PDA

View Full Version : Chavez ups leftist drive with private sector attack


griftadan
01-08-2007, 08:27 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070108/wl_nm/chavez_powers_dc_1

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez accelerated his socialist revolution on Monday, seeking increased powers from Congress, nationalizing firms and promising to strip the central bank of its autonomy.
ADVERTISEMENT

The anti-U.S. leader, a close ally of
Iran and Cuba, has pledged to deepen his centralizing reforms, and Monday's fiery speech was his strongest step in that direction since his landslide re-election last month. He refutes opposition charges that such moves will create a Cuban-style one-party state.

Chavez said he would submit a "revolutionary enabling law" to legislators through which he would be able to pass bills by decree to rush through socialist economic packages. The measure is expected to sail through Congress, dominated by Chavez supporters after the opposition boycotted the 2005 election.

"We are making the final revisions so we can send it to the National Assembly in the next few days to request special powers," he said at the swearing-in of the
OPEC heavyweight's cabinet ministers.

Chavez, in power since 1999, said he would nationalize telecommunications firm CANTV, Venezuela's largest telecommunications firm, and unspecified energy companies in the fourth biggest oil exporter to the United States.

He will be sworn in on Wednesday for a third term that will last through 2013.

Chavez skirmished with CANTV earlier this year, saying he would nationalize the firm unless it adjusted its pension payments to match the minimum wage.

Venezuelan bonds fell by more than 1 percent.

"These disconcerting policy announcements represent a clear turn into deeper nationalist and interventionist policies, which can lead to further erosion of business confidence and the country's macro and institutional fundamentals," economist Alberto Ramos said in a Goldman Sachs research note.

Chavez's confiscations in the past have focused on land, distributing private estates, sometimes foreign-owned, to poor farmers.

STATE PROPERTY

Chavez also said the heavy crude projects of the Orinoco Belt would become state property, referring to plants that process tarry eastern Venezuelan crude oil into fuel.

These Orinoco projects are in the hands of foreign companies such as Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Statoil and Conoco Phillips and Venezuela has been pushing to have a majority stake in them. It was not immediately clear if Chavez was suggesting something stronger with his call that they become state property.

Chavez said central bank autonomy could not continue and called the institution's independence "disastrous."

"The central bank must not be autonomous, that is a neoliberal idea," he said.

Chavez has met resistance from central bank directors who object to the leftist president dipping into state coffers for lavish social spending of oil wealth, which wins him supporters but stokes rampant inflation.

The president has also sparred with the central bank over the calculation of Venezuelan's 17-percent annual inflation. He wants data included from state-subsidized stores that would douse the runaway figures.

Chavez is pulling the disparate parties that make up his government into a single one, sparking accusations that he is seeking a Communist-style system. He denies the charge, saying he will always allow opposition.

But giving ammunition to those who say he is centralizing the state, he has said only those loyal to his movement can serve in the army or work in the giant state oil company.

His decision last month not to renew the license of an opposition television channel has also drawn widespread international condemnation that he will not muzzle voices that do not sign up to his reforms.

holy power grab. hopefully it will go away like the nationalized CANTV non-sense.

sensitiveorgan00
01-08-2007, 08:50 PM
chavez-powER!!

Smokey D
01-08-2007, 08:56 PM
Unless he actually starts investing his appropriated funds, Chavez is laying the grounds for economic collapse when the oil price drops.

griftadan
01-08-2007, 11:23 PM
yes but how close are we really to that? i'm more concerned about this being a blatant authoratarian move

The Digital Pimp
01-09-2007, 04:25 AM
George Bush doesn't care about Venezuela.

Iskandar
01-09-2007, 09:05 AM
Viva la Nuevo Cuba?

Anything he says to the contrary is false. Chavez would love nothing more than to centralize a ton of state power and install himself as dictator-for-life. If he implements successful socialistic policies, that'll merely be an offshoot of that.

Smokey D
01-09-2007, 01:53 PM
yes but how close are we really to that? i'm more concerned about this being a blatant authoratarian move

Oil prices are dropping. Much of the clout he got in the last 2 years is evaporating out from under him. Of course, he'll never be impotent but he might end up like Saudi Arabia.

griftadan
01-19-2007, 08:53 AM
well, this ended up passing. good luck venezuela.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070119/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_chavez

griftadan
01-20-2007, 02:10 AM
and none of the leftists here care, surprise surprise....

italic zero
01-20-2007, 11:00 AM
I care but there's not much for me to argue.

nowhesingsnowhesobs
01-20-2007, 11:43 AM
and none of the leftists here care, surprise surprise....
the "leftists" have some sort of obligation to post?

griftadan
01-20-2007, 01:25 PM
no?

the_green_bastard
01-20-2007, 04:48 PM
I want to like Chavez, I really do, but this whole attack on the private sector thing just irks me in a rather uncomfortable way.

RNR
01-20-2007, 05:01 PM
I would rather the US has to deal with this guy for oil than with the middle east.

spitfirejunky
01-21-2007, 12:29 AM
The central bank lost its autonomy?

Snap.

Sroji
01-21-2007, 12:53 AM
Americans should (and do) worry most about Venezuela's influence on other countries, which might domino. Who are we to tell them what to do though? The poor in Venezuela are happy, which is why Chavez' government is progressing.

griftadan
01-21-2007, 02:09 PM
what have they to be happy about? they're still poor as ****, they just like chavez because of his charisma. this power effectively makes him a dictator, and no one dow there seems to care...

Iskandar
01-21-2007, 02:18 PM
and none of the leftists here care, surprise surprise....
Dude, I made a post criticizing him. I do so every time he does something worth criticizing. The left doesn't universally support Chavz, especially since he's an authoritarian socialist and most leftists here are libertarian socialists.

griftadan
01-21-2007, 02:27 PM
i know i was just drunk posting, i get a few beers in me and i become a partisan asshole haha

the_green_bastard
01-21-2007, 09:46 PM
Dude, I made a post criticizing him. I do so every time he does something worth criticizing. The left doesn't universally support Chavz, especially since he's an authoritarian socialist and most leftists here are libertarian socialists.

Ah, yes. The road to hell is paved with good intentions I guess. It is admittedly hard to bring oneself to be so critical of such an ideologically similar person on something that seems trivial at first glance.

Scuba_Steve
01-22-2007, 08:58 PM
Ah, yes. The road to hell is paved with good intentions I guess. It is admittedly hard to bring oneself to be so critical of such an ideologically similar person on something that seems trivial at first glance.

no not really.


I am FAAAAR left and I disagree with him.

Him trying to calm the private sector is good, but I dont like how he acts as the centre of power.

Danish
01-26-2007, 02:45 PM
Unless he actually starts investing his appropriated funds, Chavez is laying the grounds for economic collapse when the oil price drops.

Oil prices will never drop in the long term.

Danish
01-26-2007, 02:50 PM
Viva la Nuevo Cuba?

Anything he says to the contrary is false. Chavez would love nothing more than to centralize a ton of state power and install himself as dictator-for-life. If he implements successful socialistic policies, that'll merely be an offshoot of that.

No way. Any socialist should be in favour of nationalizing natural resources industries and the media. From a political economy perspective, nationalizing these industries is democratizing.

And Chavez has a major base of support. He's been elected or re-affirmed three times. Simply because his development model is incongruent with Washington's, he is dragged through the mud by private media corporations.

nowhesingsnowhesobs
01-26-2007, 02:52 PM
Him trying to calm the private sector is good
I dont really know a great deal about Chaves and Venezuela so, up until recently, I was quite willing to withhold judgement on him. But I don't see how these developments are anything other than very worrying.
No way. Any socialist should be in favour of nationalizing natural resources industries and the media. From a political economy perspective, nationalizing these industries is democratizing.

And Chavez has a major base of support. He's been elected or re-affirmed three times. Simply because his development model is incongruent with Washington's, he is dragged through the mud by private media corporations.nationalizing the private sector is not democratizing it's giving power to elites

Iskandar
01-26-2007, 02:53 PM
No way. Any socialist should be in favour of nationalizing natural resources industries and the media. From a political economy perspective, nationalizing these industries is democratizing.

And Chavez has a major base of support. He's been elected or re-affirmed three times. Simply because his development model is incongruent with Washington's, he is dragged through the mud by private media corporations.
Man, I have no problem with nationalization, you know that. I fear that Chavez will use nationalization to gain control of the economy and media. I'd like to lend support to a socialist government, but I simply distrust him.

-1up!-
01-26-2007, 03:25 PM
nationalizing the private sector is not democratizing it's giving power to elites

What elites?

nowhesingsnowhesobs
01-26-2007, 03:25 PM
um government people

-1up!-
01-26-2007, 05:13 PM
um government people

given that "government people" are put responsible before the population through democratic institutions, why not favor this instead of private economic elites with no regards whatsoever save their business' profit?

griftadan
01-27-2007, 10:55 AM
because the people in charge within the government are becoming increasingly more powerful and not responsible to the people. that and you can't really compare the authority of businessmen to that of bureaucrats.

Iskandar
01-31-2007, 03:46 PM
because the people in charge within the government are becoming increasingly more powerful and not responsible to the people. that and you can't really compare the authority of businessmen to that of bureaucrats.
I could say the same about the power of private firms, which are not democratically elected and therefore not directly accountable in my eyes.

-1up!-
01-31-2007, 03:51 PM
because the people in charge within the government are becoming increasingly more powerful and not responsible to the people. that and you can't really compare the authority of businessmen to that of bureaucrats.

How in any way are private businessmen more trustworthy than bureaucrats?

Chrizzle fo' Shizzle
01-31-2007, 03:53 PM
Who's to say that elected government people will be put in charge of it? Bureaucracies are frequently patronage jobs, making them rife for incompetence and corruption. Just look at Mexico

How in any way are private businessmen more trustworthy than bureaucrats?

Because they have an actual motivation to do their job well, in order to increase profits. Also, they were presumably hired because they've been educated and know what they're doing, as opposed to bureaucrats who benefit from patronage and nepotism

Iskandar
01-31-2007, 03:55 PM
Who's to say that elected government people will be put in charge of it? Bureaucracies are frequently patronage jobs, making them rife for incompetence and corruption. Just look at Mexico
The problem then is bureaucratic and unaccountable government, not government intrinsically.Because they have an actual motivation to do their job well, in order to increase profits.
Politicians have the motivation of being re-elected to continue pursuing the policies they want. That only goes for elected politicians though, not bureaucrats.

griftadan
01-31-2007, 04:16 PM
How in any way are private businessmen more trustworthy than bureaucrats?

they aren't, i never said they were. i was saying the bureaucrats have more power and thus the untrustworthy ones can do more damage.

Smokey D
01-31-2007, 06:04 PM
Oil prices will never drop in the long term.

But they might drop sufficiently far for sufficiently long to undermine Chavez's so called revolution.

Because they have an actual motivation to do their job well, in order to increase profits. Also, they were presumably hired because they've been educated and know what they're doing, as opposed to bureaucrats who benefit from patronage and nepotism

Most bureuacrats are hired because they no what they're doing, and I think you'd be suprised to find a business that didn't employ at least some people based on patronage and nepotism.