Venezuela is about to bite the dust...

[DoggyDaddy]

The Venezuelan people voted for socialism, voted for gun confiscation, voted for nationalization (theft) of foreign oil companies, and are now living with the consequences of their decision. They bucked capitalism and the American way, this is what they got, and as far as I'm concerned we owe them nothing and I am vehemently opposed to any kind of military intervention. The fallout of socialism isn't worth one American soldier's life.

If the entire country gets set on fire and become refugees, dig trenches and lay barbed wire on the southern boarder. Let all the people from over the years who whined about American intervention and empire clean up the mess. Our economy is humming along nicely, and it's time for the American people to enjoy peacetime and investment at home.

They've just been doing it wrong. If we sent AOC and Bernie down there, they could straighten them out in no time, I'm sure.

 

[KG1]

They've just been doing it wrong. If we sent AOC and Bernie down there, they could straighten them out in no time, I'm sure.

Yes because they can do it better than anywhere else that it’s been tried in the world. It can work here.

 

[NKBJ]

How does getting involved in THEIR mess help us at all ?

Well, if we can keep the Chinese from getting the rebuilding contracts...

 

[actaeon277]

They've just been doing it wrong. If we sent AOC and Bernie down there, they could straighten them out in no time, I'm sure.

I'm still waiting on Sen. Sanders and Rep. AOC to explain how their "democratic socialism" will work better.
I figure we'll get "BECAUSE", or silence.

 

[Ark]

When a person or persons see the error of their ways we don't ignore them or beat them up more. We help them to the best of our ability. When folks see their own error and come around they are far more powerful allies in the future.

Have they? Or are they mainly just angry that .gov isn't giving them all the free stuff they were accustomed to anymore? Do the people actually want to step away from socialism, or do they just want a new strongman who will make them comfortable again?

 

[Libertarian01]

Have they? Or are they mainly just angry that .gov isn't giving them all the free stuff they were accustomed to anymore? Do the people actually want to step away from socialism, or do they just want a new strongman who will make them comfortable again?

In all fairness it is probably a spectrum of all sides and viewpoints. Is it fair to say that we all loved President Obama because, well, we elected him, right? He won both the electoral collage AND the popular vote. Or can we say that all Americans just LOVE President Trump because, well, we elected him, right?

I am certain that there are Venezuelans who love socialism, some who love a portion of socialism, some who love capitalism, and some who hate a variety of each ism out there.

How many Americans, besides me, want to see medicare, medicaid, AND social security totally destroyed? Not very many, not at all. I consider myself extremely fiscally conservative as do many on these boards, yet I go to an extreme on the philosophical spectrum.

I want to see military spending cut by about 50% in an effort to reduce our deficit spending. I know I'm in a very small minority on this issue. Where I disagree with my government I don't rise up and oppose it because I understand the futility of it. I'm certain there are many Venezuelans who would love to see Maduro deposed but don't have the means, fortitude, or ability to do so.

And I don't think they got a lot of "free" stuff. I doubt even with whatever free things they got their standard of living is far below most of the western world.

Don't forget that WE are partially socialist in many areas of our society and government. Police, courts, fire department, EMS services, highways, schools, etc etc etc. Are we as a society ready to do away with all of these socialist programs? I don't think so. I'll bet that most folks don't even think about firemen when the idea of socialism comes up, but that's what they are.

I do hope that many Venezuelans see the problems in their government and work hard to correct those problems to build a better country and community for all of them.

Regards,

Doug

 

[jamil]

They've just been doing it wrong. If we sent AOC and Bernie down there, they could straighten them out in no time, I'm sure.

Excellent idea. They can stay there until they get socialism to work.

 

[jamil]

In all fairness it is probably a spectrum of all sides and viewpoints. Is it fair to say that we all loved President Obama because, well, we elected him, right? He won both the electoral collage AND the popular vote. Or can we say that all Americans just LOVE President Trump because, well, we elected him, right?

I am certain that there are Venezuelans who love socialism, some who love a portion of socialism, some who love capitalism, and some who hate a variety of each ism out there.

How many Americans, besides me, want to see medicare, medicaid, AND social security totally destroyed? Not very many, not at all. I consider myself extremely fiscally conservative as do many on these boards, yet I go to an extreme on the philosophical spectrum.

I want to see military spending cut by about 50% in an effort to reduce our deficit spending. I know I'm in a very small minority on this issue. Where I disagree with my government I don't rise up and oppose it because I understand the futility of it. I'm certain there are many Venezuelans who would love to see Maduro deposed but don't have the means, fortitude, or ability to do so.

And I don't think they got a lot of "free" stuff. I doubt even with whatever free things they got their standard of living is far below most of the western world.

Don't forget that WE are partially socialist in many areas of our society and government. Police, courts, fire department, EMS services, highways, schools, etc etc etc. Are we as a society ready to do away with all of these socialist programs? I don't think so. I'll bet that most folks don't even think about firemen when the idea of socialism comes up, but that's what they are.

I do hope that many Venezuelans see the problems in their government and work hard to correct those problems to build a better country and community for all of them.

Regards,

Doug

Police, fire, courts, ems, highways, etcetera, are not “socialist”. Having some community provided services (“socialized”) does not make them “socialist”. Those publicly provided services are a common feature of every capitalist first world economy. Some of those services can be and sometimes are (sort of) capitalized. I say “sort of” because when they’re privatized, it’s not a consumer market system, it’s more of a government contract. So those privately provided systems are still publicly funded.

 

[jamil]

Oh, and I’m with you on cutting military spending, but not by a predetermined percentage. I still want the US to have the most powerful military by a lot. I just don’t think we need to soak taxpayers to fund the military industrial complex to have that. I think part of that would be prioritizing things better. We can spend billions of dollars on a flying turd, but couldn’t spend millions to provide adequate armor for soldiers.

 

[Libertarian01]

Police, fire, courts, ems, highways, etcetera, are not “socialist”. Having some community provided services (“socialized”) does not make them “socialist”. Those publicly provided services are a common feature of every capitalist first world economy. Some of those services can be and sometimes are (sort of) capitalized. I say “sort of” because when they’re privatized, it’s not a consumer market system, it’s more of a government contract. So those privately provided systems are still publicly funded.

I respectfully disagree. These are all based upon socialism, lite. Each and EVERY one of them could be privatized. Each and every one IS privatized to some very small degree already. People can and do hire private detectives and private security firms to investigate issues, provide security, etc, especially that top 1/10 of 1%. Children can and are sent to private schools. Insurance companies pay for private fire protection, individuals may as well. Lawyers and clients can choose to pick their own arbiter voluntarily for binding arbitration. For every public service done there is a private sector alternative.

The fact that every nation state provides these services does not remove from these services the basis of socialism. In a 100% capitalist system each and every service and infrastructure could and would be provided by the free market.

Look, I am not slamming these services. I am very comfortable with them being provided by the state, from each according to his abilities to each according to his needs. (Yes, I know that's Marx, but it still fits.) My analogy here is that we are all taxed, either on income or property or other means (each according to his ability), and most often that revenue is distributed to regions based upon population (each according to his needs.) However, I do find it disingenuous to disguise them as anything but socialist.

Providing these services by a centralized, unopposable government makes them socialist in nature. In a purely capitalist system we may chose what products or services to purchase. When it is purchased for us without our consent that is socialist.

Regards,

Doug

 

[T.Lex]

Hey Doug - I kinda get what you're saying, but I think some definitional issues are presented.

The "social compact" that gives us things like a police force and regulatory government are not "socialism" in the modern sense.

Unless the definition shift to the idea that any sort of government is a functional embrace of "socialism." I don't think Locke would see things that way.

 

[Libertarian01]

Hey Doug - I kinda get what you're saying, but I think some definitional issues are presented.

The "social compact" that gives us things like a police force and regulatory government are not "socialism" in the modern sense.

Unless the definition shift to the idea that any sort of government is a functional embrace of "socialism." I don't think Locke would see things that way.

I agree that these services are not thought of as "socialist" in the modern sense, but I do believe that they are.

Per a simple google definition of socialism: "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

The government hires and trains police, fire, etc falling into the "means of production." It assigns them where the government wants, aka "distribution." It forces taxes on the public to provide these services "exchange." It owns and regulates these services, aka "regulated by the community as a whole."

At or near the turn of the industrial revolution we could have chosen a multitude of paths to follow. Board a rail at any time in America and you are under the lawful authority of the railroad police. This is a clear example of private, free market law enforcement. However, most of the country took the alternative route to government run, socialist based approach.

Again, I am not saying I am opposed to it. I am just calling it out for what it is: socialism lite.

Regards,

Doug

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

So we're hoping to induce/ control geopolitical regional stability, ok got it .

My history sucks but I'm pretty sure both Russia and China haven't had too much trouble controlling their regions and maintaining stability.

I'm thinking we pull everything outa that region, take that money and spend it on preparing our country for the inevitable day when they and their friends detach from the petro dollar .

A soften the blow kinda thing .

 

[jamil]

I agree that these services are not thought of as "socialist" in the modern sense, but I do believe that they are.

Per a simple google definition of socialism: "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

The government hires and trains police, fire, etc falling into the "means of production." It assigns them where the government wants, aka "distribution." It forces taxes on the public to provide these services "exchange." It owns and regulates these services, aka "regulated by the community as a whole."

At or near the turn of the industrial revolution we could have chosen a multitude of paths to follow. Board a rail at any time in America and you are under the lawful authority of the railroad police. This is a clear example of private, free market law enforcement. However, most of the country took the alternative route to government run, socialist based approach.

Again, I am not saying I am opposed to it. I am just calling it out for what it is: socialism lite.

Regards,

Doug

I'm not saying you're putting any valuation on it one way or another so no need to say you oppose or favor either. I'm saying you're misinterpreting the definition particularly around what public ownership means under either system. They're not the same. We can stay with police as an example if you want. A police force run by the state is not "socialist-lite". It's not capitalism either. It's just a government provided service. Having a police force does not make us a mixed economy. The only part of police service that's counted towards GDP is the salaries of employees. I would grant that the VA hospital, for example, is a socialist program; medicare, medicaid, public schools. That makes the US a mixed economy.

 

[Libertarian01]

I'm not saying you're putting any valuation on it one way or another so no need to say you oppose or favor either. I'm saying you're misinterpreting the definition particularly around what public ownership means under either system. They're not the same. We can stay with police as an example if you want. A police force run by the state is not "socialist-lite". It's not capitalism either. It's just a government provided service. Having a police force does not make us a mixed economy. The only part of police service that's counted towards GDP is the salaries of employees. I would grant that the VA hospital, for example, is a socialist program; medicare, medicaid, public schools. That makes the US a mixed economy.

I don't believe I am misinterpreting as the police could be replaced with a private sector, free market system. I think that would be horrible, but it could be done, just like privatizing prisons is horrible but it is done.

To my thinking, and per the definition of socialism, when the collective controls a product or service, say LE, that IS socialist in nature. I believe that trying to water it down to simply a "service" provided by the government fails to acknowledge the mechanism and philosophy behind the service.

When the government provides a service, any service, it is socialist in nature. I think we take so much for granted today that we are like fish within the fish tank who cannot see the tank we are living in. If we go back in time 2,000 years almost every government on earth provided almost nothing. They maintained an army (maybe?) and/or the kings men, but those were for the king, not the little people. As societies and nation states developed people began to demand more and more safety nets because they could begin to see the big picture, and the future. They became able to predict.

The problem is they turned to the big guy, who was the government. They didn't privatize, that would require more work and resources from them. They turned over control to big brother. Some of this was good and necessary, some horribly vile, and most in between. And as our understanding of governmental systems came into being we defined one, socialism, as the community controlling the process of an industry or service.

To me it's like people not wanting to call the Boston Tea Party a terrorist attack, but that is exactly what it was. It also happens to shine a very bad light on folks we want to adore and so folks are reluctant to see it that way.

By the way, what is so wrong with accepting that services provided by the government as socialist in nature? I think a large part of that answer is that folks don't want to acknowledge how socialist we already are.

Regards,

Doug

PS - I feel truly sorry for the folks in Venezuela. Maduro is a buttnugget and I hope he is removed from power as bloodlessly as possible. I also hope whoever takes his places cleans it up and makes it the most prosperous and happy country that it can be.

 

[jamil]

I don't believe I am misinterpreting as the police could be replaced with a private sector, free market system. I think that would be horrible, but it could be done, just like privatizing prisons is horrible but it is done.

To my thinking, and per the definition of socialism, when the collective controls a product or service, say LE, that IS socialist in nature. I believe that trying to water it down to simply a "service" provided by the government fails to acknowledge the mechanism and philosophy behind the service.

When the government provides a service, any service, it is socialist in nature. I think we take so much for granted today that we are like fish within the fish tank who cannot see the tank we are living in. If we go back in time 2,000 years almost every government on earth provided almost nothing. They maintained an army (maybe?) and/or the kings men, but those were for the king, not the little people. As societies and nation states developed people began to demand more and more safety nets because they could begin to see the big picture, and the future. They became able to predict.

The problem is they turned to the big guy, who was the government. They didn't privatize, that would require more work and resources from them. They turned over control to big brother. Some of this was good and necessary, some horribly vile, and most in between. And as our understanding of governmental systems came into being we defined one, socialism, as the community controlling the process of an industry or service.

To me it's like people not wanting to call the Boston Tea Party a terrorist attack, but that is exactly what it was. It also happens to shine a very bad light on folks we want to adore and so folks are reluctant to see it that way.

By the way, what is so wrong with accepting that services provided by the government as socialist in nature? I think a large part of that answer is that folks don't want to acknowledge how socialist we already are.

Regards,

Doug

PS - I feel truly sorry for the folks in Venezuela. Maduro is a buttnugget and I hope he is removed from power as bloodlessly as possible. I also hope whoever takes his places cleans it up and makes it the most prosperous and happy country that it can be.

I don't accept that services like police is socialist because it's not. I listed some of the ones that are socialist. BTW, Rome, for example, did provide a lot of government services. Public bath houses among them.

 

[spencer rifle]

Aqueducts that fed the public baths were also public works.
Roman socialists - who knew?

 

[BugI02]

I don't accept that services like police is socialist because it's not. I listed some of the ones that are socialist. BTW, Rome, for example, did provide a lot of government services. Public bath houses among them.

Something something bath-house Barry something

 

[Leadeye]

I wonder sometimes about both the morality and mortality of leadership. What would the world think of us if agents figured out where he was sleeping and we flattened the place with some smart bombs. Eliminating a problem and sending a message, would Venezuela be a better place and the people happier? Isn't that what most of the world is saying that they want.

 

[BugI02]

Was the world a better place when Arafat was afraid to sleep in the same place twice? Is the world better or worse when members of terrorist organizations suspect drones are always watching and are afraid to meet.

If it's my hand on the joystick, the only thing that saves him is if we kill him, the narrative becomes that he was killed by running dog imperialists. If his own people kill him, the narrative is closer to the truth - socialism/communism fails again