cannuck

You give mankind a lot more credit than it deserves. While it is true that someone, or some group must define what becomes the motivation for our idiotic behaviour, there are dozens, nay...HUNDREDS of competing philosophies, and nobody is sure which one will gain traction and followers - since nobody seems to know with certainty how human nature is evolving. It was easy in the days before that bugger Gutenberg screwed up communications and took control of information away from the religious networks, and today with the interweb giving just every man-Jack easy access to all of the (right or wrong) information, I can not imagine how anyone could predict what lie is going to catch on. Once one does, though, there is enough inertia that 7 billion people get dragged down really stupid roads by the success of some truly stupid idea.

Considering that Conservative governments created socialist agencies such as the Canadian Wheat Board, nationalization of the Grand Trunk, etc, and until Mulroney, so-called "conservative" governments did nothing to dismantle the dozens of Canadian government incursions into the world of business (building airplanes, mining Uranium, etc.), the Red Torries are really not much different.

Amen! (yeah, my "lip service" duly noted)

In a world dominated by weak-minded people who believe in fairy tales (and, in that I include the new global religion of greed) and are willing to die or kill for it: I think we are already in Hell.

His family really is from the Catholic cult, but religion of any kind seems to have the same result - depravity, dependence, death and destruction...in the name of "The Lord" (allah, etc.).

Which is why the Liberals are so anxious to bring in as many minorities with such a proclivity to reproduce - votes. They sell the idea by playing on the rather weak-minded sensibilities of the left. of course, this is 100% correct. The "right" (if there really is any such thing in Canada) didn't have the brains or the balls to stand up for what is "right" in this last election, and the harsh reality of democracy is that you get what you deserve.

You are asking the right question, just sorry I have been posting on the fly and leaving out a lot of detail Maduro has (mostly) control of the means of production of the country (which means PDVSA, 70% of whole economy, 95% of all exports). There are those who still have power who are blocking some of Maduro and the Generals activities, but not all. Sanctioning PDVSA would end cash flow to them, but that is also the only source of money to Venezuela to try to survive as a society. It must have been a difficult decision for Washington as to how to deal with that. I am glad they got the message first hand as to who is able to do what, and decided to leave PDVSA alone.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. there are no sanctions against Venezuela,. That does not mean Maduro!

clearly a return to some good old fasion Yankee imperialism would be one hell of a lot better for the people than any Bolivarian Revolution.

So: the CIA is ... ah... it's just not worth the effort. You have absolutely no connection with reality.

The only terrorism going on in Venezuela is being perpetrated by the leadership and military of Venezuela. You are clinging to these idiotic dillusions, I am simply listening to people in Venezuela that I have known for many years.

You don't get it at all, do you? NO country is lily white and blameless for a great deal of things, but the solution is NOT to impoverish the nation, starve the people and reward a handful of elites for their treachery. What the US did in the past or other places has NOTHING TO DO with what is happening in Venezuela today.

Yes, those nasty Yanks caused all that troublesome economic prosperity that Venezuela had before it went of the left deep end of the socialist pool. And YES, it is indeed the choice of the country that owns the wealth to do as it sees fit...it is just that the PEOPLE of Venezuela chose Chavez with a very different idea of where the wealth of the nation was going to go. Instead of into the hands of government agencies for the good of the people, it did, as in the case of EVERY socialist and communist country ended up in the hands of Chavez, Maduro, the Generals and all kinds of hangers-on who have never done a lick of work to earn it.

The USA is causing the grief in Venezuela??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Spoke with our associates who just returned from DC. There will be no sanctions for the time being. While Chavez stole the business of Americans (and Venezuelans) by the BILLION$$ to fund the Bolivarian Revolution, the US not only allowed PDVSA (Venezuela's state owned oil company) to continue to own and operate 100% of Citgo, ripping billions a year out of the US to pay for even more of the Bolivarian Revolution, but it continued to allow US companies to buy Venezuelan crude - that continues to fund the Bolivarian Revolution. So, I guess I have to agree with Hot Enough, the USA is indeed behind the troubles of Vietnam - as it has largely funded Chavez and Maduro (since 95% of all Venezuela export is petro).

There is a HUGE difference between what is socialist policy and programme vs. what is Marxist socialism. One of the big problems in the US, is that nobody seems to know the difference. Things that SHOULD be done by government - i.e. social services - the US seems to think is business. This would in particular include sick care. Where the US is different from EVERY other G7 nation is that it can't delivery sick care, nor health care effectively as a government programme. Thus, the highest cause of bankupcy is paying for sick care whose costs are doubled (at least) because the US also lets the legal and insurance business use sick care as a piggy bank. So, in that manner, the US is short on social policy, but is in other ways very socialistic (as is ANY country), but definitely short on Marxist versions of the state owning the means to production (excluding the obvious exceptions of the BLM, TVA, Corps of Engineers, etc.). Now Bernie is a socialist fruitcake in some of his policies, but to his credit, he is the ONLY person inside the beltway who seems to appreciate just how wrong a speculative economy run by and for the member banks of the Fed really is. What is common between Marxist socialism and Casino Capitalism is that the function of the controlling body is to redistribute wealth according to the interest of those who in a position to dispense privilege. In spite of what BOTH claim in theory, in fact the only beneficiaries are a very few people who control privilege of access. In both cases, 100% at a cost borne by the citizens. In other words: neither work. Nations don't fail because of socialism in public policy, they fail because control of the resources are lost to the people. Reality is: Marxist socialism fails EVERY TIME because the people are still required to DO something to produce, and if they do not have some expectation of owning and controlling their destiny, they simply will NOT do anything effectively (ask USSR, ask Mao's China.....geez, as Chavez family and Maduro) The difference is that in the US, the population FEELS as if it has control and actually IS still able to own the means of production (albeit increasingly at the pleasure of the banksters), so they are still to some extent productive...and that is what it takes to keep your head above water (although at $20T in public debt with massively inflated money supply, that is pretty shakey in the US). AND: Betsy is very correct - Bernie at least wears it on his sleeve (as does The Donald). IMHO: the perfect combination to save the US from certain disaster would be a Trump presidency with a Bernie VP in charge of financial regulation.

You must be mistaken. Who of the enlightened socialist country that has benefited so much from the Eutopian Bolivarian Revolution would possibly want to flee to the capitalist pig cesspool of the USA??? Next thing you know, you will be trying to tell us that CUBANS want in too. And this coming from a country that almost elected Bernie.

As I said: not going to appologize for what the PEOPLE who have taken power in the US did. What they do and did is NOT based on what the US form of government and economy is intended to be. As to the 2008 deal, and the 1929 deal: these are NOT unique to the US - it is just that the US Fed is the ONLY central bank owned by its member banks (and just think carefully about who actually controls them). THE WHOLE FRIGGING WORLD has become so greedy that they are ALL happy to let redistribution of wealth by speculative gain (heavily manipulated) become the defacto economy, rather than the one in which wealth is actually created (i.e. by actually MAKING something, or doing something to support productive activity). What is unique about the US is that by owning the central bank, the member banks can simply increase the money supply, stuff the bux into their own back pockets, and pass the bill on to the citizens of the US (mostly in the form of pent-up inflationary forces). As long as the Greenback maintains hegamony, it will not inflate and devalue as doing so wipes out the US denominated holdings AND INSTRUMENTS of all of the other central and commercial banks of the world. PLEASE, do not blame the sins of Wall Street and the Beltway on the people and Constitution of the USA.. On edit: ALSO, remember that the USSR maintained tit-for-tat covert activities by the KGB. Again, these things are NOT in any way related to the system of government in either country, but please do take note that of the two superpowers, one died because i did NOT have the privilege of benefiting from the productivity of a capitalistic economy.

Again, I don't disagree with some of what you say about the USA (except the "all bad" part), but lets face the facts: Venezuela under the Bolivar Revolution - collapsed economy, collapse of human rights, collapse of order. Venezuela while being manipulated by the nasty capitalist pigs - wealthy, stable, great and safe place to live. BTW: SoDamnInsane was kept in power by the US...so let's not go there. So was Daffy Duck. China workers' paradise under Mao - no Yankee manipulation there, they backed the Nationalists - a hundred million starved to death with the state took over the means of agriculture production. China embracing the dirty capitalist pig ways under Four Pillars of Modern Reform - biggest success story in history.

Yeah, then they could just build a few windmills and recover by exporting unicorn farts.

Sorry for beating on you a bit, but as you might gather, it is a subject that is not only close to my heart, but has taken a lot of time and money as well as personal sacrifice to participate in opposing.

I have never tried to be an appologist for the US, nor is this thread about the USA at all. It is about what socialism has done to other countries, and in this case, Venezuela. Not socialism as in social policy, but socialism as in Marxist ownership of the means of production. I wish you could learn to separate your ravenous dislike of the US from what needs to be done to keep other people alive or better yet comfortable. Regarding your Chinese post preceding, I don't think you are very well versed in China. I had an office there for nearly a decade, and worked there extensively throughout the Y2K +/- times. My business partner was one of the extremely few people who travelled extensively throughout China in the Mao years (one of only a handful of people to do so, particularly unique as he was intimately involved in the Nationalist side of the revolution). His Mother survived the Japanese occupation and raised a young son at that time, and walked him through the front lines of the Red Army in '46/'47. She was one of the most important influences in my life and teachers about reality. My best friend from China has just immigrated to SK so we can carry on business OUTSIDE of what you think is a glorious place. He left one of the very top positions in a national company (had 80,000 people under him) simply to be able to raise his son OUTSIDE of China. The Chinese Communist Party embraced many of the values of capitalism following the Four Pillars of Modern Reform - that essentially allowed state enterprises to act as state funded and extremely predatory "capitalists" - hardly by following the dictates of Chairman Mao. When you have lived and worked there in some senior capacity, come back and tell me about it. What I feel you have bought into is that old divisive strategy of the politics of fear and envy. Just because the US has done, and probably will do some very bad things, that does not make their system of governance and democracy bad, it makes the people who have abused it bad. The SAME thing applies to socialism: the theory is great, but because of the same thing - GREED - it works far worse than the US or Euro version of capitalistic democracies simply because it facilitates centralization of political and economic power that can result in the destruction of vibrant economies or millions of lives. It is not the ideology that is wrong, it is people that are bad.

Not trying to win a point, but trying to have people understand that genuinely Marxist socialist policies are more than window dressing for web discussions - they are what destroys economies and kill people. In theory, socialism is a great thing (and in fact, there is no such thing as a government today without some socialistic policies - literally for the good of the people). It falls apart, though, when you start into the state owning the means of production. Not only are governments totally inept and running any kind of business, once they have resources to squander, they then have the means to skim, and skim they do. In a Canadian context, Saskatchewan's flirtation with socialism meant that we had no growth in population from 1925 until 2005. Our best export was well educated children. It started with the Great Depression, but once the "cure" of decades of socialist experiments. The feds didn't do any better. The disaster of them owning airplane companies (deHaviland, Avro, etc.) and of course the Canadian Wheat Board were perfect examples of why government should be there to GOVERN, not to run things. Chairman Mao was a world class example as well: once the state took over the means of agricultural production, the starvation of about 100 million Chinese followed. This is what brings us back to Venezuela. The state in ANY country owns the resources and controls who gets to do what within their borders. Venezuela was just that when they had a government that managed the affairs of state and collected royalties, duties and taxes from resource companies. They were also a prosperous, wealthy country. Once the state took over the means of production, they removed EVERYONE from PDVSA (the national oil company) who did not openly align themselves with the Chavez government. As a result, PDVSA started to lose production of both crude oil and refined products. Chavez also used his power in control of the petro resources to try to displace US influence in SA and the Caricom, giving countries such as Cuba deals on petro that were far below market, and terms that meant little if any repayment. He literally bankrupted the country for one to maintain his policies and secondly to service the bond market who's indebtedness not only has drained the country, but mortgaged its future. Yes, Chavez was elected, and with a mandate to start the "Bolivarian Revolution". What the people did NOT bargain for was for him to seize control of the resources of the country and piss them away to the extent of impoverishing most of the population. He maintains this status by skimming billions a month into the hands of the military, judges of the Supreme Court and a few other friends. It is not a good situation.

Of course you have to support the Government of Venezuela. Jailing any political opposition, killing many of them, rewriting the Constitution to make a "president for life" with dictatorial powers. Replace everyone in state-controlled positions with party faithful. Blame the US for every problem to deflect attention from what human rights are being taken. Sound familiar? The difference between Venezuela using marxist/socialist platform vs. Erdogan using the Islamist one is that Chavez and then Maduro were able seize control of the resources of the country (about 95% of exports are petroleum - and Venezuela has the world's largest declared reserves) and fill the pockets of the judges, bureaucrats and most importantly the generals by raiding the treasure chest. Erdogan did not learn from the Russians how to pull this stuff off, so the military bit him. Maduro's plan to gain powers that Erdogan seeks will fail because he robbed so much of the value of the state, the people can't afford to eat or buy medicine.

Never heard of Petro Canada?????? Trudeau DID nationalize a part of the industry. The Sask NDP did as well. HQ of most of Canada's oil companies were in Regina and Moose Jaw until the NDP nationalized much of it - to Calgary's delight.

Could not agree more...except that with Morgenstern ancestry and Cohen business partners, I am thoroughly anti-zionist but hardly anti-semite. I should get an update from our Venezuelan associates when they come up to DC tomorrow. Will see what I can find and post (could be restricted).