poor venezuela

[Cancel 2016.2]

Did I say that? Nope.

Did the article say that? Nope.

I'm just giving a little balance here....please try to maintain at least a little honesty in the discussion, if not objectivity.

And the beat goes on.


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

http://www.trinicenter.com/venezuela/

The above was your quote. You emphasized that portion of the article. The article also made the same point. Both of which are incorrect. Which is why we laughed at the assertion the author made and you emphasized.

So no... you didn't confuse anyone... you just made a foolish statement and were called on it.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Did I say that? Nope.

Did the article say that? Nope.

I'm just giving a little balance here....please try to maintain at least a little honesty in the discussion, if not objectivity.

Quote:
And the beat goes on.


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

http://www.trinicenter.com/venezuela/

The above was your quote. You emphasized that portion of the article. The article also made the same point. Both of which are incorrect. Which is why we laughed at the assertion the author made and you emphasized.

So no... you didn't confuse anyone... you just made a foolish statement and were called on it.

What is "emphasized" is the SUB-TITLE of the article, genius! Had you actually read the article, you'd know this.

Bottom line, you don't know WTF you're talking about and cannot debate the content of the article, and then you make generalized accusations based on your ignorance. You're dishonest as well as full of it.

When you get it together, I'll respond. Otherwise, you're upcoming invective filled smokescreen will be in vain.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I wish you were as level headed when it came to US politics.....

I am always this level headed, you just have on too many partisan blinders to see it.

 

[Timshel]

In 2003, when Chavez began experimenting with price controls, Venezuela was self-sufficient in beef. Last year it imported over half of what it consumed. After his police began rounding up butchers for selling beef at more than the state mandated price, beef disappeared almost altogether from the stores.

Which proves my point. Let's ban beef, so the prohibitionist can finally have a "win."

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I think this should stand as a warning to people in the future. Maybe prices are the way they are for a reason?

 

[Timshel]

TC the only thing your article cited as a reason for not calling it a crisis is debt.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

What is "emphasized" is the SUB-TITLE of the article, genius! Had you actually read the article, you'd know this.

Bottom line, you don't know WTF you're talking about and cannot debate the content of the article, and then you make generalized accusations based on your ignorance. You're dishonest as well as full of it.

When you get it together, I'll respond. Otherwise, you're upcoming invective filled smokescreen will be in vain.

No moron... it is NOT what is emphasized. NO ONE stated that Venezuela was Greece. The point the author was trying to make was that because Venezuela does not have high debt levels, that somehow means they cannot be having an economic crisis.

Which is the point YOU emphasized with your post. Which is why you cherry picked that sentence from the article.

To pretend now that you were emphasizing the point that Greece and Venezuela have different problems is quite simply an attempt by you to spin your way out of the ignorance of your first post.

 

[Minister of Truth]

1. Obviously, I made the error of confusing T&A with SuperFreak. I humbly apologize for any mental trauma that T&A may have suffered from this erroneous association.

2. Since my numerous posts and threads have stated everything BUT a conservative point of view that can be related to the GOP or the current right wing punditry or fringe elements like the teabaggers, T&A's accusation that I'm a "neocon" logically does not make sense.

3. T&A's claim that the GOP has been a leader in "wedge" issues is misleading (his alluding to the GOP being of a "positive" action)...since the leadership under Nixon, Reagan and the Bush family has been anything but positive in progressing the benefits and rights of the middle and working class against that of the corporation and finacial institutions.

2. "Neocon" is an ironic term, since its origins come from New Deal Leftism, and it remains a force for massive govt. spending and growth. You can twist the word to fit most Americans, as you attempt to do every minute of everyday...

3. Your belief that market liberalism is an enemy of the middle and working classes means that you make yourself an enemy of the historical GOP, as well as the Whig and Federalist parties which preceeded it. On economics alone, the Democrats have always been your party (a bad thing, btw)...

 

[Taichiliberal]

TC the only thing your article cited as a reason for not calling it a crisis is debt.

Ahh, and what did those "reasons" touch on, String? See, when taken into context, there is a counter-balance to the subject title and opening post's article...that's all I'm saying.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
What is "emphasized" is the SUB-TITLE of the article, genius! Had you actually read the article, you'd know this.

Bottom line, you don't know WTF you're talking about and cannot debate the content of the article, and then you make generalized accusations based on your ignorance. You're dishonest as well as full of it.

When you get it together, I'll respond. Otherwise, you're upcoming invective filled smokescreen will be in vain.

No moron... it is NOT what is emphasized. NO ONE stated that Venezuela was Greece. The point the author was trying to make was that because Venezuela does not have high debt levels, that somehow means they cannot be having an economic crisis.

One more time for the mentally challenged....Superfreak(ing dense) pointed to the SUB-title of the article and pontificated on that alone....he was wrong. Now, I never said that the original subject title and opening post article mentioned a comparison to Greece....as I stated, the article is a BALANCE to give another aspect of Venezuela's over all economic situation, which is NOT as dire and desperate as others would have us believe.

Which is the point YOU emphasized with your post. Which is why you cherry picked that sentence from the article.

Wrong again, genius.....I didn't CHERRY PICK the sub-title of the article, I gave it along with the title as an indicator of what was to come, rather than cut & paste large sections of the article. It's done all the time..and when one actually reads the entire artitcle, they get the point of the author.

To pretend now that you were emphasizing the point that Greece and Venezuela have different problems is quite simply an attempt by you to spin your way out of the ignorance of your first post.

Amazing....you get everything ass backwards, and then falsely accuse me of something based on your personal bias and erroneous comprehension of what you read. Super Freak(ing dumb) indeed!

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
1. Obviously, I made the error of confusing T&A with SuperFreak. I humbly apologize for any mental trauma that T&A may have suffered from this erroneous association.

2. Since my numerous posts and threads have stated everything BUT a conservative point of view that can be related to the GOP or the current right wing punditry or fringe elements like the teabaggers, T&A's accusation that I'm a "neocon" logically does not make sense.

3. T&A's claim that the GOP has been a leader in "wedge" issues is misleading (his alluding to the GOP being of a "positive" action)...since the leadership under Nixon, Reagan and the Bush family has been anything but positive in progressing the benefits and rights of the middle and working class against that of the corporation and finacial institutions.

2. "Neocon" is an ironic term, since its origins come from New Deal Leftism, and it remains a force for massive govt. spending and growth. You can twist the word to fit most Americans, as you attempt to do every minute of everyday...

Stop your nonsense.....neocon is short for "new conservative", which refers to either self proclaimed former liberals or standard conservatives that have embraced the excutive branch centric of the GW Bush era and the quasi-imperialistic PNAC. Clearly by my postings, I am nowhere near agreeing with or supporting such dreck...and since no reputable dictionary supports your babblings, your personal beliefs are irrelevent.

3. Your belief that market liberalism is an enemy of the middle and working classes means that you make yourself an enemy of the historical GOP, as well as the Whig and Federalist parties which preceeded it. On economics alone, the Democrats have always been your party (a bad thing, btw)...

"market liberalism" as practiced by the GOP under Reagan and the Bushies sure as hell didn't do the working and middle classes any good, unless you were out of the country during the S&L scandal, Enron, the Wall St. and bank bailouts. The Whig & Federalist parties don't exist and haven't for a century or so, so spare us all your "would have, could have, should have" BS on that level. And since I'm an Independent voter and have been since 18 years old, you just don't know WTF you're talking about (not surprising).

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Amazing....you get everything ass backwards, and then falsely accuse me of something based on your personal bias and erroneous comprehension of what you read. Super Freak(ing dumb) indeed!

again moron... you are 100% wrong and desperately spinning.

The ENTIRE point of the authors article was that 'it was silly and wrong' to say Venezuela has an economic crisis. The authors reasoning was that 'the don't have much debt as a percentage of GDP'.

Also... you are also incompetent when it comes to reading comprehension. You most certainly DID cherry pick the sentence as I stated. Your cut and paste in its entirety tried to justify that one point the author was trying to make.... and that was the ONLY point the author made in the article. So when the author is 100% wrong on the only point made... then what exactly is the 'balance' you are bringing?

Is it that your wrong is balanced by others 'right'?

Bottom line, you are a moron, as is the author of that pathetic attempt at journalism that you posted.

 

[Timshel]

Ahh, and what did those "reasons" touch on, String? See, when taken into context, there is a counter-balance to the subject title and opening post's article...that's all I'm saying.

Uhh, debt. That was the entire argument offered against calling it a crisis.

 

[Minister of Truth]

"market liberalism" as practiced by the GOP under Reagan and the Bushies sure as hell didn't do the working and middle classes any good, unless you were out of the country during the S&L scandal, Enron, the Wall St. and bank bailouts. The Whig & Federalist parties don't exist and haven't for a century or so, so spare us all your "would have, could have, should have" BS on that level. And since I'm an Independent voter and have been since 18 years old, you just don't know WTF you're talking about (not surprising).

First of all, no, a neocon is not automatically someone who is a former liberal. The fathers of the ideology happened to be. Some former liberals are communists and socialists, libertarians, paleoconservatives, fascists, anarchists, and a whole host of other philosophies. Neoconservatism is generally conceived of as a blending of fiscal liberalism with social conservatism. Since it is not a small government, traditionalist, principles first philosophy, the term "neocon" is a joke. It would be like calling someone a neocommunist who believed in free markets, civil liberties, and a government that resists the temptation of stuffing its people into death camps. If you need further proof of what a joke the term is, refer to your pathological usage of it, to people on the site, who have little in common, except the gall to disagree with you on one or more things.

Furthermore, if you are not a market liberal, but instead subscribe to pre-Enlightenment economic principles such as state-run economies, then you're clearly living in the wrong millenium.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Amazing....you get everything ass backwards, and then falsely accuse me of something based on your personal bias and erroneous comprehension of what you read. Super Freak(ing dumb) indeed!

again moron... you are 100% wrong and desperately spinning.

The ENTIRE point of the authors article was that 'it was silly and wrong' to say Venezuela has an economic crisis. The authors reasoning was that 'the don't have much debt as a percentage of GDP'.

Also... you are also incompetent when it comes to reading comprehension. You most certainly DID cherry pick the sentence as I stated. Your cut and paste in its entirety tried to justify that one point the author was trying to make.... and that was the ONLY point the author made in the article. So when the author is 100% wrong on the only point made... then what exactly is the 'balance' you are bringing?

Is it that your wrong is balanced by others 'right'?

Bottom line, you are a moron, as is the author of that pathetic attempt at journalism that you posted.

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

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=655971&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.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by ditzyliberal
Ahh, and what did those "reasons" touch on, String? See, when taken into context, there is a counter-balance to the subject title and opening post's article...that's all I'm saying.

Uhh, debt. That was the entire argument offered against calling it a crisis.

Seems you clowns are reading from the same script....pity you have trouble comprehending anything that doesn't come from that script.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=654351&postcount=13

"ditzy liberal"?!??

Now I KNOW your intellectually bankrupt on the issue, String. Grow the fuck up, will ya please?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
"market liberalism" as practiced by the GOP under Reagan and the Bushies sure as hell didn't do the working and middle classes any good, unless you were out of the country during the S&L scandal, Enron, the Wall St. and bank bailouts. The Whig & Federalist parties don't exist and haven't for a century or so, so spare us all your "would have, could have, should have" BS on that level. And since I'm an Independent voter and have been since 18 years old, you just don't know WTF you're talking about (not surprising).

First of all, no, a neocon is not automatically someone who is a former liberal. Didn't say it was, genius. If you'd paid attention, you have read that it was one of two descriptions. The fathers of the ideology happened to be. Some former liberals are communists and socialists, libertarians, paleoconservatives, fascists, anarchists, and a whole host of other philosophies. That was a waste of space & time, because it doesn't invalidate my previous descriptions in the least. Neoconservatism is generally conceived of as a blending of fiscal liberalism with social conservatism. That's a crock, because there's nothing "fiscally liberal" about Reaganomics or the deregulation that shielded corporations from accountability, and if "social conservatism" means the nonsense of the religious right, you should mean social ULTRA-conservatism! Since it is not a small government, traditionalist, principles first philosophy, the term "neocon" is a joke. It would be like calling someone a neocommunist who believed in free markets, civil liberties, and a government that resists the temptation of stuffing its people into death camps. If you need further proof of what a joke the term is, refer to your pathological usage of it, to people on the site, who have little in common, except the gall to disagree with you on one or more things.

ONLY if one smokes whatever you've got in your pipe to believe the revisionist dreck you just postulated. You've demonstrated brilliantly how neocons love to substitute their opinion, suppostition and conjecture for facts and logic, then rewrite history for parts that you like, thus excluding others that you don't.

Furthermore, if you are not a market liberal, but instead subscribe to pre-Enlightenment economic principles such as state-run economies, then you're clearly living in the wrong millenium.

More supposition and conjecture on your part.....just stop all the BS, get a dictionary, read the PNAC agenda, review WTF happened under Reagan and the Bushies, and then come back with a rational discussion.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

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

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=655971&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...

Yet you continue to fail to state what it is you think the author is trying to convey. 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.

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.

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.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Here it is taimoron....

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.

2) The rest of the article states EXACTLY what we told you it did. 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.

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.

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.

 

[Minister of Truth]

More supposition and conjecture on your part.....just stop all the BS, get a dictionary, read the PNAC agenda, review WTF happened under Reagan and the Bushies, and then come back with a rational discussion.

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...

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

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.