poor venezuela

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Folks, just read what previously transpired to see that this clown is just regurgitating his disproven blatherings.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...1&postcount=30

Then go and read the original article I posted. Super Freak(ing dumb and proud of it) does what most neocon numbskulls do....substitute his supposition and conjecture for facts and logic. Super Freak(ing pathetic), indeed.

You keep saying that...

Because YOU keep doing it, as the chronology of the posts shows.

Yet you continue to fail to state what it is you think the author is trying to convey. I've already stated it time and again, as the chronology of the posts shows...it is YOU who continually keep trying to misrepresent what I and/or the article is putting forth with your erroneous accusations. As the chronology of the posts shows, I simply pointed out the logical flaw in your poor reading comprehension....TFB if you can't handle the truth of the posts. So instead of continuing to stomp your feet and telling others to go read the article.... how about you state what it is that you seem to see in the article that no one else has.

Oh stop lying.....How about YOU read the damned thing so instead of making moronic statements about the sub-title and what you think I mean. That way, we've got grounds for a real discussion. Don't try to bluff pass your willful ignorance and stubborness here...you made a mistake, just own up to it, read the article and then we can discuss specifics in detail.

Because we HAVE read it and it states EXACTLY what we said it does. The author pretends that because Venezuela has a low debt to GDP that it is silly to proclaim they are in an economic crisis.

Who is the "we" you refer to? Are you implying that you're part of some group that's responsible for your printed idiocy regarding a sub-title? If that's so, you guys need to smarten up...maybe get an adult to explain things to you.

And stop lying about the content....the author doesn't "pretend" anything, he uses FACTS to back his statements. Again, the author is NOT saying that things aren't economically messed up in Venezuela, but when analyzed in a broader context, it's nowhere near the doomsday scenario (a'la Greece), that the anti-Chavez crowd proclaims...because let's face it the Greek debt to the GDP is a total disaster.

So either put up or shut up. Show us what it is in the article that you think supports your position. quote it.... it is quite a short article... I am sure no one will mind you posting the whole thing and bolding the portion you think makes your case.

Nice try chuckles....but FIRST YOU HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU WERE ASS-BACKWARDS WRONG REGARDING YOUR BLATHERINGS ABOUT THE SUB-TITLE OF THE ARTICLE. Once you do that, THEN we can honestly continue.

And I've put up responses in the same general analysis and statements as you did, as we see here. The chronology of the posts proves me out on this....for you to ignore such and try to bluff pass your folly will seal your fate. So shit or get off the pot, my friend.....the ball has never left your court.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Well, you lied about how you previously defined "neoconservatism," so that's kind of a dealbreaker, and needlessly so. You could have just added, oh yeah, I meant to say it also means...

I love it when you neocon numbskulls think you're clever and then lie yourselves into a corner in a printed medium.

Here, you dishonest little cretin, read it and weep:

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary

Main Entry: neo·con
Pronunciation: \ˈnē-ō-ˌkän\
Function: noun
Date: 1979
: neoconservative

Main Entry: neo·con·ser·va·tive
Pronunciation: \ˌnē-ō-kən-ˈsər-və-tiv\
Function: noun
Date: 1952
1 : a former liberal espousing political conservatism
2 : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means

— neo·con·ser·va·tism \-və-ˌti-zəm\ noun

— neoconservative adjective


Furthermore, unsatiable spending is not conservatism. Hence, Reagan and Bush certainly had a huge fiscal liberal streak to them.

Well bunky, then anyone who calls themselves a conservative and/or voted for/supported the policies of either Reagan or the Bushies are either hypocrits or too fucking dumb as to know which way is up. So where does that leave you?

Finally, liberalism (as an economic philosophy) is one of the few truly modern, Enlightenment economic philosophies. The only other contender is communism, which is just a utopian bong-hit that not only doesn't work, but is an absolute menace. Your statist approach to economics is dated.

Finally, you just throw in the kitchen sink in hopes of distorting the issue and the stance YOU originally took. Sorry toodles, but the chronology of the posts won't let you BS your way out of this.....you keep creating these definitions based on your personal opinion, supposition and conjecture...then when properly challenged and proven wrong, you just throw in moot points that don't directly address your acknowledging your errors.

Grow up, man.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Here it is taimoron.... (oh wow, got your mommy to help you with that one, ehh bunky?)

Venezuela is Not Greece
Posted: Friday, May 7, 2010

Given the Venezuelan government's low public and foreign debt, the idea the country is facing an 'economic crisis' is plain wrong

by Mark Weisbrot

With Venezuela's economy having contracted last year (as did the vast majority of economies in the Western Hemisphere), the economy suffering from electricity shortages, and the value of domestic currency having recently fallen sharply in the parallel market, stories of Venezuela's economic ruin are again making headlines.

The Washington Post, in a news article that reads more like an editorial, reports that Venezuela is "gripped by an economic crisis," and that "years of state interventions in the economy are taking a brutal toll on private business."

There is one important fact that is almost never mentioned in news articles about Venezuela, because it does not fit in with the narrative of a country that has spent wildly throughout the boom years, and will soon, like Greece, face its day of reckoning. That is the government's debt level: currently about 20% of GDP. In other words, even as it was tripling real social spending per person, increasing access to healthcare and education, and loaning or giving billions of dollars to other Latin American countries, Venezuela was reducing its debt burden during the oil price run-up. Venezuela's public debt fell from 47.5% of GDP in 2003 to 13.8% in 2008. In 2009, as the economy shrank, public debt picked up to 19.9% of GDP. Even if we include the debt of the state oil company, PDVSA, Venezuela's public debt is 26% of GDP. The foreign part of this debt is less than half of the total.

Compare this to Greece, where public debt is 115% of GDP and currently projected to rise to 149% in 2013. (The European Union average is about 79%.)
Full Article : commondreams.org

1) Venezuela reduced its debt burden as 'oil prices ran up' because its economy is largely driven by the price of oil. Hence, the debt burden went back up as oil prices came back down.

No shit sherlock! But a 6.1% increase as opposed to a 33.7% drop is pretty damned good...and if you include state oil company debt it's 12.2% increase.....not exactly the end of the world, wouldn't you say?

2) The rest of the article states EXACTLY what we told you it did. Again, what cast of clowns compose this "we" you keep going on about? So far, no intellectual giants...just a bunch of neocon wonks with delusions of expertise and an ability to debate properly. The author is whining about other journalists discussing the economic problems of Venezuela and acting like Venezuela is becoming Greece. (which is NOT the case) The authors problem (and yours) is he thinks an economic crisis can only come about if debt is high relative to GDP. That is 100% false... which we pointed out to you. Yet you continue to spin.

Stop lying, the author NEVER states what you do...he is pointing to FACTS that determine the type of crisis that YOU and others swear is happening now...yet part of the indicators of such a crisis needed to support your claims DON'T EXIST! The comparison to Greece burns your ass because if we apply your logic, then the Greecian indicators would be treated as "negligible" instead of major. REMEMBER, THE AUTHOR NEVER STATED THAT VENEZUELA IS NOT HAVING SERIOUS ECONOMIC PROBLEMS....what we're talking about is degree...something you and your alleged cronies are stubbornly trying to slant one way.

Bottom line... the entire article is posted above. Do show us all how smart you are and point us silly confused souls where it is we went wrong.

Again with the "we" (not to intimidating given the stuff you "guys" are bullhorning).....and I did as you asked with simple reading comprehension and an easy grasp of current events in general. See the rest of the article below, which explains why you're wrong better than I can. I've underlined and hi-lited parts to help you along.

My guess... you will continue to spin, refuse to quote anything from the article and continue to post links to other posts in this thread. Because in the end... you are a simpleton, a moron, a brain dead fool who thought he was making a grand point... when in reality you are JUST smart enough to know you should be embarrassed at this point and thus are desperately trying to spin your way out of this.

Given the Venezuelan government's very low public and foreign debt, the idea the country is facing an "economic crisis" is simply wrong. With oil at about $80 a barrel, Venezuela is running a sizeable current account surplus, and has a healthy level of reserves. Furthermore, the government can borrow internationally as necessary - last month China agreed to loan Venezuela $20bn in an advance payment for future oil deliveries.

Nonetheless, the country still faces significant economic challenges, some of which have been worsened by mistaken macroeconomic policy choices. The economy shrank by 3.3% last year. The international press has trouble understanding this, but the problem was that the government's fiscal policy was too conservative - cutting spending as the economy slipped into recession. This was a mistake, but hopefully the government will reverse this quickly with its planned expansion of public investment this year, including $6bn for electricity generation.

The government's biggest long-term economic mistake has been the maintenance of a fixed, overvalued exchange rate. Although the government devalued the currency in January, from 2.15 to 4.3 to the dollar for most official foreign exchange transactions, the currency is still overvalued. The parallel or black market rate is at more than seven to the dollar.

An overvalued currency - by making imports artificially cheap and the country's exports more expensive - hurts Venezuela's non-oil tradable goods' sectors and prevents the economy from diversifying away from oil. Worse still, the country's high inflation rate (28% over the last year, and averaging 21% annually over the last seven years) makes the currency more overvalued in real terms each year. (The press has misunderstood this problem, too - the inflation itself is too high, but the main damage it does to the economy is not from the price increases themselves but from causing an increasing overvaluation of the real exchange rate.)

But Venezuela is not in the situation of Greece - or even Portugal, Ireland, or Spain. Or Latvia or Estonia. The first four countries are stuck with an overvalued currency - for them, the euro - and implementing pro-cyclical fiscal policies (eg deficit reduction) that are deepening their recessions and/or slowing their recovery. They do not have any control over monetary policy, which rests with the European Central Bank. The latter two countries are in a similar situation for as long as they keep their currencies pegged to the euro, and have lost output six to eight times that of Venezuela over the last two years.

By contrast, Venezuela controls its own foreign exchange, monetary, and fiscal policies. It can use expansionary fiscal and monetary policy to stimulate the economy, and also exchange rate policy - by letting the currency float. A managed, or "dirty" float - in which the government does not set a target exchange rate but intervenes when necessary to preserve exchange rate stability - would suit the Venezuelan economy much better than the current fixed rate. The government could manage the exchange rate at a competitive level, and not have to waste so many dollars, as it does currently, trying to narrow the gap between the parallel and the official rate. Although there were (as usual, exaggerated) predictions that inflation would skyrocket with the most recent devaluation, it did not - possibly because most foreign exchange transactions take place through the parallel market anyway.

Venezuela is well situated to resolve its current macroeconomic problems and pursue a robust economic expansion, as it had from 2003-2008. The country is not facing a crisis, but rather a policy choice.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/05/07-2


Grow up, man. If you can't handle being proved wrong or properly challenged on any level, then either IA me or don't respond or don't post. of you're embarassing yourself with these tantrums.