Venezuela has a bread shortage. government decided bakers are problem. Arrests Bakers

[Deleted]

As sweden doesnt work anymore as propaganda target, the right now moves to Venezuela?

[Ed0o]

Hello! I am Venezuelan so I will try to help with the discussion of the matter in the most constructive way I can. I am too lazy to quote all the misinformation that I have seen here so I will just paraphrase it, I will also clear up some stuff that may be unclear.

-Bakers were using cheap state provided wheat to make luxury items: 100% true. How did they find out? well, if any of you have ever been to a bakery before you notice that most things are alike in size (even if not in shape), this is obviously done by weighting items. The "necessity" bread that the government wants weights 180 grammes, the bakers produced 140 grammes worth of bread and used the rest for pricier, non-regulated items. This is how they found out.

-Bakers are greedy bastards that just want to get rich off the misery of the Venezuelan people: not really. Regulation of prices in Venezuela are not regularly updated, so when the state tells you to sell X item for a set price and its value rises from that, then you are basically losing money every time you make a sell. Let me put a bit of context here:
The price of regulated items does not change gradually, for example, a litre of milk cost 36 local currency (Bolivares - BsF) in 2014, when they revised the price in 2016 it rose to 1800 BsF, over 1700% even with government subsidies and regulations!!!!
One year ago, the minimum wage was around 25.000 BsF per month, now it is close to 150.000, that is about 6 times (or 500%) increase in a year, which is, of course, ridiculous. The inflation in Venezuela is projected to be 1700% in 2017 alone, so you can't really blame somebody for trying to "overprice" something. What can a businessman do during that time? does he wait until the regulatory agency decides to change the price and has the place go down under? does he refuse to produce or sell it and then worsen the situation for Venezuelan people? does he go halfway and breaks the regulatory price in order to stay in business? it is not so black and white.

So bakers have to pay more to their employees, use electricity, water and resources (such as an oven that could be making non-regulated items for actual profit) to sell an item that actually counts as losses to them. Bakers are people too, with family, they need money as much as every other person to feed their kids, if their business goes bankrupt they will end up without a home. So what they did was they cut around 22% off the bread and used it to produce items that actually allows them to stay in business. If they refuse to produce the regulated item the business can be taken over by the state and the owner will get some form of money for the place, but the amount is always ridiculously low. I am not saying that what they did was right, but they were pushed into a corner by situations created by the very own government. Yes, something bad happened, but the president is making a huge deal out of it, as if that was the cause of all the problems that are happening in Venezuela, it is mostly a smokescreen and a scapegoat for the frustration of Venezuelan people. The government is partly to blame for these type of things happening.

TL;DR, The government is a father angry at his kid for cheating on a school test (which is a wrong act) but it is kind of his fault because he constantly tells his kid "if you don't get 100% marks all the time I will beat you and rape your mum".

PS: Some guy said that Venezuela was doomed to this no matter if it were capitalist, socialist, mixed, etc...that is a little bit bullshit, Venezuela was expanding its economy to include manufacturing and exporting other basic goods such as steel, gold and aluminium. But those companies were taken over by an incompetent and corrupt state that brought them to the ground, turning the country from a 75% oil dependent economy to a 97% one. I understand that this is not the fault of "socialism" or "capitalism" alone, nor do I want to be involved in this debate of which is the true definition of each, I am just trying to shine a light.

[Forogil]

I'm saying the concept of government ownership of means of production, that is fundamentally socialist.

And I am clearly stating that government ownership isn't an EXCLUSIVE property of socialism; it's just a part of the definition.
Same as four-leggedness isn't an exclusive property of dogs.

Thus government ownership doesn't make an economic system socialist; it's a necessary not sufficient requirement; and you cannot use some government ownership of a company to state that it is socialism.

Socialism has never been a path to communism.

If "many socialists" don't see socialism as a path towards communism and have no desire to pursue that path forward, then my statement is true.

Wrong - as everyone can see. "Never been" and "many don't see" are not the same.

[Ed0o]

Hello! I am Venezuelan so I will try to help with the discussion of the matter in the most constructive way I can. I am too lazy to quote all the misinformation that I have seen here so I will just paraphrase it, I will also clear up some stuff that may be unclear.

-Bakers were using cheap state provided wheat to make luxury items: 100% true. How did they find out? well, if any of you have ever been to a bakery before you notice that most things are alike in size, this is obviously done by weighting items. The "necessity" bread that the government wants weights 180 grammes, the bakers produced 140 grammes worth of bread and used the rest for pricier, non-regulated items. This is how they found out.

-Bakers are greedy bastards that just want to get rich off the misery of the Venezuelan people: not really. Regulation of prices in Venezuela are not regularly updated, so when the state tells you to sell X item for a set price and its value rises from that, then you are basically losing money every time you make a sell. Let me put a bit of context here:
The price of regulated items does not change gradually, for example, a litre of milk cost 36 local currency (Bolivares - BsF) in 2014, when they revised the price in 2016 it rose to 676 BsF, over 1700% even with government subsidies and regulations!!!!
One year ago, the minimum wage was around 25.000 local currency BsF per month, now it is close to 150.000, that is about 6 times (or 500%) increase in a year, which is, of course, ridiculous. The inflation in Venezuela is projected to be 1700% in 2017 alone, so you can't really blame somebody for trying to overprice something. What can a businessman do during that time? does he wait until the regulatory agency decides to change the price and has the place go down under? does he refuse to produce or sell it and then worsen the situation for Venezuelan people? does he go halfway and breaks the regulatory price in order to stay in business? it is not so black and white.

So bakers have to pay more to their employees, use electricity, water and resources (such as an oven that could be making non-regulated items for actual profit) to sell an item that actually counts as losses to them. Bakers are people too, with family, they need money as much as every other person to feed their kids, if their business goes bankrupt they will end up without a home. So what they did was they cut around 22% off the bread and used it to produce items that actually allows them to stay in business. If they refuse to produce the regulated item the business can be taken over by the state and the owner will get some form of money for the place, but the amount is always ridiculously low. I am not saying that what they did was right, but they were pushed into a corner by situations created by the very own government. Yes, something bad happened, but the president is making a huge deal out of it, as if that was the cause of all the problems that are happening in Venezuela, it is mostly a smokescreen and a scapegoat for the frustration of Venezuelan people. The government pushed the bakers (and other businesses) into these type of things.

TL;DR, The government is a father angry at his kid for cheating on a school test (which is a wrong act) but it is kind of his fault because he constantly tells his kid "if you don't get 100% marks all the time I will beat you and rape your mum".

PS: Some guy said that Venezuela was doomed to this no matter if it were capitalist, socialist, mixed, etc...that is a little bit bullshit, Venezuela was expanding its economy to include manufacturing and exporting other basic goods such as steel, gold and aluminium. But those companies were taken over by an incompetent and corrupt state that brought them to the ground, turning the country from a 75% oil dependent economy to a 97% one.

Sorry if I double (or triple) posted this...does the edit tool take a long time to work? or does someone has to approve the edit?

[Endus]

And I am clearly stating that government ownership isn't an EXCLUSIVE property of socialism; it's just a part of the definition.
Same as four-leggedness isn't an exclusive property of dogs.

Thus government ownership doesn't make an economic system socialist; it's a necessary not sufficient requirement; and you cannot use some government ownership of a company to state that it is socialism.

And you're wrong about that.

First, collective ownership outside of government ownership is still socialist. It isn't a "necessary" requirement at all.

Second, it certainly does mean that economic system includes socialist principles. It doesn't make it PURELY socialist, but literally nobody was arguing that.

[Yunru]

Hello! I am Venezuelan so I will try to help with the discussion of the matter in the most constructive way I can. I am too lazy to quote all the misinformation that I have seen here so I will just paraphrase it, I will also clear up some stuff that may be unclear.

+ wall of text

?[/I]

So it is propaganda after all. Goverment scruvs up, trys to rip-off people, they fight back by ignoring the law, they get punished and noted as a bad people.

If i was a busnis there, i would get the heck out of the country before its to late.

[Forogil]

And you're wrong about that.

First, collective ownership outside of government ownership is still socialist.

Perhaps for you. But commonly neither collective ownership nor government ownership are exclusively socialist. Thus you can have collective ownership without a hint of being socialist - and trying to hijack the word "socialist" to refer to that is impolite.

But what about you incorrectly stating that "socialism never been a path to communism" - when China officially sees itself in primitive socialism aiming for communism?

[Osmeric]

Venezuela is a whole nation cosplaying an Ayn Rand novel.

[Forogil]

Largely because social democrats aren't democratic socialists. Two different things, even if they share some similarities (like horses and dogs).

Glad that you discovered that.
Can you and others then stop using social democrats (who often don't want to be viewed as socialists) as examples of working socialism?

[Deleted]

Can you and others then stop using social democrats (who often don't want to be viewed as socialists) as examples of working socialism?

Isnt it the guys that voted trump into office who call everything outside of social darwinist capitalism socialism?

When a republican talks about welfare, health and pension insurance you often hear the word "socialism".

While those social safety mechanisms are social democrat, and work in social market economies like a charm.

[Scathbais]

Yeah, Venezuela's in a food crisis, the government was issuing flour to be used to make bread, and these bakers were instead using it to make luxury items they could sell illegally for higher profits. That's pretty shitty. This isn't a case where the bakers were using their own supplies to make croissants and the government arrested them for it.

Government controls are directly responsible for the food shortages, hyper inflation and the destruction of the Venezuelan economy. Bakers are being forced to sell bread at a loss, thus the efforts to make some actual profit.

The government is the problem in Venezuela and increased government control is only making everyone more miserable.

[NED funded]

I didn't.

There was a statement that "socialism can't work", and I responded by saying "it can work, here are examples". That doesn't mean ALL socialist systems will work, because that's a ludicrous claim when applied to ANY such system; as I said in an earlier post, we're all human, and humanity has a near-infinite capacity to fuck anything and everything up.



The sources provided did so. If you're just straight-up not going to read them, that's not my problem.

Fact is, I don't have to convince you. I just have to convince other people reading the thread.



You're flat-out wrong, here. Socialism does not imply "democratic ownership"; worker-owned factories and credit unions and co-operatives are all socialist models, without any governmental involvement. If you meant "democratic" in the sense that every owner gets a say, that's a position that applies to shareholders in a capitalist system, so it's even less relevant.

And it does exist in the USA and in Scandinavian countries, in both possible interpretations. That's just a straight-up falsehood. Want an example? Amtrak.

Yes; the government owning and running a business is socialism. That's literally part of the definition. We're back to "you don't understand what 'socialism' means".

I didn't.

There was a statement that "socialism can't work", and I responded by saying "it can work, here are examples". That doesn't mean ALL socialist systems will work, because that's a ludicrous claim when applied to ANY such system; as I said in an earlier post, we're all human, and humanity has a near-infinite capacity to fuck anything and everything up.



The sources provided did so. If you're just straight-up not going to read them, that's not my problem.

Fact is, I don't have to convince you. I just have to convince other people reading the thread.



You're flat-out wrong, here. Socialism does not imply "democratic ownership"; worker-owned factories and credit unions and co-operatives are all socialist models, without any governmental involvement. If you meant "democratic" in the sense that every owner gets a say, that's a position that applies to shareholders in a capitalist system, so it's even less relevant.

And it does exist in the USA and in Scandinavian countries, in both possible interpretations. That's just a straight-up falsehood. Want an example? Amtrak.

Yes; the government owning and running a business is socialism. That's literally part of the definition. We're back to "you don't understand what 'socialism' means".

1. The more complicated issue involves property ownership, and here there is no agreement. A major part of this is that China has property forms that are not seen anywhere else in the world. One of the larger parts of the Chinese economy, which used to get lots of publicity but has not received much lately, is what was called the Town and Village Enterprise (TVE) sector. This is the sector that lies between the remaining state-owned sector (from the center) and the fully privatized corporate capitalist sector of the Chinese economy. There are at least four different property forms in this mostly rural part of the Chinese economy, with them varying from being somewhat more publicly (if locally) owned to being more privately, although in some cases cooperatively so, owned. Much of this sector, which as more than a third of the whole economy, is very hard to characterize as being either socialist or capitalist, although clearly the Chinese like to consider it more socialist. Taken from the text. He even calls it tacky to call the chinese socialism.
2.
The other similar term is "social market economy," which Germany uses to label its system ("sozialmarktwirtschaft" in German). This is really a fully market capitalist system, but one with a large social safety net. Also taken from the text. If the german model is fully market capitalism then so is the US. Also democratic ownership does not need a goverment but for workers or the "people" to own the means of production.

[Zelk]

It's cute how people think socialism is only one thing and not a huge section of varying ideas

[The Stormbringer]

It's cute how people think socialism is only one thing and not a huge section of varying ideas

Or how socialism was the downfall of Venezuela rather than their ineptitude when it comes to investment and diversification of resources. Seriously, who the fuck things they can survive solely on ONE RESOURCE?

[Endus]

Perhaps for you. But commonly neither collective ownership nor government ownership are exclusively socialist.

Thus you can have collective ownership without a hint of being socialist - and trying to hijack the word "socialist" to refer to that is impolite.

Define for me what you mean by "exclusively socialist".

Because if you mean "exclusively exist in purely socialist systems", that's A> something I never said, and B> directly OPPOSED to what I've said, so it would be weird if that was what you were arguing.

And if you mean "exist in systems without any hint of socialism", then you're just wrong. They're definitively socialist in principle. The simplest definition of socialism is "collective ownership of the means of production", where "collective" also includes "the government, for the benefit of its people".

But what about you incorrectly stating that "socialism never been a path to communism" - when China officially sees itself in primitive socialism aiming for communism?

It's not "incorrect". Socialism itself is not a path towards anything. It is it's own thing, and is not designed to progress towards any particular further goal by nature.

It may be part of a particular group's path towards a communist goal, but it itself is not such, on its own merits.

Socialism is never a path to communism, by itself. It may be a stepping stone in some particular path, but that's not the same thing at all, and has nothing to do with socialism itself, regardless.

[Ed0o]

If i was a busnis there, i would get the heck out of the country before its to late.

Unfortunately, most big businesses such as airlines, manufacturing companies, oilfield service companies have already left. The risk of investment is too high, not to mention the huge debt the government has with most of them.

Venezuela is also facing huge problems with professionals (doctors, engineers, etc) emigrating to seek economic and physical safety, I am one of them.

[igualitarist]

Hello! I am Venezuelan so I will try to help with the discussion of the matter in the most constructive way I can. I am too lazy to quote all the misinformation that I have seen here so I will just paraphrase it, I will also clear up some stuff that may be unclear.

-Bakers were using cheap state provided wheat to make luxury items: 100% true. How did they find out? well, if any of you have ever been to a bakery before you notice that most things are alike in size, this is obviously done by weighting items. The "necessity" bread that the government wants weights 180 grammes, the bakers produced 140 grammes worth of bread and used the rest for pricier, non-regulated items. This is how they found out.

-Bakers are greedy bastards that just want to get rich off the misery of the Venezuelan people: not really. Regulation of prices in Venezuela are not regularly updated, so when the state tells you to sell X item for a set price and its value rises from that, then you are basically losing money every time you make a sell. Let me put a bit of context here:
The price of regulated items does not change gradually, for example, a litre of milk cost 36 local currency (Bolivares - BsF) in 2014, when they revised the price in 2016 it rose to 676 BsF, over 1700% even with government subsidies and regulations!!!!
One year ago, the minimum wage was around 25.000 local currency BsF per month, now it is close to 150.000, that is about 6 times (or 500%) increase in a year, which is, of course, ridiculous. The inflation in Venezuela is projected to be 1700% in 2017 alone, so you can't really blame somebody for trying to overprice something. What can a businessman do during that time? does he wait until the regulatory agency decides to change the price and has the place go down under? does he refuse to produce or sell it and then worsen the situation for Venezuelan people? does he go halfway and breaks the regulatory price in order to stay in business? it is not so black and white.

So bakers have to pay more to their employees, use electricity, water and resources (such as an oven that could be making non-regulated items for actual profit) to sell an item that actually counts as losses to them. Bakers are people too, with family, they need money as much as every other person to feed their kids, if their business goes bankrupt they will end up without a home. So what they did was they cut around 22% off the bread and used it to produce items that actually allows them to stay in business. If they refuse to produce the regulated item the business can be taken over by the state and the owner will get some form of money for the place, but the amount is always ridiculously low. I am not saying that what they did was right, but they were pushed into a corner by situations created by the very own government. Yes, something bad happened, but the president is making a huge deal out of it, as if that was the cause of all the problems that are happening in Venezuela, it is mostly a smokescreen and a scapegoat for the frustration of Venezuelan people. The government pushed the bakers (and other businesses) into these type of things.

TL;DR, The government is a father angry at his kid for cheating on a school test (which is a wrong act) but it is kind of his fault because he constantly tells his kid "if you don't get 100% marks all the time I will beat you and rape your mum".

PS: Some guy said that Venezuela was doomed to this no matter if it were capitalist, socialist, mixed, etc...that is a little bit bullshit, Venezuela was expanding its economy to include manufacturing and exporting other basic goods such as steel, gold and aluminium. But those companies were taken over by an incompetent and corrupt state that brought them to the ground, turning the country from a 75% oil dependent economy to a 97% one.

Sorry if I double (or triple) posted this...does the edit tool take a long time to work? or does someone has to approve the edit?

That was an amazing read and very elucidating. I feel bad for the venezuelan people (amazing people btw) and wish they can get rid of this nightmare as soon as possible.

Its too bad that, since this forum is mostly a left wing circle jerk, they will just ignore your post and pretend socialism has no fault on this disaster.

[DJ117]

where's sean penn and the rest of the film actors guild?

matt damon!!

[Adam Jensen]

Someone answer me this question. How exactly is venezuela not socialist?

There's more than one type of socialism, different levels of socialism.

Bernie Sanders "socialism" is more akin to Scandinavia, not Venezuela. Or the even worse example, the USSR.

[Sunseeker]

Or how socialism was the downfall of Venezuela rather than their ineptitude when it comes to investment and diversification of resources. Seriously, who the fuck things they can survive solely on ONE RESOURCE?

The State of Wyoming?