Venezuela's Crash: There's No Toilet Paper In Caracas

[Touch of Anarchy]

Can anyone tell me what the point of this thread was? I know it's the off topic section but it's not in the "Off-Topic and Pointless" section so I'm assuming some sort of intellectual message is attempting to be put across.

[Sargerasraider]

My apologize if I came off supporting pure socialism, I am not. I am not advocating either pure socialism or pure capitalism as both of them are horrible in their pure states.

But from my knowledge of it, you seem like you are talking more about communism where the government owns near everything.

I personally advocate for socialistic policies for critical stuff where no free market can function and capitalistic approaches for luxury stuff where a free market can actually function with protections in place where a company can't corner the market and I also advocate for allowing private companies to compete against the socialistic programs if they wish to do so as that actually gives them something they must compete against and sets a baseline in quality.


I was talking about how people keep thinking that Socialism will ruin everything it touches like it is some toxic force when so is capitalism in its pure state.

I think that what the vast majority of people want is a regulated market economy with safety net provisions. What most people disagree on is the degree of regulation and the breadth of the safety net.

A pure Ayn Randian anarcho-capitalist society would almost certainly be an unmitigated disaster.

On the other side, you have several nations which have really tried to give it a good go at nationalizing / placing in common ownership the means of production. Venezuela has been a recent example of this. You end up with authoritarian states usurping private property. Attempts at a planned economy generally fail. Price controls lead to shortages. This same story has happened again and again.

From a definition standpoint, I agree, most of us are in the middle. However, I think both the right and left (at least in the US) do a terrible job defining what socialism is. Nordic social democracies are not socialism.

[Deleted]

It has everything to do with it - since the reward of higher pay to the successful ones is effectively removed, when the government (in the case of Venezuela) controls what should be produced - and how it should be produced. Note that it isn't just about inventing the things themselves, but about actually taking the innovation from idea to reality.

Is this another fact or just your opinion? cause i can assure you it's not the case. There is nothing about socialism that says "managers should not be evaluated based on their performance" and no state company does that. Ofc there is an incentive and reward and in many cases the management also has a share in the company. When i asked first if you know what you copy/pasted this is what i was talking about, having control of a company doesn't mean making decisions on what and how it's produced, that defeats the whole purpose of contracting management.

Also i don't know why you keep hammering this association between Venezuela and socialism, like this country created this system or it's a frame of reference/template for socialism. If we're being honest if Bernie Sanders wasn't running nobody would have been aware of this crysis in Venezuela, this is propaganda at work.

Seriously? Are you that ignorant.
Marx worked mid 1800s and his analysis included the existing industrial age, that had began a century earlier (due to agrarian revolution that preceded it creating the workforce); the assembly line of H. Ford came later - but was inline with his analysis. Without the large potential industrial work-force his ideas wouldn't have found such a fertile ground - unless there were other severe problems making people desperate for any idea.

I know when he published his works but this has nothing to do with this values. Industrialization was a point of reference yes but he argued FOR the pre-industrialization manufacturing values, the whole worker being part of the product thingy which i admit i don't understand because i think division of labor is good but again, this is irrelevant for modern day socialism and Venezuela, it's just "let's add one more scary thing to this mix", next you must bring Stalin and we're full house.

Some systems are better at reducing it.

Sadly capitalism isn't one of them.

[Forogil]

And the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is neither democratic nor for the people, nor a Republic.

No-one claimed it was, but a few years ago (2008) you could see people claiming that Venezuela was socialist:
http://asocialistmalaysia.blogspot.s...socialism.html
http://cpim.org/marxist/200802_marxi...ela-petras.pdf

People have just stopped after Venezuela crashed and burned too visible.

[JTHMRulez1]

Whoa. You just discovered that Venezuela has no Toilet Paper

What else did you discovered? that we have no electricity?

[Theinquisition]

This is the most bullshit garbage article I've ever read.

Supertony, I'm glad you lost all respect for me for some random post I made a while back, because I have zero respect and will never gain any respect for anyone who posts this kind of shit like it's serious news.

It's an opinion piece, not a news article. Learn the difference Calvin.

- - - Updated - - -

How about the Rwandan genocide?
https://libcom.org/blog/capitalism-v...art-1-12062014
So, your argument is wrong. Here we go, capitalist country going on a genocide. Guess genocides can happen in all kinds of countries and political systems, who would have thought?

By the way, to add something, I know you're pro-Israel. Did you know that Israel was founded as a partially socialist country?
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/capit...raeli-economy/
And they even had tests to see if it could work under full communism (tests didn't go as planned, but still, the socialist part did).

How Israel runs their country is their business, as is Venezuela.

It's not how it like my country to be run.

- - - Updated - - -

This "amurican" fear of socialism is so hilarious to watch.

You spelled it wrong.

[Bumkin]

socialism and communism has failed in every country it has been implemented, let's just move on

[Fugus]

I think that what the vast majority of people want is a regulated market economy with safety net provisions. What most people disagree on is the degree of regulation and the breadth of the safety net.

A pure Ayn Randian anarcho-capitalist society would almost certainly be an unmitigated disaster.

On the other side, you have several nations which have really tried to give it a good go at nationalizing / placing in common ownership the means of production. Venezuela has been a recent example of this. You end up with authoritarian states usurping private property. Attempts at a planned economy generally fail. Price controls lead to shortages. This same story has happened again and again.

From a definition standpoint, I agree, most of us are in the middle. However, I think both the right and left (at least in the US) do a terrible job defining what socialism is. Nordic social democracies are not socialism.

I see them as more a flaw of authoritarian governments than anything as they tend to have these exact same flaws regardless of what philosophy they wish to follow in the long term.

Honest question, have we ever had a democratic government attempt socialist government? Virtually every time I hear about them, they are always authoritarian.

And as far as Authoritarian governments are concerned, they will virtually always fail in the long term because the type of people attracted to those positions and even if you managed to get the perfect leader, he won't always be there. The only way I could see an authoritarian government succeeding long term would be with a pure benevolent computer controlling it and even then you would have the risk of it being hacked or otherwise subverted for a select group to destroy that.

As far as US politics are concerned, I don't even see them as left and right, I see them as center right and far right and the main difference between them involves which part of the problems they wish to ignore and which part they want to play up.

Edit: AFK

[Forogil]

Is this another fact or just your opinion? cause i can assure you it's not the case. There is nothing about socialism that says "managers should not be evaluated based on their performance" and no state company does that.

They don't have anything to measure performance against - because the competition is removed - and thus the incentives to beat them.
There is a reason why social democratic countries are de-nationalising companies - while socialist countries would want to keep control.

Also i don't know why you keep hammering this association between Venezuela and socialism, like this country created this system or it's a frame of reference/template for socialism. If we're being honest if Bernie Sanders wasn't running nobody would have been aware of this crysis in Venezuela, this is propaganda at work.

WHAT?

I care much more about the state of Venezuela than some lowly Vermont-senator; and I have seen Venezuela go from being an shown as a example of successful socialism (by some; while hearing the horror stories of corruption, state agencies overseeing foreign students, Manduro's lack of intelligence, and crime) - to total collapse in recent years.

If you care about Bernie that is your problem, it certainly isn't mine, and neither is it a problem for the ones living in Venezuela.

I know when he published his works but this has nothing to do with this values. Industrialization was a point of reference yes but he argued FOR the pre-industrialization manufacturing values, the whole worker being part of the product thingy which i admit i don't understand

You simple don't understand the theory, but it hardly matters since it is fundamentally flawed - and based on the capitalist-sons distaste for the lowly workers; and seeing them as interchangeable cogs in the machine. However, Marx values are clearly not pre-industrial revolution.

Sadly capitalism isn't one of them.

It's bad at it, it's just that the others are worse.

- - - Updated - - -

Whoa. You just discovered that Venezuela has no Toilet Paper

What else did you discovered? that we have no electricity?

Last I heard there was electricity some days of the week.

[Wildtree]

The Cold War Doctrines are strong in these young Jedi...

It's sad to see otherwise smart people running headlong into the same trap over and over again.
Either the entire planet sans the US, or the US sans the entire planet existed in another Universe for the last 100ish years.

I blame Sanders, I knew it is going to blow up in his face, when he called himself a socialist.
He ain't one, he never was one. He is and always was a social democrat.

But then, the thread gives me an unexpected chuckle..
Appears that Americans spend nearly $1.5 billion on deodorants per year.
Or say, a little more than $4.00 per year per capita.
And either way, there's a whole plethora of deodorant statistics. Holy fuck, marketers really got a lot of (highly paid) time on their hand.
http://www.statista.com/stats/162395/deodorant

[Forogil]

Honest question, have we ever had a democratic government attempt socialist government? Virtually every time I hear about them, they are always authoritarian.

A government taking control of the means of production without being authoritarian? Don't you see a slight problem?

However, there has actually been some such attempts to gradually do that by democratic governments. None successful as far I know.

- - - Updated - - -

I blame Sanders, I knew it is going to blow up in his face, when he called himself a socialist.
He ain't one, he never was one. He is and always was a social democrat.

Well, he doesn't seem that smart in running his campaign and would have had a hard time if he had won the primaries.

Or say, a little more than $4.00 per year per capita.
And either way, there's a whole plethora of deodorant statistics. Holy fuck, marketers really got a lot of (highly paid) time on their hand.
http://www.statista.com/stats/162395/deodorant

Only 4$/year? I must be using too many - they cost more than 2$ per deodorant.

[Wildtree]

A government taking control of the means of production without being authoritarian? Don't you see a slight problem?

However, there has actually been some such attempts to gradually do that by democratic governments. None successful as far I know.

The entirety of the capitalistic World runs on controlled market. Uncontrolled free market exists nowhere. Only an almost uncontrolled market exists in one country, that's the USA, and the side effects are that the country drifts into a full blown oligarchy. Corporations have long taken over that role of the government so many people fear would do.
When you have 3 or 4 corporations split the entire cake, never compete with one another. And where they compete the prices are magically all the same, then you got the very things you feared so much.
I rather have a government with a healthy business sense and social goals, than corporations sucking the money out of the population.

[lockedout]

I rather have a government with a healthy business sense and social goals, than corporations sucking the money out of the population.

It just depends whether you're the statue or the pigeon.

[endersblade]

Venezuela's out of TP

Uses entire article to bash Bernie Sanders

2edgy4me

[Wildtree]

Only 4$/year? I must be using too many - they cost more than 2$ per deodorant.

That is the thing with per capita. That counts every single head there is. From the 1 minute old baby, to the 120 yrs old elder.
Not every single person uses. not every single person buys.
So, essentially, the people actually buying deodorants pay definitely more over the course of a year.

- - - Updated - - -

It just depends whether you're the statue or the pigeon.

Without the government acting as pest control you are always the statue. Always.

[Forogil]

The entirety of the capitalistic World runs on controlled market. Uncontrolled free market exists nowhere. Only an almost uncontrolled market exists in one country, that's the USA, and the side effects are that the country drifts into a full blown oligarchy. Corporations have long taken over that role of the government so many people fear would do.

I am not sure of that the US market is that free - however, instead of government controlling the market for some good reason the government is partially in the hands of corporative lobbyist.

When you have 3 or 4 corporations split the entire cake, never compete with one another. And where they compete the prices are magically all the same, then you got the very things you feared so much.
I rather have a government with a healthy business sense and social goals, than corporations sucking the money out of the population.

That is a problem. But socialism with 1 state controlled corporation wouldn't be an improvement.

- - - Updated - - -

Venezuela's out of TP

Uses entire article to bash Bernie Sanders

2edgy4me

Hmm... I would say it is clickbait to attract views; giving an actual description of how Venezuela failed - and how that is related to socialism, analyzing Sanders position and comparing it to social democrats/socialists would be hard work - and would have attracted fewer viewers.

[Wildtree]

That is a problem. But socialism with 1 state controlled corporation wouldn't be an improvement.

Absolutely not. You're right.

[Deleted]

They don't have anything to measure performance against - because the competition is removed - and thus the incentives to beat them.
There is a reason why social democratic countries are de-nationalising companies - while socialist countries would want to keep control.

I really don't know what you're on about, are we still talking about socialism or some ultra-communist island? Just cause a country owns their oil production it doesn't mean they don't compete on the open market or are the only supplier. But oil is a natural resource so let's take cars. Just cause the state owns the native car manufacturer it doesn't mean big companies, be it foreign or privately own from the same country, can't produce/sell cars in that country.

Let's pretend Bernie becomes president. What do you think he'll ban all other companies? nationalize and merge them into one so they don't compete? stop all imports? something even more ridiculous if that's even possible? It's getting silly tbh, the more you're trying to show how socialism is anti-competition/innovation and rewarding performance the less sense it makes

WHAT?

I care much more about the state of Venezuela than some lowly Vermont-senator;

Grats, you part of an exclusive club. It's safe to assume i'm part of the majority here and i'm also assuming Venezuela got more coverage on Fox news now due to the US 2016 elections than it did in the last 10 years.

[Sargerasraider]

Honest question, have we ever had a democratic government attempt socialist government? Virtually every time I hear about them, they are always authoritarian.

For what it's worth, the Maduro and Chavez before him are/were democratically elected leaders. There is no rule that says that a democratically elected leader cannot be authoritarian. Both enjoyed enormous public support for large parts of their tenures.

I do think from both an experiential and theoretical standpoint, that it is impossible to have a truly socialist system in the absence of an authoritarian government. If I have two pairs of shoes and choose not to give one to my neighbor, it takes force to necessitate that I do.

[Forogil]

But oil is a natural resource so let's take cars. Just cause the state owns the native car manufacturer it doesn't mean big companies, be it foreign or privately own from the same country, can't produce/sell cars in that country.

Except that it does when the state takes control of the production, and also the other companies - like car sellers - and the other car manufacturers; as part of socialism. However, you are right that car companies would compete against foreign ones - that's why nationalized car companies don't last long; unless the country stops import.

Let's pretend Bernie becomes president.

And he would be stuck with a congress unwilling to implement any of his ideas; so very little would change.

Grats, you part of an exclusive club. It's safe to assume i'm part of the majority here and i'm also assuming Venezuela got more coverage on Fox news now due to the US 2016 elections than it did in the last 10 years.

It's not safe to assume that - the US is not the entire world.