 |
| Love those self-imposed awards! |
Even though he got treatment in the universe’s finest medical system (according to Michael Moore), Cuba, he died. And here he thought he was invincible.
Chavez’s first attempt to gain power was in 1992, but his “coup” failed. In 1998 he was “elected” president in what the liberal establishment called a “fair and honest election.”
In 2002 the coup tables were turned and an attempt was made to throw him out of office. He made it through that coup, thinking there was now nothing that could prevent him from owning everything in Venezuela.
During his tenure, he took over the country’s oil resources, took money from the wealthy to fund government food programs, as well as to provide “free” housing, “free “education and various other “free” government redistribution activities.
None of that did anything to reduce poverty in Venezuela. How can that be? In the U.S., our president has told us that the top 1% of our wealthy (anyone earning over $250, $200 or is it $150 thousand) should help pay for poor people’s needs because that’s fair. Yet, in Venezuela, as in every other country that has tried it, it did not work.
Of course, we all know that if it had been handled by the right people, people like President BO (the amateur president), it would have worked.
Chavez loved Fidel Castro and wanted to be just like him. Only Chavez wanted to oversee and rule a socialist “United States of South America.”
He routinely jailed anybody who dared speak out against him and denounced and intimidated those who disagreed with him.
He preempted scheduled media programming to fill the airwaves with his talk of community and equality, while busying himself seizing property, giving it to members of his own family, most of whom are now billionaires.
I wonder whether the citizens of the United States of America are capable of learning any lessons about government in general and their government in particular when it comes to redistribution of wealth and government regulations.
I am very afraid not.
10 comments:
In 1998 he was “elected” president in what the liberal establishment called a “fair and honest election.”
The '98' election was overseen by international election monitors from around the world. It wasn't just the "liberal establishment" that concluded it was fair. In subseqent elections the monitors weren't allowed in. I haven't heard anyone defending that as fair and honest except one Dem congressman from N.Y., Serrano(?)
he took over the country’s oil resources
No one is advocating nationalizing the oil industry here. Maybe the U.S. should adopt what they do in Alaska. They charge oil rents and have created a permanent fund. Each resident shares in the revenue from their natural resources. Seems to make more sense than the taxpayers subsidizing oil co.s, then paying more to clean up their mess.
took money from the wealthy to fund government food programs, as well as to provide “free” housing, “free “education and various other “free” government redistribution activities.
Every industrialized nation on earth offers "free" primary education, subsidized housing, food assistance, etc. I realize it's not free, everyone contributes. There are countries that don't. We refer to them as Third World.
None of that did anything to reduce poverty in Venezuela.
Once again, Joe. You just say stuff with no regard to whether or not it's factual. Since 1998 UE dropped from 14.5% to 6.2%. GDP per capita rose from $4,105 to $10,801, extreme proverty went from 23.4% down to 8.5%. Facts, Joe, try 'em.
I wonder whether the citizens of the United States of America are capable of learning any lessons about government in general and their government in particular when it comes to redistribution of wealth and government regulations
We've been redistributing wealth for the last 35 years to the top 1%. We have the highest income and wealth inequality and the lowest income mobility than almost any OECD nation.
The United States has a higher degree of income inequality than almost any other developed country, according to the Gini Index. In fact, the most recent data compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows that Chile, Mexico, and Turkey are the only OECD member countries that rank higher than the US in terms of inequality. And it’s only getting worse
Source
None of what I wrote is an endorsement of Chavez. He was a tyrant and antisemite. Inflation and crime went way up under him. You set up a false choice between Chavez's Venezuela and an unregulated, free market, capitalist utopia that has never existed anywhere, anytime in the history of ever.
I wonder whether you will learn any lessons from reality. I doubt it.
Craig: "No one is advocating nationalizing the oil industry here."
Wrong. It HAS been advocated.
"We have the highest income and wealth inequality and the lowest income mobility than almost any OECD nation."
We have the highest level of opportunity of any country in the world.
In our country, a person can become president whether he is a haberdasher, an actor, a peanut farmer or a person of color.
We also have more people wanting to come TO this country than any other. They must see something about a Constitutional Democracy.
Income inequality is the result of opportunity. There is the opportunity for even poor people to become wealthy if they are willing to do what it takes to get there. A very small percentage of wealthy people got there through inheritance, a few more by illegal means, but the majority got there by their own sweat, hard work and ingenuity.
I don't want the US to be like Venezuela.
"The '98' election was overseen by international election monitors from around the world."
I'm totally unimpressed.
None of that did anything to reduce poverty in Venezuela.
-----
This needs citation, Joe.
Many sources believe that poverty has been reduced considerably.
Witness his support among the poor.
Did the man have serious faults, yes but much of your opposition occurs simply because you are told to hate Chavez without taking an objective position.
Ducky: "you are told to hate Chavez without taking an objective position."
No one has ever told me to hate Chavez.
We have the highest level of opportunity of any country in the world.
That may have been true at one time. Not any more.
Economic mobilty is another indicator and we're near the bottom of those rankings, too.
These things are quantifiable. You say things and have no idea if they're true. They just sound good.
Income inequality is the result of opportunity
You really are naive. Yeah, there's always income inequality. When the gap gets to the level it is now, it's the result of a system that is rigged. The rising tide is lifting only a few yachts. Historically, these levels are indications of oligarchies and failing economies.
It seems your whole philosophy is bulit on platitudes and ignoring what's right in front of your face if you bothered to look.
Craig: So it is your stance that a poor person has no hope? He cannot start in a company and work his way up? He cannot start and succeed in his own business?
You are flat out-and-out wrong.
It happens to many people every day.
Lose the hate and open your eyes.
BTW, if it's so bad here, why are you still here?
Jo Joe - "So it is your stance that a poor person has no hope? He cannot start in a company and work his way up? He cannot start and succeed in his own business?
You are flat out-and-out wrong.
It happens to many people every day."
I know this will get me banned (again). But I have to ask.
Tell me Joe Joe, if you are such a True Believer in your vision of American Equal Opportunity and Free Enterprise, if you truly believe that ANYONE can achieve greatness through hard work and a desire to succeed...why aren't you rich?
Are you "shiftless and lazy"? Not willing to work hard?
Let's take the acquisition of wealth out of the equation. Let's step it down to the bare minimum.
Why aren't you self sufficient? Why do you have to rely on tax payer subsidized health care to keep you not just alive, but mobile?
You worked in radio for many years. Why didn't you start your own radio station and grow it into a media empire? Why aren't you Rush Limbaugh?
You're a religious person. Why didn't you start a Mega Church and let your congregations donations pay for your multiple McMansion and tropical "Prayer Tower"?
If the American Dream is as real and as accessible as you, a white Christian male, seem to believe it is, then why haven't you been able to achieve it?
Why are me, Craig, Ducky, Fredd, GEC, Lisa and the rest of us subsidizing your healthcare?
And don't give me that "I paid into it" crap because you know that's not how it works. There is no "interest bearing lock box" that you paid in to for years and are now withdrawing from.
Seriously Jo Joe, if America is the Land of Opportunity you believe it to be, why are you sucking on the Medicare and Social Security teats?
Why are you not fabulously wealthy or at least able to care for yourself?
BUH BYE EVERYBODY! I'm sure a righteously indignant deletion and banning will be the "low information" path of least resistance to my questions.
XO: You might remember I wrote, "...even poor people to become wealthy if they are willing to do what it takes to get there."
Due to life choices, I am not willing to do what it takes to get there.
But I do work for a living.
What about you? Did you make your millions through hard work, or did you cheat the system.
Jo Joe - "Due to life choices, I am not willing to do what it takes to get there."
Due to your "life choices" every other American citizen, rich or poor, is subsidizing your "life choices".
I work paycheck to paycheck. I'm one lost paycheck away from total financial collapse and homelessness. I don't have a buffer. I have no savings. I have no retirement. I have no 401K.
But a percentage of every dollar I own pays for your "life choices" because you don't have enough confidence in the American Dream to do what it takes to achieve it for yourself.
Don't get me wrong. I think a higher percentage of all of our paychecks should go towards insuring that every citizen should be able to make "life choices" that don't involve getting rich.
I just want you to stop the hypocrisy and own up to the fact that you are a willing recipient of government welfare and would be dead without it.
Joe, you need to widen your news source so why not try the "Counterspin" podcast? It's very well done and this week's discussion of Chavez is pretty revealing.
They do point out that the NYT and WAPO (the lamestream media as you call them) never wrote a positive oped about Chavez and they quoted a few.
In one the author chastised Chavez for not "going big" with his oil money as they have in the Emirates. Rather, Chavez "squandered" his on local health clinics, government food banks and education. What a waste, huh? Positively un-Christian, eh Glenn?
And of course there were the attempted coups and the various problems any government encounters when they have something the U.S. wants and aren't playing ball.
It's a complicated story and you are free to investigate as you see fit but realize there is a cost to keeping your mind welded shut.
Post a Comment