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

[Goatfish]

Looks like it's from this CNBC interview with him. Full context:

The bolded actually makes his claim seem more bizarre. Does he actually believe that the choice is between footwear selection and feeding kids?

It sounds more like he is bashing the rich for owning 23 different deodorants and 18 pairs of sneakers rather than taking a pay cut to give people a living wage. Because you know, that sounds far more in line with all of his other arguments, and fits better with the rest of the paragraph, instead of some strange straw-man people are throwing over something he said in an attempt to make him sound like a crude dictator who wants to take everyone's things and turn this country black and while.

[Sargerasraider]

It sounds more like he is bashing the rich for owning 23 different deodorants and 18 pairs of sneakers rather than taking a pay cut to give people a living wage. Because you know, that sounds far more in line with all of his other arguments, and fits better with the rest of the paragraph, instead of some strange straw-man people are throwing over something he said in an attempt to make him sound like a crude dictator who wants to take everyone's things and turn this country black and while.

No, he expressly was talking about having the -choice- of deodorants and sneakers. The quote, and Bernie's feelings, speak for themselves.

[purebalance]

Idiotic opinion piece....

Oh please, it's ok when it's coming from the left talking about something that's an opinion piece and they're lauded as the second coming, but when it's something you don't like it's "amg opinion piece". 90% of the leftist crap spouted on here is opinion and inaccurate.

[Deleted]

I find it harder and harder to tell what is actual concerns and valuable criticism of socialistic countries and ideologies (and it certainly as hell ain't that article) and what is essentially capitalistic protection/propaganda, trying to find anything that can convince people that any form of socialistic policies (or social democracy) is a factual detriment as well as any supports of any changes towards it.

[Dendrek]

Arguments like this only appeal to people who already think all forms of Socialism are evil. You know, stupid people. People who aren't stupid will never be swayed by this argument. You thinking you have a "gotcha!" on Socialism with this is proof you are incapable of a reasonable discussion on this issue because you're incapable of understanding what the actual issue is.

[shise]

You are ignorant.

Socialism is a kind of politic and Venezuela does not have it. What they have is modern communism.

You obviously have no idea what socialism is, so please, before you make a post, whatever it is about but related to politics, get some clues about the different politic areas, because there are a few.



Let me make it very very simple for you:



Communism................................................................................. ..Fascism

Socialism --- Centro left/Centro right --- Right side parties

In fact, you can not even say that fascism and communism are opposite poles because they are simply different.

So, by your logic, Trump is a fascist. That sounds dumb, right? so do you when you refer to Venezuela as socialist. They are not even in the same political line.

[nextormento]

Meaning every country under this system lives in usury. People work just so banks get money, which they created out of nothing. Usury is a form of slavery.

Usury is abusive, but clearly not slavery. The existence of debt has nothing to with with usury, least you think any interest at all on a loan is unfair.
What interests are fair are established by the state; that you personally find them unfair is at odds with we the people thinking their rates are fair. The simple resolution to this conundrum is you starting a revolution and maybe taking over the state, but at that point, I'm not sure "fair" is what we'd be debating here.

Money is not created out of nothing: it is created out of debt, which is an asset.
You'll note that in the process of exchanging labor for wages banks don't need to be involved.
Your impression of what money is, or how banks and monetary systems operate is wrong. But even if you took issue with banks, which is a fair thing to do, it's entirely unrelated to wages, or the labor market.

[Sargerasraider]

You are ignorant.

Socialism is a kind of politic and Venezuela does not have it. What they have is modern communism.

You obviously have no idea what socialism is, so please, before you make a post, whatever it is about but related to politics, get some clues about the different politic areas, because there are a few.



Let me make it very very simple for you:



Communism................................................................................. ..Fascism

Socialism --- Centro left/Centro right --- Right side parties

In fact, you can not even say that fascism and communism are opposite poles because they are simply different.

So, by your logic, Trump is a fascist. That sounds dumb, right? so do you when you refer to Venezuela as socialist. They are not even in the same political line.

So, when a government calls itself socialist, others call it socialist, and they do socialist things (i.e. nationalize industries, practice central economic planning, institute price controls, etc.), you are saying that it is dumb to call them socialist?

This makes complete sense! I'm sorry that it just goes right over our small minded heads!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[caervek]

So, when a government calls itself socialist, others call it socialist, and they do socialist things (i.e. nationalize industries, practice central economic planning, institute price controls, etc.), you are saying that it is dumb to call them socialist?

Depends, Nazi Germany = yes, USSR = yes, France = no.

[Sargerasraider]

Depends, Nazi Germany = yes, USSR = yes, France = no.

I don't quite understand what you mean by this.

[caervek]

I don't quite understand what you mean by this.

Just because a country calls itself socialist and others do too doesn't actually make them socialist. I.E the USSR had socialist in their name and were called socialist by other countries (this is why socialism is a bad word in the USA) but weren't really. The "Nazi" party was actually a nickname for "the National Socialist German Workers' Party" who despite their name were facists.

So as per your question, it would be dumb to call the USSR and Nazi Germany socialist, as they were really communist/fascist dictatorships masquerading as socialist states. Whereas France right now is actually a socialist country, it just isn't mentioned that much, well because the western media put so much effort into demonising socialism during the cold war.

[shise]

So, when a government calls itself socialist, others call it socialist, and they do socialist things (i.e. nationalize industries, practice central economic planning, institute price controls, etc.), you are saying that it is dumb to call them socialist?

This makes complete sense! I'm sorry that it just goes right over our small minded heads!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

They are not socialists and none calls them such a thing. Only closed minded right wing people who can not think out of their ideology so they like to consider everything that is not like their ideals as socialism.

Social policy is the best politic model we have ever achieved, denying it shows a degree of ignorance.

[VCrash]

They are not socialists and none calls them such a thing. Only closed minded right wing people who can not think out of their ideology so they like to consider everything that is not like their ideals as socialism.

Social policy is the best politic model we have ever achieved, denying it shows a degree of ignorance.

Honestly, this is so much pot calling kettle black, its laughable.

To your average left wing SJW, everything outside of extreme Socialism is far right and capitalist.

Given the limited amount of resources the Earth has, i think at some stage it's going to be sensible for the human race to not breed like rabbits.

Which kind of throws a spanner in the works of your social policies.

Truly, only the ignorant would close their mind up and suggest one policy is best for all scenarios.

[Fathr]

They are not socialists and none calls them such a thing. Only closed minded right wing people who can not think out of their ideology so they like to consider everything that is not like their ideals as socialism.

Social policy is the best politic model we have ever achieved, denying it shows a degree of ignorance.

If it isn't socialisme then what would you define it as ?

Here's is an article from a MARXIST news site:

http://www.marxist.dk/artikler/teori...ocialisme.html

Here is another one from the most socialist newspaper we have in my country:

https://www.information.dk/debat/201...istisk-fadaese

The title is: Venezuela - A socialist blunder.

So stop beign daft and trolling. Every media knows it is a socialistic failed state. Hell even the socialists knows this.

[Independent voter]

Lawmakers from Venezuela's ruling Socialist party filed treason charges Wednesday against a prominent billionaire businessman for allegedly seeking an IMF bailout for the recession-ravaged oil giant. Lorenzo Mendoza, head of Venezuelan food and beverage empire Empresas Polar, could face decades in prison if convicted of the charges, which include conspiracy and "usurpation of state functions."
The charges were filed with prosecutors by 101 lawmakers from the 167-seat National Assembly, said deputy Pedro Carreno of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), as he presented the document.
The complaint is based on a leaked phone call between Mendoza and Venezuelan economist Ricardo Hausmann that was aired a week ago on a TV program hosted by the speaker of the National Assembly, Diosdado Cabello.

[Shadowferal]

The title is: Venezuela - A socialist blunder.

So stop beign daft and trolling. Every media knows it is a socialistic failed state. Hell even the socialists knows this.

And of course the socialist successes are all in Europe.

[Sargerasraider]

They are not socialists and none calls them such a thing. Only closed minded right wing people who can not think out of their ideology so they like to consider everything that is not like their ideals as socialism.

Social policy is the best politic model we have ever achieved, denying it shows a degree of ignorance.

I'm sure you're joking because you really can't be this dense.

Just because a country calls itself socialist and others do too doesn't actually make them socialist. I.E the USSR had socialist in their name and were called socialist by other countries (this is why socialism is a bad word in the USA) but weren't really. The "Nazi" party was actually a nickname for "the National Socialist German Workers' Party" who despite their name were facists.

So as per your question, it would be dumb to call the USSR and Nazi Germany socialist, as they were really communist/fascist dictatorships masquerading as socialist states. Whereas France right now is actually a socialist country, it just isn't mentioned that much, well because the western media put so much effort into demonising socialism during the cold war.

Could you define for me what you think socialism is, so that we can at least be on some semblance of the same page? You seem to want to cite countries which are largely capitalist (i.e. means of production / business) are privately held (albeit strongly regulated) as socialism. On the other hand, you ignore examples of authoritarian societies which have seized the means of production as "not socialist". I love your attempt to ignore and brush away these trivialities, but it makes no logical sense.

[Deleted]

Can't they use money to wipe?

Seems to be worth less than toilet paper in Venezuala

[Shadowferal]

I laugh at the states that cry for federal help, while they hypocritically criticize socialist programs that doles them federal checks.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Well authoritarian socialism certainly set the stage for the collapse.

- - - Updated - - -



Number 2 is key.

Govt was given enough power that they could make that happen. Govts under a socialist style economic system are typically empowered enough to allow cronyism to run rampant through govt enablement.

Venezuela is a fine example of why I'm not a fan of giving govts more and more power. Bernie is just a older less entertaining version of maduro

There's cronyism in most government systems, and we see the worst of it in systems without socialism. You're not describing something that's unique to socialism. While a somewhat independent factor, we actually see regulations in place that prevent this kind of cronyism in systems that seek to protect the people the most through socialism.

- - - Updated - - -

I love how you, and those who agree with you, totally ignore that this same story has occurred again and again.

Giving the government enough power to nationalize business and plan the economy absolutely encourages corruption and cronyism. Entrusting a few people to plan the economy will cause the country to fail when those people fail.

Yes, countries with a largely capitalist system (including almost ALL of Europe) have recessions and even depressions from time to time. You do not frequently see this kind of disaster that you now see in Venezuela and other countries which have given a good try at real socialism.

I'm sure that you think that if we just had that system here, we'd have absolute angels in control. I'm sure that, even if given power, they would be totally immune to corruption as they nationalize industry. I'm sure they would be excellent at planning the economy. Einstein's insanity quote comes to mind.

Lol. Venezuela is a country that too much if its own country's economy on the weight of a small number of commodities that failed. Then a system, that was designed to help the poor in their time of need, received a mass influx of people needing to go on it. What's you're seeing is the result of commodities crashing from unchecked "free market" son.