• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AP: VP of Venezuela Has Announced Hugo Chavez has Died

PeteEU said:
The left dont do the "hate" card nearly as much as the right.. it is the whole basis of right wing ideology.. conflict and strife.
Click to expand...

Only when it comes to immigration, then the left play it to extremes. "Racist Racist" :roll:
 
Spriggs05 said:
Only when it comes to immigration, then the left play it to extremes. "Racist Racist" :roll:
Click to expand...

And while they do "play on it" as you say, the right has to admit that some to a lot of their rhetoric and policies are at best borderline racist when it comes to illegal immigration... you (no offense... dont think you meant too) just did a classic... forgot the "illegal" part in front of immigration, and turned your whole comment into a nationalistic right wing fascist comment being promoted by the far right for decades and that of course means the left will jump on it and call "racist racist".. even though it most likely was a typo in your case. :)
 
PeteEU said:
The left dont do the "hate" card nearly as much as the right.. it is the whole basis of right wing ideology.. conflict and strife. Now that aint saying that left wingers have not used the boogieman excuse to gain or maintain power... hell Chavez did it, but compared to the right it is relatively minimal.
Click to expand...

What a remarkable statement. The whole basis of right wing ideology is hate, conflict and strife?

Something tells me you might be just a wee bit off in your assessement.
 
PeteEU said:
And while they do "play on it" as you say, the right has to admit that some to a lot of their rhetoric and policies are at best borderline racist when it comes to illegal immigration... you (no offense... dont think you meant too) just did a classic... forgot the "illegal" part in front of immigration, and turned your whole comment into a nationalistic right wing fascist comment being promoted by the far right for decades and that of course means the left will jump on it and call "racist racist".. even though it most likely was a typo in your case. :)
Click to expand...

No i meant the right wants to restrict all forms of immigration :lol: but seriously that was a mistake yes. Some are however there are some that have been mis-interperated such as enoch powells "rivers of blood" speech, what he meant was that there will eventually be so many immigrants that inter racial conflict will be inevitable so gradually cut down on it, however it was interperated as "CUT ALL IMMIGRATION NOW" and hence the British right has constantly been labeld racist.
 
RGacky3 said:
Thats nonsense.

View attachment 67143884View attachment 67143885View attachment 67143886View attachment 67143887
Investment and GDP Growth in Venezuela | venezuelanalysis.com

Manufacturing has increased, as has trade, as has capital formation.

I'd like to see the piece by Rueters.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what source you are using or how they got their numbers. But I am going to go with the data from the World Bank and OECD that says that capital investment peaked at 24.5% (not 31.9%) in 2007, and has declined to ~18% in 2011. The year 1998 saw gross capital formation at 28.6%, while it never went above 24.5% in any year afterwards.
It is also important to not that most of this investment is the result of oil money dictated by the government, rather than actual organic growth. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but economic growth in Venezuela has been lock in step with increases in oil prices. The poor economic performance before Chavez was directly the result of low oil prices, and the average (for similar countries in the region) growth after Chavez has been the result of surges in oil prices (much of which was lobbied for by Chavez). See figure 1 and figure 9. Considering the boom in natural gas and declining exports of oil to the U.S., much of that lobbying power to fix high prices is going to take a nose dive, and the Venezuelan economy with it.

If you consider abandoned half constructed buildings as a boom in construction, then perhaps they are doing well in that sector.


I think what is far more telling, is the rapid decline of non-oil exports which are at 60 year lows in dollar amounts (not %), rising imports, as well as dogging shortages in housing, basic food staples, and pharmaceuticals are much better reflections of the result of Venezuelan economic policy under Chavez.


I won't repeat other points I've already made on this thread so I'll just refer you to post #157.
 
ocean515 said:
What a remarkable statement. The whole basis of right wing ideology is hate, conflict and strife?

Something tells me you might be just a wee bit off in your assessement.
Click to expand...

Am I? You might want to look at the policies and rhetoric coming out of the right......

Obama is a Muslim.... aint that playing to fears and hatred?
Obama is a socialist... aint that playing to fears and hatred?

Are the two above solely used to create conflict between left and right?

Another example... refusing to compromise... the party of NO... is that not confrontational?

And I am not saying the left are angels, but compared to the right... come on.
 
Spriggs05 said:
No i meant the right wants to restrict all forms of immigration :lol: but seriously that was a mistake yes. Some are however there are some that have been mis-interperated such as enoch powells "rivers of blood" speech, what he meant was that there will eventually be so many immigrants that inter racial conflict will be inevitable so gradually cut down on it, however it was interperated as "CUT ALL IMMIGRATION NOW" and hence the British right has constantly been labeld racist.
Click to expand...

Yep, but why make it easy for the left? And often it is hard to tell the difference between a verbal mistake and an actual opinion.
 
PeteEU said:
Am I? You might want to look at the policies and rhetoric coming out of the right......

Obama is a Muslim.... aint that playing to fears and hatred?
Obama is a socialist... aint that playing to fears and hatred?

Are the two above solely used to create conflict between left and right?

Another example... refusing to compromise... the party of NO... is that not confrontational?

And I am not saying the left are angels, but compared to the right... come on.
Click to expand...


And you use the above points to conclude the whole basis of right wing ideology is hate, conflict and strife?

I think you are demonstrating that of which you seek to promote.
 
PeteEU said:
The left dont do the "hate" card nearly as much as the right.. it is the whole basis of right wing ideology.. conflict and strife. Now that aint saying that left wingers have not used the boogieman excuse to gain or maintain power... hell Chavez did it, but compared to the right it is relatively minimal.
Click to expand...

The "hate card" is a staple of the "left."

All the left does is fashion themselves as a bunch of victims of the "big bad wolf." Hell, progressives create the language used to play victim.

Who uses the language: "The war on __________" or "anti-_________."

I'm not a republican but I can say I have never seen republicans use "hate" and attempt to twist it into sympathy.

To progressives there are only two types of positions on issues - hate and obedience.

A perfect example is the fact I'm pro-life, now democrats take that to mean I hate woman and I'm perpetuating an alleged war on woman... So democrats automatically hate me for that and attempt to portray me as a toothless southern redneck t bagger.

See how that works?

I'm pro-capitalism, pro-business and pro-right to work, what's the progressive response to that? "the Kotch brothers bought you off."

Another good example - I realize crime rates are higher in urban minority neighborhoods - that makes me a racist in their book.

I strongly defend the Second Amendment - to a progressive that means I want to see babies die, not only that but I must be an uneducated southern hillbilly.

Those are just several examples of how progressives use their hate and attempt to justify it.

Progressives are hateful people...

I cant say I have ever seen a conservative pull that "hate" nonsense. Conservatives have their flaws but they don't resort to playground bully tactics unless they're trying to degrade us libertarians.
 
PeteEU said:
The left dont do the "hate" card nearly as much as the right.. it is the whole basis of right wing ideology.. conflict and strife. Now that aint saying that left wingers have not used the boogieman excuse to gain or maintain power... hell Chavez did it, but compared to the right it is relatively minimal.
Click to expand...

You don't live to much in a Big city such as Chicago, NY or L.A......where you can see the hate enmasse. Plus all the chit talkin. Do you?

Plus I wouldn't confuse that part about Southern Democrats that call themselves Republicans.

In my experiences one would be more apt to come across one that is a Republican that would show kindness thru action first, and I have been in all 3 of those Major cities. Where population density speaks for it self with the Numbers. Also living in some Southern states and or being around for Business.

So I doubt you are even close with the perception and population theory.
 
PeteEU said:
Am I? You might want to look at the policies and rhetoric coming out of the right......

Obama is a Muslim.... aint that playing to fears and hatred?
Obama is a socialist... aint that playing to fears and hatred?

Are the two above solely used to create conflict between left and right?

Another example... refusing to compromise... the party of NO... is that not confrontational?

And I am not saying the left are angels, but compared to the right... come on.
Click to expand...


Provide citation of any congress critter, Senator saying this. Otherwise you are making **** up......Again.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
For many of the so called 'Progressives' that is the sum total of where they are progressing to.
Click to expand...

I can't have a debate with even an educated progressive without being accused of hating everyone that isn't me just because I disagree with them on issues.

Hell, my uncle is a limo liberal (progressive) that is a professor at the University of Illinois that I destroy in a debate every time one occurs, and this guy starts taking political jabs while my grandmother literally lays dead right next to him (she just died that day in hospice).

I'm thinking to myself: "seriously" this guys mother just died (my grandmother) and he's wining about raising taxes?

That was certainly not the time to throw political dung yet he did it anyways. But these progressives are supposed to be so caring and so sensitive...
 
RGacky3 said:
Thats nonsense.

View attachment 67143884View attachment 67143885View attachment 67143886View attachment 67143887
Investment and GDP Growth in Venezuela | venezuelanalysis.com

Manufacturing has increased, as has trade, as has capital formation.

I'd like to see the piece by Rueters.
Click to expand...

And I'd like to have a slightly more neutral source than a left-wing blog.

EDIT: And this would certainly qualify:

ReformCollege said:
http://www.cgdev.org/files/1426486_file_Rodriguez_et_al_Venezuela_OTC_FINAL.pdf for figure 1 + 9 I forgot to post the link in my response
Click to expand...
 
Citgo lowers US, Texas flags to honor Hugo Chavez.....

March 6, 2013: Venezuelan-based Citgo has its United States headquarters in Houston, and it stirred up controversy when it lowered the U.S. and Texas flags to honor Hugo Chavez. Andy Cerota reports.

Citgo lowers US, Texas flags to honor Hugo Chavez | News - Home

I am Surprised those in Texas didn't Riot Citgo when they lowered the US and Texas Flags.
 
j-mac said:
Provide citation of any congress critter, Senator saying this. Otherwise you are making **** up......Again.
Click to expand...

And you are blind or ignoring the facts. Are you seriously saying that you have not heard GOP members float the idea that Obama might not be a citzen to him being a Muslim?

Poll: 30% Of Republicans Think Obama Is A Muslim

How do you explain that? As for a citation from a GOP senator or Congressman... come one, politicians are not that dumb, they let their talking heads do the dirty work and you know that. But saying that, there are several "birther" Congressmen and Senators, and that is basically the same thing.
 
MMC said:
Citgo lowers US, Texas flags to honor Hugo Chavez.....

March 6, 2013: Venezuelan-based Citgo has its United States headquarters in Houston, and it stirred up controversy when it lowered the U.S. and Texas flags to honor Hugo Chavez. Andy Cerota reports.

Citgo lowers US, Texas flags to honor Hugo Chavez | News - Home

I am Surprised those in Texas didn't Riot Citgo when they lowered the US and Texas Flags.
Click to expand...

Why? Citgo is owned by the Venezuelan state is it not?
 
PeteEU said:
Why? Citgo is owned by the Venezuelan state is it not?
Click to expand...

So.....in Venezuela they can lower their Flags. In their Country and whatever city or town they want. There was no reason to lower the US and Texas Flags to half mast. Chavez is not an American. They want to lower flags to half mast lower the Venezuelan Flag and the Citgo Flag.

This is the US and the State of Texas. American Soil.....not Venezuela. Now if it was their Embassy.....they could lower their flag. Not ours!
 
jmotivator said:
It's has bounced between 20 and 40% his entire time as president. It has no direction.

And I'm not holding water for any previous Venezuelan president, just pointing out to you that your rosy glasses view of the Venezuelan economy is flawed.
Click to expand...

I don't have a rosy view of the Venezuelan economy, all I said is Chavez has made it better for the majority of Venezuelans.

Growing scarcity of commodities and/or a growing supply in currency leads to inflation. Economic growth is neither of those. In the case of Venezuela it's been a combination of the two.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence that an increase in currency leads to inflation, what would lead to inflation is large amounts of people with disposable income entering the market (increased demand), and without supply matching it, which is economic growth. If more of the profits of industry go to the lower/working classes, if industry doesn't increase production as fast as the wages increase you'll have inflation, but that doesn't mean that it undoes the increase in living standards.

I never said it wasn't. But if you want to claim economic success under CHavez you have to actually show it. The GNI versus GDP comparison in combination with the inflation doesn't paint the picture of a healthy economy. The only real source of economic advancement in Venezuela has come from the oil industry.

In fact, the primary reason that the GNI really rose in 2003 was because that was the year when the oil industry was finally nationalized and it's profits were counted in GNI.
Click to expand...

I show it with the vast decrease in poverty, and deep poverty, also I've shown graphs showing that the economic advancement is across industries, manufacuring has gone up, commerce has gone up and so on.

That GNI vrs GDP argument is a weak one, if a vast amount of your capital and labor power goes into oil and the profits of that go to foreign corporations that is gonna be a major hit to your economy.

Care to provide a readable graph? And yes, as I said, the GNI was stagnant/declining under Chavez until 2003. When he nationalized the oil industry the GNI started counting all of it's profits towards GNI, AND the cost of crude also sky rocketed.
Click to expand...

The GNI goes up from 1996-2001, drop, then go up again 2003, in that time you had a coup attempt and a giant strike ... That isn't the result of policy.

US poverty rates are inflation adjusted, but there is no set definition from country to country for the "poverty line".... so what was Venezuela's criteria? Please provide citation.
Click to expand...

They use the same criterion as the US. (Center for economic research)The Chávez Administration at 10 Years: The Economy and Social Indicators | Reports

You haven't shown that.
Click to expand...

Err, yes, if GDP gros, as well as living standards, and poverty rates drop, those are growth dispite inflation.

Because Chavez said so? I know that seems to be enough for you, but not for me.
Click to expand...

I never appealed to Chavez, these numbers are pretty well attested ... it's funny that the only solution is that somehow Chavez is fudging the numbers set by international economists .... :p.

Really? Page 13. Go there. Post is by Harshaw.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I read those, not really a reputable source,

Hah, "the media all ran the story but nobody thought it was reputable!" .... I see a flaw in your reasoning....
Click to expand...

Did you look at the source? Did you check, that it was just one guy, without qualifications, that is really nothing more than an anti-leftist crusaider? Look at the source.
 
ReformCollege said:
I have no idea what source you are using or how they got their numbers. But I am going to go with the data from the World Bank and OECD that says that capital investment peaked at 24.5% (not 31.9%) in 2007, and has declined to ~18% in 2011. The year 1998 saw gross capital formation at 28.6%, while it never went above 24.5% in any year afterwards.
It is also important to not that most of this investment is the result of oil money dictated by the government, rather than actual organic growth. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but economic growth in Venezuela has been lock in step with increases in oil prices. The poor economic performance before Chavez was directly the result of low oil prices, and the average (for similar countries in the region) growth after Chavez has been the result of surges in oil prices (much of which was lobbied for by Chavez). See figure 1 and figure 9. Considering the boom in natural gas and declining exports of oil to the U.S., much of that lobbying power to fix high prices is going to take a nose dive, and the Venezuelan economy with it.

If you consider abandoned half constructed buildings as a boom in construction, then perhaps they are doing well in that sector.


I think what is far more telling, is the rapid decline of non-oil exports which are at 60 year lows in dollar amounts (not %), rising imports, as well as dogging shortages in housing, basic food staples, and pharmaceuticals are much better reflections of the result of Venezuelan economic policy under Chavez.


I won't repeat other points I've already made on this thread so I'll just refer you to post #157.
Click to expand...

Increase local consumption would necessarily mean less exports, and increased imports, however manufacturing HAS gone up Venezuela - value added in manufacturing. ... meaning it's not just Oil.

As far as the oil prices being low before oil, it doesn't make a difference, because the oil money wasn't staying in Venezuela. Also Oil money dictated by the government is just as organic as Oil money dictated by BP.

None of this is suprising NOR does it show that Hugo Chavez's economic policy was a failure, or left the country worse off.

The fact is poveryt has dropped dramatically ADJUSTED for inflation Venezuela's Economic Recovery: Is It Sustainable? | Reports.

SO none of these problems show that overall the economy is worse off.

As far as inflation look at it BEFORE chavez ... as far as shortages look at access BEFORE Chavez ... Chavez made things better for the vast majority of venezuelans.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
You do realize Hugo Chavez was a devote Catholic right?
I dont get with the rights fetish of thinking that Chavez was some sort of tyrant dictator.
Click to expand...
Chavez was a devout Communist which indicates that he was most likely an atheist_

It is the nation of Venezuela that is devout Catholic, which he feigned for political expedience_

All communist revolutionaries and dictators are liars who believe the end justifies the means_

TheDemSocialist said:
Exactly. Until people understand that the word socialist does not automatically mean the USSR or Stalin the quicker we can actually understand the term.
Click to expand...
Like all Marxists, you are an idealist in search of an unsustainable utopian dream that invariably morphs into a stalinist style nightmare involving the usual theft, oppression, human suffering and political genocide_

(see signature below for clarification)
 
Reign of Evil: A Look Back at the Vicious Rule of Hugo Chavez.....

0109_Chavez-592x323-450x309.jpg


Hugo Chavez was born July 28, 1954. Raised largely by his grandmother in the western state of Barinas, Chavez began nurturing his fascination with Marxism at an early age, boosted by Castro’s revolution in Cuba in 1959. His education led him to despise “imperialist” America, even as he idolized Castro and 19th century South American liberator Simon Bolivar. He eventually joined the army, after failing to fulfill his dream of becoming a major league baseball player.

1999 was the year he also began traveling around the world, ingratiating himself to a number of America’s enemies. While in Communist China, Chavez put his cards on the table. ”I have been very Maoist all of my life,” he declared at the time. He was also successful in getting OPEC to pump up oil prices.

Steadily, Chavez’s “democratic” revolution began to resemble the dictatorship his regime inevitably became. The legislative and judicial branches of the Venezuelan government were subordinated to his authoritarian rule. He stacked his government with military officers, emulating the juntas that ruled Peru and Panama in the 1970s. The constitution became increasingly irrelevant, a reality most recently emphasized when Chavez’s absence still allowed him to win inauguration last January. That absence should have triggered certain procedures, but they were completely ignored. Chavez also politicized Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the state-owned oil company, whose output has declined by almost half from 2000 to 2011.

This combination of factors, as well as Chavez’s interminable rants (one went on for almost ten hours), polarized the nation to the point where Chavez was himself ousted in a short-lived coup in 2002. Yet his populist supporters, angered by TV images of the nation’s former elite reveling in victory, restored him to power two days later

Unsurprisingly, Venezuela increasingly began to resemble some of the authoritarian states Chavez admired. The Heritage Foundation’s 2013 Index of Economic Freedom ranked the nation as one of the most repressed in the world. Only Zimbabwe, North Korea and Cuba ranked lower. Chavez’s government also seized TV stations, numerous banks, the assets of 60 oil service companies, 32 sugar plantations, and foreign-owned cement plants, that refused to be nationalized. All privately held oil production was effectively nationalized in 2007 as well.

Crime soared. Caracas became one of the most dangerous cities in the world, and Venezuela’s 2009 murder rate topped that of war-torn Iraq, and Mexico’s cartel-inspired carnage. By 2012, Venezuela’s national murder rate was one of the highest in the world. Chronic food shortages and power outages as well mounting debt — leading to a 33 percent currency devaluation last month, Venezuela’s fifth in a decade — has turned the nation into one of the Western Hemisphere’s worst economic basket cases.....snip~

Reign of Evil: A Look Back at the Vicious Rule of Hugo Chavez


So much for the Alleged Socialist that was all SO very much for the people! :roll:
 
this world needs such bravehearts .unfortunately it is usually the good ones who die young ..
 
That's alright Maduro is being Called out.
protest.gif


Venezuela opposition leader Capriles to stand in election.....

_66311066_017439565.jpg


Venezuelan opposition leader Henrique Capriles has confirmed that he will stand in presidential elections on 14 April.
In a televised address, Mr Capriles accused the governing PSUV party of manipulating the recent death of Hugo Chavez.

The opposition boycotted Mr Maduro's swearing-in on Friday, claiming that - under the constitution - the speaker of the National Assembly, Diosdado Cabello, should be the one to take over as acting president.

Mr Capriles - candidate for the umbrella opposition group Table for Democratic Unity (MUD) - called the move fraudulent.
On Sunday, he again accused the socialist PSUV of violating the constitution.

'Biggest mistake'

In his televised address on Sunday, Nicolas Maduro accused Henrique Capriles of inciting hatred, and said he was trying to provoke violence by insulting the late president's image.

"You have made the biggest mistake of your life," he said.....snip~

BBC News - Venezuela opposition leader Capriles to stand in election

Hope Capriles gets plenty of Security!
glasses7.gif
glasses6.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom