Jump to content

Venezuela


where

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

For real, I do not support the taking over of everything that commercial entities have done.   I think they have moved way past government control and become worldwide.  No amount of government is likely to stop them in their pursuit of profits.  The unseen hand of the markets do nothing to stop them, since the financial markets are not being tied to the will of the people. This is why I blame capitalism.  I see and understand why people are worried about the reach of the government, but I think that time has long gone, since the money from capitalism has disrupted all aspects of our life’s, to include the government.   Billionaires control media and for the most part pick who is elected at all levels.   In my mind capitalism bought our government and is using it as a tool for their own profit and control.   The government is just a tool for capitalism and is not able to force its own will anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CILONE/SK said:

In my mind capitalism bought our government and is using it as a tool for their own profit and control.

Believe it was a gradual system, but the companies large enough to affect government largely reached that size because they were facilitated by government. 

 

1 minute ago, CILONE/SK said:

The government is just a tool for capitalism and is not able to force its own will anymore. 

Again, if you read the definition of capitalism and understand it, what you're describing is not capitalism. Likewise, how would you propose this dynamic be corrected by allowing the government even more control over people and markets if clearly the've abused the power given to them under a system that has been largely democratic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To clarify... You don't get to be the size of the companies were discussing here by simply doing "good business". Facebook wasn't just a great idea that happened to reach the extent of the power and success they currently enjoy because they flourished under capitalism. In fact, I doubt they'd even be known by most the country, let alone the world, had they been subject to the true competition inherent under a capitalist system.

 

Further to that, the fact that there's a mountain of evidence that these large politically engaged (entrenched) corporations regularly support both sides of our two party system and further to the points you've made yourself, it would point to an Oligarchy rather than Capitalism. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the world is way past traditional definitions of what is going on.   Those definitions could not foresee what is happening on such a massive scale. And I do not think more power to the government is the answer.  I am not sure there is an answer.   I just do not think that giving corporations or billionaires more money or the ability to make more more is the answer.   In my opinion, that have shown that checks and balances do not work and are easily bought out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Language isn't fluid like that. despite what politicians and the media would have us believe. Many notable documents, like the US Constitution are often referred to as "living" documents which really is just code for them thinking they can twist it to mean whatever suits them.

 

1 minute ago, CILONE/SK said:

I am not sure there is an answer

True indeed and precisely why systems of government like Socialism and Communism simply can't work despite (arguably) looking good on paper and in some intellectual circles. The human condition is flawed and despite what we are taught, as humans, we are not created equal. This is not to say one person is inherently more deserving than another by default. Rather that we all have our talents and advantages, as well as our flaws and vulnerabilities. To think we can simply distribute the load and reward equally at any sort of scale, just does not work. Therefore, a system like capitalism in which we are each free to pursue or not pursue our own version of happiness in an open market contingent on an exchange of value between two willing participants, is about as close to perfect as we will likely ever get even if you can argue its still far from perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with that, except for it is easily corrupted when one person uses their money to overpower other people, which is what happened and is happening now.  Billionaires are reaping all the benefits and have made it impossible for the large majority of the world to pursue anything other than helping the billionaires make more money.    I do not think giving them the ability of more freedom in the markets, will change this from continuing to happen.  It will make it worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I for one am happy to see amazing talents, even when those talents amass other people fortunes. I don't feel like I have a right to their wealth, or have a right to decide how it's spent. What's mine is mine, that's what I have a right to.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was born poor, I'm a minority, the high school I graduated from was a juvenile lockup where kids had a 90% chance of going to prison within 5 years. My wife escaped a socialist country at 19 and moved here with $500 in her pocket, we're doing pretty damn good now if I do say so myself. It's not just us, most billionaires are self made if you didn't know. Sure, rich kids got a way better chance but again, I don't have the right to decide how their parents spend their money, I mean I have the right to make sure my kids are doing well since it's my own money don't I?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not talking about people like me and you.  I was poor for most of my life, but doing pretty well now.  I don’t even have to work now.   But I am talking about the people that run corporations and their families.  It this point, most of them are not working hard to get ahead, they are using the funds and most importantly the networks of connections to get what me and you can never achieve. Unless we are in entertainment or sports.   There are always exceptions, but for the most part, the ballpark they play in, 99.9% of the people in the world, are not even allowed close enough to it to see what game they are playing.   

 

What made america great (excelling through hard work) is gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CILONE/SK said:

I do not think giving them the ability of more freedom in the markets, will change this from continuing to happen.  It will make it worse. 

Again, that money on its own doesn't inherently provide the ability for abuse without being enforced through the threat of violence from the state. Also, you can't undo decades of abuse overnight by simply rolling back the rules (regulation) that allowed for the abuse to occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, misteraven said:

Language isn't fluid like that. despite what politicians and the media would have us believe. Many notable documents, like the US Constitution are often referred to as "living" documents which really is just code for them thinking they can twist it to mean whatever suits them.

 

True indeed and precisely why systems of government like Socialism and Communism simply can't work despite (arguably) looking good on paper and in some intellectual circles. The human condition is flawed and despite what we are taught, as humans, we are not created equal. This is not to say one person is inherently more deserving than another by default. Rather that we all have our talents and advantages, as well as our flaws and vulnerabilities. To think we can simply distribute the load and reward equally at any sort of scale, just does not work. Therefore, a system like capitalism in which we are each free to pursue or not pursue our own version of happiness in an open market contingent on an exchange of value between two willing participants, is about as close to perfect as we will likely ever get even if you can argue its still far from perfect.

Just to clarify are you taking the position that Capitalism is the one and only system that allows society to function?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, One Man Banned said:

Just to clarify are you taking the position that Capitalism is the one and only system that allows society to function?

I'm claiming 100% that it's clearly the most superior system, not the only way.

 

Look at North/South Korea. Look at China's success embracing free market capitalism. We could even look at the subject at hand here Venezuela, and see that it's obvious. Socialism has never improved anyones standard of living unless you count the political ruling class that can abuse their absolute power under socialism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mercer said:

I'm claiming 100% that it's clearly the most superior system, not the only way.

 

Look at North/South Korea. Look at China's success embracing free market capitalism. We could even look at the subject at hand here Venezuela, and see that it's obvious. Socialism has never improved anyones standard of living unless you count the political ruling class that can abuse their absolute power under socialism. 

There most be at least one example of a libertarian government in history that has succeeded.  Right?   

 

If if it is so superior, some country in history must have realized that and lead the way.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, One Man Banned said:

Just to clarify are you taking the position that Capitalism is the one and only system that allows society to function?

Nope, never said that and clearly not accurate. Society functioned under Mao, Stalin and Hitler, but one could make a pretty convincing argument that there were better ways to function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mercer said:

I'm claiming 100% that it's clearly the most superior system, not the only way.

 

Look at North/South Korea. Look at China's success embracing free market capitalism. We could even look at the subject at hand here Venezuela, and see that it's obvious. Socialism has never improved anyones standard of living unless you count the political ruling class that can abuse their absolute power under socialism. 

LOL, not quite free market Capitalism, but your overall point is valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CILONE/SK said:

There most be at least one example of a libertarian government in history that has succeeded.  Right?   

 

If if it is so superior, some country in history must have realized that and lead the way.

 

 

Surprisingly, there's few examples even true constitutional republics so no, not really. America is often referred to as the great experiment due to the fact that we took a novel approach to government and governance. Reality is that if you analyze the way things worked here when first established, it is essentially libertarianism or more accurately a closely related version of it called constitutionalism. Both are completely derived from how the country was founded and are little more than an effort to return to our roots.

 

But consider this... How often do those in power willing relinquish that power? Changing a system of government from one form to another is most often a very gradual process or a very quick and violent one. Voids in power get filled exceedingly quickly and unfortunately its a rare thing for a society to come together, as in the case of the USA, and start with a clean slate and true interest in establishing individual freedom and liberty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I've been beating the drum about this particular podcast, but its one of a few that I've been listening to for many years. The guy (Jack Spirko) is exceedingly pragmatic and logical and I rarely find myself disagreeing with what he has to say, even when I try to pick apart controversial topics and arguments he presents. This is a recent one I was listening to yesterday that once again speaks to precisely what we're discussing here.

 

I know you guys are busy, but you'd be doing yourself a favor by at least listening to this episode.

 

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

 

Episode-111- TSP Rewind – How Liberty Creates Inequality and Why that’s Good - http://www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/tsprw-111

 

Show notes:  There is a fallacy out there masquerading as a universal truth, and that is that our goal in society should be equality for all. That inequality should be eliminated, period. Politically many people have many different views on how that should be done, however the average person would agree that inequality is a bad thing, and should be eliminated.

 

The truth though is while the definition of inequality has been changed by the politically correct you can’t ignore the root of the word. It is formed from two parts, In this case the prefix “in” indicates a negative, as in the word “not”.

 

The component equality comes from the word equal as in each part, person, etc, get the same thing.

 

In other words inequality means “not equal”. So some get more than others, some get less.

 

What we have done is made inequality the same as or equal to injustice, which means a lack of fairness or justice or simply “not just”.

 

These two things are not the same thing.

 

If you think I am splitting hairs tune in today because this is a critical thing to understand when discussing liberty with others.

 

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

 

Much of what his podcasts focus on is homesteading and permaculture, but there's plenty of podcasts on liberty, capitalism, personal responsibility, etc if you search his archive. If anyone is interested, I'll link you to a few really great ones and save you the searching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, misteraven said:

LOL, not quite free market Capitalism, but your overall point is valid.

To me, Socialism/Capitalism isn't a black/white description, all states are complex mixture of both including our own since it's inception. The only truly free market is one outside of any state regulation, the best modern examples of these are black markets. Capitol, and socialism are sliding scale when describing a state that allows some of both to exist. Even communist party members acknowledged china has clearly moved towards the free market end of the spectrum allowing more economic freedom in recent decades, pulling millions, possibly billions out of poverty. It's one of our generations greatest achievements, and everyone buying cheap Chinese shit they don't need from Amazon can give themselves a pat on the back for contributing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CILONE/SK said:

There most be at least one example of a libertarian government in history that has succeeded.  Right?   

 

If if it is so superior, some country in history must have realized that and lead the way.

 

 

The United States was/is a libertarian government, admittedly it's slowly drifted towards socialism, and totalitarianism since it's inception. You've got me confused with libertarians, who believe in a constitutionally limited small government. I'm an Anarcho-captalist, (an Agorist to be exact) and I believe there's no better government, than no government. Governments are the leading cause of unnecessary death, and violence. They always have been, and contrary to popular indoctrination theory, they are not required to maintain a peaceful society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mercer said:

To me, Socialism/Capitalism isn't a black/white description, all states are complex mixture of both including our own since it's inception. The only truly free market is one outside of any state regulation, the best modern examples of these are black markets. Capitol, and socialism are sliding scale when describing a state that allows some of both to exist. Even communist party members acknowledged china has clearly moved towards the free market end of the spectrum allowing more economic freedom in recent decades, pulling millions, possibly billions out of poverty. It's one of our generations greatest achievements, and everyone buying cheap Chinese shit they don't need from Amazon can give themselves a pat on the back for contributing.

No doubt, but even in a general context of describing free markets, it would be a tough sell to lump china into that. They've embraced many aspects of capitalism, but at the end of the day the governments approach there is among the most heavy handed anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mercer said:

 I believe there's no better government, than no government. Governments are the leading cause of unnecessary death, and violence. They always have been, and contrary to popular indoctrination theory, they are not required to maintain a peaceful society.

I find this to be an extremely naive statement.  Historically, people left to their own devices, descend into death and violence, which is why humans tend to drift into groups with leaders and laws.  Organized religion has been in place as governments for the most part during many parts of human history,  this has led to kings and rulers of all types.   I take it that you are ok with a king, but not government.   I also take it that you believe people to be generally morally upstanding.   I would tend to disagree with you on any of that. 

 

I also find find it funny that you do not want any government, but you seem to have zero problems with corporations using their money to essentially deny you the ability of choice and freedom, just to make a higher profit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CILONE/SK said:

I find this to be an extremely naive statement.  Historically, people left to their own devices, descend into death and violence, which is why humans tend to drift into groups with leaders and laws.  Organized religion has been in place as governments for the most part during many parts of human history,  this has led to kings and rulers of all types.   I take it that you are ok with a king, but not government.   I also take it that you believe people to be generally morally upstanding.   I would tend to disagree with you on any of that. 

 

I also find find it funny that you do not want any government, but you seem to have zero problems with corporations using their money to essentially deny you the ability of choice and freedom, just to make a higher profit.  

Most often death and destruction is the exclusive domain of the government, whether its war lords, kings or democratically elected government. In fact, history has shown repeatedly that the more heavy handed government takes in governing, most often it results in war, if not genocide. Personally I see anarchism in a similar way as I see socialism in that it looks good as an intellectual thought experiment, but just don't think it possible in the practical sense. I'd love to give humanity or even a sizable subset of humanity the credit to be able to govern themselves without government, but just don't have the faith that they'd be capable at scale. If anything, we'd have to undue all the dependency and lack of motivation towards self sufficiency that in my own humble opinion will take generations if it can even be done.

 

I'm not a fan of government and really do wish we as a collective had the ability to do away with it entirely, but the pragmatic side of me thinks that due to the proliferation of truly stupid people, we'd never be able to do away with it entirely. At least until they come up with a cure for stupid. Then again, I'm not nearly as educated on that system of government as @Mercerso perhaps as an interesting topic to explore, he can shed light on the subject and how a country like the USA, with its 320 million or so people, could possibly wean themselves off the system we have and make anarchism work at that scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CILONE/SK said:

I find this to be an extremely naive statement.

So is thinking Socialsm will work the next time it's tried after it's been failing for over a century.

 

Quote

Historically, people left to their own devices, descend into death and violence, which is why humans tend to drift into groups with leaders and laws.  Organized religion has been in place as governments for the most part during many parts of human history,  this has led to kings and rulers of all types.

No problems with the above statement

 

Quote

I take it that you are ok with a king, but not government.   I also take it that you believe people to be generally morally upstanding.   I would tend to disagree with you on any of that. 

Putting words in my mouth to construct a straw man argument against, never wanted a king, and no, that's not the natural conclusion of freedom. Reminds me of people saying "without a king, there will be chaos" before constitutional democracy was finally  proven far superior.

 

Quote

 

I also find find it funny that you do not want any government, but you seem to have zero problems with corporations using their money to essentially deny you the ability of choice and freedom, just to make a higher profit.  

I would of course have a problem with any company infringing on my rights. Again, you're constructing a straw man to argue against. The only entity infringing on anyone's rights is the government, and criminals, to me there is no difference.

Edited by Mercer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russian Air Force landed in Caracas Monday, barely made the news no mention by Trump unlike in March. Cuba is fixing the power grid. There was someone code named “Child Eater” in the failed May coup. According to a senior official who escaped house arrest and flew to Washington the opposition has supposedly infiltrated Maduro’s security, Me thinks either they are trying to trigger Maduro into  a serious purge which will untimely be even more unpopular or another coup or assassination is about to happen.

 

It kinda seems like the manipulation of the commodities markets over the past say 75 years by the “Allies” has had some negative affect on socialist countries. Not saying it’s the only cause of their shitting the bed, but it seems when countries nationalize utilities it’s only a matter of time before they get hit with a 1-2 punch of oil production increase and raise in interest rates. This can force popular movements to implement austerity policies which is their eventual downfall.

Edited by where
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they "nationalize" something like the oil refineries, the multinational corporations that owned the refineries go to international court and say hey, Venezuela just seized 3 billion in assets from us. These courts eventually impose sanctions on Venezuela, and eventually start seizing Venezuelas foreign assets in retaliation. This, in itself isn't the worst consequence of nationalization (theft), it's capitol flight.

 

When a country goes kleptocratic, it's citizens, and foreign investors alike pull assets out of the country. They don't want to end up like that toy maker who was stupid enough to keep the toys in Venezuela, the government said you can't charge that much and need to take a loss on them, so they stopped selling them, then the government seized them saying not selling them was bad for Venezuelans. Next thing you know, there will never be someone stupid enough to import, or manufacture toys there, and there will be a shortage eventually when the government runs out of stuff to steal, with zero plans to replace/repair the industry they've just basically destroyed. Oh no it's the capitalists fault.

Edited by Mercer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...