Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluerules009

Maduro giving away the wealth of his people to gain friends.

Recommended Posts

 

The success of @Akkula and @Boise fan socialist dreams.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-latin-america-47171879/venezuela-s-gold-diplomacy-gamble

As Venezuela’s oil industry has plummeted with sanctions and economic collapse, President Nicolas Maduro has turned to his country’s other mineral wealth: gold.

He’s used it to win allies and raise money. But the US, which has urged Mr Maduro to stand down, has warned those profiting from what it calls Venezuela’s illegitimate gold trade.

The BBC's Mark Lowen takes a look at Venezuela's gold diplomacy gamble.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

 

The success of @Akkula and @Boise fan socialist dreams.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-latin-america-47171879/venezuela-s-gold-diplomacy-gamble

As Venezuela’s oil industry has plummeted with sanctions and economic collapse, President Nicolas Maduro has turned to his country’s other mineral wealth: gold.

He’s used it to win allies and raise money. But the US, which has urged Mr Maduro to stand down, has warned those profiting from what it calls Venezuela’s illegitimate gold trade.

The BBC's Mark Lowen takes a look at Venezuela's gold diplomacy gamble.

If I'm a Socialist, then you're a Fascist.  So I guess you want to get rid of minorities/races you hate with a final solution, enslave women to breed children for Der Fatherland, and give corporations everything they need with the only string being they produce weapons of war to further your plans for world domination.

Why do you hate the World, Tool?  Why do you hate women and other races?

:hmmm:

Damn!  You are sexist, racist and want to give all power to corporations.  You also worship a group with world domination plans.

LIBERTARDS2.png.dc2acd92f3f40705503455917ca53323.png

Do you goose-step to the mailbox?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Boise fan said:

If I'm a Socialist, then you're a Fascist.  So I guess you want to get rid of minorities/races you hate with a final solution, enslave women to breed children for Der Fatherland, and give corporations everything they need with the only string being they produce weapons of war to further your plans for world domination.

Why do you hate the World, Tool?  Why do you hate women and other races?

:hmmm:

Damn!  You are sexist, racist and want to give all power to corporations.  You also worship a group with world domination plans.

LIBERTARDS2.png.dc2acd92f3f40705503455917ca53323.png

Do you goose-step to the mailbox?

...and the mysogist, racist card is played again.   You guys need to come up with an actual arguement sometime...but you dont have one.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maduro, and Chavez before him, syphoned off money from the oil production and did not allow one Bolivar to be spend on maintaining the petroleum infrastructure.  The money went mainly to cronies of Chavez and then Maduro   Where do you think all those rich Venezuelans who now live in Spain got their money?  

Just because a person declares themselves to be a communist or leftists does not mean they are in fact anything other than another tsar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

Maduro, and Chavez before him, syphoned off money from the oil production and did not allow one Bolivar to be spend on maintaining the petroleum infrastructure.  The money went mainly to cronies of Chavez and then Maduro   Where do you think all those rich Venezuelans who now live in Spain got their money?  

Just because a person declares themselves to be a communist or leftists does not mean they are in fact anything other than another tsar. 

They sure fixed the income inequality situation in Venezuela.   Everyone is equal now, they are all starving.  That is what socialism does for you.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

They sure fixed the income inequality situation in Venezuela.   Everyone is equal now, they are all starving.  That is what socialism does for you.

So, if someone like Chavez claims to be a socialist that is good enough for you.  Well, it is the easy way to look at things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sandiegopete said:

So, if someone like Chavez claims to be a socialist that is good enough for you.  Well, it is the easy way to look at things. 

He nationalized everything, that is what a socialist does.  He stole from the people, that is what a socialist does.  He destroyed his country, that is what a socialist does.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

He nationalized everything, that is what a socialist does.  He stole from the people, that is what a socialist does.  He destroyed his country, that is what a socialist does.

 

What Chavez did was take over the oil company for his personal use.  He distributed money from that company to his favored friends.  What happened in Venezuela was an individual takeover of the only significant non-agricultural company in the country.  What existed under Chavez was actually a form of corporatocracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

What Chavez did was take over the oil company for his personal use.  He distributed money from that company to his favored friends.  What happened in Venezuela was an individual takeover of the only significant non-agricultural company in the country.  What existed under Chavez was actually a form of corporatocracy.

In every communist country, there is and always has been an elite class of people who live in relative luxury separate from the squalor they force their subjects to live in. This happens in North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela... and it sure as hell happened in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe during the Cold War. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jackrabbit said:

...and the mysogist, racist card is played again.   You guys need to come up with an actual arguement sometime...but you dont have one.

Awesome.  Way to show how little you understood my post.  Does it make you feel special to point out how far over your head some things go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

In every communist country, there is and always has an elite class of people who live in relative luxury separate from the squalor they force their subjects to live in. This happens in North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela... and it sure as hell happened in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe during the Cold War. 

Just like in every corporatocracy there is an elite class of people who live in luxury separate from the squalor they force their subjects to live in.  

The Soviet Union was actually just an amalgamation of countries under the thumb of Russia.  The people who controlled Russia were not elected.  They ceased control of the country and the means of production and that was actually similar to a corporate takeover.  When the individuals took over the means of production they established Russia as a corporatocracy.  The individual citizens had no say in the decisions of the people who controlled the corporations.  So, Russia never had even a democratic socialist system.  In fact, the system in Russia today is quite similar to the system that existed during the Stalin era. 

What most people mean when they refer to socialism is democratic socialism where the populace does have a say in how the means of production are allocated.  The democratic socialists rely on market socialism to provide an efficient delivery of goods and services.  The problem with that under market socialism the allocations of the means of production is almost always responsive and not anticipatory. 

Under a corporatocracy the government is controlled by corporations with the inevitable result being one corporation for each significant production sector. The corporatocracists  rely on the corporations to provide efficient delivery of goods and services. The problem with that system is that the allocation of the means of production is almost always responsive and not anticipatory.  

For any economic system to sustain itself it must innovate and without competition the propensity to innovate is dulled.  

What I support is a system called democratic capitalism where the citizens establish general parameters for corporate operations based upon public safety, general welfare and competitive reward.  Under such a system a corporate entity would not be considered an individual with the same rights as a citizen.  The citizens who own the corporations have their individual rights.  There is no reason why they should have extra rights as corporations. 

  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

Just like in every corporatocracy there is an elite class of people who live in luxury separate from the squalor they force their subjects to live in.  

The United States is not a society or system that is controlled by corporations. Our economy is robust and diverse and just about anyone can start up a multitude of entity types if they're willing to put in the work and take on the risk. Are you implying that the United States or Venezuela are corporatocracies? If so it either reveals where you fall on the political spectrum or that you don’t know what a corporatocracy is.

13 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

The Soviet Union was actually just an amalgamation of countries under the thumb of Russia.  The people who controlled Russia were not elected.  They ceased control of the country and the means of production and that was actually similar to a corporate takeover.  When the individuals took over the means of production they established Russia as a corporatocracy.  The individual citizens had no say in the decisions of the people who controlled the corporations.  So, Russia never had even a democratic socialist system.  In fact, the system in Russia today is quite similar to the system that existed during the Stalin era. 

Did you learn economics and world history at SDSU? If so, every administrator and professor at that school should be fired. Of course the Soviet Union wasn't a democratic system, name for me one communist country that ever has been. It wasn't a corporatocracy either but rather a totalitarian socialized state where there was centralized administrative planning for the means of production, collective farming, and industrial manufacturing as well as all services, trades, and wages. 

13 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

What most people mean when they refer to socialism is democratic socialism where the populace does have a say in how the means of production are allocated.  The democratic socialists rely on market socialism to provide an efficient delivery of goods and services.  The problem with that under market socialism the allocations of the means of production is almost always responsive and not anticipatory. 

Yeah, the Nazis tried this so called market socialism in the 1930s. That approach can't sustain itself over time. 

13 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

Under a corporatocracy the government is controlled by corporations with the inevitable result being one corporation for each significant production sector. The corporatocracists  rely on the corporations to provide efficient delivery of goods and services. The problem with that system is that the allocation of the means of production is almost always responsive and not anticipatory.  

This is not the case in the United States, Venezuela, or any other country involved in this discussion. There is no Hudson Bay Company or Dutch West India Company controlling the government in any instance within the context of this thread.  

13 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

For any economic system to sustain itself it must innovate and without competition the propensity to innovate is dulled.  

Duh.

13 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

What I support is a system called democratic capitalism where the citizens establish general parameters for corporate operations based upon public safety, general welfare and competitive reward.  Under such a system a corporate entity would not be considered an individual with the same rights as a citizen.  The citizens who own the corporations have their individual rights.  There is no reason why they should have extra rights as corporations. 

Corporations should have the ability to voice the opinion and position of the individuals that they're comprised of. I recognize leftist nutters hate free speech but it's a fundamental component of a liberal society. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

The United States is not a society or system that is controlled by corporations. Our economy is robust and diverse and just about anyone can start up a multitude of entity types if they're willing to put in the work and take on the risk. Are you implying that the United States or Venezuela are corporatocracies? If so it either reveals where you fall on the political spectrum or that you don’t know what a corporatocracy is.

Did you learn economics and world history at SDSU? If so, every administrator and professor at that school should be fired. Of course the Soviet Union wasn't a democratic system, name for me one communist country that ever has been. It wasn't a corporatocracy either but rather a totalitarian socialized state where there was centralized administrative planning for the means of production, collective farming, and industrial manufacturing as well as all services, trades, and wages. 

Yeah, the Nazis tried this so called market socialism in the 1930s. That approach can't sustain itself over time. 

This is not the case in the United States, Venezuela, or any other country involved in this discussion. There is no Hudson Bay Company or Dutch West India Company controlling the government in any instance within the context of this thread.  

Duh.

Corporations should have the ability to voice the opinion and position of the individuals that they're comprised of. I recognize leftist nutters hate free speech but it's a fundamental component of a liberal society. 

That is about as ignorant a comment as has ever been posted here.  Since it is clear your level of education is that of a high school sophomore I see no reason to continue the discussion.   I will, however, give you this link so that you can read a simple description of what the U.S.S.R. really was:

https://www.britannica.com/place/Soviet-Union

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sandiegopete said:

That is about as ignorant a comment as has ever been posted here.  Since it is clear your level of education is that of a high school sophomore I see no reason to continue the discussion.   I will, however, give you this link so that you can read a simple description of what the U.S.S.R. really was:

https://www.britannica.com/place/Soviet-Union

 

From your own linked source, exactly what I said it was.

Quote

The political system was thus authoritarian and highly centralized, and this also applied to the economic system. The economic foundation of the U.S.S.R. was “Socialist ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange,” and the economy of the entire country was controlled by a series of five-year plans that set targets for all forms of production.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libertarians know as much about history as they do about pretty much anything else - virtually nothing.  I don't know where they get he BS they digest, but it's hilarious to read their twisted version of history, economics, hell anything!

Libertarians care about one thing only:  Themselves.  That's why so many are narcissists.  I think you actually have to be a narcissist to be a libertarian.  At least that's how they've been represented on this board.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boise fan said:

Libertarians know as much about history as they do about pretty much anything else - virtually nothing.  I don't know where they get he BS they digest, but it's hilarious to read their twisted version of history, economics, hell anything!

Libertarians care about one thing only:  Themselves.  That's why so many are narcissists.  I think you actually have to be a narcissist to be a libertarian.  At least that's how they've been represented on this board.

Jesus Comrade — you still have no clue what a libertarian even is. All you know is that you hate libertarians and want to gulag all of them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Jesus Comrade — you still have no clue what a libertarian even is. All you know is that you hate libertarians and want to gulag all of them. 

More nonsense from the rock.  Here is your song: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sandiegopete said:

More nonsense from the rock.  Here is your song: 

Hey Boris, I thought you were not wanting to continue the discussion! I guess we can go ahead and label you as dishonest, left, and dumb. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Hey Boris, I thought you were not wanting to continue the discussion! I guess we can go ahead and label you as dishonest, left, and dumb. 

Not surprising that a rock would not know what a discussion consists of. Rocks don't think or know anything.  Rocks are not even ore.  You rocks have no value. So, you rocks are just entitled to be dissed.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sandiegopete said:

Not surprising that a rock would not know what a discussion consists of. Rocks don't think or know anything.  Rocks are not even ore.  You rocks have no value. So, you rocks are just entitled to be dissed.

My rocks have been slapping your chin throughout this thread. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×