People who own property in Venezuela are no longer secure in the belief that they control their assets. It is fundemental for stability that people believe that what they earn is their own. If ownership is in doubt a subset of people will stop earning and start taking both individually and in grand scale by fiat. btw-The Economist is not the right wing sheet you seem to believe it is.

Well said.

It still does not warrant any American military action. People must be free to make horrible mistakes in the market for governance. If we protect them from themselves, we earn their resentment and they fail to earn knowlege of communisms inability to allocate resources.

The worst for whom? Different political philosophies affect people differently.

I understand how social oligarchies can be very bad but what else do they have to work with? Right-winged oligarchies do not work for second and third world countries. It is a lose-lose situation for them. Either be exploited by western oil companies or be exploited by your own country. Capitalism did not work for them so now they have to try something new.

Oh, so how am I weak of will. I used to be an elitist but got over that phase, I now don't expect other people to conform to my way of living because I know that there is no one right way to live and other people have other preferences than me.

All you know is that I am an anti-capitalist. There are more than two types of socio-economic theories you know...

Urbane Guerrilla, who claims to be libertarian, instead advocates pre-emption. We must save Venezuela from itself. They voted for Chavez. Now we must invade them. We must burn the village to save it. That is not libertarian thinking. That is savage totalitarianism.

Urbane Guerrilla advocates totalitarianism. "We must use pre-emption to save them from themselves." That is the mindset of an extremist who must impose his will on all others. Again, only Urbane Guerrilla knows what is better. *Pre-emption*. No wonder UG could not comprehend Thomas Barnett's "Blueprint For Action: A Future Worth Creating." UG's conundrum is demonstrated by the words arrogant, Libertarian, democracy, and totalitarianism.

Urbane Guerrilla's mindset preaches democracy while advocating totalitarianism. No wonder America cannot impose democracy in Iraq. We did pre-emption doing exactly what Urbane Guerrilla and TheMercenary now advocate for Venezuela. Do they evern learn from the lessons of history? BS is right. Arrogant is when Urbane Guerrilla knows what is right for everyone else and imposes 'his wisdom' on them. The arrogant also claim to be Libertarian?

Claims to be Libertarian, preaches democracy, but advocates military totalitarian actions. UG is the ultimate example of arrogant.

Chavez is doing what every despot had done.
Not enough food? Never mind that, we have to mobilize to defend our country against Yankee Imperialism.
No jobs? Never mind that,......
No this, no that, no other thing? Never mind that,.......

Create a common enemy and a perceived threat, make the people think they are not just doing without, they are sacrificing for the cause... the common cause.

Unfortunately this is easy to do in South America because of the many forays down there by the US government in the past.

Poverty and unemployment levels in Venezuela are extremely hard to base since they are very dependant on oil since Venezuela is an oil-based economy.

All numbers relating to poverty and unemployment levels in Venezuela follow this pattern. Other oil based countries such as Argentina tend to follow the same patterns as well.

Another reason for the sudden increase in poverty in 2002 was the coup and oil strike. Besides that sudden increase, the poverty levels have steadily dropped throughout his whole time in office.

The only real concern with the stats of poverty levels are claims that the INE changed its method of measurement but there is no evidence to support that and you can search that for yourself.


Sources:
Three papers on Venezuela’s economy:
Anti-Chavez:
http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?con...s/200510200708

Pro-Chavez:
http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/downloads/ceprpov.htm
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2005/10/...cceeds_27.html

Argentina's Economy: (scholarly source)
http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/lac/lacinfoclient.nsf/d29684951174975c85256735007fef12/3d29a0ed02294a8b85256db10058dbdd/$FILE/ArgentinaPABP1.pdf

The above link doesn't show up so go here and click the fifth link down. It should say "Argentina’s crisis and its impact on household welfare".

Tw remains determined to support totalitarianism.

By tw's brand of logical thinking, he now supports me unreservedly.

I'd say he's still short on that political acumen thing.

85% of problems come from the top.

He really supports totalitarianism....

Common enemy not so common after all: Venezuelan soccer fans like the US more than Mexican soccer fans

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...er-Protest.php

Understatement. Actually he is an anti-American apologist of Hamas, bombers and executioneers of US Soldiers in Iraq, and a supporter of the terrorists who hit us on 9/11. He specializes in the ad hominem attack. His halmark is the ad personam and the Ad hominem tu quoque. Ignore him and count his attacks in a single paragraph and you will see what I mean.

While I need no instruction in tw's contemptible ways, others may need this tidy summing-up.

Funny that someone so profoundly anti-American somehow never moves out, not even to Canada. Add hypocrisy and noncommitment to his list of sins.

Pierce, in my experience they who shout "Arrogance!" are using it as a codeword for a whine of "I don' wanna dooooo that." Pfah!

Frankly, I think at the least a touch of "elitism" is about the only functional way to think of anything: value judgements are essential to good living -- if you actually want to know you're living better. Howling about "elitism" as some kind of pejorative is another way the weak, the specious, and the immoral, trying to drag the inexperienced ones down to their level.

And beware of being an anti-capitalist. Being that way means being opposed to each and every thing that makes life worth living. You may, however, be safely opposed to poor ethics and greed, etcetera. The liars-about-capitalism try and tell you that only through bad ethics can you realize great wealth in capitalism. They're wrong; you do even better with capitalism conducted ethically. A failure of, or lack of ethics means your gains will be taken from you along with your liberty: prison time.

That can be a reason but that is not the way I am using it. I have learned that it is pointless to look down on people that disagree or live a different lifestyle than me because it is their choice and they are probably looking down on me as well so we go nowhere but down. Acceptance and understanding is not a virtue of the weak UG (there are obvious exception to that).

Of course everyone has a touch of elitism, but when it gets out of control it will get you nowhere. Also, it can be seen as insecurity (I know it was for me). The people that are most secure about themselves are usually the ones that are the most accepting. Have you ever heard of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs? Under self-actualization, the highest point you can get, it says acceptance of self, others, and nature. That is not fact but I have not heard much critics about it from people that study psychology.

I don't think you understand why I am an anti-capitalist. It is not that I want to be rebellious or I want to be part of something different, just that I believe the current system has many flaws and we should move on to an improved social-economic system. I do not embrace socialism or Communism because I think the economy should mostly be run by the people even though I will support them because I agree with the social and community aspects of it.

I just want to get rid of the capital bullshit. Making money does not make people happy and only causes greed that will take over people. A community based economic system can fix that by helping the community and hopefully bringing it closer together. It is much more efficient to focus on all the needs (I am not talking about basic needs, but all non-superfluous items) of people and not flooding them with unneeded consumerism.

Humans have evolved to be very social creatures that are focused around a community. We get our basic morals from society, we are happiest when we are close to others, we are altruistic, and there are many other reasons why humans work best with a community focus.

I do not have a specific community based social-economic theory that is ran by the people but frankly, if society would change its focus from individual gain to community gain, I would be more than happy.

I think I know what you are talking about but can you explain further. I may be wrong, but I think you are a supporter of small business which I strongly agree with.

Capitalism can be seen as a community based system but that is about as realistic as saying Communism is equality.

This needs a whole new thread and so I have started one