The New York Times updates readers today (12/13/12) on the health status of left-wing Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, and the political implications for his country. But the paper starts out by suggesting that the people who keep electing him must have some kind of problem.
According to the Times‘ William Neuman, life in Venezuela is pretty dismal. Christmas tree shipments were fouled up, a government ice cream factory closed down, and “all of this happened while the economy was growing — before the slowdown many predict next year.”
He writes:
Such frustrations are typical in Venezuela, for rich and poor alike, and yet President Hugo Chávez has managed to stay in office for nearly 14 years, winning over a significant majority of the public with his outsize personality, his free-spending of state resources and his ability to convince Venezuelans that the Socialist revolution he envisions will make their lives better.
So people believe that, somewhere in the future, life will get better thanks to Chávez? But it’s already happened for the majority of Venezuelans. As Mark Weisbrot wrote (Guardian, 10/3/12):
Since 2004, when the government gained control over the oil industry and the economy had recovered from the devastating, extra-legal attempts to overthrow it (including the 2002 US-backed military coup and oil strike of 2002-2003), poverty has been cut in half and extreme poverty by 70%. And this measures only cash income. Millions have access to healthcare for the first time, and college enrolment has doubled, with free tuition for many students. Inequality has also been considerably reduced. By contrast, the two decades that preceded Chávez amount to one of the worst economic failures in Latin America, with real income per person actually falling by 14% between 1980 and 1998.
It’s not that Neuman is unaware of this. Deep in the piece– after saying that “Mr. Chávez’s own record is mixed”– he admits, in between all the hand-waving and caveats, that maybe there’s something that explains Chávez’s popularity:
He has used price controls to make food affordable for the poor, but that has contributed to shortages in basic goods. He created a popular program of neighborhood clinics often staffed by Cuban doctors, but hospitals frequently lack basic equipment.
There is no doubt that living conditions have improved for the poor under Mr. Chávez, and that is the greatest source of his popularity. But the improvements came at a time when high oil prices were pouring money into the country and fueling economic growth, which some analysts say would have led to similar improvements under many leaders, even some with more market-friendly policies.
So life is better for the vast majority of the country. That’s a far cry from the point he stressed at the beginning, that Chávez has somehow sold people on the questionable idea that the outlook would someday improve. The Times has to downplay that reality so you’ll take away the message: things are bad there. Or, if they’re not, someone else with superior, “market-friendly policies” could have achieved the same results, if not better.
Ya, he manages to convince people that they are doing better, but letting them do better; unlike the current candidate who lost, who thought they best idea for America was him making billions more, and the rest of tighten our belts.
Amazing what what people will believe when you actually do something for them, and not just take a Golden Parachute while you give those below you a Golden shower.
This shows the superiority of our U.S. leaders to Chávez: since 2008, Obama has convinced millions of Americans that he has made their lives better, despite his having done nothing for them at all.
David G has explained true American exceptionalism in a nutshell. From media to politicians, nearly every aspect of our ruling class’ dominance over us has become a willing endeavor. They have become so good at deluding us, channeling our political energy into the corporate-sponsored election cycle, and getting us to believe that we – the similarly oppressed – are each other’s enemy, that they no longer need blatantly authoritarian controls. We live and breathe free market capitalism, and it feels so natural.
America is certainly the best in the world at this – a model for all to emulate. Our democracy is the most effective tyranny money can buy.
I loved your expose of the NYT story on Chavez.
IF I WERE A VENEZUELAN I WOULD WONDER WHY MY PRESIDENT GOES TO CUBA WHEN HE GETS SICK, IF HEALTHCARE IS SO GREAT IN VENEZUELA. ALSO NO MENTION OF HIS BLAMING HIS OWN EX COMPADRES FOR ECONOMIC PROBLEMS THAT DO EXIST, THOUGH I AGREE WITH DAVID BELOW, AND EITHER JAILS OR BANISHES THEM. AS SHOWN ON THE HUGO CHAVEZ SHOW ON FRONTLINE, WHERE HE PUT A GUARDIAN REPORTER ON THE SPOT. AND ALL HIS APPOINTEES WERE SWEATING WITH ANXIETY. NOTHING IS EVER HIS FAULT. IF HE WERE A RIGHT WING LEADER ENDLESSLY EXTENDING TERM LIMITS, WOULD WE BE AS SUPPORTIVE? I WOULD LIKE FOLLOW UP ON WHETHER MEMBERS OF THE OPPOSITION PARTY LOSE BENEFITS AND JOBS AS HAPPENED THE LAST TIME SOMEONE RAN AGAINST HIM.
Someone else, but they had 400 years to do it and no one even tried. All of Venezuela’s wealth went to the bourgeoisie and their lackeys. Having 5 maids and Mansions plus vacation homes in Miami, that was what progress meant to them. “Freedom” meant a liscense to exploit at will and with impunity, their poorer compatriots. Then we have the uber hypocrite, the one with Kill-lists, torture, kidnappings, the one that overthrows governments in Honduras and Paraguay, the one whose drones kill children, the one with indefinite detentions and arrests without warrants or charges, he calls Chavez “authoritarian.” No one has ever accused Chavez of said crimes. Obama weeps for those monstrous. ghastly killings in Connecticut, does he also weep for the children his drones kill in Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan?
To understand the NYT’s hostility to Venezuela, remember this:
Hugo Chávez Departs
NYT Editorial: April 13, 2002 “Hugo Chavez Departs”
With yesterday’s resignation of President Hugo Chávez, Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator. Mr. Chávez, a ruinous demagogue, stepped down after the military intervened and handed power to a respected business leader, Pedro Carmona. But democracy has not yet been restored, and won’t be until a new president is elected. That vote has been scheduled for next spring, with new Congressional elections to be held by this December. The prompt announcement of a timetable is welcome, but a year seems rather long to wait for a legitimately elected president.
Washington has a strong stake in Venezuela’s recovery. Caracas now provides 15 percent of American oil imports, and with sounder policies could provide more. A stable, democratic Venezuela could help anchor a troubled region where Colombia faces expanded guerrilla warfare, Peru is seeing a rebirth of terrorism and Argentina struggles with a devastating economic crisis. Wisely, Washington never publicly demonized Mr. Chávez, denying him the role of nationalist martyr. Rightly, his removal was a purely Venezuelan affair.
First: great exposé. Second: One has to ask: what is wrong with LatAm politics that usually end up in personalism?, why doesn the future of Venezuela depend on the health of a single man?. Why couldn´t Chavez himself crete in the decade+ in power a succesor?. Nepotism and personalism isn´t good, whether it´s right wing or left wing. I wish Venezuelans the best… but even Chavez´ ´system´ is showing its problems ie… high inflation. I supported Hugo when he nationalized strategic assets. But now it seems he wants the government to do everything, including running supermarket chains. That is prone to inefficiency and failure, and I think that´s been tried before elsewhere. Time will tell…
You would almost think that the CIA was still paying off journalists to write bad things about nations that the US government and hyper-profitable industries like oil corporations don’t approve of. But it probably wouldn’t even be necessary, because American ‘conventional wisdom’ is aligned with America’s imperialistic, corporatist national culture.
Believe me it’s the same or worse in the WP.
Their copy must be written by the state department……
My wife and I traveled throughout Venezuela in 2005, just three years after the United States supported coup (that failed because the Venezuelan people supported Chavez).
We found the people thrilled with the improved economic life under Chavez. Fishermen who pointed to new boats and engines that would now take them to deeper water and more fish; women who now were becoming literate and learning computer skillls; Cuban doctors willing to not just visit barrios where MD’s would not venture, but actually living right in the barrios. All over Venezuela we found the people energized with the new socialism. Sorry, Miami Herald, sorry NY Times, sorry Wall Street–democratic socialism does work. Ask the people of Venezuela, not the bourgeois of Venezuela.
I just wish that we in the U.S. can have another Chavez for the President. Our % of the poor is rising, while the super rich, and the rich are growing fatter, and fatter with their ill gotten loot. Let us compare the statistical data between the two countries, and the most salient difference is that in Venezuiela, the majority of people who were not rich are better of under Chavez, while in the U.S. the majority of nor rich are poorer. So what system is better for the majority?
The New York Times has been lying its ass off in favor of Capitalism for in excess of 120 years – why did anyone think they might stoop to tell the truth now? Chavez has been reelected by sizeable majorities since his first term, precisely because he actually does care about his people. All the sad-sack-of-shit commentators in this country just can’t understand how a socialist could be popular, because they aren’t equipped to recognize that any stratum of society exists below that which they occupy: far-upper-middle-class. Anything else – is just servants. And we all know that servants deserve nothing – no consideration, no fair wage, no justice and no mention.
April said: “IF I WERE A VENEZUELAN I WOULD WONDER WHY MY PRESIDENT GOES TO CUBA WHEN HE GETS SICK, IF HEALTHCARE IS SO GREAT IN VENEZUELA. ”
He probably goes to Cuba to let the Cuban doctors in Venzuela work for the rest of the Venezuelans. With Cuba’s help, Venezuela’s medical system will get much better in time.
Now I have a question for you, April: Why am I thinking about obtaining citizenship in some other country with better healthcare? Answer: because the neocons who control this country will never permit Socialized Medicine, even when 80% of the population wants it, instead threatening people with fines and penalties if they don’t feel like being coerced to pay massively excessive fees to the Capitalist HMOs under force of law – because they know darned well they will get at best 1% of their contributions back in actual care – IF they can get care at all.
And Venezuela probably provides a better level of actual care for its citizens RIGHT NOW, than our for-massive-profit so-called “Health Maintenance Organizations” do or ever will. AND I’LL BET IT IS FREE!!
Champion our broken, thieving system only if you have no clue whatsoever what is going on in the world.
A government’s job is to say no, to all those that would work against the best interests of the nation’s population at large.
Bravo Arthur, 100% right. To understand our so called Health Care system, one need only see the movie SICKO, and then look at our system, what a shame that we do not recognize that the right to health is a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT. U.S. is the only western industrialized country that has no universal health insurance.
thanks, mike.
“Wisely, Washington never publicly demonized Mr. Chávez, denying him the role of nationalist martyr. Rightly, his removal was a purely Venezuelan affair.”
Both hideous lies, which presumably FAIR outed at the time. Chavez was demonized by the US from the moment he undertook to do anything useful in favor of his people; and if you think there weren’t continuous phone calls between our State Department and the crowd around Carmona, dream on. They couldn’t wait one second after they thought they’d gotten rid of Chavez, to start piling on the bullshit about how “bad” he was. Real Dictators – don’t run for election and aren’t voted in by margins of 80% and 64%. The one thing missing from the picture is the law that puts libelous liars of our administration – in jail for lying to our public and to the people of the world. It’s okay for them to hate Chavez – but please tell the truth as to why: he’s a living example of a leader people could actually enjoy supporting, due to his doing useful things for THE PEOPLE OF HIS COUNTRY – as opposed to this place, where if 90% of the benefit is not taken by some CORPORATION, whatever it is will NEVER HAPPEN. Namely: the marching orders of our national-security state are: if he or she is a socialist, bash them; if the country is Socialist, attack it (e.g. Yugoslavia – a ragingly successful Socialist economy – had to be DESTROYED, we can’t have successful models of Socialism to tempt the stupid common folk to get rid of Capitalism. See Michael Parenti’s ‘To Kill a Nation’ and Michel Collon’s “Liar’s Poker”.)
Robert Grant,
Our government is by the people, but for the rich people mostly. Prescott Bush tried to overthrow FDR and install a fascist government as in Germany, well, Marine Corps general Smedley Butler blew the whistle on him, and FDR stayed in power, nothing happened to Mr. Prescott Bush, he was a right-winger Republican.
Helping the unfortunate, like making peace to celebrate the birth of the “Prince of Peace,” is what a Judeo-Christian nation is supposed to be doing to adhere to the majority faith with that designation. Trying to put down a leader who does what our leader is supposed to be doing only points up the differences, like the opposite of life and death. Putting the nation’s wealth into exotic killing devices (and failing to restrict personal arms) inevitably results in death while sharing and caring helps everyone to live better. Viva Chavez!
I continue to wish for Chaves’s good health. Unless his socialist revolution is strong, corporations will suck resources dry and again impoverish the people. “I can smell the sulphur!”
What do you expect from a sleazy, extreme right propaganda rag like the New York Times? Everything they publish is bought and paid for by wealthy and corporate interests.
Can you imagine how much better life would be in the US if we had had leaders even half as dedicated, idealistic, competent and altruistic as Hugo Chave z has been. A glory for the Americas to have such a good leader, ad a sadness for America to have such disastrous leaders as GW Bush and Cheney, and such a mediocre one as Obama.
Fernando,
You wrote
“One has to ask: what is wrong with LatAm politics that usually end up in personalism?, why doesn the future of Venezuela depend on the health of a single man?. Why couldn´t Chavez himself crete in the decade+ in power a succesor?.”
Venezuela has a presidential system that predates Chavez. Latin American countries are also prone to military coups thanks to decades of US military funding for and penetration of LA militaries. Chavez survived the US backed coup of 2002 because of his strong personal contacts within the military that kept a loyalist sector on his side. Also crucial, were hundreds of thousands of poor protesters who made it clear that consolidating the coup would take a major bloodbath. Strong and competent personal leadership is, unfortunately, a very real necessity given realities that cannot wished away or easily countered..
You wrote
” even Chavez´ ´system´ is showing its problems ie… high inflation. ”
A country’s inflation rate, all by itself, tells us nothing out the health of the economy. Some of the poorest countries in the world have extremely low inflation rates – Haiti, Rwanda, Chad.
You wrote
“I supported Hugo when he nationalized strategic assets. But now it seems he wants the government to do everything, including running supermarket chains. That is prone to inefficiency and failure, and I think that´s been tried before elsewhere.”
There is nothing about inherently efficient or inefficient about public (or private ) ownership. At any rate, the whole concept of “efficiency” should always be spelled out precisely. Much of the “efficiency” of private enterprises is often obtained by passing along the costs to production to public – pollution for example. Or think of the Walmart wages so low employees are on food stamps. Being good at enriching a tiny group doesn’t mean the public benefits when all costs are accounted for.
Also – in terms of public health and environmental impact – Cuba’s health care system is arguably the most efficient in the world.
I too denounced the US media and government for their lies and deception. I too believe in the rule of people and fair distribution of wealth. But I started resenting Chavez and Venezuela when they started collaborating with the religious tyranny of Iran. “My enemy’s enemy is my friend” is something that only people of loose morals subscribe too. Collaborating with Iran may be good for the people of Venezuela but it is not good for the people of Iran. Sacrificing another nation for your own interests is immoral.
We are allowed, in the US, to vote–sometimes, as the Supreme Court made plain in Bush vs. Gore–but have no right to vote.
If we in the US were also allowed to have candidates, I would vote for someone like Chavez, just as the majority voted for him in his country.
We in the US have a long way to go before what we have here deserves to be called democracy.
Yeah we all want to be more like the country Mr Chavez rules.Ok joking aside…..He is a bur in our saddle.No friend of this country.We deal with him from that standpoint.We deal with him when it is in our national interest.Other than that he is off our xmas card list.If he tries to make life hard for us we will make his life worse.No fairy dust in our eyes- we move forward.He imports almost all his cars, electronics ,clothes, and a good amount of his food.As far as singing his praise…save it.Like Mussolini who made the trains run on time and put a pasta ball in every pot ,Chavez rules with the open hand of the man who controls the bread lines..Yippie! He empowers his people with his village idiots belligerence .He is a tin horn oil rich banana republic nimrod- who will get swatted like a fly if he ever finds a ways to really threaten his neighbor.My guess is he exhibits just enough “mouth” to keep his people feeling like hard asses.So Just sell us your oil at a fair price.We will sell you pretty much everything else you need, and we probably will get along just fine.People will keep voting him in for the same reason Obama got the gig again.Obama runs the bread line here.These two should get on fine.Just fine.
What a reaction to having a man like Chavez, who actually tries hard to equal the plain field between the rich parasites, and the working class! I admire Chavez’s efforts to minimize the gap between the have all, and have nothing classes. Bravo Chavez! He will outsmart our CIA any time. As long as he has his people behind him, NO CIA will replace him. They may assassinate him, but, look at Castro; he outlived how many U.S. Presidents since 1959? How many attempts to assassinate Castro officially admitted 17, how many that we did not admit?
Bozidar…..Rich parasites?Really?Did you just say that?Whom may I say is a rich parasite?In this country lets say?Would that include Obama who’s net worth is near 20 million?Bill Clinton over 100 million?Our incoming secretary of state john Kerry 1 billion?Or are rich parasite those who make over 250K?500k?One million?And of course they are not the” working class” cause they don’t work right?I never hear the term poor parasites from the left.Just the rich.Or do you just mean anyone who succeeds in anything is nothing more than a parasite?I give you the respect to understand that the words you speak ,are the words you mean.You do not have an addled brain I have noticed.So you will be given no sanctuary of excuse-or the beliefs you hold.You spew hatred and class warfare.And we see you.We see you.
email to the Washington Post Ombudsman.
TO ombudsman@washpost.com
RE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hugo-chavezs-legacy-failing-to-prepare-venezuela-for-the-next-leader/2012/12/10/2d54a5d4-430a-11e2-8061-253bccfc7532_story.html
Mr. Pexton.
This Washington Post editorial claimed the Venezuela’s fiscal deficit for 2012 was 20% of GDP. The UK Guardian just amended an article that made a very similar claim as follows:
“The IMF estimates the deficit at 7.4% of GDP, although private sector analysts say the figure could be close to 20%.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/08/venezuela-election-hugo-chavez
The Guardian should have named the “priavte sector analysts” and explained why they haven’t sold the anti-Chavez IMF on their claims. Nevertheless, the UK Guardian is at least letting its readers know that the 20% of GDP number is very far from an uncontested fact. The Washington Post editors should at least do that much. Editorials should also have some minimal standards for accuracy.
Joe Emersberger
In order to have a simple illustration of the capitalist system, i shall copy a page from the book Looking Bacward by Bellamy (mid 19 cent. america):
“By way of attempting to give the reader some general impression of the way people lived together in those days, and especially of the relations of the rich and poor to one another, perhaps I cannot do better than to compare society as it then was to a coach which the masses of humanity were harnessed to and dragged toilsomely along a very hilly and sandy road. The driver was hunger, and permitted no lagging, though the pace was necessarily very slow. Despite the difficulty of drawing the coach at all along so hard a road, the top was covered with passengers who never got down, even at the steepest assents. These seats on top were very breezy and comfortable. Well out of dust. Their occupants could enjoy the scenery at their leisure, or critically discuss the merits of the straining team. Naturally such places were in great demand and the competition for them was keen, every one seeking as the first end in life to secure a seat on the coach for himself and to leave it to his child after him. By the rule of the coach a man could leave his seat to whom he wished, but on the other hand there were many accidents by which it might at any time be wholly lost. For all that they were so easy, the seats were very insecure, and at every sudden jolt of the coach persons were slipping out of them and falling to the ground, where they were instantly compelled to take hold of the rope and help to drag the coach on which they had before ridden so pleasantly. It was naturally regarded as a terrible misfortune to lose one’s seat, and the apprehension that this might happen to them or their friends was a constant cloud upon the happiness of those who rode.
But did they think only of themselves? Was not their very luxury rendered intolerable to them by comparison with the lot of their brothers and sisters in the harness, and the knowledge that their own weight added to their toil? Had they no compassion for fellow beings from whom fortune only distinguish them? Oh, yes, commiseration was frequently expressed by those who rode for those who had to pull the coach, especially when the vehicle came to a bad place in the road, as it was constantly doing or to a particularly steep hill. At such times, the desperate straining of the team, their agonized leaping and plunging under the pitiless lashing hunger, the many who fainted at the rope and were trampled in the mire, made a very distressing spectacle, which often called forth highly creditable displays of feeling on the top of the coach. At such times the passengers would call down encouragingly to the toilers of the rope, extorting them to patience, and holding out hopes of possible compensation in another world for the hardness of their lot, while others contributed to buy salves and liniments for the crippled and injured. It was agreed that bit was a great pity that the coach was so hard to pull, and there was a sense of great relief when the especially bad piece of the road was gotten over. This relief was not, indeed, wholly on account of the team, for there was always some danger at these bad places of a general overturn in which all would lose their seats.
It must in truth be admitted that the main effect of the spectacle of the misery of the toilers at the rope was to enhance the passengers’ sense of the value of their seats upon the coach, and to cause them to hold on to them more desperately than before. If the passengers could only have felt assured that neither they nor their friends would ever fall from the top, it is probable that, beyond contributing to the funds for liniments and bandages, they would have troubled themselves extremely little about those who dragged the coach.
I am well aware that this will appear to the men and women of the twentieth century as incredible inhumanity, but there are two facts, both curious, which explain it. In the first place, it was firmly and sincerely believed that there was no other way in which society could get along, except the many pulled at a rope and the few rode, and not only this, but that no very radical improvement even was possible, either in the harness, the coach, the roadway, or the distribution of the toil. It had always been as it was, and it always would be so. It was a pity, but it could not be helped, and philosophy forbade wasting compassion on what was beyond remedy.
The other is yet more curious, consisting in a singular hallucination which those on the top of the coach generally shared, that they were not exactly like their brothers and sisters who pulled at the rope, but clay, in some in some way belonging to a higher order of beings who might justly expect to be drawn. This seems unaccountable, but as I once rode on this very coach and shared that very hallucination, I ought to be believed. The strangest thing about the hallucination was that those who had but just climbed up from the ground, before they had overgrown the marks of the rope upon their hands, begun to fall under its influence. As for those whose parents and grandparents before them had been so fortunate as to keep their seats on top, the conviction they cherished of the essential difference between their sort of humanity and the common article was absolute. The effect of such delusion in moderating fellow feeling for the suffering of the mass of men into a distant and philosophical compassion is obvious. To it I refer as the only extenuation I can offer for the indifference which, at the period I write of, marked my own attitude toward the misery of my brothers.”
Did the system change much in over 100 years?
Good lord Bozidar you are quoting a victorian era failed science fiction writer and socialist, to grasp an understanding of what you call the paired misery of then and now.If all around you here you see misery I will travel to the four corners of the earth with you to show you real misery.in this country the poor look like the rich in other lands.And thats why those countries HATE America.They demand in their own way that our poor who have so much more share what they have WITH THEM.And so the idiot wheel spins.Does that mean our poor should not be angry that they have so little ,while others have so much?No.In fact we must remove ALL impediments so that they may work, and rise up to any level they want.And most of those impediments are governmental.I have the feeling that your basic impulse is to take care of the poorest among us.And when you see the uber rich you bristle that the two walk side by side.My feeling is that communism and socialism are failed methods of dealing with bringing the largest group of people into a place were their basic needs are taken care of.Or better put- it does work for a time.Then you run out of other peoples money.And you kill the golden goose.It has been calculated that if you confiscated ALL the money of the rich in this country that you could run the government for just under two months.See real freedom when matched with a law abiding capitalist system has its own engine built in.How can you possibly look at this country and not see that it has fulfilled more dreams than any country that has ever been.And benefited mankind.Look at our farming and food growing advancements.All derived from private companies with profit motives.Our medicine ,Telecommunication,transportation,fiber optics advancements,computer,energy based technologies.Profit,profit,profit always as its motive.You want to remake the wheel ,and still reap its benefits.Someday we will have a car and a home that will run on hydrogen.Made for pennies as we sleep from offshoots of our nuclear reactors.The air will be clean.The so called global warming will become a myth.But behind it will be a profit motive.And everyone will benifit.
‘Michael e,’
At this ‘junction’ of our discussion, I shall leave to this educated FORUM to decide whether your utopian description of our current or the envisioned American system is correct. I shall let our participants be judge whether my claim that the capitalist system is as Bellamy described it with the ‘Couch Ride,’ still valid. I still claim that without strict regulations, the capitalist system is anti human, damages environment, and causes permanent insecurity, and anxiety. It creates poverty at the same time extremely wealthy. I still prefer the life style of the American natives, or the Swedish system to ours. I would sooner be called a socialist than a capitalist like Rockefeller was, any time. The U.S. Census of 2010 clearly proves that in this glorious system better than 50% of the population OWED more than they OWNED, at the same time, our government was borrowing money from China $2,000,000, 000,000 to operate. I would definitely call it a failed system. With over 60,000,000 Americans unable to get health insurance, 23,000,000 Americans out of work, our infra structure failing, and the gap between the have it all, and have nothing widening, I find this ‘paradise’ a failed system for the majority. You are free to keep waving the flag, and I will continue to work on helping the system change to be more for the majority, even if at the cost of the 2% of the parasites. I am a Humanist, for your information, not a socialist, and if a socialist system is more humanist than the capitalist system, so be it.
Well Bozidar no we wont leave it to this forums readers.Most are hard core libs who have been infected by socialist fairy dust.We shall leave it to the population of this country to make the decision if socialism is the way to go.It has worked well for Europe hasn’t it?As far as American “natives” you really need to read a few books of the nature of things when we arrived.The so called noble savage suffered the same foibles of every other man.Warfare….land acquisition…..subjugation….greed…cruelty.Sweden is a very homogeneous society(code word for racial purity?)They are like Switzerland ,a rule oriented people.Rigid and harsh in judgement on “slackers”.Totally unsuited to modern America’s attitude of penalizing those who succeed ,while we subsidize failure.And by the way take a look at what native Americans did to those in the tribe who refused to support their family unit.Not pretty.See the problem with socialism,communism,and most of the other forms of government people here laud is that it empowers a central authority.ALWAYS a bad deal.We here in America want exactly the opposite.Empowered people .Disempowered Government.We are in a time when our government is borrowing 40 cents on every dollar.Printing money as fast as they can.All to spend on a ballooning government overburdened with massive social programs.So soon we will eviscerate the military to pay for those programs.We tax the rich.But taxing everything and everyone will not pay the bill.The libs stubbornly refuse to change.I spoke for two years against Fanny and freddy and the collapse that would come when they went belly up.I prophesied that the left would deflect all blame to the banks and wall street(and republicans)when it went south.Even though they ran this disaster lock stock and barrel.Reed and shumman promised me all was well, and my fears and warnings unfounded.I told them they needed a class in basic math.So here we are again.I tell you we need to recreate wealth to save ourselves.And you bozidar say socialism….more socialism is the way.You were wrong then ,you are wrong again.Very disheartening and sometimes futile.
‘Michael e’
Ignoring what I wrote about the Census results, that our military budget takes more than 505 of our collected taxes so that our government can protect the holdings of the 2% of the parasites, welfare for the corporations, and the huge land owners dumped in the budget for the welfare of the displaced workers from the employment, so many ills that you ignore, and just keep defending the rich class interests, well, I shall stay as a minority, I will stay my course, helping change this system to be better for the MAJORITY of our suffering, exploited, and betrayed people. You chose the oppressors, exploitators, that is your choice. Long Live our Declarations of Independence
,,,,,,,
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers form the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Bozidar
First our founding fathers tried to guarantee equal opportunity.The process goes on.No one ever guaranteed equal results.That process will never begin.And using our founding documents in a reinterpretation ….trying to imply that our founders sought socialistic answers to the problems of society, is total nonsense.Just the opposite is true.Real freedoms were always seen in a government ruled over by the people.And in a full blooded capitalist system for the people, and of the people.I would respect your beliefs more if you simply said you are a socialist, and want to throw down our form of government.Stop mincing words sir.Your slippery as an eel move to simply “tweak” the system, is a fraud, and you know it.
As far as the military and what they spend….this is an old canard.Do we spend massive amounts?Yes we do.Is it constitutional?Yes it is.Should we spend those massive amounts ,or simply suffer defeat,retreat,and surrender to save a buck?Beyond my pay grade.I would put it this way.If we do ceed our position as a super power (who accepts that projected power keeps the wolves at bay)what will the results be ?And what will the cost visa vis our future be?Soon dramatic military cuts will take effect.The truth behind that is less safety for our soldiers.And less ability to enforce our national interests.That money will be handed to politicians to do with as they will.Like handing a chicken to a fox.Bozidar you are the poster boy for the saying….”The road to hell is paved with liberal good intentions”.
‘Michael e’
There was not a single sentence in all the basic documents outlining our form of government that mentions A SINGLE TIME the word you inject, ‘CAPITALISM.’ Not once. The current amendments to the Constitution are my proof that we can, and must amend our system that would be favoring the MAJORITY of our population, NOT THE MINORITY of those who are just raking huge sums of money. As for the military budget, and our need to as you say ‘project’ our stupendous power, I will argue that point until it stops, or until my death. There was nothing in the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence that requires of us to have an empire, or to police the world. Nothing at all. We plunder the world resources because we have let the corporation usurp, buy, or politicians, and they run our country. They have upended the system of government. We must as a nation implement immediately renewable energy to reduce/eliminate the need for imported oil, or other fossil fuels, produce electric cars, start recycling better than 80% of all our garbage, rebuild our infra structure that is badly neglected, make higher education free to all, stop exodus of jobs, and pass a law against importing the products that our corporations produce over-seas to create the jobs over here, in the good U.S. of A. We must have a Universal Health Insurance as other modern European countries have. As we have it now, patriotism is inversely proportional to wealth, the richer a person, the less patriotic, more for exporting of our jobs, and more for the military spending to protect the their interests, not OUR, people’s National Interests. Our National Interests are to have our people employed, have insurance, a living wage, education, food and shelter. Yes I am for THESE National Interests, not for protecting the resources in the far away countries, or shielding the dictators we put in power. A country is made up of two entities; the country physical, and its people. We must save both. We have neglected both.
By the way, I have all three documents of our government framed, and hanging in my bedroom on the wall, so that I will NEVER forget my rights. Do you?
From nine a.m. to twelve p.m., you take in an unrestricted amount of apples, pineapples, pears, grapes, yellow plums, kiwi, and some cucumber. twelve to three p.m., consume any amount of oranges or tangerines, peaches, apricots, and papaya. Involving three to 6 p.m., try to eat mangos, cherries, strawberries, purple plums, watermelon, and a couple tomato.
To begin with, you have to have to undertake a distinct way of living by owning healthier nourishment and doing some variety of physical activity which will enable you to sweat. Perspiring means burning fat and that is what you need to have to get rid of belly fat. It indicates you need to have to go via soreness, so you are going to require to exhaust your system. It is not easy for an inactive person to start training all of a unexpected but with time, when you get made use of to it, you will experience far more at relieve bodily as well as morally and you could possibly even delight in it a large amount. You will need to be individual and think of your lengthy time period targets and primarily your health.
Now, it is genuine that lowering tummy fats in ladies is a very little far more complicated than in a man. This is resultant of a woman’s lean entire body mass becoming much lessen than a man’s. Lean overall body mass is instantly proportional to a person’s metabolism, and the bigger your metabolic process, the speedier and more competently you can shed belly unwanted fat.
Whenever a shopper asks me what could be likely erroneous with his or her conditioning application, I basically talk to them to consider out their tracker so we can have a glimpse. 99% of the time, they have not been measuring, and the other one% I am capable to correct with a few of easy and uncomplicated tweaks.
cheap phen375 won’t dehydrate the system like different methods of fat deprivation. When comparing it with other methods of getting rid of fat, it does not just take most secure in discovering water written content in your system. When you assess the folks who did liposuction and other medication you can expect to be able to notify possible struggling from dehydration from the seem of kinds own pores and skin. Many will conclude up having large quantities of drinking water for a lot of many years soon after the business or they conclude up having sick in the treatment. This other strategies also have an affect on the way the hormones perform and they can have an effect on the immune method.
Stepping: If you have manufactured many outings upstairs when shifting or cleaning, you may know how much electricity this work out requires. The advantages are multi-fold: burns energy, boosts coronary heart charge, terrific aerobics exercise session, builds leg and buttock muscular tissues. You can use your stairs for this. Stage up and down 20 periods, relaxation and repeat two or 3 situations.
Nourishment instruction not ingesting a great deal less but having a good deal far more from the ideal foodstuff things is the system at Western Wellness Institute. The Wellness Institute presents customers the knowledge to check out to try to eat accurate and the assistance to realize and to preserve optimum well being and body fat decline. placeholder
Hi, I do believe this is a great website. I stumbledupon it
;) I will return yet again since i have bookmarked it. Money and freedom is the best way to change, may you be rich and continue to help others.
What’s up, this weekend is nice in favor of me, since this time i am reading this impressive educational piece of writing here at my residence.
Is it surprising that the U.S. media will see Chaves’ actions to correct the errors of capitalism in Venezuela as a ‘communistic’ action? Consider this short description of our demise:
American Imperialism
America has often been accused of Imperialism. During the cold war it has played this role to a considerable degree mostly to preserve its own interests. The collapse of the Soviet Union has left the United States unprepared to cope with the New World Order.
Military imperialism has been illustrated both by the direct intervention of American Forces in many theaters of operation (Angola, Ethiopia, Kuwait, Vietnam, Korea, Cambodia, Haiti) but chiefly by indirect methods (arms, training of foreign military leaders, american bases, covert actions by the CIA). Many dictatorships around the world were installed or supported through indirect american intervention (Afghanistan, Argentina, Chili, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Panama, Spain, Turkey, Zaïre, to name a few). American policy has been very agressive towards any dissenting voices within its sphere of influence (Cuba, Nicaragua, Salvador, Granada, Canada).
Economic Imperialism is achieved through international trade, multinational companies and the threat of protectionism. Monetary Imperialism is epitomized by the mythic stature of the American Dollar and the abandoning the Gold standard. The USA has often been accused of exporting its own inflation.
Cultural Imperialism is by far the most reaching influence America enjoys. The immense distribution of Hollywood productions, the large diffusion of American television programs, the influence of American music, advertising, books and the Internet is unmatched by any other culture in the world. American trading partners have tried to stem the influence of American Culture to protect their own cultures and languages much to the irritation and misunderstanding of the USA. Linguistic imperialism has imposed the use of American English as the new esperanto.
You’re a moron. How can you think you’re smart just by cherry-picking what you want to hear and then ignoring all the rest? Yes the poor have more poorly executed programs under Chavez–programs that can issue you bandaids but misdiagnose an upset stomach as stomach cancer because they only studied to be a doctor for two years. So you tell me: is it better to have more hospitals staffed by those untrained to take care of you? Why don’t we set up a check up next time you’re in town. But wait a minute…how much time have you actually spent in Caracas? What Neuman is saying is that there have been scraps thrown to the poor from the master’s table and that the master has eaten better in the past 14 years than all the other masters combined that came before him. Now you tell me where you see the progress now…
Tim:
I feel sorry for all those who like you resort to name calling opposition instead of debating in a civil manner political/economic issues. I never posited that the various economic measures implemented by Chaves actually CURED all poverty, nor all social ills. I only pointed that his measures are a start toward equalizing the plain field for most economic classes. I find that if we take our system (capitalism U.S. kind) one shall find astronomical differences in the wealth, and income distribution. In case you have not checked it lately, just go to Google, and type; ‘wealth distribution in the U.S.’ (Je prends mon bien ou je le trouve). You should also check the average per capita income, (median is better), using as index 1970 inclusive 2012. You will notice that the actual wages when adjusted for inflation have been going steadily down since 1972. You may also find that the disparity in income between the top and the bottom was in 1972 hundred eighty times, while in 2012, it was 400 times. Using the same yard stick, evaluate the economic situation five years before Chavez and that under Chavez. Compare it using conventional statistical methods, and then publish it here. Present the raw data, and your calculations of the results. If the results show that the majority of the population is worse off under Chavez, I’ll take back everything I posited here. On the other hand, if you find that the majority (better than 50%) of the population are better off economically, you shall retract your claims. Why don’t you compare the U.S. and Venezuela using the same time periods and economics? Let us debate, like scholarly people, we are not running for any office, no need to get abusive. While both of us feel biased one way or the other, objectivity (facts) should be the mode of debating. N’est-ce pas? (Dime con quien andas,decirte he quien eres. Since I don’t know your class). By the way, check the APA and their definitions as to what I.Q. is designated for various ranks in intelligence.