Venezuela VP: Hugo Chavez has died

[angelatc]

venezuela unemployment is at 5.9 % right now, it was over 16 % when he assumed, http://www.tradingeconomics.com/vene...mployment-rate
but the real issue with chavez is not economics, is on ideas, you may dont like him, thats ok, but try to understand why the the most of venezuelan people felt for the first time that they were rulede by someone who takes care of them.

Try to understand why that's a horrible reason to elect a leader.

And again - it's not like he won by a landslide. He used the government to strip away the financial resources of his opponents, and forced government workers to campaign for him while on the clock. There's a significant number of people who voted for him simply because they didn't want to lose everything they owned.

This man is in no way, shape or form a good role model for leadership. He was a bully on a power trip.

[heavenlyboy34]

So that's the liberal definition of a good leader? One who doesn't round people up and kill them when he's stealing their property and using government to quash political opposition.

Got that bar set pretty damned low, don't cha?

Don't point out a splinter in your neighbor's eye when there is a log in your own. People in this country tend to have pretty damn low standards too. (keep teh boogiemen away and keep the welfare river a-flowin'!)

[UWDude]

So that's the liberal definition of a good leader?

Did I say that?

No I said he wasn't a Tyrant.

There is a big spectrum between "good leader" and "tyrant"

your strawman failed. Try again. hopefully without the strawman this time.

[UWDude]

There's that liberal bull$#@! again. Word of advice: quit pretending facts aren't facts when they don't fit your narrative.

Every site I can find - right, left, American, or international cites that number. So perhaps you could enlighten us as to where you're getting your truth, since you're obviously so much better informed than the rest of the entire English speaking world.

How about a link?

I Googled it, found NYT.... but nope, that was actually just a comment left by someone. Where is a link to a reputable source for this $2B embezzlement claim? Also, where is the flashy displays of wealth that most corrupt politicians display when they embezzle billions?

Where did this $2B figure come from originally? Right now, it sounds like nothing more than a baseless rumor, based upon a story from celebritynetworth.com. Can we get an itemized list of his assets, please? I want to know if this is true, or deliberate mis-info. Kind of like the preposterous claims he "killed thousands".

[politics]

Try to understand why that's a horrible reason to elect a leader.

And again - it's not like he won by a landslide. He used the government to strip away the financial resources of his opponents, and forced government workers to campaign for him while on the clock. There's a significant number of people who voted for him simply because they didn't want to lose everything they owned.

This man is in no way, shape or form a good role model for leadership. He was a bully on a power trip.

I cant agree with you
You may don’t like his ideas, that’s ok. But don’t get confused with misleading ideas from mainstream media. He suffered a coup ten years ago, during 48 hs was in jail. So please don’t tell me he was bully. Chavez didn’t even accused them. And most of them left the country without any restrictions.
Also in 2007 he signed a pardon to all the people involved in those actions, and try to read why he did it.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...82318110_x.htm

[mad cow]

How is it different? In all those instances, you can either comply or go out of business. Under the Chavez plan, there was no option to comply. If he wanted your property, he came and took it. Google Venezuela Private Property Seizures, and you'll see that he was coming after the ranches and farms.

He sent soldiers in to confiscate residential property from real estate developers and builders who were supporting his political opposition.

Even if there were no difference, that would still mean Chavez was nothing to celebrate.

A Venezuelan used to work for me as a deckhand on a fishing boat for several years.Real nice guy.
His Father owned a dairy farm/cheese making operation and was relatively well-off.
Chavez confiscated his business and kicked him off his property.

I have a hard time understanding the anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism wing of this "Ron Paul R3volution".

[heavenlyboy34]

A Venezuelan used to work for me as a deckhand on a fishing boat for several years.Real nice guy.
His Father owned a dairy farm/cheese making operation and was relatively well-off.
Chavez confiscated his business and kicked him off his property.

I have a hard time understanding the anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism wing of this "Ron Paul R3volution".

I didn't see any anti-private property/anti-free market capitalism sentiment in this thread. What are you referring to?

[AuH20]

How about a link?

I Googled it, found NYT.... but nope, that was actually just a comment left by someone. Where is a link to a reputable source for this $2B embezzlement claim? Also, where is the flashy displays of wealth that most corrupt politicians display when they embezzle billions?

Where did this $2B figure come from originally? Right now, it sounds like nothing more than a baseless rumor, based upon a story from celebritynetworth.com. Can we get an itemized list of his assets, please? I want to know if this is true, or deliberate mis-info. Kind of like the preposterous claims he "killed thousands".

You can't be this gullible?????? You do realize that most "socialists" are crooks and simply utilize the common man's system to plunder for them. Crony capitalists and socialists like Chavez are basically the same person.

http://newsfromvenezuela.tumblr.com/...ne-at-around-2

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Did I say that?

No I said he wasn't a Tyrant.

There is a big spectrum between "good leader" and "tyrant"

your strawman failed. Try again. hopefully without the strawman this time.

What is a tyrant?

[mad cow]

I didn't see any anti-private property/anti-free market capitalism sentiment in this thread. What are you referring to?

Hugo Chavez seized the private property and privately owned businesses of Venezuelans at gunpoint countless times during his sorry tyrannical reign.Do you deny this? Does Ron Paul support this?Murray Rothbard?Lew Rockwell?

Please provide me with any so-called libertarian source that supports the reign of Hugo Chavez.

[heavenlyboy34]

Hugo Chavez seized the private property and privately owned businesses of Venezuelans at gunpoint countless times during his sorry tyrannical reign.Do you deny this?

No, as I said earlier. But the destruction he caused was only a fraction of what has been caused by western regimes.

Does Ron Paul support this?Murray Rothbard?Lew Rockwell?

I don't speak for them, but Lew quoted a reader in his blog:

Writes Danny Sanchez:

Hugo Chávez may have been oppressive, but at least he wasn't a lapdog for Washington like so many other heads of state. The world would be a much more free and decentralized place with more anti-imperialist "rogue" nations. And it is important to put his depredations in perspective. Bush, Obama, Blair, Hollande, etc., have caused more death and suffering in the world than Chávez ever did. And this should be no surprise.It is often the less authoritarian states that afflict more humans more seriously, even if those afflicted the worst happen to be foreigners. That is because the most "free" countries are also often the most imperialistic. This is what Hans-Hermann Hoppe calls the "paradox of imperialism." States that allow more domestic freedom have more wealth to tap to fund more conquests and interventions.

Considering the chaos, terror, and wanton murderous destruction perpetrated on a daily basis by the West upon its recipients of "liberation," the evil of Chávez is dwarfed by that of the governments of the "free world.

And I agree.

Please provide me with any so-called libertarian source that supports the reign of Hugo Chavez.

None do. They simply place it on the scale of evil as less evil than imperial regimes like the US and UK. Not everything is as black and white as you seem to want it to be.

There is a famous Chinese proverb: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." In a way, it applies here. I wouldn't regard Chavez as a "friend" per se, but he was the enemy of my enemy (the US regime), and to that extent he was good.

[Feeding the Abscess]

No, as I said earlier. But the destruction he caused was only a fraction of what has been caused by western regimes.


I don't speak for them, but Lew quoted a reader in his blog:
And I agree.


None do. They simply place it on the scale of evil as less evil than imperial regimes like the US and UK.

I don't disagree with saying that Chavez, on a global scale, was less bad than Obama. But that has nothing to do with the beliefs of each person, and all to do with the institutions they head. If Chavez were at the helm of the Empire, he'd have been an outright monster, far worse than any president we'd ever had.

[UWDude]

If Chavez were at the helm of the Empire, he'd have been an outright monster, far worse than any president we'd ever had.

You are condemning him based on hypothetical situations that may have happened in the future. How about condemn and compare him to world leaders based on the realities of the actions he did.

[Feeding the Abscess]

You are condemning him based on hypothetical situations that may have happened in the future. How about condemn and compare him to world leaders based on the realities of the actions he did.

I'm condemning him on his ideology, which is entirely abhorrent.

[UWDude]

You can't be this gullible?????? You do realize that most "socialists" are crooks and simply utilize the common man's system to plunder for them. Crony capitalists and socialists like Chavez are basically the same person.

http://newsfromvenezuela.tumblr.com/...ne-at-around-2

I'm gullible? Here is an indicator of the agenda and slant of your "source"

“We believe that organized bolivarian criminal groups within the Chávez administration have subtracted around $100 billion out of the nearly $1 trillion in oil income made by PDVSA since 1999.”

Uh huh. Try again. Can we get an unbiased source, please?

What is a tyrant?

wiki says:
In its modern English usage, is a ruler of a cruel and oppressive character[1] who is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution, or one who has usurped sovereignty.

You are the ones calling him a tyrant. You are the ones uttering Hitler and Stalin in the same breath as Chavez. Why don't you tell me why he was a tyrant, instead of continuously flinging the word so cheaply around.

[mad cow]

Hugo Chavez was anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.
Anybody that supports Chavez is anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.

[UWDude]

I'm condemning him on his ideology, which is entirely abhorrent.

No, you weren't. You were condemning him by saying he would be worse if he had more power. You said nothing of his ideology.

[heavenlyboy34]

Hugo Chavez was anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.
Anybody that supports Chavez is anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.

okay, but no one supports him-except in a Sun-Tzu-ish sort of way. Also, anyone who supports the Federal government is anti-private property and anti-free market capitalism. So there.

[Feeding the Abscess]

No, you weren't. You were condemning him by saying he would be worse if he had more power. You said nothing of his ideology.

Where do you think I got the criticism? Did I just pull it out of a hat? "But that has nothing to do with the beliefs of each person, and all to do with the institutions they head." was the sentence before your quote.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

wiki says:
In its modern English usage, is a ruler of a cruel and oppressive character[1] who is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution, or one who has usurped sovereignty.

You are the ones calling him a tyrant. You are the ones uttering Hitler and Stalin in the same breath as Chavez. Why don't you tell me why he was a tyrant, instead of continuously flinging the word so cheaply around.

Okay, well, I'd say president Obama is a tyrant as the man just has to $#@! with everyone and everything. He seems to be the only person in the United States who made that while everyone else is a jerk who didn't. So, using him as a model, I'd say Chavez is also a tyrant as he also seemed to be a major $#@!wit.

[UWDude]

Where do you think I got the criticism? Did I just pull it out of a hat? "But that has nothing to do with the beliefs of each person, and all to do with the institutions they head." was the sentence before your quote.

Yeah, your first sentence condemned his ideology. Your second sentence then just used a crystal ball or tarot cards or maybe it was numerology to make a prediction based on no facts whatsoever. Chavez had power in Venezuela, and he didn't do nearly the same $#@! in 14 years some past presidents have done in four. Alien and Sedition acts? Executive order 9066? Drone bombing American citizens? Not to mention all the unconstitutional wars.

[HigherVision]

okay, but no one supports him-except in a Sun-Tzu-ish sort of way. Also, anyone who supports the Federal government is anti-private property and anti-free market capitalism. So there.

All governments are basically bad but they all aren't bad to the same degree. At least the American constitution has private property rights written into it. That's a lot better than Chavez's Marxist system. The qualm I have with some Ron Paul supporters sometimes is taking contrarianism too far. That is, that anything that opposes the current establishment political system is good. Supporting people like Dennis Kucinich and Chavez who I think are worse than the establishment. At least in the current neoliberal or whatever you want to call it order there is some recognition of individual rights existing. Even Obama has to pretend at least that he isn't totally against stuff like the second amendment.

[kcchiefs6465]

WRT to your post, Highervision, I, and a few others, are mainly concerned at what role our government has played in his death and what our role will be in Venezuela now that he is dead. The CIA is rumoured to have been involved in his attempted coup. We have a record in the region and I am sad to say that I would not doubt our government having a role in his assassination, if and that's a big if, it was one. Whether that be from thallium salts, or whatever. I do not consider the man to be a hero personally, though I haven't really read much about his exact policies and presidency. I really would not have cared less either way, had it not been for us being suspected in the earlier attempted coups and our suspected attempted poisonings of other leaders around the area. I really haven't a clue how they might have done it, and haven't ruled that they did or did not. I am simply concerned with the running wild of the CIA and the various plots they have partook in. I hope that it is untrue as that is not what America stands for. [Though they have assassinated people in the past]

[heavenlyboy34]

All governments are basically bad but they all aren't bad to the same degree. At least the American constitution has private property rights written into it. That's a lot better than Chavez's Marxist system. The qualm I have with some Ron Paul supporters sometimes is taking contrarianism too far. That is, that anything that opposes the current establishment political system is good. Supporting people like Dennis Kucinich and Chavez who I think are worse than the establishment. At least in the current neoliberal or whatever you want to call it order there is some recognition of individual rights existing. Even Obama has to pretend at least that he isn't totally against stuff like the second amendment.

The regime believes it has the right to kill you on a whim. You can say they generally recognize rights, but only conditionally. If your rights become inconvenient, they will find a way to screw you. Remember the Kelo decision? A lot of people seem to have let that fall down the Memory Hole.

[KrokHead]

Can't believe Castro outlived him.

Can't believe anyone can outlive Castro, he probably used the dragonballs and wish for immortality.

[Ender]

We've been fed the same $#@!e about Chavez as we are currently being fed about Ahmadinejad, so it is best to take everything with a grain of salt. We can at least thank Chavez for stopping a union of the Americas, that would have put us in the same predicament as those in the EU, so give him some credit.

[Ender]

All governments are basically bad but they all aren't bad to the same degree. At least the American constitution has private property rights written into it. That's a lot better than Chavez's Marxist system. The qualm I have with some Ron Paul supporters sometimes is taking contrarianism too far. That is, that anything that opposes the current establishment political system is good. Supporting people like Dennis Kucinich and Chavez who I think are worse than the establishment. At least in the current neoliberal or whatever you want to call it order there is some recognition of individual rights existing. Even Obama has to pretend at least that he isn't totally against stuff like the second amendment.

Property taxes wiped out private property rights. Stop paying your taxes and the real owners show up.

[Bossobass]

Never been to Venezuela, so I restrict my thoughts to the facts:

2007:

April 14 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuela said it paid off $3 billion in loans owed to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank this week, ending ties to two multilateral lenders it says curtailed its ``economic sovereignty'' for decades.

The government will save $8 million in interest payments with the World Bank through 2012, Finance Minister Rodrigo Cabezas said at a press conference at his office in Caracas. The government will continue to borrow money from the Washington- based Inter American Development Bank and the Caracas-based Andean Development Corp., to finance future infrastructure projects.

``With this we just want to say `bye' to these two institutions that imposed their police recipes to us for years,'' Cabezas said. ``It's a historic moment for Venezuela because our policy-making is finally gaining freedom back.''

Cabezas reiterated the government's goal of eliminating the nation's debt by 2021, and said the repayment of all obligations to the IMF and the World Bank puts the country on track to win investment-grade ratings.

Standard and Poor's Corp. and Fitch Inc. rate Venezuela a BB-rating, three levels below investment grade. Moody's Investors Service has a B2 rating on Venezuela's long-term debt.

Goldman Sachs, in a phone interview, warned that everything points to a downgrade of Venezuelan debt rating.

Analysts fear that against a background of low oil prices, in the event of applying for lending, Venezuela will pay dearly for leaving the IMF.

2011, 4 years later:

Fitch:

--Foreign currency Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'B+';

--Local currency IDR at 'B+';

--Country ceiling at 'B+';

Chavez told the IMF/World Bank, BP, Exxon and Bush to get bent. For that he survived a coup attempt and assassination attempts and did not survive the latest assassination attempt. He set the precedent and Brazil, Argentina and other SA countries followed.

Brazil, Paraguay, Venezuela and Argentina have leaders with or recently dead from cancer.

Venezuela sits on $50 trillion in oil, the largest proven reserves in the world, twice the reserves of Saudi Arabia. It has never defaulted on a loan. Its debt to GDP is less than 1/2 the US debt/GDP.

The rest of the media 'data' is bull-$#@!.

Left, right, conservative, liberal, libertarian, communist, socialist, monarchist, blah, blah, blah. Irrelevant bull$#@! from those who must ascribe a label to every human on earth.

Learn how it has worked for 100 years:

We find resources, CIA installs a puppet, the IMF/World Bank floats loans for infrastructure (to extract the resources), Haliburton gets the infrastructure contracts, Exxon gets 97% of the profits from the resources and the country with the resources gets saddled with debt they can never repay.

You dare to buck that playbook at your own peril because we Constitutional Republic citizens have absolutely zero control over what 'our' POTUS, Congress, SCOTUS, CIA, Haliburton and Exxon do here or internationally.

The banks are the problem in every country. Iceland treated the problem correctly and it doesn't matter to me what religion their government is, I applaud that. Same for Chavez.