Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Legend has it that the land known as Monte Sacro -- or sacred mountain -- once belonged to Venezuela's 19th-century national hero, Simón Bolívar, the man who inspired Hugo Chávez to launch a socialist revolution.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Everything in this article I have heard liberals espouse. And this is showing what happens when you put it into practice. Why anyone would want to do things like that is beyond me, especially when you have a formally rich nation, which turned to socialism, in such a bad way.

#1 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-25 11:19 AM | Reply

Whether socialism succeeds of fails hinges almost solely on the willingness of enablers willing to create the conditions where the workers championed by socialists are able to succeed. The problem is, these enablers are more often than not viewed as enemies through a socialist lens, and are the primary target. In Venezuela, the enablers were driven out by the policies of Hugo Chavez. In Soviet Russia, they were imprisoned. Pol Pot simply killed them all.

#2 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-25 11:39 AM | Reply

Socialism has never succeeded anywhere.

#3 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-25 11:39 AM | Reply

"Socialism has never succeeded anywhere."

Not true.

I lived in Qatar for a year. The median household income of a Qatari citizen is ~$20k...per month. This is possible because the government (i.e the Emir, Tamim the Glorious) rigidly regulates all the wealth and wealth creating capacity with the country. This is based primarily on gas reserves, but the government also regulates every business, which by law must be "owned" by a Qatari citizen. Healthcare and education are also cost free and high quality

The Emir could keep all this wealth for him and his close associates. But he doesn't, choosing instead to share his wealth with the citizens of Qatar.

I should add, however, that Qatari citizens only make up around 11% of the countries population. And the other residents don't fare nearly as well.

#4 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-25 11:51 AM | Reply

There is a Chinese immigrant that I work with that tells of his years in Communist China.

He graduated high school, and was sent to a farm 1000 miles away from his family. The group that he worked with had a plot of land, they worked the land fighting with upstream groups/communes that used too much water, or didn't irrigate the spillway properly.

At the end of growing season the government took their share of the rice, anything left was "profit" to be eaten by them for the next year. This is the same thing that happened in the Ukraine, only the Russians took everything.

This went on for two years, many of the commune committed suicide, but not to worry more HS graduates were on their way, there was no end to their toil, it was literally hopelessness. There was no "plan" of leaving, going back to the city, they were stuck in the middle of rice paddies for as long as the system would stay afloat.

Then Mao died, two years later he was in a Chinese University, then immigrated to the US for a Phd in Mathematics.

Governments kill, absolute governments kill absolutely.

#5 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-25 11:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Socialism has never succeeded anywhere."
Not true.

Agreed, socialism succeeds when there is ample resource to be bought by the Capitalist countries.

Any socialist country today is backed by its resources. Ven could still be operational today if they didn't kick out the oil companies, but just taxed them an enormous amount.

The US does it properly, it taxes at the pump, its not different than nationalization of the resource, but you get the optimization of Capitalism with the revenue stream needed for socialist programs.

My issue with all socialism isn't the economics, its the transfer of power, and relying upon the benevolence of its leaders, eventually the leader isn't benevolent, and can't get tossed out.

#6 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-25 12:01 PM | Reply

Qatar is not socialist. They are an "oil monarchy". The sheik makes the money and distributes it to his serfs.

#7 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-06-25 12:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The sheik makes the money and distributes it to his serfs.
#7 | POSTED BY MUSTANG

A distinction without a difference to the DR left...

#8 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-25 12:12 PM | Reply

The sheik makes the money and distributes it to his serfs.
#7 | Posted by MUSTANG

How does he make money?

#9 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-25 01:57 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Most Socialist nations that have failed have been isolated, boycotted, embargoed by the west. The largest Socialist nation on Earth was very poor until we opened up our trade to them and now, we all know China is becoming very rich. 80% of the Chinese own their own homes, most without mortgages. Now we are returning to the bad old days of punishing any nation that decides they want to try Socialism after centuries of universal poverty for the vast majority of their population while the elites enjoyed lavish life styles. Del Vizo is actually a pretty good example of all of that.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-25 02:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#9 Why, I believe he does that using old fashioned capitalism, Mr. Sniper! He exchanges goods for money at a profit.

#11 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-06-25 02:15 PM | Reply

The largest Socialist nation on Earth was very poor until we opened up our trade to them and now, we all know China is becoming very rich.
#10 | POSTED BY DANNI

...an excerpt from Danni's forthcoming book, "Say Hello To My Little Friend, Capitalism"

#12 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-25 02:19 PM | Reply

#10 Except that China abandoned socialism in favor of something known as "state capitalism", wherein the private industry is allowed to exist to support the good of the state, and the major industries are partly or wholly owned by the state. Combined with the Chinese' xenophobia, militant expansionism, and state-endorsed racism, what you have is FASCISM.

#13 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-06-25 02:20 PM | Reply

"...an excerpt from Danni's forthcoming book, "Say Hello To My Little Friend, Capitalism"

They still have Socialist education, healthcare, etc. Capitalism is good for some things but terrible at other things. I won't defend the dictatorship of China, it's terrible in many ways but so too is our form of Capitalism. How many people lost everything they had in the Great Bush Recession while we bailed out Wall St? To the tune of trillions of dollars while ignoring the plight of formerly hardworking Ameicans who were just caught by the manipulations of that very same Wall St.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-25 02:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The largest Socialist nation on Earth was very poor until we opened up our capitalistic trade to them

There, fixed that for your Danni.

#15 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-25 02:39 PM | Reply

Hate to break it to all of you but... the USA is a Socialist Nation by any sane definition of socialism.

#16 | Posted by moder8 at 2019-06-25 02:47 PM | Reply

"Qatar is not socialist. They are an "oil monarchy". The sheik makes the money and distributes it to his serfs."

That's true...but what do you think socialism is? In this case, the means of production are regulated by a government dominated by a monarch. But the distribution of wealth in Qatar is as close to socialism as socialists could ever hope for...because the wealth producers and enablers are willing to distribute wealth in a manner unrelated to the economic value of those recieving the wealth.

#17 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-25 02:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Most Socialist nations that have failed have been isolated, boycotted, embargoed by the west."

Proving yet again that socialism cannot succeed without capitalism to keep it afloat.

#18 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-25 02:48 PM | Reply

"Hate to break it to all of you but... the USA is a Socialist Nation by any sane definition of socialism."

Any socialism in the US...or anywhere else for that matter...is wholly funded by capitalism.

#19 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-25 02:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

the USA is a Socialist Nation by any sane definition of socialism.

#16 | POSTED BY MODER8 AT 2019-06-25 02:47 PM | FLAG: Insane

#20 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-25 02:51 PM | Reply

Socialism has never succeeded anywhere.

#3 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, TANF, GI Bill, Veterans' Benefits, Unemployment Insurance, Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit...

#21 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2019-06-25 03:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Wildstar,

None of that is Socialism and it's all funded off the fruits of capitalism's labor.

#22 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-25 03:26 PM | Reply

None of that is Socialism and it's all funded off the fruits of capitalism's labor. fits my definition for socialism.
#22 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

FTFY.

Conservatives, they hate change. Even when it's the definition of a word.

#23 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-06-25 03:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"None of that is Socialism and it's all funded off the fruits of capitalism's labor."

The creation of wealth depends on labor whether you have a Capitalistic system or a totally Socialistic system. In truth, Capitalists don't create anything, they just profit from the efforts of the rest of us. Capitalism, as we have it here in the United States, where you can end up jobless, homeless, virtually starving to death when the Capital manipulators on Wall St. get too greedy is an awful system. A nation's economy should not be basically designed to allow the 1% to steal all the wealth, it should be designed to provide a good life for all of the nation's people.

#24 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-25 03:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

""None of that is Socialism and it's all funded off the fruits of capitalism's labor."

That was the view of the slave owners in the South.

#25 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-25 03:39 PM | Reply

Free schooling
Free medical care
Free roads and highways
Low cost housing for poor people
Government provided military and police protection

I could go on and on. The US is a socialist nation. Our government pays for almost everything. The fact that some of the money comes from taxes does not change that fact. There is not a nation on earth, socialist or otherwise where people don't pay some form of taxes. No essential services are provided entirely by the private sector in this nation.

#26 | Posted by moder8 at 2019-06-25 04:21 PM | Reply

Mod8,

You are defining it this way:

Socialism = Government

Words have meaning and that is NOT what Socialism means.

Here is the definition for Socialism:

so·cial·ism
/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/

noun

a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, Fabianism, syndicalism, consumer socialism, utopian socialism, welfarism; More

policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.

synonyms: leftism, Fabianism, syndicalism, consumer socialism, utopian socialism, welfarism; More

(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-25 04:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, TANF, GI Bill, Veterans' Benefits, Unemployment Insurance, Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit...
#21 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar

Social security, Medicare,GI Bill, Veterans' Benefits, Unemployment Insurance,

Are all earned benefits. I will never get out of SS that I have put in.

#28 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-25 04:59 PM | Reply

#26 | Posted by moder8

As a tax payer I have paid for every one on your list. You are a funny guy.

#29 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-25 05:01 PM | Reply

No. I am not defining socialism as = government. It is ironic you say that. It kind of proves the point that I was making. Namely, pretty much every nation on earth is socialist to some degree.

#30 | Posted by moder8 at 2019-06-25 07:55 PM | Reply

Only 10% of all investors profit from the US stock market, which is a rigged bubble which bursts regularly. But for the New Deal, a series of socialist programs 90% of our population would lose their housing and food every time the bubble bursts, as they once did.

US interventions, military and parliamentary coups have been relentless before and since in Latin America. Often they are preceded by outright disinformation in order to misrepresent events and demonize the target government. These interventions are immoral and illegal. The people hell bent on invasion like Bolton and Pompeo couldn't care less about the Venezuelan people, They just want to restore control of that oil to American companies.

Farming takes skill and luck with weather. Nulli implies that the landowner somehow kept the farm going when he was in charge. There might be a few examples of that, but you can be sure landholders with large farming tracts hire all the help they need and sit on their butts.

he level of disinformation about Venezuela has been widely exposed by political analysts like Dan Kovalik and media groups like Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), which prove the corporate media in the US have engaged in a full-scale marketing campaign for regime change in Venezuela. , Nulli swallows their BS hook line and sinker, yet unlike Venezuelan peasants, has no direct knowledge of life or events there.

Venezuala uses local co-ops to keep everyone fed that used to be starving under US rule. That is the basis for Maduro's survival while the USA wages all out economic warfare, as they are attempting to do against Iran as well. Hundreds of co-ops know everybody's name and deliver groceries to everyone weekly. To Nulli this is a violation of the sacred right to profiteer over someone else's pain and suffering.

Illegal sanctions still kill many people unnecessarily in Venezuela as we cruelly deprive them of basic medical supplies like insulin, IVs, vaccines, etc. we do it all not because we care about those people, we do it all because we want control of their oil. In Afghanistan we have given up hope of operating any oil pipeline but continue to maintain a presence in order to ensure that, like oil, opium and heroin are traded in dollars.

#31 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-25 08:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Namely, pretty much every nation on earth is socialist to some degree.

#30 | POSTED BY MODER8

Jesus H Christ. NO, that is not even REMOTELY true. You are ignorantly conflating socialism (an economic theory which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community) with social programs (which is not an economic theory whatsoever..merely a means by which government distributes money they got from taxes on capitalist returns).

#32 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-06-25 08:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

a means by which government distributes money they got from taxes

Yea, socialism.

You conservatives will eventually realize words can change meanings over generations. Your father's socialism isn't the same as the socialism of the young.

Once you let go of trying to control what words used to mean, you'll start to breath easier.

#33 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-06-25 08:47 PM | Reply

Mustang uses a definition of socialism found in many dictionaries, written by Capitalists, that seek to unfairly vilify Marx as they wage class warfare. NO ONE who wants to restore key elements of socialist New Deal laws which have been systematically decimated by the ruling class uses that meaning when promoting socialism. Even billionaire Bill Gates recognizes this and has said as much. If it is paid for with taxes and made available to all citizens it is a socialist program. Public schools are socialism, roads are socialism, libraries are socialism, the military and space program are socialism, dams and their associated power generating equipment are almost always socialism, sewage treatment plants are socialism. Putin and Xi are capitalists, yet rightie-tighties continue to deride them as communists. There aren't many communists left. In every country on earth there is a blend of social and private projects. Those things which are natural monopolies work better when they are managed in the best interests of the common good. Roads are like that because it doesn't make any sense to make two roads to everywhere and nobody does that. They belong in the public domain who share their costs. Any other definition of socialism is a deliberate mischaracterization promoted by capitalists that are seeking control of a natural monopoly so they can gouge people exorbitant fees for things which are necessary and only one supply is available.

#34 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-25 09:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If the Pentagon's Cyber Command has the capability to plant remote-controlled cyber weapons in the software of Russia's power grid computer systems, it certainly has the capability of using them to bring down the power grid of a Third World country like Venezuela. The US denied this, of course.

Such an act of sabotage and war has deadly consequences. When Venezuela was out of electricity, hospitals were without power, street lights no longer functioned, frail old people were left in darkness where they were at risk of deadly falls, people in multi-story apartment buildings were without elevators and forced to use dark stairwells to go to and from their apartments, and water, which relies on pumps to reach faucets, became scarce. The list of risks to life and health are endless. If the victims of such an attack were added up, I'm sure it would be staggering.

Given the depth of US involvement in the opposition movement against Maduro, which included creating and propping up the ludicrous self-proclaimed "legitimate President" Juan Guaidó (who self destructed in a fake "coup" attempt orchestrated by the US with help from the US media, when Guaidó was caught pretending to be in control of a "liberated" air force base when he was really with a handful of soldiers standing on a bridge outside the base), it is hard to believe that the US was not behind the grid collapse.

So how is that different than murder?

#35 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-25 09:52 PM | Reply

"The creation of wealth depends on labor whether you have a Capitalistic system or a totally Socialistic system."

Really?

Just labor? No land or capital required?

Is that what your learned in economics class?

#36 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 01:21 AM | Reply

"You conservatives will eventually realize words can change meanings over generations. Your father's socialism isn't the same as the socialism of the young."

Then let's call it fascism. What you're describing as socialism looks a lot more like what Mussolini rallied for in post WWI Italy, and what the National Socialists outlined in their 25 point plan. And economically, these systems were somewhat economically functional, despite not being backed by capitalism.

#37 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 01:29 AM | Reply

"So how is that different than murder?"

If Maduro is a murderer, aren't all socialists?

The US didn't create the conditions in VEN...Hugo Chavez did. Maduro simply built upon his good work.

Venezuela is what socialism looks like when capitalists choose not to support it.

#38 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 01:31 AM | Reply

Venezuela is what socialism looks like when capitalists choose not to support it.

#38 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Amen. But our resident "Socialism" cultists will blame everything else under the sun as the primary reason for this country's almost unprecedented decline.

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-26 01:34 AM | Reply

"There aren't many communists left."

That's because it was an abysmal failure when compared to, well, pretty much everything else. But the end-state desired by the communists has not changed in a huge number of people. They think they can still succeed where the USSR failed.

#40 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 01:36 AM | Reply

"Amen. But our resident "Socialism" cultists will blame everything else under the sun as the primary reason for this country's almost unprecedented decline."

Progressive economic ideas are very much faith-based. I have never once seen an left-leaning politician consider moves and counter moves resulting from the implementation of progressive economic policy. When Bernie ran in the last primary, his economic plan assumed no changes in economic behavior as a result of increased taxation and regulation. That's big. And you only make those types of assumptions if A) you're being disingenuous, or B) you truly believe that increasing taxes on a person will not affect their willingness to generate the income that is taxed.

#41 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 01:42 AM | Reply

Good GOD what a long article. Well-written too. Eh, trade-offs.

#42 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2019-06-26 04:31 AM | Reply

mads failure to acknowledge the impact of US sanctions, attempted assassinations of Chavez up to and possibly including giving him cancer and disrupting their electric grid has to this day not broken the peasants commitment the Venezuela's Bolivian revolution. US interference in the domestic affairs of Venezuela is immoral and illegal, driven by a desire to control oil. Guaidó is an American puppet,unknown and illegitimate to the Venezuelan people, who voted for Maduro in a majority exceeding 60%. The US is the greatest terrorist threat to lovers of democracy and peace on the planet earth. Far greater than any functioning dictator in this day and age. Trump is a dotard who is also laying siege on Iran while that State reinvigorates uranium concentration. It is not a coincidence that States the US targets have oil and opium. It is obvious to the most casual observer that Trump and his minions couldn't care less how many innocent people in Yemen the Saudis kill, just like they don't care how many innocent people they have to kill in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan they have to to get their way. But they have failed completely in every one of these depraved invasions.

#43 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-26 07:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"mads failure to acknowledge the impact of US sanctions, attempted assassinations of Chavez up to and possibly including giving him cancer and disrupting their electric grid has to this day not broken the peasants commitment the Venezuela's Bolivian revolution."

First, you're a Nutcase. Even if you do change your name. Second, absolutely none of that stuff would matter, even if it were true. Would the US fall apart if someone gave Trump cancer? Nope.

It would likely be beneficial to some in the US if all the little Venezuelan socialists developed cancer...but it would be far more beneficial to Venezuela.

#44 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 08:59 AM | Reply

Americans are required to ignore the truth and pretend that much of the suffering in Venezuela isn't being caused by the sanctions placed on their economy because our President decided to self-appoint and "interim President' ond overrule their elections. You are also required to ignore the probability that most of our elections are more corrupt than theirs are as was stated by Jimmy Carter after serving as an election inspector in Venezuela. You are also required to pretend that before Chavez the Venezuelan peasants were treated fairly by the mostly white elites who owned virtually everything and took all the profits from the oil industry, lived well and fled with their loot when Chavez took over. They are scattered all over S. Florida, living rich lives without working because they stole enough they can still afford to do so. I have met many of them, charming folks until they figure out you don't side with right wing elites.

#45 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:17 AM | Reply

"It would likely be beneficial to some in the US if all the little Venezuelan socialists developed cancer...but it would be far more beneficial to Venezuela."

That comment deserves a vacation, IMHO. Disgusting. You should be ashamed but you are incapable of shame.

#46 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:18 AM | Reply

"Progressive economic ideas are very much faith-based."

No, they are actually proven historically unlike Trickle Down, Voo Doo economics pushed by conservatives which have never worked anywhere and have spelled disaster wherever they were enacted.

#47 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:31 AM | Reply

"Americans are required to ignore the truth and pretend that much of the suffering in Venezuela isn't being caused by the sanctions placed on their economy because our President decided to self-appoint and "interim President' ond overrule their elections."

Yep.

Without capitalists to back up Venezuelan socialists, their vision will fail.

"You are also required to pretend that before Chavez the Venezuelan peasants were treated fairly by the mostly white elites who owned virtually everything and took all the profits from the oil industry, lived well and fled with their loot when Chavez took over."

And now the peasants are destitute and stomped on by police. The socialists basically turned Venezuela into Somalia. A failed state. And everyone who could leave, the ones the socialists needed in order to achieve their vision, their now your neighbors.

"That comment deserves a vacation, IMHO. Disgusting. You should be ashamed but you are incapable of shame."

Take it easy, Champ...it was in response to Nut's claim that the US may have given Chavez cancer...and that the loss of Chavez was bad for Venezuela. It wasn't.

#48 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 10:32 AM | Reply

"Second, absolutely none of that stuff would matter, even if it were true."

It is absolutely true and it absolutely does matter, unlike you.

#49 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:33 AM | Reply

"No, they are actually proven historically..."

Like in Venezuela?

Tell me, do you think the average Venezuelan who had been in the country in 1992 when Chavez first emerged...would they support him still?

#50 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-26 10:33 AM | Reply

"and that the loss of Chavez was bad for Venezuela. It wasn't."

Yeah, I'll take your word over the Venezualan peoples' opinion. Chavez was loved by the people of his country and he didn't care what right wing lunatics in America thought about him.

#51 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:34 AM | Reply

"Tell me, do you think the average Venezuelan who had been in the country in 1992 when Chavez first emerged...would they support him still?"

They do.

#52 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:35 AM | Reply

That is hardly the question madbomb. An equivalent question would be would the US collapse if everyone else in the world refused to trade with them? It is a fact that the USA attempted to assassinate Chavez. It is a fact that the USA has the capability to infect electric grids and Iranian centrifuges with disabling viruses. It is a fact that neither Venezuela or Iran have a Hi-Tech industry and depend on the outside world for many things. It's also a fact that the USA has never invaded another nuclear power.

#53 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-26 10:49 AM | Reply

It is also a fact that sanctions have never accomplished anything except to make the average citizens of their countries to suffer more. We are depriving Venezuelans of their right to commerce, medicines, food, even clean drinking water and somehow our misguided government thinks they are going to love Trump for it. Generally speaking when a big country punishes a small country the people unite in that small country against the bully nation, i.e. the U.S. Proud bullies of the world.

#54 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-26 10:53 AM | Reply

Next up rightie tighties insist all of socialist Japan, Europe and Scandinavia are nothing but a string of failed States. You ideologues are unable to grasp reality.

#55 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-26 11:33 AM | Reply

The sanctions on Venezuela are a very recent thing.

It's collapse occurred long before any sanctions and it's collapse is most directly tied to the state appropriating industries, which is known as Socialism.

Yes, that's right. By far, the single biggest factor in Venezuela's collapse was the implementation of Socialism.

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-26 11:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

It is also a fact that sanctions have never accomplished anything except to make the average citizens of their countries to suffer more. We are depriving Venezuelans of their right to commerce, medicines, food, even clean drinking water and somehow our misguided government thinks they are going to love Trump for it. Generally speaking when a big country punishes a small country the people unite in that small country against the bully nation, i.e. the U.S. Proud bullies of the world.

#54 | POSTED BY DANNI

We aren't depriving anything. Their economy collapsed on its own. Now, people are eating zoo animals and pet dogs just to survive. People are pilfering garbage dumpsters for scraps. Girls are prostituting themselves for their next meal. People are looting graves for trinkets to be sold at the black market. Currency inflation is rampant. It's a resource-rich country. The moment free markets are opened its economy will see a rapid turnaround.

#57 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-26 11:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Next up rightie tighties insist all of socialist Japan, Europe and Scandinavia are nothing but a string of failed States. You ideologues are unable to grasp reality.

#55 | POSTED BY BAYVIKING

Those are all Capitalist economies.

#58 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-26 11:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

--"There aren't many communists left."

The remaining ones are working and teaching on college campuses.

#59 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-26 11:51 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

It is also a fact that sanctions have never accomplished anything except to make the average citizens of their countries to suffer more.

There was never a sanction on the people, only high level Maduro officials and "corporations".
www.treasury.gov

"Tell me, do you think the average Venezuelan who had been in the country in 1992 when Chavez first emerged...would they support him still?"

If he was alive, I doubt this would have happened, so yes. As I have stated, socialism works while you have a benevolent dictators.

The problem with socialism is you can't guarantee it.

#60 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-26 11:53 AM | Reply

Those are all Capitalist economies.

Great! That should make them easier for us to emulate. :)

#61 | Posted by JOE at 2019-06-26 12:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It is a fact that the USA attempted to assassinate Chavez

I would ask for a source, but I dont have time for theories and innuendo.

#62 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-26 01:25 PM | Reply

"it's collapse is most directly tied to the state appropriating industries, which is known as Socialism."

That's called nationalization.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-26 02:49 PM | Reply

boaz automatically questions a well known fact but can't be bothered to spend 5 seconds googling for the answer:

www.globalresearch.ca

Must be a very lazy man.

Multiple failed attempts on Castro. The CIA operated a cocaine running ring which was even made into a movie recently. Gary Webb, who broke that story for the San Jose Mercury News was vilified and ostracized before supposedly committing suicide. CIA denials proved to be lies. The number of coups executed by the CIA South of our Border is staggering. The last one led to the capture of Assange.

If you can read, unlike the orange sloth, this would provide you an entertaining education:

www.amazon.com

#64 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-26 03:43 PM | Reply

"Next up rightie tighties insist all of socialist Japan, Europe and Scandinavia are nothing but a string of failed States. You ideologues are unable to grasp reality."

Any successes that you're calling socialism, in any of those countries, is wholly due to capitalism. Socialism fails without capitalist backing.

#65 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-27 01:27 AM | Reply

"They do."

They do?

You think that, while they're picking through trash to find something to eat or selling their ass, they're thinking "I'm sure glad that Hugo came along and rescued us from those filthy capitalists..."

#66 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-27 01:45 AM | Reply

"Yeah, I'll take your word over the Venezualan peoples' opinion. Chavez was loved by the people of his country and he didn't care what right wing lunatics in America thought about him."

Then why did so many move to Florida and become your neighbors?

#67 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-27 01:49 AM | Reply

"We are depriving Venezuelans of their right to commerce, medicines, food, even clean drinking water and somehow our misguided government thinks they are going to love Trump for it. Generally speaking when a big country punishes a small country the people unite in that small country against the bully nation, i.e. the U.S. Proud bullies of the world."

The US is the only country on the planet with medicine, food, and the ability to purify water?

Why would a capitalist country be signularly responsible for shoring up a socialist country? Why doesn't North Korea jump in and help out? Or maybe Cuba? Hell, why don't you hop on the next plane into Caracas.

#68 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-27 01:53 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The more I learned about Marx, the more I realized he and his theory were both frauds. How many times did he go to see the plight of the working poor? Once. Where did he do his research? In a library. Did he believe in the classless society? Not by a long shot, It took him 15 years to admit the knocked up his maid,(yea- he liked servants in his home), additionally he would bully and belittle actual leaders of worker's rights movements,(proto-socialists). He bathed once a year, so seldomly he had terrible skin problems because of the filth he carried on himself. He did work for news papers occasionally, but his income was primarily from money given him by Engels. He was living the life of an upper middle class bourgeoisie, and never liked to be around the proletariat. He could not manage his own money. Engels had to fish him out of serious debt several times.
The central tenet of his theory that falls flat is the belief that all the value added by the labor of the workers was theirs by right and simple justice. Yet he had no account for the capital it required to build a factory, the creativity and skill of the engineers and designers of the products, the transportation and distribution of products and the materials they were made from.
Hell, he wasn't even that original, As I remember there was a socialist revolution that failed in Paris years before he wrote the Communist Manifesto.

#69 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 05:21 AM | Reply

Rightie tighties confuse Capitalism with productivity. Landlords, Bankers, stock traders are not productive workers. They are paper shufflers who are capturing a disproportionate piece of our GDP. Every society depends soon the productive worker that generated real wealth to sustain itself. These people will work in a capitalist or socialist environment. Every country has a blend of socialist and capitalist policies. Without socialist policies most people will die homeless on the socialist streets which every country has. Just because a conservative makes the claim all socialist societies fail doesn't make it a fact. But a single real world example might support such a claim. Stalin and Mai were dictators using Marx ideology to prop themselves up.

#70 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-27 08:57 AM | Reply

#70 | Posted by bayviking, Actually most people in banking and finance work hard. Want to see inequality? The senior administrators of CHARITY hospitals make millions. One made 60 million last year. Japan had a good ideal back in the 50s. The CFOs and CEOs of a corporation can not make more than 20 times that of an entry level employees. Japan is much more hierarchical than the US, but they drew the line at financial return for work. Banking and finance provide a service, they rent money. That way you can live in a home that otherwise you could never afford while paying rent. You can buy a car, or any thing you need to work and support your family. The caveat is to remember that debt is slavery.

#71 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 09:28 AM | Reply

Landlords provide housing. Working for my dad I helped maintain 30 units at one time. The over head and risk is high. The amount of grunt work, IE, yard work, cleaning up vacancies, basic pluming and replacing windows and doors was a full time job.

#72 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 09:34 AM | Reply

Landlords collect rent while they are sleeping, eating and drinking. So do bankers. I have no doubt Bankers work long hours but their income is derived from control of the money supply. Every time they make a loan they create money from nothing in an entirely digital imaginary universe. The only they look an substantial money on is real estate, though they also lend for cars. This has nothing to do with real world wealth tied to factories, land, gold, steel, good or other things... I'm not suggesting they are unnecessary, just that they do not generate real new wealth yet paper shufflers if all kinds capture ever more disproportionate share of the economy without increasing the nations wealth. People who live off of others just by trading stock are even worse.

#73 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-27 10:41 AM | Reply

#73 | Posted by bayviking, Most people who invest in stocks take substantial risk. Pure speculators, IE, day traders take the most risk. Most loose money.

#74 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 12:20 PM | Reply

They take risks in an imaginary digital universe. 90% of investors lose money and 10% win consistently in a rigged market. Meanwhile, workers in the companies speculators own stocks in create real wealth in the real world making, growing and mining things if real value. Republicans gave decided to pay workers less sand tax them more because they only represent the interests of the 1%. This results in less real wealth being created and more imaginary wealth, even though both are measured in the same dollar units.

#75 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-27 01:21 PM | Reply

#73 | Posted by bayviking, Actually banks use a thing called Fractional Reserve Lending. The system works so long as the lender controls risk. This allows a bank to lend up to 10 times what they have on deposit. My credit score is 790+, I can buy a house if I desire with no down payment at 3% interest. I don't buy new cars, own a home that I could easily afford and generally carry no credit card debt. Control your money or money will control you.

#76 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 01:44 PM | Reply

Good for you sir. But you are delusional if you think Banks loan against what they have on deposit. Banks usually lend to "qualified borrowers", and whatever amount satisfies the loan and rules are borrowed from each other or the Federal Reserve every day. Thus Banks create money from nothing everytime they generate a loan.

#77 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-27 04:12 PM | Reply

#77 | Posted by bayviking That is the best ideal anyone has ever had. Loans are granted upon a borrower's credit history and ability to repay. Banks do not create money from nothing, they create if from expectations. That has been going on for at least 1000 years.

#78 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 05:24 PM | Reply

Until 2002 or so...I used the word "usually" because Countrywide and WaMu abandoned all such guidelines and rules which the Fed never bothered to enforce.

#79 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-27 06:50 PM | Reply

#79 | Posted by bayviking, Have you heard the banking term, "daisy chain" or "pass it up"? The way a daisy chain works is the old requirement for a bank to report a delinquent account on a loan after it went delinquent 90 days. Banks and S&Ls could trade loans, hold them for 89 days as an asset, then trade them with another firm. Pass, assume, claim, and repeat. These guys held billions in crap loans which on their book were listed as as assets. Carter let it happen, Reagan cleaned up that mess. Pass it up schemes are basically to send bad loans to larger and larger brokerage institutions as MBSs (Mortgage based securities) such as Freddy Mac or Salli Mae. It requires fraud to do this crap, and as far as I know, no one went to prison for stealing billions. I do remember vividly Barney Frank on the house banking committee saying there was no problem at these institutions a week before the crash.

#80 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 09:13 PM | Reply

"I do remember vividly Barney Frank on the house banking committee saying there was no problem at these institutions a week before the crash"

No you don't.

See, that's the problem with age and memory: Frank's speech was four years before the crash, and at a time where he was being lied to.

Please do some research, come back, and correct your inaccurate claim.

#81 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-27 09:27 PM | Reply

#81 | Posted by Danforth WRONG, Barney repeated the same lie for years many time. Up until the crash.

#82 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-27 09:38 PM | Reply

In July 2008, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson called Frank and told him the government would need to spend "billions of taxpayer dollars to backstop the institutions from catastrophic failure," according to Paulson's recent book. Frank, despite that conversation, appeared on national television two days later and said the companies were "fundamentally sound, not in danger of going under."
archive.boston.com

#83 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-27 10:33 PM | Reply

DNCDan? Anything?

#84 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-27 10:41 PM | Reply

"The more I learned about Marx, the more I realized he and his theory were both frauds."

Marx didn't really have a theory of his own...he simply borrowed Adam Smith's thoughts and added in a few of his own. It seems that Marx's biggest issue with the free market was that it was never going to provide him with what he felt the world owed him. Marx was born rich and married richer. He was the trust fund kid that the Occupiers and progressives scream about.

#85 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-28 02:48 AM | Reply

"Landlords collect rent while they are sleeping, eating and drinking. So do bankers."

How does a landlord collect rent on an unoccupied house? I want to know, because I have rental properties and at some point I may not have tenants to fill them. Similarly, how does a banker collect on a loan that the borrower refuses to pay? I should probably know that trick as well.

#86 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-28 02:52 AM | Reply

"DNCDan? Anything?"

Maybe he is doing so research...so he can come back and correct your inaccurate claim?

#87 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-28 02:53 AM | Reply

#86 | Posted by madbomber In real estate and cars those are secured loans- the collateral is the property. Which is why you should never pay more than 13% on a car loan, even if your credit rating is crap. Buy a house as a rental, you should never pay more than 4% interest. Otherwise you will loose money. Additionally you will have to pay insurance, and that is not cheap. You pay taxes on the property, then maintenance is a constant problem. Rent now the landlord runs a credit check and a criminal background check, which costs money. If the renter stops paying rent, they have to be 60 days behind before you can evict them. So you are looking at no revenue from that property for three months. Evicting someone costs about 275 around here. I doubt many landlords consider their property management effort free. Those big complexes make money, the mom and pop operations can get sunk under the overhead.

#88 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-28 07:03 AM | Reply

#85 | Posted by madbomber I read me some Adam Smith, and Marx- I honestly don't see much of a common theme between the two. Smith believed that economies were built on production of goods and services, and the free exchange, (voluntary), participation. Marx was into centralized control of the economy. Command economies.

#89 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-06-28 07:22 AM | Reply

"I honestly don't see much of a common theme between the two. Smith believed that economies were built on production of goods and services, and the free exchange, (voluntary), participation. Marx was into centralized control of the economy. Command economies."

Adam Smith introduced the labor theory or value, whereby the economic value of a good or service is determined by the total amount of "socially necessary labor" required to produce it, rather than by the use or pleasure its owner gets from it (demand) and its scarcity (supply).

en.wikipedia.org

Marx took it a step further by arguing that labor was the only factor of production that could add value, and therefor workers should be entitled to all surplus revenues recieved through the sale of a good.

There are several problems with this. First, it only addresses goods, and then only goods that behave as commodities. There is no distinction made for differentiated goods. To Marx, a pair of jeans purchased at Wal Mart would have the same value as a pair of Jeans produced by a high end designer, because the utilitarian value of both would be the same.

LTV also fails to address marginal utility or value. Consider pizza. If you're hungry, you buy a piece of pizza at a set cost. But as you satisfy your hunger, the amount of money you're willing to spend on a piece of Pizza declines. Which is why many retailers give a discount for the purchase of more than one item.

#90 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-28 08:18 AM | Reply

While I would agree the neoliberal era began under Carter, not Reagan, as many claim, Reagan kicked it up a notch. Blaming Presidents or Congressmen for failures that are clearly the legal responsibility of the Federal Reserve is disingenuous. Same with giving those same people cretveedit. When it comes to managing the economy, creating bubbles and recessions the Federal Reserve is the responsible organization. But that's not how the public perceives the situation.

#91 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-28 08:49 AM | Reply

Marx's philosophy evolved. Of course he began with Adam Smith and contributed new insights, particularly in how Capitalism commodities everything including human beings, which any decent system should protect from abuse.

#92 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-06-28 08:53 AM | Reply

"Marx's philosophy evolved."

Indeed. By the time he died, he was realizing that much of what he had preached was garbage.

"...particularly in how Capitalism commodities everything including human beings, which any decent system should protect from abuse."

Not really. Marx's position was that labor was the preeminent factor of production. It was more than OK to exploit land and capital. In fact that's really what Marxism was.

#93 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-06-28 02:34 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort