Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

_Gandalf_the_Ghey_ t1_j8g5vwe wrote

Reply to comment by sxjthefirst in [OC] New Mexico Now Produces More Oil Than Mexico & Venezuela by latinometrics

Because it couldn't be the nationalization of their economy and series of terrible dictators at fault.

26

danielv123 t1_j8hmuo5 wrote

I mean, not being allowed to trade doesn't help their economy either.

1

rayden-shou t1_j8iwh3z wrote

They're autosustainable, why would they need to trade with capitalistic pigs?

Unless...

4

bilboafromboston t1_j8k827n wrote

Ever consider how bad Cuba and Venezuela etc were BEFORE the people revolted? Russia was a cesspool before the Communists, a well fed cesspool with them, and a hell hole now. The right in Venezuela is demonstrably stupid. Actually stupid. Look up how they planned to revolt a few years ago. Outside the border on a bridge! Great idea! Oh wait. Troops closed the border !

1

_Gandalf_the_Ghey_ t1_j8kbnmp wrote

"This government is good because the last one was bad too"

1

bilboafromboston t1_j8kc7wg wrote

No. Just people act like the Cubans etc are looking for freedom. They aren't. They just want to go back and oppress people from their position. Venezuela's right wing was so bad the people revolted. Have you seen how bad South and Central American right wing governments are? But they stay in power. ? Venezuela's " freedom fighters" were oppressive AND incompetent.

1

_Gandalf_the_Ghey_ t1_j8kd52t wrote

Cool, more shallow, uneducated internet leftist factoids.

1

bilboafromboston t1_j8kdnx0 wrote

Lol. You are a fan of right wing monarchy and brutal racist governments. Opposing them doesn't make me a leftist. Opposing putting murderers back in power doesn't make me a leftist. If a government can't stop rape gangs and feed it's people with the mist fertile land on earth, you shouldn't be fellating them in public. Kneel away. Just don't ask me to cheer you on.

1

_Gandalf_the_Ghey_ t1_j8kdy22 wrote

Wtf are you talking about

Edit: and you say all of this while rushing to the defense of failed left-wing monarchies without a hint of irony. Sad. I've noticed your sick factoids could really use a touch of self-reflection.

1

bilboafromboston t1_j8lhdce wrote

I didn't defend anyone . Can you read. ? I know you conservatives are against education and all. But the fact is one needs to know the history of a county. Blaming a desert country for a lack of water is stupid. Attacking leaders of an historically shitty country is fine, but one does need to ask what the alternative is.

1

Empire_Engineer t1_j8hp3n8 wrote

You’re right dude

Imagine if everyone in the country benefitted from oil production instead of just a handful of oil executives and shareholders. That would be TERRIBLE

0

GeneralNathanJessup t1_j8j5nw7 wrote

>Imagine if everyone in the country benefitted from oil production instead of just a handful of oil executives and shareholders. That would be TERRIBLE

PDVSA, Venezuela's national oil company, only has one shareholder. The government of Venezuela owns PDVSA, all of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDVSA

I am sorry you had to find out this way.

3

Empire_Engineer t1_j8j75is wrote

I'm sorry you don't understand that the government is a national entity that can dedicate funds toward national benefit. The concept probably isn't lost on you for thinks like infrastructure and defense?

2

GeneralNathanJessup t1_j8j9nc7 wrote

I do understand that. That's why I told you that Venezuela's government was the sole shareholder of PDVSA, Venezuela's national oil company.

Not only did Venezuela nationalize all the oil, they nationalized the food, agriculture, electricity, telecommunications, mining, manufacturing, and finance sectors of the economy. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-election-nationalizations/factbox-venezuelas-nationalizations-under-chavez-idUSBRE89701X20121008

But you probably knew that.

2

SteveInMotion t1_j8i5eep wrote

In a free economy, the benefits flow to many people. In a state controlled economy like Venezuela 🇻🇪 the benefits stay with the dictators and their friends.

−2

Empire_Engineer t1_j8ig0os wrote

Is this something you know for certain or are you just parroting what you heard on Fox News / MSNBC?

There have been instances where nationalizing resources has directly benefited the population. Here are a few examples:

  1. Norway's nationalization of oil reserves: Norway nationalized its oil reserves in the 1970s and created the state-owned company Statoil (now Equinor). The revenues from the oil industry were used to fund social programs and invest in infrastructure, education, and healthcare. This has made Norway one of the most prosperous and equal societies in the world.

2.Bolivia's nationalization of gas: In 2006, Bolivia's President Evo Morales nationalized the country's natural gas industry. This move allowed the government to increase its share of the revenue generated from the industry and invest it in social programs such as healthcare, education, and poverty reduction. As a result, poverty rates in Bolivia have decreased, and the country has made significant progress in reducing inequality.

3.Malaysia's nationalization of tin mining: In the 1970s, the Malaysian government nationalized the tin mining industry, which was previously dominated by foreign companies. This move allowed the government to regulate the industry and ensure that the profits were reinvested in the country's economic development. As a result, Malaysia was able to diversify its economy and achieve significant economic growth, which benefited the population.

2

SteveInMotion t1_j8is21v wrote

I’ve done business in Venezuela. Chavez’s family wound up with billions of dollars. Also I don’t watch TV news. Sod off.

4

10xwannabe t1_j8it8sw wrote

I believe Norway is only 2/3rd owner of Equinor last I checked after a merger with someone else years ago. Rest is public owned (my guess) as it traded on public markets.

3

GeneralNathanJessup t1_j8j8swk wrote

By 2012, Venezuela had nationalized the oil, gas, electricity, telecommunications, food, agriculture, manufacturing, mining, and finance sectors of the economy. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-election-nationalizations/factbox-venezuelas-nationalizations-under-chavez-idUSBRE89701X20121008

Norway's Equinor is 33% owned by Hedge funds, like Black Rock. https://www.equinor.com/investors/our-shareholders

And Bolivia was able to Build a skyscraper for the President to live in with all that money from nationalizing the gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casa_Grande_del_Pueblo#/media/File:Plaza_Murillo_.jpg

The largest tin producer in Malaysia is Malaysia Smelting Company, which has never been nationalized, and is owned by private investors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straits_Trading_Company

2

FlibbleA t1_j8lpotp wrote

>Norway's Equinor is 33% owned by Hedge funds, like Black Rock.

Why would this be relevant? Does 67% not give you overall control? Also how are Black Rock and other Hedge funds returns benefiting many people and not just the hedge fund?

1

GeneralNathanJessup t1_j8lwphs wrote

Yes, anything over 51% gives the government of Norway control. But they still must pay dividends to the Hedge funds that own the other 33%.

And no, those dividends paid to hedge funds do not benefit the people of Norway at all, and that was my point.

Do you think it strange that private investors and hedge funds can invest in Norway's "socialist" oil company?

1

FlibbleA t1_j8lytzk wrote

Right but the problem is that guy is responding to someone saying state business is bad because it doesn't benefit many people unlike private while you are describing how the privatised part of Norway's state oil doesn't benefit the people of Norway unlike the state. That would mean before 2001 and the partial privatisation that it all benefited the people.

1