Venezuela to Cut Oil Contracts as Prices Fall

[WriteDown]

Source: WSJ

Venezuela said it will seek to renegotiate contracts with oil-service companies and force food producers to make basic items covered by the government's price-control policies -- moves that point to increased economic strain.

More than 90% of Venezuela's hard currency comes from its oil production, which populist President Hugo Chávez has used to fund a splurge in consumer imports and underwrite social spending programs.

In the past few months, Mr. Chávez also spent freely on a political campaign to persuade Venezuelan voters to scrap term limits and allow him to run for president as many times as he likes. He won that referendum last month.

But as oil prices have plummeted, Mr. Chávez is increasingly hard-pressed to pay for his programs. Adding to woes is falling production at state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA....

Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123612776562124343.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

---

An economy based on oil is not a good idea.

[Igel]

1. Force food producers to make basic items?

Well, it's either that or price less-than-basic items at the same price as the basic items. I'm sure either would be resounding successes.

After all, that was French policy. At least just before the Revolution. Qu'ils mangent de la brioche! (Not that ma chere Marie ever uttered such words, but that would have been the context--hey, they don't have basic bread, they can eat the fancy bread.)


Ah, military-school econ. We've seen both stories and know how they turn out.

[ohio2007]

23. only until all supply is depleted. Then Hugo will demand they pull basics out of their

asses
or be shot as enemies of the state



"I owe my soul to the company store"

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez tightens state control of food amid rocketing inflation and food shortages
snip

"Forcing companies to produce rice at a loss will not resolve the situation, simply make it worse," said Luis Carmona of Polar, a rice company that has been singled out by the government for trying to sidestep restrictions.

Government price controls on basic goods have been in place, in various forms, since 2003. But the restrictions have forced Venezuela to become increasingly reliant on imports of these products as local farmers will not supply the selected food staples at government prices.



Mr Chavez last month won a referendum allowing him to stand indefinitely for re-election. With that now achieved the Venezuelan leader, who has vowed to turn his South American nation into a model Socialist state, is now taking some unpopular decisions needed to stabilise his floundering economy.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/4938993/Venezuelas-Hugo-Chavez-tightens-state-control-of-food-amid-rocketing-inflation-and-food-shortages.html

[Peace Patriot]

2. And what if "an economy based on oil" is the only thing possible, for the time being?

You need to do some reading about what the Chavez government is investing the oil money in--after decades of rightwing governments completely neglecting local manufacturing, local agriculture, local infrastructure, regional manufacturing, agriculture and infrastructure, and literacy and education, not to mention health care for the poor and the working class.

Your perspective is weird and backwards and very...well, Wall Street Journaly. Someone for once tries to use a country's main resource to help people, to build in diversity and local jobs, and you dis it as "not a good idea" because the oil profits should be used...um...how? Will stuffing Exxon Mobil's pockets with all the oil profits make Venezuela less oil-dependent in the future? No, but using them to create local auto manufacturing, local tractor manufacturing, local machine parts manufacturing, local shipbuilding, food security (local food production), an educated work force, a new bridge to Brazil, a new highway from Brazil through Bolivia to the Pacific, a new railroad to Colombia, and numerous new small businesses, including supporting local (as opposed to imported corporate) arts and entertainment, will help prepare Venezuela for a future without oil.

I just don't get it. What do you think the Chavez government should be doing with the oil profits, given that oil is Venezuela's major resource, and the world needs oil? You think Chavez should shut down the oil industry and starve millions of people, because "an economy based on oil is not a good idea"?

If you base your views on what you read in the Wall Street Urinal, then your views aren't going to worth old piss.

The Venezuelan Finance Minister says they have three years, at current oil prices, before they have to spend one peso of the $42 billion in international cash reserves that they have put away for a rainy day. That's good management, it seems to me--even allowing for normal government self-puffery. We are bankrupt--horribly bankrupt--in no small part due to crimes that the Wall Street Urinal promoted. Venezuela is flush. They are not only not bankrupt, they have a healthy cushion, and their financial planning includes continued spending on things we can only dream about--universal health care, free university educations.

You wonder why the Urinal is pissing on Hugo Chavez? They're jealous cuz he has a bigger dick, and can piss right back at them. And they can't do anything about it, not just because they're weanies are too little, but because he has insulated Venezuela's economy and has helped insulate his neighbors' economies against the vampire clutches of their World Bank loan sharks, and every other "shock and awe" weapon in their bloody arsenal. This is why they hate him, and the 70% of the Venezuelan people who support him, with such a nasty passion that they can't even pretend to be journalists any more.

[WriteDown]

3. Then it is unviable....

Its pretty simple. Pegging your entire economy to the price of a declining commodity is foolish. The results are plain to see. Nixonian price controls and inflation at 31%. Very little to argue about.

[Peace Patriot]

7. "Pegging" the "entire economy" on oil was done long before Chavez.

You continue to turn things upside down.

Venezuela's oil was nationalized in the 1970s. And a succession of rightwing governments proceeded to create an economy that was entirely dependent on oil. They fostered a pampered, well-paid, import-dependent, urban oil elite, who would rip off some of the profits and control the government, while they gave away 90% of the country's oil profits to multi-national corporations. They failed to create other jobs. They were even importing machine parts for the oil industry! They did not use their wealth to create local manufacturing, or to provide bootstrapping for the vast poor majority. They completely neglected local farming, and their stupid, corrupt land reform programs did nothing to stop Venezuela from losing all food security.

This is the situation that Chavez faced in 1998--an entirely oil-dependent country, that had been run for decades by an entrenched, spoiled, traitorous oil elite.

He did not have a choice on whether to "peg" the economy to the price of oil. It was a given. That's all Venezuela had going out, was oil. And the logical thing to do, in that situation--which is what the Chavez government did do, and why it is so popular--was to increase Venezuela's share of the oil profits and to use the oil profits to start to build that infrastructure, those local manufacturing plants, those schools and retraining and literacy programs, and other forward-looking activities, that the rightwing had completely failed to do.

Please answer my questions: 1) What else should Venezuela's oil profits be used for, than what the Chavez government is using them for?, and 2) What could Chavez have done to un-peg the country's economy to the price of oil, while still answering the country's desperate need for creating a manufacturing capability and local/regional infrastructure, and insuring food, housing, education and jobs to the vast poor majority of the country?

Cuz I don't get it. How could he have un-pegged that economy, without getting strung up on a lamppole by angry mobs of starving people? That would have been "tyranny"! To gradually diversify the economy, and bootstrap its workforce with education and health care, using the oil profits, was the wisest, more reasonable, most common sense thing to do! I don't see any alternative. He did NOT "peg" the economy to the price of oil. It was already "pegged" long before he was elected.

[WriteDown]

9. Non-issue....

Just because it was done before him does not excuse it. Many of his programs were based on the high price of oil which was just not sustainable. Similar to the many programs in the US we base off of cigarette tax revenue.

[Peace Patriot]

26. So, the Bushwhacks' Financial 9/11 is Obama's fault? Cuz that's what's coming

from Puke mouths--they've already started.

The Venezuelan rightwing gave away the oil, after ripping off some of the profit for themselves alone, and built nothing, nada, while their countrymen lived in shacks and starved. Chavez had a broken, grossly mismanaged, looted country to rebuild. What does he build it on, hm? Oil was the whole economy, everything else utterly neglected. "Just because it was done before him does not excuse it." What are you, a Republican? You sure sound them. "Many of his programs were based on the high price of oil..." Why then did the Chavez government sock away $42 billion in international cash reserves, against contingencies like a drop in oil prices, or our Financial 9/11? You are simply wrong on this. The Chavez government has managed the Venezuelan economy as well as it could be managed, given the conditions they were handed, just as Obama is trying to do here, now. And it is arrogance, smugness and know-nothingism to deny what they've achieved, and blame them for starting conditions that they did not create.

[Judi Lynn]

10. It would take a contortionist to avoid seeing the facts you've presented.

It's close to a pathological reaction to sound reasoning based on reality. Something very strange is at play here, clearly!

[Peace Patriot]

4. We're in meltdown--BIG meltdown--& the Urinal is dissing Chavez?

I gotta say this again. The Wall Street Urinal IS our problem--or one big fat disinformation part of it. They've been pushing "Shock Doctrine" economics for forty years. The South Americans finally wised up. And the very smartest of them--Chavez in the lead--have insulated their industries, their currencies, their banks and their major resources against any more of Wall Street's "shock and awe."

That is why they hate Chavez. It may not completely explain their relentless psyops and disinformation about the South American left. (There may be yet another Bushwhack oil war plan in the works, for which the false narrative about "Chavez, the dictator" will be needed.) Their hatred and their phenomenal lies have reasons--and none of them are the Bushwhacks' or the Wall Street Urinal's concern about democracy or the welfare of the majority of South Americans! In fact, there couldn't be anything more laughable than the Bushwhacks', and the WSU's, and Exxon Mobil's concern about "dictatorship."

:rofl:

And as the barricudas of international finance and war profiteering come after us--to make our economy "scream," as Milton Friedman said of Chile, at one time--we need to pay attention to how the people of Venezuela managed to elect and re-elect such a smart and visionary government, in a country that actually has worse corpo-fascist media than we do. Answer: Transparent vote counting. Get on it!

[WriteDown]

5. Chavez is not currently a dictator, but that does not mean

his policies are effective. Once again, the results are Nixonian price controls and runaway inflation.

[Peace Patriot]

12. Please see my two questions of you, re Chavez being able to "un-peg" Venezuela's

economy from the price of oil. I would really like to hear your answers. I don't see any way he could have done that, and I don't see any reason why he should have. The situation of oil-dependence was a given, dumped on him by previous rightwing governments (much like our crippled manufacturing and finance industries have been dumped on Obama, and like the Wall Street fiasco was dumped on FDR). You posit a choice (un-pegging Venezuela's economy from oil) that didn't exist.

As for problems: All countries and economies have problems, even ones that are run well, and/or run with good intentions and the best available information and people. FDR made mistakes, but at least he was moving in the right direction, and fed, clothed, housed and employed millions of hurting people. Chavez has made mistakes, but he, too, is moving in the right direction--with truly awesome economic and social achievements, as a matter of fact. Venezuela had a nearly 10% growth rate, over a five year period, with the most growth in the private sector, not including oil. That is a phenomenal accomplishment.

Inflation favors the poor and the working class, as a general rule, and deflation harms them and favors the rich with money to speculate. Neither thing is good when it gets too high. 30% inflation is too high, as the Chavez government acknowledges. But it's far better than serious deflation (depression). It just needs to be brought down.

Venezuela has a lot of problems. The street crime/murder rate is too high. The rightwing opposition is extreme and absurd and traitorous, like here. There is no effective opposition. That is not Chavez's fault. He has given them free reign. I sometimes wonder at what he lets them get away with--for instance, accepting millions of dollars from the Bushwhacks (our tax dollars) for political campaigns. That is illegal in Venezuela (as it is here--accepting foreign money to influence elections). He has done some things to balance the media a bit--mainly funding public broadcasting--but not nearly enough, in my opinion. There is no Fairness Doctrine, or busting up of media monopolies. Another problem is the air pollution in Caracas--not nearly enough done to clean it up--and other environmental issues related to extractive industries. The most important opposition is internal to the socialist movement--environmentalists, indigenous tribes, leftist groups that want to move faster on certain things, feminist and gay rights groups. There was a dispute, for instance, between the leftist mayor of Caracas and the Chavez government. The mayor wanted to confiscate some country club property for low cost housing, and the Chavez government nixed it, because private property is protected by Venezuela's Constitution.

The internal dissent is constructive--aimed at helping people, and the planet. The external dissent, from the shrill rightwing, is destructive, because its only aim seems to be to stop all this social and economic progress and install greedbags in power again, to profit from the oil at everybody else's expense. They don't want good government, even if it's quite fair to them.

I don't think this an optimal situation--wherein the rich have such fools representing them in politics. I really don't. I think all sectors of society should have at least adequate representation. Because I think almost everyone has something to offer--ideas that should be considered. But nothing the Venezuelan rightwing opposition has ever said--that I've got wind of--has struck me as worthy of consideration. Not a single constructive idea! They have no legitimacy as a potentially viable national government. If they were able to steal elections and regain power, it would be disastrous for the country and for its democracy (as it has been here--the Bushwhacks and the Venezuelan rightwing have much in common).

The reason this is not optimal, re: democracy, is that it surely presents a power temptation to the hugely popular Chavez. Politicians must always be watched--always! But I challenge you to establish ONE FACT--just one, mind you--one fact that justifies your use of the word "currently" in this statement of yours: "Chavez is not currently a dictator...". Barack Obama is not currently an ax-murderer. True or false?

Establish one fact--or, heck, make a whole case, if you have one--that Chavez has ever behaved like a "dictator," tyrannized anyone, curtailed anyone's rights, jailed anyone unfairly, staunched the rampant free speech in Venezuela, tortured anyone, stolen any election, invaded anyone, executed anyone, or has ever committed a single illegal or unconstitutional action of any kind.

All the evidence goes the other way--including the testimony of outside observers, like President Lula da Silva of Brazil, who said, of Chavez, "They can invent a lot of things to criticize Chavez--but not on democracy!"

So what is the justification for "Chavez is not currently a dictator"? That word impugns him. But I don't see any evidence for it. What is the evidence you are basing it on? It seems to be that, "anyone can become a dictator." Well, yeah. But is it fair to imply that of Chavez? Anyone can become an ax-murderer, too. But is it fair to say that Obama or anyone else "is not currently an ax-murderer"?

I can think of a lot of ways that Venezuela's democracy is not perfect, including the lack of an effective opposition, too much "personality cult" around Chavez (like we have here, around Obama), and even things like government resources being used to push the term limits referendum--a bit iffy, but not without precedent in other countries. (Say, a governor of California pushing his proposed anti-smog initiative--how much of his time and travels pushing that vote is inappropriate? what about non-profits, getting some gov't support, printing posters for it?) I see problems. I don't see tyranny. And, if you answer my question, I hope you will make that distinction. I want one fact that points to tyranny. And don't say no term limit, because FDR had no term limit. FDR had to be re-elected, just as Chavez does. The rightwing also called FDR a "dictator." But he wasn't. Neither is Chavez. And I challenge you to state any evidence that he wants to become one.

[WriteDown]

27. You seem to be the ones that doubts Chavez abilities....

The economy is still 90% reliant on oil. It would seem that during his time in office, he would have found new ways to diversify the economy.

Also, inflation "helping' the poor is a stretch.

[Peace Patriot]

28. Inflation helping the poor (vs deflation) is not a "stretch." It is a fact.

Let it go too far--just as with deflation (i.e., great depressions) and it destroys economies.

As to Venezuela's economy--that is, its exports--being 90% oil--how long do you suppose it takes to create an automobile industry, or a tech industry, or a food production (farming) industry, starting from scratch? Answer: It will never happen if you don't try. That was what previous, rightwing governments did. Enjoyed their Gucci bags and their Jaguars, and fuck everybody else. The Chavez government is having to build everything from scratch, including an educational system that doesn't waste the talent and intelligence of 90% of the population, by not educating them at all, or educating them very poorly, and a medical system in which half the population had never seen a doctor. How are you going to start an automobile industry or a tech industry with people who can't read? You have to start with educating them. How long does that take, to produce an educated workforce?

This is one of the reasons that Venezuelans just voted to lift term limits, so that the Chavez government can continue its programs, just as FDR needed to do with the "New Deal." It takes time to rebuild a trashed and looted country.

The Chavez government oversaw a nearly 10% economic growth rate, over a five year period (the last five years), with the most growth in the private sector, not including oil. I just told you this. (Can you read?) And you're dissing them for not doing enough? What do you think the inflation rate would be if growth had been 20%? Hm? Creating a manufacturing sector, and an agriculture sector, and the education and technical programs essential to them, takes time, and must be done with care, to avoid an overheated economy prone to inflation!

And this was all being done--all of the achievements of the Chavez government, and of the Venezuelan people--with help, encouragement and aid from the greatest democracy on earth, right? Our wonderful democratic government, which promotes democracy and social justice all over the world, lent a helping hand at every turn, praised the creation of a transparent voting system, applauded when the Chavez government wiped out illiteracy in five years, cried with joy when 70% of Venezuelans turned out to vote (one of the highest rates of citizen participation in the world), and Laura Bush gave speeches praising the Chavez government for providing food, clothing and books, so the poorest of the poor children could go to school, and raised cheers from her audience of have's when she declared, "No child left behind!" Right? And Condi Rice joined her at fatcat dinners, and spoke up and said, "There is no better use for a country's oil profits than bootstrapping the poor!" And there were Bush and Cheney, sitting there nodding approval of our humanitarian, pro-democracy policies, and speaking proudly of the USAID programs that had done their part to help Venezuela.

Right? The Chavez government didn't have to rebuild their country from scratch, in the face of U.S. assassination plots, and rightwing coups suspending the Constitution, the courts, the national assembly and all civil rights, and Exxon-Mobil sponsored, crippling oil professionals' strikes, and U.S.-funded recall elections, and USAID money training young rightwing thugs in disruptive tactics, and the U.S. government knee-capping any government that allied itself with Venezuela, and issuing the dictate to South American leaders that they must "isolate Chavez," and running guns and drugs and CIA operations and Colombian rightwing death squads over the border to destabilize Venezuela and kill its leaders if possible.

The Chavez government had ideal conditions for rebuilding Venezuela, and an easy sail to democracy and prosperity, right?

:sarcasm:

Venezuela overcame all of these terrorist tactics of the Bush Junta, and ended up leading the continent in the restoration of democracy, and in joining together to create the new South American Common Market (USASUR), and you're picking at them for not doing enough--for taking ten years to build an education system, and a medical system, and a manufacturing system, and food security, and regional alliances and infrastructure, and not being finished yet?

What planet do you live on? Planet Rush? Why are you ignoring the facts and spouting Wall Street Urinal pissing points?

[WriteDown]

29. 10% growth over five years....

And oil prices did what over those five years? Despite your copious wordage, the economy is still 90% tied to oil revenue. Great benefit was achieved when the price was high and great suffering will now be seen as the price bottoms out. It is inescapable.

[Idealism]

31. Not so.

More of the growth since the 2003 rally in Venezuela has been tied to the private sector, not the nationalized oil sector.

In that same span, poverty has been cut by 50%, extreme poverty has been lessened by 27%.

I would say he has done wonderful things for the economy.

[WriteDown]

32. If poverty has been cut by 50% in 5 years....

Then it should be eliminated or practically so in another 5 I suppose. If the growth is due to "private sector" why are they experiencing problems now that oil has tanked. Seems that is problematic.

[Idealism]

33. I am not saying their economy isn't oil dominated

I said the growth they experienced was mainly in the private sector.

And poverty reduction is not a linear equation. Ask the IMF and the World Bank, they have been trying to eliminate poverty for more than 50 years without much success.

[Judi Lynn]

6. Great comment I just found from Eduardo Galeano, world-famous Latin American writer:

Page 1
EDUARDO GALEANO
NOTHINGLAND—OR VENEZUELA?
A strange dictator, this Hugo Chávez. A masochist, with suicidal tendencies: he
established a constitution that allows the people to get rid of him, and then took the
risk of this happening in a recall referendum, which Venezuela is the first country in
history to have held. He was not punished: 5,800,629 Venezuelans voted for him to
remain president, with 3,989,008 against—a margin of 19 per cent. This was the
eighth election Chávez has won in five years, with a transparency of which Bush
could only have dreamed.

Faithful to his own constitution, Chávez accepted the referendum called by the
opposition, and put his presidency at the disposal of the people: ‘You decide’. Until
now, presidencies have been interrupted only by death, putsches, popular uprisings or
parliamentary proceedings. The Venezuelan referendum has ushered in an
unprecedented form of direct democracy. An extraordinary event: how many leaders
would be brave enough to do such a thing? And how many would remain in power
afterwards?

This tyrant invented by the mass media, this fearsome demon, has just given a
tremendous vitamin-injection to democracy, which, both in Latin America and
elsewhere, has become rickety and enfeebled. A month prior to the referendum, the
81-year-old former president Carlos Andrés Pérez, that flawless democrat whom the
media so adore (despite his impeachment on corruption charges), openly called for a
coup d’état. In an interview from his Miami base—in which he also argued that
Chávez should ‘die like a dog’—he stated in the plainest terms that ‘the path of
violence’ was the only possible one for Venezuela, and discounted the referendum
because ‘it is not part of Latin America’s specific character’. Our specific character
or, in other words, our precious heritage: a deaf and dumb populace.

Until only a few years ago, Venezuelans went to the beach when there were elections.
Voting was not, and still is not, compulsory. But the country has gone from total
apathy to total enthusiasm. The torrent of voters, standing in the sun for hours in
enormous queues, overwhelmed the structures that had been put in place by the
electoral authorities. The turnout was 70 per cent, up from an average of 55 per cent
in previous elections. The democratic flood also made it difficult to use, as had been
planned, the latest technology for preventing ballot fraud, in this country where the
dead have the bad habit of turning out to vote, and where some of the living vote
several times.

‘There is no freedom of speech here!’ protest the tv screens, radio waves and
newspaper front-pages, with absolute freedom of expression. Chávez has not closed a
single one of the mouths that daily spew forth insults and lies. A chemical war, aimed
at poisoning public opinion, is being waged with impunity. The only tv channel that
has been closed down in Venezuela, Channel 8, was a victim not of Chávez but of
those who usurped his presidency for a couple of days in the fleeting coup of April
2002—the coalition of business, media and church interests that had, fittingly, tried to
install employers’ association chairman Pedro Carmona as head of state. And when
Chávez returned from prison on 14 April and once more assumed the presidency on
the shoulders of an immense multitude, the principal Venezuelan media blotted out
the event. Private tv stations spent the whole day showing Tom and Jerry cartoons.
Such exemplary tv coverage apparently merited the prize that the King of Spain
awards to the best international journalism. Juan Carlos bestowed the award on a film
containing footage of those turbulent days in April, showing vicious chavistas firing
on an innocent protest by unarmed oppositionists. The footage was a sham. The
demonstration did not take place, as has since been irrefutably proven. But such
details are obviously of no importance, since the prize was not withdrawn.
After decades of rule by Carlos Andrés Pérez and his like in the oil paradise of Saudi
Venezuela, the official census recorded 1.5 million illiterate people, and 5 million
Venezuelans without papers or civic rights. These and many other invisibles are not
prepared to return to Nothingland, the country where nobodies live. They have taken
control of their country, which had been so foreign to them; this referendum has
proved, once again, that they are there to stay.
25 August 2004

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:xPWB2j4-zmgJ:www.countdownnet.info/articoli/analisi/Latin_America/230.pdf+Venezuela+oil+Eduardo+Galeano&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Galeano's Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Galeano

http://hbtl.files.wordpress.com.nyud.net:8090/2008/05/galeano.jpg



Eduardo Galeano, with South American Presidents

[EFerrari]

8. That's beautiful! Thanks!

[Judi Lynn]

11. Very happy if you enjoyed it. He's quite a guy! We need some Galeano clones for this country. n/t

[Peace Patriot]

13. Judi, your photos are such a wonderful treasure! Bless you for posting them!

And look at Rafael Correa there, praying next to the Bishop! Ha-ha! A beaut! (And the thoughtful Mr. Chavez, in a "brown study," as they say.) (I wonder how the English came up with that phrase. I'll have to look it up.)

[Peace Patriot]

15. Juan Carlos gave a prize for journalism to that falsified RCTV footage?!?!

Wow! So the jerkoff King DID support those rats! And that's what the "shut up" flap was about. But, of course, the flaming liars of our corpo/fascist media never provided that evidence of the reason why the Chavez government was mad at the king of Spain, and why the king of Spain was acting so...well...guilty-like (testy, touchy).

Enlightenment!

"Such exemplary tv coverage apparently merited the prize that the King of Spain
awards to the best international journalism. Juan Carlos bestowed the award on a film
containing footage of those turbulent days in April, showing vicious chavistas firing
on an innocent protest by unarmed oppositionists. The footage was a sham. The
demonstration did not take place, as has since been irrefutably proven."
--Eduardo Galeano

[Judi Lynn]

16. Yes, he WAS very testy, wasn't he? Guilty conscience!

Also, his fascist Prime Minister José María Aznar apparently instructed their ambassador in Caracas to show up for the ceremony when the coup President Pedro Carmona and his mob strode into Miraflores and dissolved the Venezuelan National Assembly, the Supreme Court, voided the Constitution, and sent the police out to arrest the cabinet members, and prominent supporters.

During a two-day diplomatic visit to Spain made by the Venezuelan President on November 23-24, the recently elected Spanish government of José Zapatero’s Spanish Socialist Workers Party (PSOE) admitted that the previous government under former President José María Aznar had supported the unsuccessful coup attempt against Chávez. “Although it was never published, under the previous government, in an unprecedented move for Spanish diplomacy, the Spanish ambassador (in Caracas) received instructions to support the coup,” said Miguel Angel Moratinos, Spain’s Foreign Minister.

Last paragraph
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/820

Thanks for pointing out Rafael Correa's prayerful posture. No doubt it was entirely unconscious, but it is amusing, isn't it? Former Bishop Lugo seems to have calmed him down a bit after the invasion of his country by the little Colombian cretin!

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. It is ironic that a guy who rails against globalization has built his country's fiscal house on

the global oil trade.

Whoopsie!

[Peace Patriot]

17. There's globalisation, and there's U.S.-dominated globalisation.

Just like there's "free trade" (corporate predation) and "fair trade" (a real marketplace).

Chavez has never been against globalisation--that is, a real marketplace, with fair rules, and no domination by any big country or by global corporate monopolies. His government has trade relations with many countries. And it helped found ALBA (a barter trade group in Latin America) and the new South American 'common market'--UNASUR. The idea of these and other trade groups that Venezuela is party to is to trade with other countries, on a global scale, whether its trading cheap oil for doctors with Cuba, or Panama's ag products for Venezuelan fertilizers, or bolivars for rifles from Russia (for Venezuela's army), or attracting investment from China and France and Norway in Venezuela's oil industry infrastructure, to ultimately yield oil products and oil profits. The same with infrastructure that the Chavez government has completed (such as the new bridge over the Orinoco to Brazil), or that the Chavez government is helping to fund and plan (such as the new highway from Brazil's Atlantic coast, across South America, through Bolivia, to the Pacific Ocean)--the goal is global trade, but--contrary to "globalisation" as it is defined inside the Beltway, and at the U.S.-dominated World Bank, or at the G-8--globalisation that only benefits the rich and the richest countries--Chavez supports globalisation that benefits everyone. The new highway, for instance, will benefit Bolivia--one of the poorest countries on the continent--by making it a major global trade route (from Africa through South America to Asia, and up and down the coasts). The Chavez government's investment in shipbuilding also aims at globalisation. That is hardly an "isolationist" investment.

Globalisation, as it has occurred over the last two decades, has been ruinous to many countries, and has had extremely severe impacts on local agriculture (small family farms, for instance) and other small businesses (such as Africa's cloth weavers). This has to change, and is being changed, by action of leaders such as Lula da Silva in Brazil, a close ally of Chavez. Brazil led the 20-country walkout at the WTO meeting in Cancun--the start of the third world rebellion against U.S.-domination of the trade rules. It is also being changed by the worldwide campesino movement and labor movements, who are electing leftist governments like those in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, Paraguay and others. The objective is not isolation; the objective is fairness. Protecting your country's oil industry from the likes of Exxon Mobil, or protecting your region from the loan sharks at the World Bank, is not anti-globalisation, or "isolationist." It is just common sense. If you want FAIR globalisation, you have to fight these monsters off and exclude them. And if we really want a true marketplace here, we will do the same. Giant corporations do not engage in "free trade"--they engage in predation. The predators need to be checked--and, if we're really smart, we'll find a way to restore democracy here, and dismantle these monster corporations, pull their corporate charters, and seize their assets for the common good. Corporations that don't operate in the common interest need to be gone.

[Idealism]

18. Does your anti-Chavez bias make thinking hurt?

Perhaps you should look at how far Venezuela has come in the past decade before you judge the man from right-wing media sources and Bush administration talking points.

[reg373]

19. Does your anti-Chavez bias make thinking hurt?

VZ sells in the U.S. as Citgo I think...

[Idealism]

21. Yes they do, and?

They also offer lower priced contracts for several remote US towns in Alaska, for example.

[Spouting Horn]

22. Can we judge him by what

he himself says (and does)?

[bemildred]

20. WSJ needs to stop worrying about Chavez and start worrying about it's own relevance. nt

[ohio2007]

24. Cargill interests in Venezuela were 'nationalized' tuesday

UPDATE 2-Chavez seizes Cargill Venezuela unit, warns other

CARACAS, March 4 (Reuters) - President Hugo Chavez seized a local unit of American food giant Cargill on Wednesday and threatened to nationalize Venezuela's largest private company, Polar, as he demanded industry produce cheaper rice.




.......


U.S. company Cargill , which operates one rice mill in Venezuela, said earlier in the week it was expecting a visit from officials even though it does not produce the type of rice that is at the center of the dispute.

Chavez said he ordered the takeover because Cargill -- the largest privately owned U.S company -- does not produce basic rice that is subject to government price controls.

"Prepare the decree, we are going to expropriate Cargill. We are not going to tolerate this," Chavez said.


It was not clear if Cargill's other Venezuelan food units would be affected. Cargill Venezuela did not answer calls to their offices.

Polar, which is the country's largest private sector employer and produces and distributes everything from beer to flour, has vowed to take legal action over the rice mill takeovers. (Writing by Saul Hudson, Editing by Frank Jack Daniel)

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0426337720090305

Is it ten months left to Rule By Decree?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=405&topic_id=6762&mesg_id=6762
"Prepare the decree, we are going to expropriate Cargill. We are not going to tolerate this," Chavez said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRvPoCWElOc&feature=related

[Idealism]

30. Your ignorance on this subject paraparallels other topics

Then again, I am not surprised.

[Peace Patriot]

34. I wonder about people quoting Rotters and the Wall Street Urinal to make Puke 'talking points.'

...instead of analyzing their lies, false "framing," false narratives, disinformation, psyops and black holes where information should be.

Here are some articles to help such brainwashed or lazy-people to get educated about Venezeula...

Venezuela Expropriates Cargill Rice Plant that Evaded Price Controls

March 5th 2009, by James Suggett - Venezuelanalysis.com

President Chavez announced the decision to expropriate in the Miraflores presidential building Wednesday (VTV)

Mérida, March 5th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) -- Following a week of inspections of privately owned rice processing facilities aimed at assuring the supply of essential foods at regulated prices, the Venezuelan government initiated expropriation procedures of a plant owned by the multi-national food company Cargill that was found to be modifying all its rice so as to evade price controls on basic food items. (emphasis added) (MORE)

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/4267

----

The New Venezuela of President Hugo Chávez
Ten Years of Bolivarian Revolution
January 31, 2009
By Salim Lamrani

(snip)
Since his election ten years ago, Hugo Chávez set about an ample transformation of Venezuela. His main objective consisted in improving the living standards of 70% of the population who lived below the Poverty Line. On the occasion of this tenth anniversary, we offer a first record of the main reforms. (MORE)

http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/20416

----

The Struggle to Industrialize Venezuela
October 5th 2007, by Chris Carlson

Latin America has been told for decades that free trade is the path to modernization. Washington's politicians and intellectuals praise its virtues and promise underdeveloped countries that it is a crucial element for successful development. But Latin American leaders are getting tired of empty promises. (MORE)

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/2689

-----------------------

If you continue to rely on Rotters for the info on which you based your opinions, your mind will rot. If you rely on the Wall Street Urinal, you will get pissed on. If you rely on the Associated Pukes, "organized money" will continue to vomit in your soup. Read them if you must--and we all must do so, to some extent--but know them for what they are--'news' monopolies in the service of those who mean ill to the majority of people in this country, to Venezuelans and to everyone else in the world. And seek out alternative sources in order to make up your mind about things, and to join with others to help keep these global predator powers from rotting our brains, pissing on us and vomiting on our dinner.

[ohio2007]

35. "Rotters" ? truely your ignorance is bliss

stick to your dot org kool aid pp

[unkachuck]

25. K&R....n/t