Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

I bet many venezuelans would be ok with becoming a US puppet, because US puppets usualy have something to eat.

idk about that. Beef consumption is a good metric to whether people are eating or now, because beef is a luxury item for poor countries. If it's true that Venezuelans are starving, then beef consumption should be dropping, but it's going up:
http://beef2live.com/story-venezuela-beef-production-imports-consumption-1960-2015-0-120921

The peak was 2008, it then dropped hard in 2009 (global financial crisis), but every year 2009-2015 it's grown. So the idea that they have a worse food situation than 2008-2009 is not born out by consumption figures, which are only increasing during the "crisis" period. Right now, Venezuelans consume about 50% more beef than 1999 before Chavez.

Here's the USDA noting that American food exports to Venezuela are booming:
https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/venezuela-prospects-us-agricultural-exports

They blame it on lower production because of "socialism". But in fact ... look at the beef figures, almost all the increase is from higher demand. And instead of "socialism" being to blame for the dip in production from 2012-2015, what about the freaking drought?
venezuelanalysis.com/news/11822

I mean seriously, there's a drought there that's lasted for 4 years, maybe that's got more to do with lower beef production that "socialism", and food consumption has skyrocketed in Venezuela since before the Chavez years. These two factors have driven imports. There's no way the USDA isn't aware of this. They tell you it's a good export market, but the reasons they give for that being true are plain bullshit. Don't always trust the "reasons" that government agencies and the media give for things happening.

[Teneb]

I searched english-language news sites for this but only found one. Venezuela's Supreme Court, which is pro-Maduro, has stripped all power from Venezuela's congress, dominated by the opposition.. In portuguese.

This is big. Really big. Maduro is making his move to become South America's Glorious Leader.

It's sad, even. Venezuela was doing reasonably well before Chavez went and died. I absolutely cannot fathom why he would even make a man like Maduro his second in command. But he did, and Maduro is proceeding to completely fuck his country.


Also more shit going down in Paraguay.

[TempAcc]

Chavez died before the biggest shit could hit the fan. Also, Maduro's government has managed to somehow mismanage venezuelan's oil reserves so damn bad that their production has plummeted REALLY HARD in the last year.

After legalizing state sponsored slavery, its really no surprise he'd go this far, specially after the congress somehow gained enough balls to challenge him when the starving people begged them and protested for it. Chavez knew where venezuela was going, but he prob didn't think Maduro was this incompetent (keep in mind i only said incompetent, not evil, I have no reason to believe that chavez wouldn't also go this far, given the same circunstances. Chavez knew that Maduro was a fanatical egomaniac trash, and was ok with it since he was also an egomaniacal trash himself, and knew maduro would do everything to preserve his ideas).

[smjjames]

I searched english-language news sites for this but only found one. Venezuela's Supreme Court, which is pro-Maduro, has stripped all power from Venezuela's congress, dominated by the opposition.. In portuguese.

This is big. Really big. Maduro is making his move to become South America's Glorious Leader.

It's sad, even. Venezuela was doing reasonably well before Chavez went and died. I absolutely cannot fathom why he would even make a man like Maduro his second in command. But he did, and Maduro is proceeding to completely fuck his country.


Also more shit going down in Paraguay.

I suppose the closest analogy to Maduro would be Stalin, he basically worked his way up the chain of command and became Lenins second. Which would explain how someone as terrible as Maduro got to become Chavez's second in command.

[Reelya]

Chavez did ok, inflation was actually lower every year during his reign than before it, and the economy tripled in size.

But one of the big things they need to do has actually been political unpalatable for decades, not just during the Chavez era: they need to abolish the fuel subsidies. The total costs of the fuel subsidy is $US12 billion, which is about 20% of their entire government spending.

So while there are a number of costly economic stimulus packages that distort pricing, the most costly and damaging ones actually predate socialism by several decades. Things like health clinics for the poor and other social spending are often claimed to be causing budget problems, but in fact those spend a pittance compared to the gasoline subsidy. There are also the food price controls that people say are the main problem now, but I doubt they spend anything close to $12 billion a year propping those up.

There were those massive protests and riots in 1989 when a right-wing government tried to abolish the fuel subsidies. The crackdown lead to a death-toll estimated in the low thousands. Maduro has recently talked about removing the fuel subsidies, but it will be interesting to see whether the opposition goes along with that. It's one of the biggest economic reforms that's been needed in Venezuela for 40 years, but nobody has gotten close to passing that without a massive death toll.

[TempAcc]

but it will be interesting to see whether the congress goes along with that.

What is this congress you talk about?

[Reelya]

Without other evidence say they stripped all power from the National Assembly is not necessarily factual. Headlines in this matter tend to by hyped:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-39449494

On Wednesday, the court gave President Maduro the authority to create joint oil ventures without congressional approval, by-passing the assembly.

The opposition says the court is controlled by the government.

It says the court's move is an attempt to muzzle the opposition during a mounting economic crisis in the oil-rich country.

For example the headline here says the court is "taking over" but the details only mention this one specific type of ruling that no longer needs congressional approval, and that is the entire source of the claim that the courts "took over" the assembly. It doesn't actually sound any different to criticisms of Obama for the courts ruling that his executive orders are valid and can't be overturned by congress. Without more evidence you can't conclude whether the headlines are entirely accurate or journalistic hype. I can cite dozens of example of hype out of Venezeula over the last two decades so it seems like you should always take things with a grain of salt.

In an emergency session, lawmakers said there had been a "rupture of the constitutional order".

... This would be the same opposition who took power in a coup in 2002 and cheered as they announced the abolition of the constution. It was short-lived but the 2002 opposition government was whatever they're saying about Maduro but to the power of 10.

[Teneb]

Quoting the supreme court, my own translation: "It is warned that, as long as the contempt and invalidity of the proceedings of the National Assembly persist, this Constitutional Chamber will ensure that parliamentary powers are exercised directly by this room or by the body it has available to oversee the rule of law". (it's in one of the links I posted)

It pretty much is saying: Until you do what we want, you have no power.

That authority to create joint oil ventures was contested by some members of the congress, who were... I don't know the english term for it. Removed from their functions, I guess. They refused, leading to this.

[Reelya]

Well the claims are specifically that Congress has been ignoring court rulings for some time now. The courts do in fact have the authority to interpret the constitution, which is standard separation of powers.

Since the current constitution was written in 1999 during the Chavez years (it was written by elected national delegates then ratified by a referedum), and the opposition have always claimed to hate that constitution and tried to have it overturned more than once, I'd be interested to know what the actual legal details are here. They're suddenly defending Chavez's constitution now?

[Teneb]

Well the claims are specifically that Congress has been ignoring court rulings for some time now. The courts do in fact have the authority to interpret the constitution.

Since the current constitution was written in 1999 during the Chavez years (it was written by elected national delegates then ratified by a referedum), and the opposition have always claimed to hate that constitution and tried to have it overturned more than once, I'd be interested to know what the actual legal details are here. They're suddenly defending Chavez's constitution now?

No idea.

Also, it's funny in a sad way that no one commented on there being a fistfight in otherguay's congress and one of the congressmen declaring himself president of the body.

[smjjames]

Quoting the supreme court, my own translation: "It is warned that, as long as the contempt and invalidity of the proceedings of the National Assembly persist, this Constitutional Chamber will ensure that parliamentary powers are exercised directly by this room or by the body it has available to oversee the rule of law". (it's in one of the links I posted)

It pretty much is saying: Until you do what we want, you have no power.

That authority to create joint oil ventures was contested by some members of the congress, who were... I don't know the english term for it. Removed from their functions, I guess. They refused, leading to this.

Neutered? Probably not the word you're looking for, but seems to work

[Reelya]

Also another thing is they hint at opposition leaders arrested for no reason at all. What they don't tell you is that those are anti-corruption cases and both sides have seen major politicians charged with crimes. The corporate news selectively reports on right-wing arrests, makes no mention of left-wing arrests, and then gets all hand-wavy about what the actual charges involved, merely insinuating that it's political motivated. It's implied guilt by omission, which is bad journalism.

For example, this socialist party mayor was arrested for corruption in 2013
https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10093
The story also mentions three police officers and two state-owned bank officials arrested for corruption. Making the total government-side officials mentioned as arrested in this story as 6.

Another socialist mayor was arrested in 2015. At first I thought they were the same story, but nope. This happened just before the parliamentary elections. And the supporters of the (popular) arrested mayor promised to boycott the 2015 parliamentary elections. Might have had some connection to the outcome.
https://nsnbc.me/2015/10/01/popular-chavista-mayor-arrested-on-charges-of-corruption/

13 police officials (detective rank and higher) arrested for corruption:
www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Venezuela-Arrests-13-Police-Officials-over-Corruption-Charges-20150115-0004.html

One of their own state oil company executives arrested for corruption. They arrested an oil ministry official, his sister, a week before on related charges.
www.reuters.com/article/venezuela-corruption-idUSL1N0VC1QI20150202

And those are only from a few minutes of googling. Those stories add up to 22 government-appointed or socialist aligned figures arrested for corruption, just during the Maduro years. So articles that only mention vague allegations of opposition arrests are not giving you the full picture. Politicians of both sides face similar scrutiny.

[TempAcc]

Surely arrest under Maduro's regime result only of the government interest in serving its people and are in no way connected to any other interests, aye?

The latest protests and political movements working towards removing maduro from his term have come from all sides, specially now food (beef, bread, vegetables and fruits) imports have plummeted hard since late 2016, and production is so inefficient that employees are being forced to work the fields. There are socialists that want Maduro out, this is nothing new. Beef imports have risen in venezuela for the last 10 years because production was gradually decaying, but the constant spenditure in food imports weren't sustainable.

Those glorious spenditures on public health? It was sure fun while money lasted, because public health doesnt seem to be a thing anymore.

The food situation has kind of become a little bit ridiculous as of late, since the government has full control of grain usage, mandating that the bigger part of use be used in bread production, which is, incidentaly, a big source of taxation. Since bakers don't have money to handle the taxation effects on their revenue from selling bread, they decided to sell brownies instead, which aren't as heavily taxed, but were arrested for it. You can only eat the food the government wants you to eat, I guess, specially if the government feels like taxing it.

[Reelya]

I provided independent data on beef, it's at the top of this page and the data is beef industry data, not from any politically connected source. Almost all the increase in beef imports is related to higher consumption, not decreased production. There was a dip in beef production after 2012, but it just happens by coincidence to exactly coincide with reports of a once-in-a-century prolonged drought that's still ongoing.

e.g. beef consumption in 1999 was 392000 tons. It was 590000 tons in 2015.

Production in 2012 was about the same as in 1999, but dipped strongly in 2013+, the time period that other sites are reporting on there being a massive drought.

So, take actual numerical data, and other related events into consideration when assessing how truthful other articles are being about causation. I mean, if they're not mentioning the drought but telling you about decreases in agricultural output during the drought period they're clearly lying their asses off at you. For example here some context on the drought:

http://www.businessinsider.com/drought-floods-and-shortages-in-venezuela-2016-4/?r=AU&IR=T
This is a government minister inspecting the nation's largest dam in 2016:


https://widerimage.reuters.com/story/drought-hit-venezuela-waits-for-rain

Drought has turned parts of the area behind Venezuela's Guri dam, one of the world's biggest, into a desert

Yeah, this drought turned one of the world's biggest dams into a desert.

https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/11822

Venezuela Faces its Worst Drought in 47 Years

For the first time since 1969 Venezuela has seen three consecutive years of drought, bringing nearly all primary reservoirs across the country to critically low levels.

Socialists can promise a few things but nobody can force rain to fall. And agriculture sort of relies on that. The main things causing this problem are in fact nothing to do with government policies whatsoever, and they're so clearly out of government control that the media that tells you "coz socialism" can only make that argument by completely divorcing their articles from plain physical facts.

[smjjames]

Surely arrest under Maduro's regime result only of the government interest in serving its people and are in no way connected to any other interests, aye?

The latest protests and political movements working towards removing maduro from his term have come from all sides, specially now food (beef, bread, vegetables and fruits) imports have plummeted hard since late 2016, and production is so inefficient that employees are being forced to work the fields. There are socialists that want Maduro out, this is nothing new. Beef imports have risen in venezuela for the last 10 years because production was gradually decaying, but the constant spenditure in food imports weren't sustainable.

Those glorious spenditures on public health? It was sure fun while money lasted, because public health doesnt seem to be a thing anymore.

The food situation has kind of become a little bit ridiculous as of late, since the government has full control of grain usage, mandating that the bigger part of use be used in bread production, which is, incidentaly, a big source of taxation. Since bakers don't have money to handle the taxation effects on their revenue from selling bread, they decided to sell brownies instead, which aren't as heavily taxed, but were arrested for it. You can only eat the food the government wants you to eat, I guess, specially if the government feels like taxing it.

I'm a bit confused. The bakers are now mostly making brownies and other non-bread stuff instead of bread because they don't want to be taxed? Brownies aren't a food staple......

Also, wasn't overtaxation of bread one of the underlying causes behind the French Revolution?