Chavez orders National Guard to stop price rises

[Synicus Maximus]

Source: Reuters

CARACAS, Jan 10 (Reuters) - Venezuela's Hugo Chavez ordered soldiers to seek out businesses that raise prices after a sharp devaluation of the bolivar currency last week, saying he will expropriate firms that engage in price gouging.

Chavez also created a $1 billion fund to jump-start the recession-hit, oil-reliant economy before elections in September when the opposition hopes to strip him of a parliamentary majority.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1012995920100110?type=usDollarRpt

[msongs]

1. he can order nat'l guard to shoot all th canned food that's over priced nt

[hughee99]

50. He hates our cans!

[unkachuck]

2. Hugo's in charge in Venezuela...

....in America, our politicians work solely for the corporations....we get fucked....the Venezuelans get protected....

[TomCADem]

3. I Don't Like Inflation Either, But Using Soldiers To Stop Inflation?

That strikes me as a tad extreme. It is like Richard Nixon's wage and price freeze on steroids.

[Odin2005]

8. Price controls NEVER work.

They cause shortages. That is a FACT.

[Posteritatis]

29. "Never" is way too strong there

Canada has price controls on most medications, and some of the provinces (such as mine) do on the price of oil and gas. Those and similar things generally work alright.

When you start going from price controls on specific things to price controls on most goods in general, or sending the frigging army (not the cops - the army!) in to micromanage individual stores at that level, you're going to start running into problems, though.

[Odin2005]

48. Yeah, you're right, I was just banging my head at the stupidity when I posted that.

[Posteritatis]

72. Fair enough. :) nt

[paulsby]

35. your advocacy for dictatorships is noted

he's IN CHARGE

sweet!

[Flaneur]

73. Hardly a dictator. Been watching too much Fox News lately?

Because that's THEIR talking point.

[paulsby]

89. you advocate dictatorial powers

and laud him for it, then you play the faux card?

that's about as sophomoric as you can get.

[howard112211]

92. So do you think sending the national guard to de-segregete a school or protect a strike i

is also dictatorial?

[winninghand]

82. Protected...?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

He's protecting them by swindling them.

[robcon]

4. It's fascism, pure and simple

A police state.

[EFerrari]

5. That's right. Protecting the people from corporations is fascism.

:crazy:

[robcon]

6. Raising costs, and not allowing businesses to raise prices is fascism.

pure and simple.

[EFerrari]

9. Regulation is not fascism, it's regulation.

I know that the idea is foreign to you but some governments do try to protect their people from predators.

[naaman fletcher]

17. It's also retarded. Price controls have never worked anywhere.

He is going to destroy the country, and make it like Zimbabwe.

But he wears a red beret so the coffee shop revolutionaries are ok with it.

[zeemike]

47. From where did you get your absolute law of economics?

Just look at our own system of hands off.
The price of food in this country starts with companies like Archer Daniel Midland which controls 80% of the food consumed in this country and a lot of the world.
And it starts in the board room when the chairman tells his board members that he wants a 10% increase in proffits....he needs it so that he will get a big bonus at the end of the year and increase the value of his stock and it's dividends....So the department heads raises the prices to get that bonus, and the companies that buy from ADM also raises the price of their goods and tacks on some for themselves, and on down the line until we find at the grocery store steak costing 9 dollars a pound and a can of beans 1.89 where last year it was .99.
And on the other end the farmer that grows the beans sees his profit fall....ADM will lower the price paid to the Farmer for beans, and blame it on overproduction.
yes it is a wonderful system we have here, one that creates perpetual inflation and a lowering of the well being of the people that work for wages....and no one can change it because the sky is blue.

[boppers]

18. Regulation *with military guns* is not regulation.

It's thuggery.

I wouldn't call it fascism, though.

The fascist part isn't the regulation, it's the possibility of the takeover of businesses so that business interests are intertwined with state interests, and the business being turned over to "the workers" (often state allied party members, if history is any predictor).

One word comes to my mind (at first): Kristallnacht

In this case, *however*, it's not an ethnic group being targeted, but a social class (business owners), so maybe the more operable comparison would be the purges of Russia, Cuba, China (etc.) where people who wanted to improve their livelihood through profit were sought out and destroyed.

OTOH, this could be seen as an anti-gouging measure, played up by capitalist-driven mindsets as "OH NOESS!!!111" to stir up anti-Chavez sentiment. We shall see how it's enforced, if at all... it may be selectively enforced, brutally enforced, or not enforced at all.

[Vidar]

22. Whatever it takes to stop your thieving corporate friends.

[boppers]

27. There's a great store down the street from me, owned by a guy named Ira.

Ira's an immigrant, I don't know where from. Since his deli makes really great gyros, I assume he's from that general part of the world.

I like to buy local, non-corporate, when I can, so I go there as often as possible. He takes a moment with all of his customers to ask about them, he keeps track of their lives, and he really bonds the neighborhood together.

Under Chavez, he would now have to live in constant fear of charging too much for a loaf of bread, and thus losing his entire business.

Not cool.

Do you have "thieving corporate friends", too?

Real people, simply trying to run a local business?

[RumJungle]

43. Yeah!!!!!

Have you ever sold anything for profit in your lifetime you vicious robber baron????

[hack89]

46. Small local businesses are now "thieving corporate friends" ? nt

[WriteDown]

55. See post 53. nt

[RumJungle]

42. LOL

Those predatory country stores selling bread and milk!!!!!!!

[Posteritatis]

28. Using the army as law enforcement certainly blurs the line. (nt)

[boppers]

30. Point of order:

Army and law enforcement aren't divided in the same way in many nations as they are in the US.

I haven't scrutinized the Venezuela system lately, but in many cases, things like "the military" and "the police" are the same thing in various nations.

[Posteritatis]

32. And I don't see that as a good thing. (nt)

[boppers]

33. Considering the level of coup/insurrection, it sort of happened.

Most South American nations haven't fought wars against each other, so much as civil wars and internal insurrection.

Messy stuff.

[paulsby]

36. and in most nations, there is a national police force

unlike the US.

i think our system is superior, but that's apparently an evil thought on DU

[ronnie624]

76. Is there a difference

between a "national police force" and a federal law enforcement agency like the FBI or the Department of Homeland Security?

And thinking the U.S. system is superior to others is not evil, it's just an opinion. Expressing your opinion is a good thing, but if you express it on an open debate forum like DU, you should prepare to have it challenged, and you should be willing to support it with facts and a well reasoned argument.

[paulsby]

90. there most definitely is a difference

the FBI has extremely limited jurisdiction. it is not a national police force, like the RCMP for example.

let me put it this way. the federal govt. and the FBI etc. have NO jurisdiction over the VAST majority (to put it mildly) of crime.

most rapes, murders, burglaries, robberies, etc. are simply outside their jurisdiction.

that is NOT the case in most countries.

i prefer a nation that decentralizes such things as penal law, law enforcement, etc.

the US (rather uniquely) does that.

for a very small country, i might be ok with federal police, etc.

i prefer local control and local laws over central control and central laws when it comes to law enforcement. and that's a foundational principle in our democratic republic.

and trust me, based on my last post comparing our decentralized police vs. a country like france etc. was met with claims that i would be hated and ridiculed in continental europe and other histrionic rubbish.

fwiw, i spent a lot of time in france, love france, speak fluent french, etc.

i think many aspects of their governance are superior - such as their healthcare system.

but not their CJ system.

[WriteDown]

54. See post 53. nt

[Ter]

85. Why do you love government so much?

I hate it, seeing how GWB expanded government more than any president in US history. It's no longer a Republican thing to against Big Brother.

[Vidar]

23. Sometimes it's a choice between police & thieves. Your choice is evident.

[boppers]

31. Sometimes the police are the thieves.

If only the world was more simple.

[naaman fletcher]

40. in this case the police are the thieves.

[fascisthunter]

98. so, the theives are stealing from thieves

I guess it depends on how you define business/price gouging.

[bitchkitty]

37. The only thing pure in that statement is the bullshit.

And the simple is in your mind.

If a police state means that corporations aren't allowed to blithely rob and pillage the population, then I wish we lived in a police state.

[cali]

44. well, that's a bit extreme. I believe that corporations can be regulated

without turning a nation into a police state to achieve it.

[ronnie624]

66. And if they refuse to be regulated?

If they horde food and otherwise collude with each other to deliberately cause inflation and create political instability, then what?

[WriteDown]

51. If a "corporation" raises prices in Venezuela...

wouldn't another "corporation" try to undercut that price as much as they could to try to increase sales? A hard concept to grasp, I know. :shrug:

[ronnie624]

61. Not if those corporations wanted to work in collusion

in order to create political instability. If all of the big corporations in Venezuela are united in their hatred of President Chavez, then they might work together to cause him problems by raising prices, hoping to turn voters against him. The big food manufacturers have already been caught hording food in their warehouses in order to create shortages and drive up prices.

There's really nothing unusual about the concept of collusion. It happens. That's why there are laws against it. Coca Cola and Pepsi have been fined for colluding to prevent losing their collective market share to local competitors. Unregulated capitalism isn't as neat and straightforward as its adherents like to pretend.

Your message is a classic example of dissembling.

[WriteDown]

62. Please see post 53 then.

Why not make national companies like "Chavez Rice Corporation" and "Chavez Bread Corporation?" Prices could then be set at his choosing. Post 53 has the other "solution."

[ronnie624]

63. Ok, I saw post #53

and as I suspected, it was a complete waste of my time. Thankfully it only took about three seconds to read it.

[WriteDown]

65. That wasn't really a response. As expected. nt

[ronnie624]

67. I'll gladly respond,

but first I'll need something to respond to; facts, figures, an opinion supported by a reasonable argument. Post #53 is utterly meaningless in intellectual terms. It's just a poor attempt to put yourself on the offensive without expending the effort of advancing an honest, meaningful course of reasoning to support your position.

[WriteDown]

68. It was a pretty simple question....

Generally a question is not where you put facts. That would be a statement which I did not make.

[ChangoLoa]

107. Are bakeries preparing a coup d'état?

This is mainly about low-middle and middle class owned shops. They will be the most affected. Not the trusts or the market sharing corporations, which will easily make the transition.

The government should have adjusted the exchange rate progressively.

[carla]

49. Try again?

Fascism is the state/corporate alliance. Pres. Chavez leads a Bolivarian/socialist project. The latter does give him considerable power, but it is constitutionally defined. Price gouging is a crime because it leaves people hungry and without the necessities. It rewards selfishness and greed. In Venezuela it forms part of the opposition strategy to disrupt the economy and to create civil friction and tension. That's wrong as well.

[17breezes]

84. And what is sad is that there are folks who

are OK with a police state as long as it is doing stuff that fits their ideology. That's way too big a tent for me.

[Odin2005]

7. That shit never works, Hugo you economically illiterate moron.

This will just create shortages and black markets. Absolute stupidity.

[Imajika]

13. He knows full well it won't work...

This is mostly a show.

Well yes, Chavez is an economic moron, but he isn't that stupid.

He knew the devaluation would cause immediate inflation, ordering troops on the streets to protect the "workers" from the supposed greedy business owners is just part of his schtick.

Chavez has propped up his approval ratings and those of his party for quite awhile with populist rhetoric and social spending, but this can only work in the short term. In the long term his economic ineptitude has all but ruined the Venezuelan economy and crippled it's infrastructure.

Chavez is a clown. Eventually he won't be able to spend his way out of the mess he has made. Within a year Venezuela will probably default on its debt and his grip on power will quickly collapse soon after.

[tammywammy]

14. +1 n/t

[Odin2005]

15. Good point.

I fear that Chavez's BS will only make a Right-wing coup all the more likely when he falls. :(

[sofa king]

88. Heck, it made it all the more likely when he was succeeding.

[EFerrari]

16. If you think that steady popularity and winning elections for a decade is "short term"

then Chavez is not the clown here.

Man, I love these dire unanchored predictions that never come true. By now, they should be a pop art form. lol

[naaman fletcher]

19. Price controls create shortages as sure as the sky is blue.

There will be massive shortages. Of course, like all dictators and their followers like you, they will be blamed on "drought".

[AlphaCentauri]

20. In the world of Milton Freedman but not in Hu Jintao's world

I guess we suppose to have only one set of rules to manage an economy, too bad economics are not a exact science thats why many economies under the same rules are complete failures.

[naaman fletcher]

39. No, it's one set when it comes to price controls..

The controls in China are simply that wholesalers can't raise by more than 6% in 6 days without permission, or something like that. If inflation is not greater than that, then price controls are not in fact controlling anything.

Chavez's are, and they will fail like they always do, and then you will blame "drought" or that it's somehow the fault of the US.

[AlphaCentauri]

52. Chavez detractors won't be happy either way, inflation or price control

I'm thinking that he is trying to avoid bailouts to manipulate the market or if he is doing it he is trying to get the most out of the bailout.

[naaman fletcher]

75. price controls don't fight inflation...

Just look at zimbabwe, they increase it. This will increase inflation, and add in shortages as well.

[AlphaCentauri]

87. Inflation is about price increases so if prices are static nothing would move up n/t

[naaman fletcher]

95. yes but they don't work and cause more inflation...

because people stop producing stuff, making it more scarce, driving up the price (albeit on the black market).

price controls simply don't work.

[EFerrari]

26. Dictators and their followers? You don't know much about Venezuela, do you?

lol

[naaman fletcher]

38. I know I know..

I need to be "educated" by people like you and websites that are slavishly devoted to Chavez.

[EFerrari]

86. Or by any website that has any sourced information.

Or, you can hang on to your opinion and enjoy your alternate reality. It's your adventure.

[proteus_lives]

21. +2

Let's hope his collapse is bloodless.

[AlphaCentauri]

24. I'm thinking of market manipulations

how we have manipulate the market to get cheaper oil and how we can manipulate it to make shortages of products in other countries.

[Flaneur]

74. When did you get your Nobel prize in economics?

[Odin2005]

106. This is basic economics, Nobel Prize not even necessary.

The Economics prize isn't a real Nobel Prize anyway.

[sabbat hunter]

10. What did he expect

after devaluing the bolivar? When you devalue the currency, a price rise is almost automatic.

Now if they are truly gouging, that is different, but bringing out soldiers to stop it is WAAAAAAAAY over the top.

[bossy22]

11. he cant order businesses

to become unprofitable...then it will cease to exist

[RainMickey]

56. You may have swerved into the truth here....

...when businesses go belly up, then the government must step in to provide for the people.

[SnakeEyes]

12. What's he going to do next?

Force them to stay in business when it becomes impossible because cost exceeded revenue since they weren't allowed to raise prices while inflation destroyed their purchasing power? If I were a business in Venezuela, I'd be getting out now.

[classysassy]

25. President Chavez

really upset some of the poster here at DU,we are americans,why are we upset at whats happening in Venezuela, while the gangsters in control of our country continue to help their partners in crime rip off the public.

[boppers]

34. You are rich enough to post here.

We are worried about you.

[naaman fletcher]

41. what bs..

It's amazing the same BS rhetoric you guys use to defend Chavez. I take it I won't find posts by you commenting on any other nation in a negative way? If I can, then you are just a lying hypocrite.

Don't worry, I already checked and know the answer.

[bitchkitty]

93. It makes you wonder, doesn't it?

The elite, in Venezuela and elsewhere, are upset because they no longer control the oil. That's it in a nutshell.

So the corporate media come up with all these hit pieces on Chavez, and our ever-eager defenders of corporate fascism jump on their ponies and start throwing out their standard one-liners. Par for the course.

[cali]

45. we'll see how this sugars off

we do already have a clue: the panic rush to buy TVs.

[WriteDown]

53. Why doesn't Chavez just nationalize EVERY industry?

Then there would be no need for a military clampdown. He could set prices at whatever he wants. Milk = 1 cent per gallon. Gasoline = Free. Bread = 2 cents per loaf.

[Dreamer Tatum]

57. That's what he's doing

And he gets a military clampdown in the bargain. In the end, the state controls everything, the shopkeepers all work for the government, and the military patrols the streets to make sure no one says anything about it.

Meanwhile, rich American liberals prattle on about how much better off the poor man is in Venezuela.

[WriteDown]

58. I still think he should have nationalized more first.

:)

[Dreamer Tatum]

70. It's a shame

With Venezuela's natural resources, it could be a truly wealthy country with freedom and prosperity for all, but instead they have a self-aggrandizing huckster in office who thinks justice is zero-sum.

[Peace Patriot]

59. Chavez is a fool? Chavez is a clown? Chavez is a fascist?(!) Chavez is ruining Venezuela's economy?

How about some facts, hm?

A 15 to 1 increase in the number of doctors (primary care).

An 8 to 1 increase in primary care centers.

A 30% to 40% reduction in food prices for the poor.

School food programs for 1.8 million children by 2006 (compared to 250,000 in 1999).

45% increases in secondary and higher education enrollment (from 1999 to 2006).

Near quadrupling of growth in the number of public schools (1999 vs 2005)

A 314% increase in social spending overall (since 1998; now 20% of GDP).

The poverty rate cut in half (as to cash income). (Plus new access to education, health care, etc.)

Unemployment cut by 1/3 to 1/2. (Now down to 7%, despite the Bushwhack's worldwide depression).

Employment as a percentage of the labor force increased by 6% to 10%.

An increase of 1.8 million jobs in the private sector (since 1999).

Venezuela's GDP grew nearly 90% between 2003-2007 (vs 30% in the 1970s expansion).

Venezuela went into the Bushwhack Depression with low levels of public debt (total interest only 2.1% of GDP), and very high international cash reserves (total $50 billion), despite massive increases in social spending.

Two more interesting facts:

"Venezuela is one of the only major oil-producing states in the developing world that allows foreign investment in oil production – even US allies such as Mexico and Saudi Arabia, for example, do not. Venezuela's reserves of heavy crude in the Orinoco region are now estimated to be among the largest in the world, so foreign companies have strong incentives to stay involved."

"...the (Venezuelan) government has not even increased the public sector's share of the economy. The central government's spending, at 30 percent of GDP, is far below such European capitalist countries as France (49 percent) or Sweden (52 percent)." (!)

http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/downloads/cepr%20report.htm

------------------------

The Chavez government re-negotiated the oil contracts with the multinationals, and improved Venezuela's share of the oil profits from the previous (rightwing) government's giveaway of a 10/90 split, favoring the multinationals, to a 60/40 split, favoring Venezuela and its social programs. Some barracudas, like Exxon Mobil, pulled out (cuz they want ALL the profits, as we know). Most did not.

The Chavez government also presided over a period of astonishing economic growth, from 2003 to 2008, of over 10%, with the most growth in the private sector (not including oil), and with full funding of numerous new social programs--in education, health care, land reform, loans and grants to small business and co-ops and local and regional development.

The Chavez government has won four presidential elections, with increasing margins of the vote, in Venezuela's transparent, honest and internationally certified election system. Their initial win in 1998. Their win in 2000, after the passage of Venezuela's new constitution. The U.S.-funded recall election in 2004. And the most recent presidential election in 2006. They also won a national referendum, by a decisive margin, to lift the two-term limit on the president and some other offices (including those of rightwing governors), which means that the Venezuelan people approve of Chavez running for office again in the future. (Note: Our own FDR ran for and won four terms in office, in a similar situation of a "New Deal" for the American people, after "organized money"--as FDR put it--had destroyed the country and impoverished millions. "Neo-liberalism" and the rightwing oil elite had done the same to Venezuela--which is why Venezuelans elected a reforming president--Chavez--and re-wrote their constitution.)

In the article cited above, Mark Weisbrot discusses the rightwing prediction that Venezuela will fall apart, under the Chavez government's leadership and he makes a good case for this prediction being wrong. He cites the strengths of the Venezuelan economy and Chavez policy and feels confident that it will be able to deal with both growth-caused inflation (not unusual in a developing country) and expected and necessary devaluation of the bolivar. His analysis was written in early 2008, prior to the Bushwhack-induced worldwide depression--and, although he doesn't see that one coming, he does include considerations of potential drops in oil prices and global recession.

One more note--because I happen to have read some articles about this: Venezuelan's military is much closer to the people of Venezuela than either our military or our national guard. They often participate in local community public works--building schools and community health clinics, helping with flood control, etc.--and live and work close to local communities. Their ranks are filled with the poor--for whom the military is a means of advancement (Chavez himself came from a poor family and rose through the military on merit). They are sympathetic with the Venezuelan people and with the Bolivarian Revolution, and played a critical role in overturning the rightwing coup of 2002, and returning the country to constitutional order.

Use of Venezuela's military to enforce laws against price gouging is somewhat similar to Eisenhower's use of the National Guard to deal with the white racism among officials in the southern states who were defying court rulings on the equality of black Americans--but Venezuela's military is a couple of steps closer to local people than, say, the nationalized Alabama National Guard. The president--whether Eisenhower or Chavez--has to enforce the laws of the country--that is his duty--especially in a crisis that could be exploited to produce violent destabilization. The white racists in the south were certainly gearing up to do just that; and the rightwing in Venezuela has several times gone that route. And, as in the south, probably the simple order itself, and some presence of the locally-recruited and locally-sympathetic Venezuelan military, will head off any trouble. Also, it is absurd to speculate that the Venezuelan military will walk into local grocery stores with "big boots" or be oppressive in any way. They never have been, under Chavez's leadership. Even during the violent rightwing coup of 2002, and the crippling oil bosses' lockout of 2003, the Venezuelan military did not over-react and were not brutal or oppressive.

[WriteDown]

60. Please see post 53. nt

[Peace Patriot]

78. Why doesn't Chavez nationalize every industry? Well, why doesn't he?

It's kind of a lame question. It seems obvious to me that Venezuelans prefer a mixed capitalist/socialist economy and get benefits from both--much like many European countries, and like our own "New Deal" of the 1930s. I don't think you read the statistics I cited or didn't grasp their import. Socialism fueled the private economy (much like the "New Deal" did here). It put money in peoples' pockets (as well as opening opportunities through education and other means--creating a hopeful, positive social atmosphere). It pulled Venezuela out of the steep recession and the political/economic destabilization that the rightwing had plunged the country into, during the 2002 to 2003 period, and set them up for spectacular growth, which the Chavez government managed very well, including their ability to keep their debt level low and accumulate a cushion of cash reserves.

Those policies are today permitting them to devalue the bolivar (long needed and long expected) and will likely permit them to bring inflation under better control. As Weisbrot says, inflation is not unusual in a forward-looking developing economy. It is a product of fast growth--and I would say, especially of fast, labor-friendly growth. (When you create lots of decent-paying jobs, manufacturers/retailers tend to raise prices; the workers then want wage increases, and so on.) The growth is real. It is not, for instance, a "stock market bubble" like the mortgage-failure derivatives (Good God!). It is not the kind of ruinous, speculative "ponzi scheme" "growth" that our benighted form of capitalism has been producing--malignant growth. It is actual growth, in products and services, with the wealth spread around among wide swaths of the population. But the Chavez government does need to deal with inflation. It has passed the 20% benchmark and they need to be wary of hyper-inflation. I hope they deal with it more fundamentally than calling out the "national guard" to prevent price gouging--and I think they will. They probably haven't done so as yet because their first consideration has always been workers and the poor, and they are hesitant to do anything that will affect job growth, salaries or benefits, or slow down their social programs. We will probably see anti-inflation measures after the national assembly elections. It's the sort of thing governments generally reserve for after elections. The Chavez government is by no means alone or unique in gaging the political impacts of government decisions.

The two-tier devaluation may be designed to address their export/import imbalance--it will raise prices on imports and may stimulate local production for local consumption. This optional devaluation is a positive sign. It was not a forced devaluation. It points to the Chavez government money managers' confidence in economic recovery from 2009 (a bad year for everybody, worldwide). They based their 2010 budget on the very conservative oil price of $40/barrel. (It is already higher.) That's half of the budget. And, as Weisbrot points out, they have improved Venezuelan tax collection (which was full of scofflaws previously, not untypical of Latin America), thus strengthening that part of government revenue. And--coming off of five years of sizzling growth (over 10%)--they project 0.05% growth this year, with continued full funding of numerous new social programs. They have a lot of flexibility in budgeting--helped enormously by their initial conditions of low debt and high cash reserves--signs of excellent management of Venezuela's resources and finances.

The industries that the Chavez government has nationalized have mostly been critical industries for economic growth and internal production/consumption. I just read an article about the drought, and the electrical blackouts (due to dependence on hydroelectric power), which affects major industry as well as individual consumers. The article is about the steel industry (which uses a lot of electricity), and conflicting goals among various sectors of the steel industry, on energy conservation and on export vs domestic production issues. Export of raw materials has high energy needs; manufacture of local construction items, less energy. Export creates profits, but production of local products creates growth. The Chavez government is encouraging production of steel products for Venezuelan use--for building construction within Venezuela. Some unions, which are not following these protocols--are in sectors that are exporting raw materials--are worried about losing their jobs on both scores--conservation and production for export. By nationalizing this industry, the Chavez government has been able to focus the industry upon goals that encourage economic growth not just short-term profit. Discussion of the issues involved is widespread, wide open and includes the workers and their unions (and much criticism of the government). If the industry were still privatized, the only discussion would happen in private board rooms among rich executives, with maybe a government rep who comes begging to them: 'PLEASE produce local rebar! Pretty please!" And the execs would say, "Sure, sure," and then go do what they damn please. As it is, this industry is still financed by private banks. The mix of capitalist/socialist issues is quite interesting.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/5059

Here's my point: Who those execs would be hurting is local construction businesses--capitalist or coop--and their economically stimulating construction projects--whether bridges, or schools, or shopping malls, or low cost housing, or factories--and many workers and many workers' families down the line (construction and after construction). It puts a roadblock on the economy for Venezuela's raw steel to be going to China or wherever, at high profit to the execs and some benefit to one group of workers--but it is regressive overall. The government now has some control over this, although it doesn't seem to be dictatorial. They listen to everybody. They respect the opinions and needs of the workers. Collective decisions are made.

In other industries--Cargill's rice plant comes to mind--most decisions can be made elsewhere, the profits can go elsewhere, they can grow and diversify into a big business, but they are regulated, for instance, they are required to produce certain quantities of basic rice, not fancied up packaged rice with spice and additives (at higher prices). They came into conflict with the government by not following this regulation--but the matter got straightened out. Cargill is still private--privately capitalized, profitable to a few--and quite a big and diverse operation in Venezuela.

http://www.cargill.com/worldwide/venezuela/index.jsp

It's a tricky business balancing capitalism and social needs. We've gone off the cliff favoring capitalism (and look what it did to us! --crashed the banks, massive looting, resource wars, outsourcing of jobs to cheap labor markets abroad, etc.). Venezuelans--having been through all that (capitalism's evil excesses)--are trying something more balanced--and are getting non-stop flak from the "free trade for the rich" crowd and its trumpeting 'news' organs. I think we should cut them some slack. They may be devising the solutions that we ourselves will one day need to recover from the destructiveness of our predatory class. The rich will NEVER "trickle" anything "down" to the poor, except their actual piss. They need to be "house-trained", for the good of society, and, indeed, for economic health and prosperity.

I don't know if Venezuelans' experiment with a more balanced approach will work, will fail, will be destroyed by Venezuela's rich elite in cahoots with ours, or what. I really don't know. But it seems to me that what worked here best was the "New Deal"--a balance of socialism and capitalism (with strong regulation of the latter). The Chavez government resembles the "New Deal" in many ways. It has worked quite well for them so far. And if we had kept our "New Deal" in tact here, I think we wouldn't be in the dire peril we are in today.

[WriteDown]

79. Seems like Venezuelans would like free food and other essentials...

That could be done if Chavez nationalizes all corporations. Since Chavez keeps nationalizing more and more and his popularity keeps soaring then total nationalization is a no-brainer.

[ChangoLoa]

97. More false information

Almost everything you wrote isn't true, EVEN for the venezuelan state statistics institute. Mark Weisbrot should at least try to show the same numbers that the venezuelan state shows.

Some statistics are real but bad too, even if presented as positive. Hmmm, 1.8 million jobs created in the private sector for a country where the labor force has increased by 6 million in the same period... any reasonable person will tell you that's insufficient and a bad sign.

The school numbers are completely fake and I've already shown you that in other posts.

Your "FACTS" are NOT REAL.. some are exaggerated and some are invented. Why don't you go to credible statistic sources (UN, INE (Venezuelan stats institute), WHO, ILO, UNESCO, FAO, etc...) instead of taking for granted anything that an author who works for the "Venezuelan Information Center" and with the venezuelan embassy in London? It's just so curious that even disposing from the same kind of stats you show here in official sources (including the venezuelan state's), you choose to use the unofficial, incorrect ones.

No official stats = no credibility.

[fascisthunter]

99. right wingers on DU don't care about facts, they just HATE leftists

and love real fascists. Read their comments on other threads...

[slackmaster]

64. HAND OVER THAT GARVEY MARKER OR FACE ARREST, STOREKEEP!

[Renew Deal]

104. lol

:rofl:

[Joanne98]

69. YAY

[AngryAmish]

71. I am sure this will end well.

I remember the great times when Nixon imposed wage and price controls.

[Unvanguard]

77. This is almost a self-evidently idiotic policy. Wow. n/t

[RussWorld]

80. Horse Hockey

Using stats supplied from Chaves is nonsesnical. The man is an ego driven despot. The day he believes he will lose an election is the day when he will cancel elections. The man cares about power period. He uses the poor and dipossed in ways that would embarress even Republicans.

[Peace Patriot]

91. He lost the 69 amendments vote, and he didn't cancel elections.

You're using the fact that he wins elections against him?

He and his government have shown no anti-democratic tendencies. The contrary is true. They have greatly enhanced citizen participation in government and politics and have dramatically improved public services to the vast poor majority never before served by government. They established honest, transparent, internationally certified elections--by INVITING the Carter Center, the OAS, the EU and other highly professional election monitoring groups to help Venezuela set up its system and to thoroughly scrutinize every aspect of it before, during and after elections. They themselves are empowered by a great grass roots movement. When the rightwing coup occurred in 2002, tens of thousands of people poured out of their hovels and surrounded Miraflores Palace to demand, a) the restoration of their Constitution, and b) the return of their kidnapped president. Are you saying that Venezuelans are stupid peasants and don't know who and what they are voting for?

Nonsensical?

Ego-driven?

Despot?

Canceller of elections?

Power-mad?

User of the poor and the dispossessed?

Where on earth are you getting your information?

I suggest that you try to cleanse your head of the bogeyman impressions you have been given, and give some consideration to facts and to writers who research and analyze facts.

You can start with Mark Weisbrot's footnotes:

<1> See, for example, Javier Corrales, “Hugo Boss,” Foreign Policy, January/February 2006; Jorge G. Castañeda, “Latin America’s Left Turn,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 2006; and Michael Shifter, “In Search of Hugo Chávez,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 2006.
<2> Mark Weisbrot, Luis Sandoval and David Rosnick, “Poverty Rates in Venezuela: Getting the Numbers Right,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), May 2006: http://www.cepr.net/documents/venezuelan_poverty_rates_2006_05.pdf.
<3> See, for example, Economist Intelligence Unit, "Venezuela risk: Risk overview," Risk Briefing Select, April 27, 2007; Chris Kraul, "Chávez's grand, risky dream," Los Angeles Times, June 23, 2007; and Jose de Cordoba, "Land Grab: Farmers Are Latest Target in Venezuelan Upheaval," The Wall Street Journal, May 17, 2007.
<4> See, Banco Central de Venezuela (BCV) seasonally-adjusted, quarterly GDP series in 1997 constant prices available at: http://www.bcv.org.ve/c2/indicadores.asp (under ‘Agregados Macroeconomicos’).
<5> See Rodriguez (2006) for a discussion of these measurement problems. Since Rodriguez' paper was written, the Penn World Tables data was revised (version 6.2) and so the major data sets at least tell the same basic story: Rodriguez, Francisco, “The Anarchy of Numbers: Understanding the Evidence on Venezuelan Economic Growth,” Canadian Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 27, No. 4 (2006) Available through the author’s website at: http://frrodriguez.web.wesleyan.edu/docs/working_papers/Anarchy.pdf.
<6> GDP peaked in 1977, but most of this downturn came after oil prices collapsed.
<7> Energy Information Administration (EIA), "Short-Term Energy Outlook," January 8, 2008. Available online at:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html.
<8> Seasonally adjusted.
<9> In 2006, the private sector’s total value added was 63 per cent of total GDP, up from 59 per cent in 1999. Calculations based on constant price GDP series from the Venezuelan Central Bank (Banco Central de Venezuela), www.bcv.org.ve (last accessed on 06/18/07).
<10> This growth is also calculated using seasonally adjusted data.
<11> From PDVSA's 2006 summary of financial operations. Available online at: http://www.pdvsa.com/interface.sp/database/fichero/publicacion/1792/76.PDF
<12> Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Salud, “Balance del avance de los servicios asistenciales de la misión Barrio Adentro,” (February 2007): http://www.misionesbolivarianas.gob.ve/component/option,com_docman/Itemid,0/task,doc_download/gid,219.
<13> Logros, febrero 2007, Sistema de Indicadores Sociales de Venezuela (SISOV), Ministerio de Planificación y Desarrollo, available online at http://www.sisov.mpd.gob.ve/estudios.
<14> Ministerio de Alimentacion, Memoria y Cuenta 2006 (Annual report of the Ministry of Food/Nutrition to the National Assembly).
<15> Logros, febrero 2007, SISOV, Ministerio de Planificación y Desarrollo, available online at http://www.sisov.mpd.gob.ve/estudios/
<16> Ibid.
<17> The data is only available for the 1994-2005 period and is from SISOV, “Planteles por dependencia,” (last accessed 12/15/07): http://www.sisov.mpd.gob.ve/indicadores/ED0304100000000/downloads/VarED_Planteles_Total(plantelesporDep).xls.
<18> SISOV, “Cobertura del sistema. Tasa bruta de escolaridad por nivel educativo,” (last accessed on 12/15/07): http://www.sisov.mpd.gob.ve/indicadores/ED0105800000000/.
<19> Update on Misión Robinson (February 16, 2007), Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Comunicación y la Información:
http://www.misionesbolivarianas.gob.ve/component/option,com_docman/Itemid,0/task,doc_download/gid,223/.
<20> Non-oil tax revenue went from 10 percent of GDP in 1999 to 12 percent in 2006 mostly due to an increase in the collection of income taxes (on individuals and companies) from 2 percent of GDP in 1999 to 3.2 percent in 2006. Data from Venezuela’s Ministry of Finance (www.mf.gov.ve, last accessed on 06/18/07).
<21> See John Schmitt (2003), “Is it Time to Export the US Tax Model to Latin America?”, Center for Economic and Policy Research. Available online at: http://www.cepr.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=391&Itemid=8.
<22> Per capita social spending is a better measure than social spending per se because it takes population growth into account.
<23> It is worth noting that the economy has continued to grow during the second half of last year (since the last survey), so poverty would probably be somewhat lower today.
<24> Weisbrot, Sandoval and Rosnick (2006). “Poverty Rates in Venezuela: Getting the Numbers Right,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), Washington, DC: (http://www.cepr.net/documents/venezuelan_poverty_rates_2006_05.pdf): see Table 2 and text.
<25> The alternative would be to estimate the market value of health care services received, but this would exaggerate the impact of health care on the actual situation of the poor; we have therefore used the conservative estimate described above as a lower bound of the impact of this health care spending on the poor. (see Weisbrot, Sandoval and Rosnick, 2006).
<26> The data are not seasonally adjusted, so we are comparing unemployment rates for the same period across years.
<27> For example, Domingo Maza Zavala, then director of the Central Bank, warned the New York Times in October 2005 of a recession as soon as 2007, without offering an explanation of how this might happen (Juan Forero, “Chávez Restyles Venezuela With '21st-Century Socialism,’” The New York Times. October 30, 2005,). Also, the International Monetary Fund has projected a drastic growth slowdown for three consecutive years, which has not materialized. See Table 2 in David Rosnick and Mark Weisbrot (2007), “Political Forecasting? The IMF’s Flawed Growth Projections for Argentina and Venezuela,” Center for Economic and Policy Research. Available online at: http://www.cepr.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1107.
<28> See, for example, Dean Baker (2000), “Double Bubble: The Implications of the Over-Valuation of the Stock Market and the Dollar,” Center for Economic and Policy Research. )Available online at: http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/double_bubble.pdf) and; Dean Baker and David Rosnick (2005) “Will a Bursting Bubble Trouble Bernanke?: The Evidence for a Housing Bubble,” Center for Economic and Policy Research. (Available online: http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/housing_bubble_2005_11.pdf).
<29> See, for example, Michael Bruno (1995), “Does Inflation Really Lower Growth?” Finance and Development, September; Michael Bruno and William Easterly (1998), “Inflation Crises and Long-Run Growth,” Journal of Monetary Economics, 41, pp. 3-26; and Robert Pollin and Andong Zhu (2005), “Inflation and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Non-linear Analysis,” Political Economy Research Institute, Working Paper Series No. 109: University of Massachusetts, Amherst (Available online: http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_101-150/WP109.pdf).
<30> Benedict Mander, “PdVSA Issue Proves a Pioneer in the ‘Democratisation’ of Capital,” Financial Times, April 12, 2007.
<31> This is based on the ratio of Venezuela's cumulative consumer price inflation since February 2003, which is 128.5 percent, to U.S. inflation of 14.9 percent.
<32> The phenomenon of resource-exporting countries having overvalued currencies and the harmful results of such overvaluation are sometimes called "Dutch disease," from the experience of the Netherlands after the discovery of natural gas there in the 1960s.
<33> The lending rate is a weighted average of the rates charged on promissory notes and loans made by commercial banks and universal banks.
<34> Steven Mufson, “AES to Sell Utility Stake To Venezuela; Chávez's State-Control Plan Nets Electric Firm,” The Washington Post, February 9, 2007.
<35> Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators Online, last accessed on 06/06/2007.

http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/downloads/cepr%20report.htm
(links at the site)

[ChangoLoa]

96. The only time people voted no to one of his referendums (69 amdts), the same laws were passed

by presidential decree. Most of the 69. The indefinite reelection was passed by another referendum (which was illegal, you can't repeat a referendum's question during one same presidential mandate in Venezuela) 1 year and 2 months later.

But some few people here, using fake numbers created by venezuelan embassies or "venezuelan information centers" around the world, will tell you that he is the MOST DEMOCRATIC leader in the world and the CHAMPION of human rights !!!! Strange isn't it? There must be an explanation...

[harun]

81. Vive Chavez!

[Socal31]

83. This should work wonders.

[howard112211]

94. The United States has used the National Guard for Law Enforcement before.

Not necessarily implies a dictatorship.

Price bounds are not a tool of a dictatorship per se, either. Countries do it all the time.

[fascisthunter]

100. shhh... the fascists on DU don't want truth to interfere

anything corporations do to a country is just business, and that means it's ok... they are speshulll.

[slackmaster]

101. The state of California called up the militia in the 1930s to control the border

Can't let too many Okies in, you know.

[Renew Deal]

105. Is this even law "enforcement?"

It seems more like enforcing economic policy.

[anonymous171]

102. What a badass. nt

[Renew Deal]

103. Why are soldiers enforcing economic policy?

That's odd.