Enjoy comunism: Venezuela raises monthly minimum wage to $2.40

[bryant.coleman]

And the people of the country - what is it, biomass crazy, needs and desires? Remember a simple axiom - we are responsible for our actions, and for inaction too!
If the people by OWN VOICES brings an idiot to the presidency, then the people are a participant in this negative process, and they share the guilt for what the president did later, but THEY DID NOT DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT! Therefore, their guilt is unambiguous, okay, they fell for promises, but then they did not stop the policy of idiocy and the murder of the economy. The position "we have nothing to do with" is a very bad human quality. It's always easier to pin the blame on someone else without admitting your mistakes.

If every single voter had preferred Maduro during the elections, then your argument would have been correct. But that is not the case here. Let's take an example. During the March 1933 German federal election, National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) of Adolph Hitler was voted in to power. The NSDAP won 43.91% of the vote, with a turnout of 88.74%. That means that less than 40% of the registered voters preferred the NSDAP, while the remainder either abstained or voted for other parties. Now will you say that the entire race of Germans need to be blamed for the rise of NSDAP, including those who voted for the opposition parties?

[actmyname]

But I take issue with the popular belief that anything to the left of the hard-right libertarian laissez-faire ideal should be decried as communist.

That is something that those of us who believe in little intervention and regulations tend to do, exaggerating. I acknowledge that. At the slightest regulation or tax increase we accuse of communism.

Dealing in absolutes is easy. Harder to rigorously define those terms before use.

Ideally, I believe that there should be some intervention (some free market theorists argue that everything should be private, justice, security forces, etc. everything). I believe that sectors such as health, justice and security forces should be if not offered and controlled exclusively by the government, at least in cohabitation with the private sector, in health for example. Just as the government has to help people who cannot fend for themselves. From there, I understand that the best thing is the minimum of regulations and the minimum of taxes possible, which is a system that has its flaws, but at least it is not as disastrous as extreme interventionism.

I always thought governments akin to companies that have gone beyond notions of 'efficiency'. Groupings of individuals lead to interesting things with mixed results, whether you think statelessness^* is good or not. Creating an amalgamation of individuals to progress toward some ideal can always have unintended consequences - it's all a matter of how one structures power in different ways at the end of the day.

_{*whatever that means}

[Cnut237]

Dealing in absolutes is easy.

This is an eloquent distillation of my entire argument in this thread.

The Venezeulan crisis is not a black and white issue. The presence of vast oil reserves is the underlying fact. What we then have is generation after generation of messy history applied on top. It's easy to blame whoever is running things at the moment, but to do so is to conduct only the most superficial analysis. Maduro certainly hasn't been great, but picking up the presidency when he did was akin to picking up a live grenade... which had been passed through many hands before it reached him.

[tygeade]

That is something that those of us who believe in little intervention and regulations tend to do, exaggerating. I acknowledge that. At the slightest regulation or tax increase we accuse of communism.

Ideally, I believe that there should be some intervention (some free market theorists argue that everything should be private, justice, security forces, etc. everything). I believe that sectors such as health, justice and security forces should be if not offered and controlled exclusively by the government, at least in cohabitation with the private sector, in health for example. Just as the government has to help people who cannot fend for themselves. From there, I understand that the best thing is the minimum of regulations and the minimum of taxes possible, which is a system that has its flaws, but at least it is not as disastrous as extreme interventionism.

That’s the right wing media that make things the way they are right now. If you are against capitalist companies ruining the world, you are suddenly a communist. What is it so communist about wanting people who worked hard all their life to not be rationing their insulin for example? If you want insulin to be free and paid by the government from our taxes, you suddenly become a communist, how so? I mean I paid my taxes, I want to take the medicine that keeps me alive, the other possibility that I won't be able to afford insulin and die, how is that bad?

However media makes sure that they talk about billionaires and protect their rights over people because those same billionaires are the ones that are paying their salary, so they do their best. Politicians are also bribed by them, so the whole nation is basically a big corporation heaven. Then they show poor people in venezuela and act like everything is cool with USA, just because Venezuela sucks doesn't change the fact that the biggest capitalist nation allows people to die so that big pharma can make more profits.

[ecnalubma]

This could happen to any country if they elected an incompetent and corrupt leaders. The increase in minimum wage could be hardly felt by the citizens of their country if the prices of goods and commodities are also increasing. Leaders should be more wiser in handling decisions now specially that the world is in state of crisis and potentially could push down economies at lowest level.

[Argoo]

I am sure that Venezuela will be able to overcome this crisis day by day. they are starting to rise from their downturn, their leaders already know how to deal with the risks of the economic crisis that befell Venezuela. So the role and regulations that have provided an increase in wages in Venezuela become a new hope so that in the future it can be even better. there has always been a reformer from every decade of government in Venezuela. we who are outside Venezuela continue to fully support this achievement. We always hope that Venezuela will be equal with other developing countries in the future.

I don't think the situation in Venezuela will change for the better any time soon. The salary is a little over two dollars a month, it's ridiculous. But, of course, not for Venezuelans. For this salary, you can buy thirty eggs, that is, the salary provides one egg per day. Therefore, a significant part of the population of this country is simply starving there. Everything needs to be changed there.

[so98nn]

Well thats very bad to see happening. It's not a good news since its creating hyperinflation in the country. It means though they get more wage for their work, then they will have to pay more for stones and pebbles too! The president have done some serious damage to the venezuelan economy for sure. I am not sure what the economist in their countries are doing but they surely not guiding Mr. President in proper direction. Even its basic math, the more money you print or the more money you circulate in the nation you will end up having hyperinflation and thus paying more than 2x to 10x for things around you. With their actions they will have bad impact on the businesses and won't be able to tackle the simple daily needs as well. They must do something in terms of economic health to restore the natural order.

[cabron]

Well thats very bad to see happening. It's not a good news since its creating hyperinflation in the country. It means though they get more wage for their work, then they will have to pay more for stones and pebbles too! The president have done some serious damage to the venezuelan economy for sure. I am not sure what the economist in their countries are doing but they surely not guiding Mr. President in proper direction. Even its basic math, the more money you print or the more money you circulate in the nation you will end up having hyperinflation and thus paying more than 2x to 10x for things around you. With their actions they will have bad impact on the businesses and won't be able to tackle the simple daily needs as well. They must do something in terms of economic health to restore the natural order.

If the US didn't sanction Maduro, it may not be really very difficult for Venezuela to rise up because they have Petroleum. It is one of the richest country in the South.
Just like Saudi, the country can actually revive everything in their economy.

If Maduro is a dictator there wouldn't be protests going on there for even the rights to protest will also be forbidden but it's not. There is democracy and freedom in the country and we can point out who is manipulating the media to make him look the worse. If US gets Maduro, US will eventually have oil and will not rely to middle east.

[Sithara007]

I don't think the situation in Venezuela will change for the better any time soon. The salary is a little over two dollars a month, it's ridiculous. But, of course, not for Venezuelans. For this salary, you can buy thirty eggs, that is, the salary provides one egg per day. Therefore, a significant part of the population of this country is simply starving there. Everything needs to be changed there.

It is not that bad. I am not a resident of Venezuela, so someone from there can correct me if I am wrong. Large number of Venezuelans are employed in the neighboring countries such as Colombia and they send considerable amounts as remittance (more than 5 million Venezuelans have left the country in the past few years). Also, a lot of Venezuelans do freelancing and receive their salaries in USD or other foreign currency. Even inside Venezuela, the salaries are not that low.

[wxa7115]

How do you define socialism, then? Does that automatically follow that since a country is providing free healthcare, education, and other social services to its people it is already a socialist country? How about the fact that capitalism and democracy is actually very much vibrant in the European countries that you've mentioned like France and Norway? Or is it that both capitalism and socialism could exist side by side in a government?

The essence of socialism is very simple - steal the money from the successful people and distribute a part of it among the poor. Since the poor have a greater voting power, the political party which promises to do this will be elected to power very comfortably. Now the problem with Socialism is that, eventually they run out of money to steal from. Successful people will either migrate to other countries (similar to what happened in Cuba), or they will lose their money and become poor themselves.

And the worst part is that they never listen, if a socialist country wants to raise taxes that is one thing, but in Venezuela we saw the government confiscating the assets of big companies, the international community warned the government of Venezuela at the time this was an awful idea as no one will want to make business with them in the future if they kept taking those actions.

They did not listened and now they cannot attract foreign investments, they thought they could get around this with their oil income but when the price collapsed this threw into disarray any semblance of order in the country and now they are going through these adverse times, and unless something changes this will be their reality for decades to come.

[samcrypto]

I don't think the situation in Venezuela will change for the better any time soon. The salary is a little over two dollars a month, it's ridiculous. But, of course, not for Venezuelans. For this salary, you can buy thirty eggs, that is, the salary provides one egg per day. Therefore, a significant part of the population of this country is simply starving there. Everything needs to be changed there.

It is not that bad. I am not a resident of Venezuela, so someone from there can correct me if I am wrong. Large number of Venezuelans are employed in the neighboring countries such as Colombia and they send considerable amounts as remittance (more than 5 million Venezuelans have left the country in the past few years). Also, a lot of Venezuelans do freelancing and receive their salaries in USD or other foreign currency. Even inside Venezuela, the salaries are not that low.

That only means Venezuelans need to look for other source of income just to support their daily needs, and most of them already travel far abroad just to look for a better job and get compensated enough to support for their families still living on Venezuela. I understand the hyper inflation that is happening in Venezuela, their government should create a concrete solution that benefit their citizen in long term, their Salary is way below than I expected.

[Sithara007]

And the worst part is that they never listen, if a socialist country wants to raise taxes that is one thing, but in Venezuela we saw the government confiscating the assets of big companies, the international community warned the government of Venezuela at the time this was an awful idea as no one will want to make business with them in the future if they kept taking those actions.

They did not listened and now they cannot attract foreign investments, they thought they could get around this with their oil income but when the price collapsed this threw into disarray any semblance of order in the country and now they are going through these adverse times, and unless something changes this will be their reality for decades to come.

As far as I know, they not just confiscated the assets of large corporations, but also did that to some of the rich Venezuelan individuals. Socialism always work using jealousy. Poor people are always jealous of the rich, and want their wealth to be stolen and redistributed. But the first group never attempt to become rich themselves. They give all sorts of excuses for that - lack of education, lack of opportunities.etc. And the political parties make use of this mentality to exploit them. Since the rich are very few in number, they can be looted, harassed and thrown out of the country. But the main issue with socialism is that eventually they will run out of rich people who can be looted. And this is what happened in Venezuela.

[DrBeer]

And the people of the country - what is it, biomass crazy, needs and desires? Remember a simple axiom - we are responsible for our actions, and for inaction too!
If the people by OWN VOICES brings an idiot to the presidency, then the people are a participant in this negative process, and they share the guilt for what the president did later, but THEY DID NOT DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT! Therefore, their guilt is unambiguous, okay, they fell for promises, but then they did not stop the policy of idiocy and the murder of the economy. The position "we have nothing to do with" is a very bad human quality. It's always easier to pin the blame on someone else without admitting your mistakes.

If every single voter had preferred Maduro during the elections, then your argument would have been correct. But that is not the case here. Let's take an example. During the March 1933 German federal election, National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) of Adolph Hitler was voted in to power. The NSDAP won 43.91% of the vote, with a turnout of 88.74%. That means that less than 40% of the registered voters preferred the NSDAP, while the remainder either abstained or voted for other parties. Now will you say that the entire race of Germans need to be blamed for the rise of NSDAP, including those who voted for the opposition parties?

So what does the victory of the NSDAP have to do with the elections in VENEZUELA? In Venezuela, Maduro received 67.84% of the vote. More than half and a large majority. The fact that it was not 100% turnout - I agree, but in fact, with the silent, voiceless, consent of those who did not come to the elections - Maduro, in fact, also won. I mean direct and indirect participants who raised even more to the presidency. This means that they must bear joint responsibility. Some for actions, others for inaction. The position "I did not vote, I am not to blame" is the position of an irresponsible person, an irresponsible citizen of the country!

[Sithara007]

So what does the victory of the NSDAP have to do with the elections in VENEZUELA? In Venezuela, Maduro received 67.84% of the vote. More than half and a large majority. The fact that it was not 100% turnout - I agree, but in fact, with the silent, voiceless, consent of those who did not come to the elections - Maduro, in fact, also won. I mean direct and indirect participants who raised even more to the presidency. This means that they must bear joint responsibility. Some for actions, others for inaction. The position "I did not vote, I am not to blame" is the position of an irresponsible person, an irresponsible citizen of the country!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Venezuelan_presidential_election

Maduro received 50.61% of the vote, while his opponent Henrique Capriles Radonski received 49.12%. Turnout was 79.68%, which means that Maduro received around 40% of the overall votes. This was the last election that was conducted in a mostly fair manner. The 2018 election is a joke, since most of the opposition parties refused to participate. Maduro received 68% of the vote in that election. Two of the most important opposition leaders (Henrique Capriles and Leopoldo López) were disqualified.

[DrBeer]

So what does the victory of the NSDAP have to do with the elections in VENEZUELA? In Venezuela, Maduro received 67.84% of the vote. More than half and a large majority. The fact that it was not 100% turnout - I agree, but in fact, with the silent, voiceless, consent of those who did not come to the elections - Maduro, in fact, also won. I mean direct and indirect participants who raised even more to the presidency. This means that they must bear joint responsibility. Some for actions, others for inaction. The position "I did not vote, I am not to blame" is the position of an irresponsible person, an irresponsible citizen of the country!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Venezuelan_presidential_election

Maduro received 50.61% of the vote, while his opponent Henrique Capriles Radonski received 49.12%. Turnout was 79.68%, which means that Maduro received around 40% of the overall votes. This was the last election that was conducted in a mostly fair manner. The 2018 election is a joke, since most of the opposition parties refused to participate. Maduro received 68% of the vote in that election. Two of the most important opposition leaders (Henrique Capriles and Leopoldo López) were disqualified.

Whether the 2018 elections are fair or not is a slightly different question. Although I completely agree with you - elections without choice are nonsense!
I wanted to talk about the so-called civic responsibility and citizenship of Venezuelans. Low turnout is also an indicator that many residents DO NOT care what will happen in the country. This is a mixture of stupidity, cowardice to be responsible, and just a devil-may-care attitude ("let them choose for me"). Well, those who came to the elections ended up "finishing off" the country with their choice. I am leading all this to - you cannot relieve the responsibility of citizens, they make a choice, or do not, or do not allow to do. They bear joint responsibility, they are the accomplices in this process. And Maduro is only a darling of fate, who managed to deceive gullible and / or stupid citizens. This is not only a problem for Venezuela, we had a very similar situation in 2019 ...

[bryant.coleman]

Whether the 2018 elections are fair or not is a slightly different question. Although I completely agree with you - elections without choice are nonsense!
I wanted to talk about the so-called civic responsibility and citizenship of Venezuelans. Low turnout is also an indicator that many residents DO NOT care what will happen in the country. This is a mixture of stupidity, cowardice to be responsible, and just a devil-may-care attitude ("let them choose for me"). Well, those who came to the elections ended up "finishing off" the country with their choice. I am leading all this to - you cannot relieve the responsibility of citizens, they make a choice, or do not, or do not allow to do. They bear joint responsibility, they are the accomplices in this process. And Maduro is only a darling of fate, who managed to deceive gullible and / or stupid citizens. This is not only a problem for Venezuela, we had a very similar situation in 2019 ...

What do you want the ordinary citizens to do? Rebel against the government? These things are very easy to say, but extremely difficult to implement in reality. Stalin ruled the USSR for three decades, exterminating 60 million people during that period. Why didn't anyone had the courage to stage a coup and overthrow him? The answer to that question will be applicable to Venezuela as well. In dictatorships, there is hardly anything that the ordinary civilians can do. Blaming them for the dictatorship is illogical.

[uneng]

And the people of the country - what is it, biomass crazy, needs and desires? Remember a simple axiom - we are responsible for our actions, and for inaction too!
If the people by OWN VOICES brings an idiot to the presidency, then the people are a participant in this negative process, and they share the guilt for what the president did later, but THEY DID NOT DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT! Therefore, their guilt is unambiguous, okay, they fell for promises, but then they did not stop the policy of idiocy and the murder of the economy. The position "we have nothing to do with" is a very bad human quality. It's always easier to pin the blame on someone else without admitting your mistakes.

If every single voter had preferred Maduro during the elections, then your argument would have been correct. But that is not the case here. Let's take an example. During the March 1933 German federal election, National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) of Adolph Hitler was voted in to power. The NSDAP won 43.91% of the vote, with a turnout of 88.74%. That means that less than 40% of the registered voters preferred the NSDAP, while the remainder either abstained or voted for other parties. Now will you say that the entire race of Germans need to be blamed for the rise of NSDAP, including those who voted for the opposition parties?

So what does the victory of the NSDAP have to do with the elections in VENEZUELA? In Venezuela, Maduro received 67.84% of the vote. More than half and a large majority. The fact that it was not 100% turnout - I agree, but in fact, with the silent, voiceless, consent of those who did not come to the elections - Maduro, in fact, also won. I mean direct and indirect participants who raised even more to the presidency. This means that they must bear joint responsibility. Some for actions, others for inaction. The position "I did not vote, I am not to blame" is the position of an irresponsible person, an irresponsible citizen of the country!

Venezuela is a fake country. The increasements in minimum wage are fake, elections results there are fake, the opposition is fake. I think the only real thing there is the communism which kills and proportionates a terrible life.
Don't take that percentage of votes seriously. And at same time, if people don't vote it's not only because they are irresponsible, but also because they see no point in doing so, as the other party is probably not going to work decently and honestly for the country. In my country at least that is my conclusion and I have no desire for voting, because both sides are liars and deceptive.

If you check carefully you will see in many countries most people never vote and the election is always decided by the minority of the population (the politicians lackeys), so all this talk about democracy is biased and a big manipulation. If democracy were good there wouldn't be so many corrupt members of executive, legislative and judiciary defending it unconditionally.

[dezoel]

There are around 85 thousand rapes a year, more than double the rate of the second nation in that category.

There are more people jailed than next 5 nations combined, there are people dying from lack of insurance or healthcare, there are people who die in overseas wars, there are over 20 million people who can't read, there are gun violence almost everywhere and more school shootings than rest of the world combined, there are neo nazi groups and there are police killing innocent people at least once a month (usually more frequently on average) 70% of the population is overweight, nearly half a million homeless people, over 40 million alcoholics, over 40 million people who are in poverty (according to poverty guidelines made by government, this number is a lot more according to other nations standards of poverty) and there are so many undereducated kids in schools that the fact that some of those kids won't be given lunch for not having money means there are kids who go all day at school without eating is a second issue to lack of quality in education. There are 724 billionaires who worth 4.4 trillion combined as well. This is United States of America.

[Twentyonepaylots]

The same thing is happening with most third-world countries and sadly even in America, albeit at a much slower rate than what Venezuela is experiencing right now. Goes to show that poor governance can really mess up a promising country as Venezuela. It may be a laughing matter for some, but for Venezuelans aren't having much fun with their liter of milk and block of cheese.

[Sithara007]

There are around 85 thousand rapes a year, more than double the rate of the second nation in that category.

There are more people jailed than next 5 nations combined, there are people dying from lack of insurance or healthcare, there are people who die in overseas wars, there are over 20 million people who can't read, there are gun violence almost everywhere and more school shootings than rest of the world combined, there are neo nazi groups and there are police killing innocent people at least once a month (usually more frequently on average) 70% of the population is overweight, nearly half a million homeless people, over 40 million alcoholics, over 40 million people who are in poverty (according to poverty guidelines made by government, this number is a lot more according to other nations standards of poverty) and there are so many undereducated kids in schools that the fact that some of those kids won't be given lunch for not having money means there are kids who go all day at school without eating is a second issue to lack of quality in education. There are 724 billionaires who worth 4.4 trillion combined as well. This is United States of America.

OK.. no need to write an essay. Let me summarize it - the billionaires in the United States own $4.4 trillion in wealth. The socialists want all that wealth to be seized and redistributed to the "poor" people. If you are living in a socialist utopia, then this is the perfect plan. But think for a moment for how long this $4.4 trillion is going to last. As per your own calculation, there are 40 million poor. Divide this $4.4 trillion by 40 million, and you will get $110,000. Now this may be enough for the poor to love comfortably for 2-3 years. After that, what you will do? Billionaires are gone. So you are going to target the millionaires? The cycle will go on until no rich people are left. Then what? From where you will steal once the rich people are gone?