good of citizens sounds like a good thing right?

5/28/2006 3:24:57 PM

Only if Cheney or Exxon didn't make a profit off it.

5/28/2006 3:29:11 PM

clearly, a nation builds wealth through social programs.

5/28/2006 3:35:02 PM

man

what the fuck is this thread

5/28/2006 4:32:23 PM

social programs dont accomplish shit

5/28/2006 4:37:07 PM

^^^^I don't think they have to worry too much about that. They have Citgo.

5/28/2006 4:57:59 PM

^^For real, some of you just need to stay the fuck up out the Soap Box.

Oh, social programs don't accomplish shit. In my ideal world, public education wouldn't exist, and none of us would be able to read or write (besides the clergy and the super wealthy, of course) because having educated citizens doesn't accomplish shit!

5/28/2006 6:08:01 PM

Using money to help people is a good thing.

A socialist president who accuses an unliked great power of trying to kill him and subvert his power is a bad thing.

5/28/2006 6:14:51 PM

Quote :

"because having educated citizens doesn't accomplish shit! "

For what it's worth, despite most people being "educated" and a good portion having gone through higher education (much of which is subsidized with public funds), voter turn out is lower than in third world countries and they did re-elect bush by a majority. So it's not too much of a stretch to say it doesn't accomplish shit.

[Edited on May 28, 2006 at 8:30 PM. Reason : /]

5/28/2006 8:27:36 PM

Quote :

"but using oil money for the good of citizens sounds like a good thing right?"

As in all economic situations there are winners and there are losers.

Financially speaking, by siezing controlling shares of the oil-fields and using that cofiscated wealth to fund social programs for the poor is such a complex web. The poor of venezuela clearly benefit in the short term, they can take advantage of the social programs. Exxon and others clearly lose in the short term, their property has been "expropriated."

However, one must look beyond the immediate effects of a policy to determine the true winners and losers. The oil fields in question were worthless before the oil companies in question invented the new technology necessary to make it useful. This experiment cost billions, but was successful. These investors feel robbed, rightfully or not, so they will never do this again. This is bad news for Venezuela's future because current oil production is falling and new fields need to be brought online to keep up, again requiring billions of dollars in speculative investment. Venezuela itself cannot do this investment, they lack the expertise, thus it is foreseeable that such investment will not be made. So, as current oil fields run dry, and new ones are not forth-coming, in the future it is likely that government revenues will leave no room for such social programs. It is also likely that employment in the oil sector will fall as old fields are shut and no new fields open, increasing unemployment and reducing wages. In other words, 25% of an ever larger pie is better than 51% of an ever smaller pie.

So, in the long run, it is possible to imagine that while the poor are better off today, in 10 years time they will be much worse off than they would have otherwise been. Not to mention, as Venezuelan oil production falls it is more likely that world oil prices will remain high, to the detriment of global economic activity and thus the poor world-wide.

5/28/2006 8:28:14 PM

what should venezuela do then, given how they have handled the oil situation to maximize immediate gain? i guess you are suggesting they are screwed unless they use their current oil income to modernize the country and develop other industries outside of oil... kind of like using the oil as just a 'springboard' to an industrialized country. is this their best bet?

5/28/2006 8:41:57 PM

Quote :

"1337 b4k4: For what it's worth, despite most people being "educated" and a good portion having gone through higher education (much of which is subsidized with public funds), voter turn out is lower than in third world countries and they did re-elect bush by a majority. So it's not too much of a stretch to say it doesn't accomplish shit."

1337 b4k4, if I recall correctly, you supported Bush in his first election, right?

Even if I'm wrong about that recollection, the point you are trying to make is stupid, stupid, stupid. The fact that Bush got re-elected has nothing to do with the particular value that educated citizens can add to society.

I still can't believe your suggesting that educating people doesn't accomplish anything.

[Edited on May 28, 2006 at 9:01 PM. Reason : sss]

5/28/2006 9:00:08 PM

If Chavez wasn't such a douche, I'd have a better opinion of this.

For a better view on using oil money to better your country, look at Northern Europe.

5/28/2006 9:12:22 PM

Quote :

"A socialist president who accuses an unliked great power of trying to kill him and subvert his power is a bad thing."

where did this come from

i just said it sounds like a good thing to use the income from oil for programs for the poor

5/28/2006 10:30:44 PM

his political ideology is inconsequential

its his attitude thats wrong. fyi: recently he proclaimed support for Iran, so that should tell you how most of America feels about him.

5/28/2006 10:45:37 PM

Lonesnark: one of the most informed and intelligent responses I have ever seen in the soap box. Good job.

5/28/2006 11:11:00 PM

Quote :

"what should venezuela do then, given how they have handled the oil situation to maximize immediate gain? i guess you are suggesting they are screwed unless they use their current oil income to modernize the country and develop other industries outside of oil... kind of like using the oil as just a 'springboard' to an industrialized country. is this their best bet?"

It is predominantly too late to fix Venezuela's business reputation, not that it matters much to Chavez. Your idea for using the money to modernize the economy sounds good, but is predominantly a waste. If the government of Venezuela could wisely invest the money in the right industries then surely the Soviet's could have done the same.

No, the best policy would be for Chavez to do as you say, modernize the country, but not by spending the oil money to do so (it would just get stolen). A better plan would be to make it clear that although the oil industry has been nationalized, that is as far as it will go. Pass laws protecting private property (obviously excluding the oil sector), lower taxes, fight corruption, lower tarriffs, and start setting aside some of the windfall profits to cover the costs of social programs in the future as oil production continues to fall.

Venezuela before Chavez had a fairly diversified economy, there is no reason to believe it has no choice but to become just another failed petro-state. I would use the profits of today to placate your supporters while you impliment market reforms. Regretfully, Chavez is not going to do this as he sees the siezure of oil production as just another salvo in his war against the free-enterprise system. He seriously believes he can follow the route of socialism, like Cuba, without ending up poor, like Cuba. This is truely odd as since the 90's Cuba has been introducing free-enterprise reforms such as allowing small business ownership, allowing foreign businesses to operate, and operating in foreign capital markets.

Maybe Chavez knows something Castro doesn't.

5/28/2006 11:38:58 PM

Quote :

"Pass laws protecting private property (obviously excluding the oil sector), lower taxes, fight corruption, lower tarriffs"

A cocktail with proven success!

5/29/2006 12:17:37 AM

^ True, I need to be more specific. You need to do more than just pass laws, see Hernando de Soto of Peru to see what you really need to do. Once done, it does ensure sucess to the best of our knowledge. Every nation that has ever tried it for an extended period of time did suceed (Britain, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan, China). As noted, placating supporters, such as with oil money, is key to any such strategy as it usually takes 20+ years for it to work.

Sure, it isn't perfect, for most countries it isn't even possible. Chavez could do it only because he has built himself a quazi-dictatorship. However, it bears noting that there are no known alternatives.

[Edited on May 29, 2006 at 12:51 AM. Reason : .,.]

5/29/2006 12:50:47 AM

Quote :

"BridgetSPK: I still can't believe your suggesting that educating people doesn't accomplish anything."

you're

DAMN, DAMN, DAMN

5/29/2006 9:46:13 AM