if only that could happen in America. Flee to canada and mexico.

To be fair to Maduro, it was Chavez who bankrupted the country. Maduro is simply the less charismatic, equally incompetent successor whose job it is to take the blame for the eventual collapse of the Venezuelan state.

typical republican, blame everything on Chavez. first election fraud and now socialism that isnt really socialism because REAL socialism has never been tried. Sad!

The country did better under Chavez than under any of the previous right wing governments. It’s not even disputable.

Amazing how a cesspool arises from socialism and still people think it isn’t that.

He seems to be no different from any other tyrannical despot


Under Chávez, Venezuela experienced democratic backsliding, as he suppressed the press, manipulated electoral laws, and arrested and exiled government critics.[24][25][26] His use of enabling acts[27][28] and his government's use of propaganda were controversial.[29][30][31][32] Chávez's presidency saw significant increases in the country's murder rate[33][34] and continued corruption within the police force and government.[35][36]

Im also reading about cruelty to the homeless by police under chavez

This post was edited by duffman316 on Jun 24 2021 08:49am

Chavez destroyed the oil industry by redirecting essentially all of PDVSA's revenue to fund social projects. Ideological programs meant to ensure loyalty and the subordination of industry experts to Bolivarian revolutionary goals led to the mass exodus of trained personnel, and as a result Venezuela has made zero progress bringing new streams online.

He "did better" in the sense that he recklessly spent massive surpluses gifted to him, ran the generational wealth of Venezuela to zero, and left it in a position where $140 / barrel oil was required to support the largess. He is the literal ruin of Venezuela.

It's a pretty simple explanation, socialism doesnt work in poor countries, only capitalism works to rise them from their mud hovels. socialism doesnt even work in middling economy countries, it stifles progress. it only works in places that can take a hit economically at the expense of raised quality of living for the individual. but still needs to be managed carefully to maintain a capitalism backbone for the general economy. it works fine in rich european nations, corporate centralized wealth at the expense of 1st world citizens isn't a sustainable system. as the american people found out during the pandemic when corporations revealed that even a 2 week shutdown would bankrupt many of them so they required bailouts. meanwhile the european nations that have socialist policies did relatively fine. their economies tanked just as ours did, but they maintained just fine. even with hordes of scary muslim invaders already drawing large amounts from the pool of social benefits. profit maximization has its benefits, but during strife it's a gun in the mouth of the country. the fact that american corporations dont have cash reserves to even ride out 1 month of a shutdown, let alone 2 weeks, should be a wake up call to all americans.

You could have stopped at "Socialism doesn't work".

The successful European nations (e.g. Denmark, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland) are all market economies which depend either on oil (Norway) or enormous trade surpluses (Germany, Denmark). They have a captive market of poorer consumers in the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe. To the extent which the EU's heavy handed approach to regulation works / doesn't work, their unimpressive performance speaks for itself (https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/06/05/once-a-corporate-heavyweight-europe-is-now-an-also-ran-can-it-recover-its-footing)

capitalism by-and-large works, so much so that even where socialism is viable, admittedly in a very narrow scope, capitalism is still required.

socialism by contrast does work, as long as you use it in moderation.

its simply a check and balance on the errs of capitalism, namely profit maximalization which has created a lot of issues in america and elsewhere.

how much longer can america continue to give tax breaks at unprecedented rates to prop up corporations while simultaneously borrowing money to pay for the basics of government functions to fill the gap that a drastically lower corporate tax rate leaves?

especially as those same corporations automate positions, outsource production, and the consumers left paying for whatever X% of the govts budget pay less and less in taxes?

in classic american style we'll approach the waterfall as if it doesnt exist, and then regroup once we hit the pool below. incremental changes aren't going to happen because we have the right wing categorically against tax increases on either the individual or corporation.

the hardest recession/depression america has seen since the 1930s approaches and we'll be left to pay for it via borrowed money. and i'd bet my 401k you and your ilk will find a way to blame it on anyone but yourselves.