I have seen a lot of people who are trying to claim that socialism cant work because of what is happening in Venezuela,but it is always VERY EASY to tell when somebody just takes a few talking points they heard on FAUXnews,or on the rush Limbaugh show,and didn't do any actual research into something themselves!!!

The problem with socialism in Venezuela is the fact that the government was corrupt,and instead of using all of their socialist programs to help the normal citizens of its country,like they were SUPPOSED TO,they took all of the money and basically just gave it to the corrupt politicians that their government is infected with!
[maybe you have heard about the mobster who is currently the president who illegally rigged the election to keep himself in power?? ]
{you know...the one who has to 20 TON PILE OF GOLD in his vault that he is trying to ship out of the country before he loses power!!]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/venezuela-20-ton-pile-gold-022753684.html

so,in REALITY,by definition,Venezuela isn't a socialist country..it is an AUTHORITARIAN DICTATORSHIP!!!

in a toxic environment like THAT,though,where the government is corrupt,NO form of government is going to work!!!

just look at OUR country...

we live in a 'democracy',but now that the government has turned corrupt,and doesn't serve the PEOPLE anymore...just themselves,and the rich and powerful,WE aren't doing very well either,are we??
[and,its only going to continue to get WORSE,if we dont do something to take back control of it from the people who are running it only for the benefit of themselves,and the super wealthy,and powerful!!]

but,i think that it is par for the course that none of you fauxsters,or dittoheads talks about the FACT that VIRTUALLY EVERY OTHER MAJOR COUNTRY IN SOUTH AMERICA HAS ALSO PRACTICED SOCIALISM,AND MOST OF THEM ARE DOING JUST FINE!!!!

[I wonder WHY they never mention THOSE COUNTRIES on FAUX,or rush?????]
[NO,i dont!!!] lol

here...
have a little education!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/08/21/no-venezuela-doesnt-prove-that-socialism-will-bring-about-a-zombie-apocalypse/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.582051ff7385


"Since the turn of the century, every big country in South America except Colombia has elected a socialist president at some point. Socialists have taken power in South America’s largest economy (Brazil), in its poorest (Bolivia) and in its most capitalist (Chile). Socialists have led South America’s most stable country (Uruguay) as well as its most unstable (Ecuador). Argentina and Peru elected leftists who, for various reasons, didn’t refer to themselves as socialists — but certainly governed as such.

Mysteriously, the supposedly automatic link between socialism and the zombie apocalypse skipped all of them. Not content with merely not-collapsing, a number of these countries have thrived.

Take Peru. When Ollanta Humala, widely seen as one of the most radical hard-left leaders in the region, was elected president in 2011, 28 percent of Peruvians were poor. In office, Humala governed from the left, but sensibly, investing in the poor while nurturing economic growth. By the time he handed over power in 2016 (peacefully, to a right-wing successor), just 21 percent of Peruvians were poor.

Some argue that it was Humala’s relative moderation that averted disaster. But look across his southeastern border. In Bolivia, a hard-core socialist, Evo Morales, has been in power since 2006. Morales’s tenure lays waste to any notion that countries succeed only under “moderates” — he’s a proper extremist, a hard-leftist who nationalized the nation’s most lucrative industry, and it’s an incontestable fact that he has handled the nation’s finances with prudence and scored real social achievements along the way. According to the World Bank, under Morales poverty in Bolivia fell by a third, with none of the economic chaos Venezuela has seen."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/01/05/as-socialist-venezuela-collapses-socialist-bolivia-thrives-heres-why/?utm_term=.26f7d439b967

As socialist Venezuela collapses, socialist Bolivia thrives. Here’s why.

"Venezuela ran large budget deficits every year, even as oil prices skyrocketed between 2005 to 2014. That meant the country was piling on debt even as government revenue exploded — a senseless, pro-cyclical policy that left Venezuela up a creek without a paddle when commodity prices tanked.

In the meantime, Bolivia was running budget surpluses every year between 2006 and 2014. This allowed it to draw down the public sector’s debt, which fell from 83 percent of GDP in 2003 to just 26 percent in 2014, even as Bolivia built up its international reserves dramatically, from $1.7 billion in 2005 to $15.1 billion at the end of the boom in 2014."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GEE!!...
socialism seems to be working out pretty well for THEM!!!
I wonder why the people trying to hold on to their power only want you to look through a pinhole at the very worst example,instead of letting you take the blinders off,and see the BIG picture??

I will answer that question for you...its because they dont want you to have to REAL FACTS,because THEN,you wouldn't be so easily manipulated for their own purposes.

"Socialism" wasnt the problem in Venezuela...."CORRUPT POLITICIANS" were he problem!!

so,you might want to start actually doing the RESEARCH it takes to have a well informed opinion about things,instead of just swallowing the propaganda that people are feeding you to further their own agenda?

[GOOGLE is your friend!!!]

As somebody who has a very dear friend living in Caracas, and being from Milwaukee, which had a socialist government that worked very well for years, I have to say, "yup, you're right on all counts Dave". Socialism can work. And corruption is corruption no matter what you call it.

The people who decry/ scream the loudest about democratic socialim not working lose credibilty when *all* they can point to is Venezuela, or some other place with a highly corrupt governnment.

FWIW..a corrupt government can cause the capatalism these epeople are so fond of to do more harm than good for the genral populace..

First, and most importantly, socialism is an economic system not a form of government!! Socialism is best operated in a benevolent dictatorship or monarchy not a democracy! In a democracy, politicians are elected based on their promises to the people that they must fulfill to be reelected. The more that is given to the people by the government, the less there is to reinvest in the economy and the desire to work. Eventually somebody has to say no we can't afford to do that. In a democracy that doesn't work very well with an uneducated electorate that doesn't understand the consequences of excessive socialism. One only has to look at the democrat candidates and the unrealistic promises they are making to get their base to vote for them.

Yet Brazil fries under the mainstream radar, subjective reasoning says, no oil wealth.

Trying to justify stepping on Ruskies toes for oil should prove to be a real comedy act!

Edit: Satirical comedy act!

And we DON'T have corrupt politicians in this country??? Just what cave are you living in?

Socialism would work---IF---

We could eliminate the drug problem in this country.

Take these lazy cusses that stand on a street corner, take away their sad looking cardboard sign, and put them to work sorting out recyclables. Excellent job for them! No skills necessary. They get credits to use at the local grocery. Their rent gets taken out of their pay before it gets into their hot lil' hands. Give them about $40 bucks spending money every week. Have a "Wake up" crew come get them when they don't show for work. Pay for their healthcare. Put some of their money away as a savings account. After all, they act like children, might as well treat them like it.

NO ONE gets a healthy paycheck if they work for government. If anything, government workers that actually do physical work make more than those who anchor down a chair, and shuffle papers. Term limits for elected people.

Sure, make schooling free. Pay these lousy professors less, take away tenure. Put these colleges in plain old buildings. A good education doesn't have to come out of a fancy building.

Pay our seniors a decent retirement wage. People in prison-There is our road workers! Kill somebody? YOU get to work in the nuclear industry! So you croak a little early. Sucks to be you. Screw up, die faster.

Socialism would work if those who want it bad enough would be willing to give up their lazy ways and go to work.

But I don't see that happening.

I have to agree with you on this one Dave ..No government will work if the politicians are corrupt..unfortunately for us tho that even those who are vying for socialism don't realize that what others are after while destroying our democracy is Globalism..those looking for a socialist government are being duped as well..So we have those standing for democracy those vying for socialism and the Deep State attempting to bring about globalism..a three ring circus..I wonder how all this will turn out..in the mean time I suppose for the most of us all we can do is sit back while munching on popcorn and peanuts and..ENJOY THE SHOW... until the SHTF..

Put people who don't value human life to work in a nuclear power plant......where they can cause massive destruction and devisttaion without consequences? Great job

^^^ No, doing menial things, like, ohhh, sweeping out the reactor room. You know, jobs that would make one glow in the dark...

I find this hilarious.

Please point to any government in the world and in any point in history where no part of it is/was ever "corrupt."

Based on your statement("where government is corrupt, NO form of government is going to work!!!"), I have to assume you are joining the "no government at all for anything!" bandwagon?


...So what was it before he "rigged the election to keep himself in power?"
You do understand things change, right? That something can be one thing, and then by the actions of one or a few can then be defined as something else?


Oh...just now the government has turned corrupt?
Thank the government for compulsory public education.


I think you need to read more about the countries in south america.
The most prosperous and stable are those that impeached, voted out, coupe'd, and turned away from socialism. Doesn't really matter if the leaders call themselves socialist if they're promoting capitalistic ideals behind the scenes while shouting empty socialist promises from the bully pulpit.


You first?

Feel free to look up what happened to the socialist leaders and how the country has been voting now. Luis Inacio, Dilma Rousseff. Socialists enacting socialist agendas, what happened?


Bolivia is a pretend socialist state.
The state takes some of the profits from private companies.
They don't own the means of production.
Would you call a country where the means of production are in privately controlled hands and the government takes a percentage "socialist?"
They have more in common with Finland and Denmark, more parasitic. They incorporate free markets, take money from them, redistribute it, and then say "see! We're successful socialists!"

Calling Bolivia (or Finland, or Denmark, or Sweden, or Norway, or south american countries) "successful socialist countries" is like calling China a "successful Communism" because of the growth of it's economy. As though its growth isn't based on incorporating free market (capitalistic) systems.


Have you read the history of Uruguay?
The "success" it has had under "socialist" leaders is based on 1.expanding free market principles e.g. foreign trade agreements with private companies. 2.being a provider of natural resources like natural gas. 3. reigning in rampant social programs.
It's not like Uruguay was all capitalistic, failed, and went socialist. It was far left, then went more right, but still to the left.
Funnily enough, a lot of Uruguay's "success" is due to companies fleeing other south american countries that were too socialistic/leftist, finding Uruguay less restrictive.

Would you say a country is an example of "successful socialism" because they were less socialist than the neighboring countries, so profited from the private companies that fled to that country in order to get away from the socialists?

Eh, the rest of the countries from the "educational" section are pretty much the same, typing just gets old.

Enough money can kick the can of problems arising from socialism down the road for a bit, but it's going to take ever increasing amounts of money.
"Successful socialist" countries raise that money...by adopting free market capitalistic ideals and systems.


...And how were the corrupt politicians voted in? Gained power in the first place? By identifying as socialists, running on socialist campaigns, and passing socialist programs.


Pot meet kettle?

Points of Information:

The word Nazi is a German abbreviation for National Socialist Party.

The abbreviation U.S.S.R. stands for Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Socialism enhances the lovely human trait of being greedy and corruption. You've just proven the arguments you're trying to disprove. Socialism, like it's more radical relative communism, is an ideology where everyone is economically equal. Unfortunately the politicians are more economically equal than the rest of society. The politicians always have better health care programs, retirement programs, etc.

Socialism doesn't work because of human GREED! Of course, eliminate greed and you might have a chance of getting it to work. How can society eliminate greed?

1. Ask the greedy politicians to pass laws against greed, right? Legislating human character traits? The ACLU may not like that.
2. The second favorite answer: educate them. So you have educated greedy politicians.

Socialists always forget that human nature becomes greedy and "Corrupt" within the socialistic legal system where you can get something for nothing.

Socialism is corrupt at it's very core.


Is #China’s corruption-busting AI system ‘Zero Trust’ being turned off for being too efficient?
Despite being restricted to just 30 counties and cities, *artificial intelligence system has already helped snare 8,721 officials.* System cross-references big data to evaluate work and personal lives of millions of government workers

What would you do if you had a machine to catch a thief? If you were a corrupt Chinese bureaucrat, you would want to ditch it, of course.

Resistance by government officials to a groundbreaking big data experiment is only one of many challenges as the Chinese government starts using new technology to navigate its giant bureaucracy.

According to state media, there were more than 50 million people on China’s government payroll in 2016, though analysts have put the figure at more than 64 million – slightly less than the population of Britain.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2184857/chinas-corruption-busting-ai-system-zero-trust-being-turned-being

And sweeping generalizations are ALWAYS wrong.

And labels are just an excuse for laziness. If it is against a race or a religion, the label is a stereotype.

The way this country is now throwing around "leftist", "socialist", etc, is just someone relying on your laziness to not think for yourself.

Appropriate of tonight, the NFL is a socialist organization: The member teams and owners share revenue, have a dictator who makes arbitrary and steadfast rules, limit competition by quotas and caps, they discourage and limit the outsiders (say a new city wants an NFL team) from taking a part of their "good thing", and they rely on fleecing the taxpayers of the cities they live in for support, they claim "for the good of all" (i.e. municipal stadiums, police details, military flyovers as entertainment)

That NFL sounds pretty socialist, doesn't it? Certainly doesn't sound American, that's for sure. So if you are watching the Super Bowl tonight, you are supporting socialism. How does that feel?

5 Ways Socialism Itself Turned Venezuela Into A Trash Heap
It's socialism, stupid.


By MICHAEL QAZVINI
August 14, 2017
“But that’s not real socialism,” says every leftist sympathizer when confronted with the horrific reality of Venezuela’s collapse into an autocratic dystopia. But for those of us who don’t have our heads in the sand, Venezuela is a textbook example of what happens when socialism infects a country and purges any hint of private enterprise.

The people of Venezuela are suffering tremendously thanks to the Bolivarian socialist experiment. Hugo Chavez, the socialist state’s now-deceased founding father, once promised a flourishing utopia where children were merry and the poor were well-fed. Today, Venezuela is anything but joyous. It’s hell on earth.

Under Chavez’s handpicked successor, President Nicolas Maduro, Venezuelans are flooding the streets in protest against everything the socialist state stands for: poverty, destitution, starvation, suffering, and ideological slavery. Intent on preserving the socialist system by any means necessary, Maduro has consolidated power like a king and deployed the state’s security forces to beat down protesters. Before socialism suffocated the prosperity and freedom out of the country, Venezuela was a relatively successful state relative to its neighbors in Latin America. In 2017, Venezuela is a trash heap pitied by the entire region.

Here are five tangible ways socialism itself turned Venezuela into a trash heap:

1. State-imposed price controls limited the supply of basic goods by rendering production unprofitable. In order for Bolivarian revolution to fully materialize, the socialist state needed to have full control over the price of goods coming out of factories. As long as the oligarchs in government enjoyed the fruits of oil revenue, profit for businesses, both large and small, were considered antithetical to the socialist agenda. The proletariat had to have access to goods even if it meant producing those goods at a loss, demanded the socialist state. After incurring tremendous losses, many businesses shut down, unable to continue production. With nobody left to make basic goods, supply became scarce, naturally pushing up the price of goods. And at a certain point, only the richest of the rich could afford goods smuggled across the border and sold on the black market.

2. Venezuela became a single commodity market. By discouraging businesses to pursue profit, the socialist government pushed the economy back to the dark ages. Creativity died. Nobody was incentivized to produce anything of value or innovate. Luckily, Venezuela had a safety net: oil, lots of it. But the global oil market is fickle. It ebbs and flows. Prices drop and rise quickly. When your entire economy is reliant on one commodity, then your economic fate is intertwined with price fluctuations that are beyond your control.

3. Venezuela subsidized its unsustainable welfare state with oil revenue. State-run oil companies were responsible for producing the revenue necessary to subsidize the government’s extensive welfare programs. Under the socialist system, the poor were promised housing, education, healthcare and other wildly expensive benefits. To pay for all of this, the Venezuelan state sold oil in bulk overseas. But when the price of crude plunged, Venezuela went into uncontrollable free fall. By then the people had become so reliant on public services and government benefits that they had no way to take care of themselves on their own. The government controlled the lives of the people and now the government had no way to keep them healthy, fed, and alive.

4. The socialist system encouraged corruption. A socialist government needs an absurd number of government workers to run the day-to-day lives of the people. As a result, government itself becomes the one employer that is always hiring more employees. In socialist Venezuela, the government filled its coffers with oil revenue, generously paying top officials who exercised control over oil profit distribution. Government oligarchs grew rich while the people remained poor. The Washington Examiner explains further:

The bigger the government, the more people's success depends on sucking up to officials rather than on offering a service to consumers. Expanding state bureaucracies offer new opportunities for nepotism. First, Venezuelan jobs were allocated on the basis of political allegiance; now food supplies are.

5. The government had no way of controlling hyperinflation because the country’s monetary policy was imaginary. The Venezuelan state pretended to have control over the price of the bolivar, the nation’s (now-worthless) currency. The socialist state thought that it could set the price of goods, wages, property, and services and simply print money to make up for deficits. But as it turns out, recklessly printing money doesn’t actually work.

Forbes contributor Tim Worstall explains why the socialist government’s monetary policy was destined to fail:

The government does indeed control certain nominal numbers about the economy. They can and do insist that the bolivar is worth this much, that bread must be sold at a certain price, that wages are this or that. And then that reality does that uncomfortable thing again and it turns out that the bolivar is worth what someone will pay for it, no more, meaning that the nominal prices of labour or bread are very different from the real ones.

Give me your backing as we create a constituent assembly and I will give you victory over rising prices. Give me the constituent assembly and you will see. We will go to battle over inflation and those criminals who profiteer and perpetuate our problems.

The inflation is of course being created by the government as they print money to pay their bills. For the Modern Monetary Theory people are entirely correct, government can just print money and spend it on whatever it likes. When they've done so hyperinflation like that in Venezuela is usually what results as well. Meaning that there's nothing wrong with MMT as a theory it's just that it always fails as a policy.

Worstall concludes that when the government aggressively allocates resources, in any country, including the United States, it’s always bad news.

“Economics is about the allocation of real resources so it's the real prices that matter,” he notes. “The Chavistas thought it was nominal that mattered, that they could just set prices as they wish. It don't work that way, something we should recall as our own democratic socialists attempt to fix the prices of rent, wages, college and the rest.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/19694/5-ways-socialism-itself-turned-venezuela-trash-michael-qazvini

By looking at Venezuela this way, I'd say it would be looking at the USA in the near future. Oh sure, you can say it wouldn't happen that way. Dem politicians are just AS crooked as the rest. No way they can claim different.

The C.I.A. killed the former president. For obvious reasons. So team America can sort it all out for them with a nice benovalant Coup d'état. End of, full stop.

Yeah, Socialism really works. Just look at Nazi Germany oh wait that collapsed. Their economy was so inflated that even if they won the war they would have gone bankrupt. Look at the USSR, they whole system collapsed every country jumped ship, the poverty levels were at a record high. Look at Cuba, a country that if it weren't for foreign aid would go belly up. Look at Venezuela, they physically removed the leader of the country under a military coup (which they attempted to also do under Chavez as well because the economy was collapsing and corruption was rampant). Russia had to fly in their Special Forces in an unmarked plane to sneak out the leader before he gets arrested. Look at North Korea, the country is practically broke and if it weren't for foreign aid it would be belly up.


Yeah, Socialism is just so wonderful......

Exactly. Also Hitler and Stalin were practically identical in almost every way.

https://youtu.be/hPqpV9olIlw

Work for peace Gill Scott Heron