UN Venezuela Megathread - Mercenaries 2 references galore! Cubanodun is MVP

With the news of an attempted army uprising ending in many arrests happening in the troubled nation, I think now is the time to just say 'Post all Venezuela related news here'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-40843494

The civil war is upon us.

 

[RodgerDodger]

It turns out when you have a lot of money and not many people you can afford to do that.

The actual formula is "Stable homogenous population with a near zero population Delta + Exploitable natural resource = somewhat functional socialism, until one of those two elements changes". Or to quote from a college discussion group with the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan " Socialized Medicine or Open Immigration? Pick one because you can't have both!"

 

[Coleslaw]

The actual formula is "Stable homogenous population with a near zero population Delta + Exploitable natural resource = somewhat functional socialism, until one of those two elements changes". Or to quote from a college discussion group with the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan " Socialized Medicine or Open Immigration? Pick one because you can't have both!"

Moynihan was a rabid leftist, and even he recognized that.

 

[RodgerDodger]

Moynihan was a rabid leftist, and even he recognized that.

Nah! Moyniham was a strange bird. The rabid leftists hated him. He used to carry around a little notebook and pencil in his jacket pocket. Whenever one of his colleagues asked him to support a Bill, he would pull out his notebook and pencil and ask "How do we plan on paying for this program". He was a brilliant economist who believed in doing the math. And despised deficit spending as a public policy tool.

 

[Far Queue]

Nah! Moyniham was a strange bird. The rabid leftists hated him. He used to carry around a little notebook and pencil in his jacket pocket. Whenever one of his colleagues asked him to support a Bill, he would pull out his notebook and pencil and ask "How do we plan on paying for this program". He was a brilliant economist who believed in doing the math. And despised deficit spending as a public policy tool.

Most politicians would hate someone like that. It doesn't matter what economic principles you have. Running up debt for unsustainable programs isn't unique to the the far left and it's idiotic no matter what kind of government or economic model you have. The crazy leftists of today would hate him for reasons beyond that though. The Moynihan Report is not at all compatible with their oppression olympic politics and victim narrative.

 

[AverageAnimeWatcher]

I am no expert.

But seems like the difference between Scandinavian countries and Venezuela is that Scandinavian countries are capitalistic enough to make everyone work for their bread but socialist enough so that everyone enjoys a part of the pie.

Whereas Venezuelans were spoiled to get freebies from oil money by Chavez. And Chavez was smart enough to give them so that nobody would question him, and people would adore him while he got rich himself. In fact, it seems some people still like him thinking they lived well thanks to his "generosity", not the fact he was lucky enough to exploit high oil prices.

Maduro is an idiot, but something tells me he would've continued Chavez' strategy if he could've. Nobody would question Maduro if people had food. I hope Venezuelans are aware their poor planned economy is more at fault here than anything else.

Socialist freebies are a hell of a drug. Everyone loves free education, health care, houses, etc. Nobody actually wants to pay for them. It's no wonder why the main guy opposing Maduro is just a slightly less extreme lefty.

I mean no offense to our Venezuelan friends, I'm sure the country has a lot of hard working honest people that keep the country running at all, but someone needs to pay the bills. And it's obvious they couldn't afford those highs standards of living. Given the fact that lower oil prices tanked the economy, and created a scarcity of food, it's obvious that, unlike Scandinavian countries, there wasn't anything they produced to keep the country afloat.

 

[Far Queue]

Given the fact that lower oil prices tanked the economy, and created a scarcity of food, it's obvious that, unlike Scandinavian countries, there wasn't anything they produced to keep the country afloat.

There were shortages and problems well before the oil price tanked. When you keep nationalizing industries and companies no one wants to invest anything in your country, and it doesn't matter if you set price controls when they're unreasonable and no one can actually afford to sell at those prices.

It wasn't oil that allowed their shitty socialistic system to function, it was oil that kept it from completely falling apart sooner.

 

[Coleslaw]

Nah! Moyniham was a strange bird. The rabid leftists hated him. He used to carry around a little notebook and pencil in his jacket pocket. Whenever one of his colleagues asked him to support a Bill, he would pull out his notebook and pencil and ask "How do we plan on paying for this program". He was a brilliant economist who believed in doing the math. And despised deficit spending as a public policy tool.

He also realized that niggers had to stop having kids out of wedlock if they wanted any chance of success in life.


The Irish have always given niggers and everyone who claims oppression as an excuse for not succeeding short shrift. The WASPs bullied them at least as hard if not harder in the 1800s, and they still turned out fine.

 

[RodgerDodger]

I am no expert.

But seems like the difference between Scandinavian countries and Venezuela is that Scandinavian countries are capitalistic enough to make everyone work for their bread but socialist enough so that everyone enjoys a part of the pie.

Whereas Venezuelans were spoiled to get freebies from oil money by Chavez. And Chavez was smart enough to give them so that nobody would question him, and people would adore him while he got rich himself. In fact, it seems some people still like him thinking they lived well thanks to his "generosity", not the fact he was lucky enough to exploit high oil prices.

Maduro is an idiot, but something tells me he would've continued Chavez' strategy if he could've. Nobody would question Maduro if people had food. I hope Venezuelans are aware their poor planned economy is more at fault here than anything else.

Socialist freebies are a hell of a drug. Everyone loves free education, health care, houses, etc. Nobody actually wants to pay for them. It's no wonder why the main guy opposing Maduro is just a slightly less extreme lefty.

I mean no offense to our Venezuelan friends, I'm sure the country has a lot of hard working honest people that keep the country running at all, but someone needs to pay the bills. And it's obvious they couldn't afford those highs standards of living. Given the fact that lower oil prices tanked the economy, and created a scarcity of food, it's obvious that, unlike Scandinavian countries, there wasn't anything they produced to keep the country afloat.

Part of the problem in Venezuela and most of Latin America is they retain one core social concept that they inherited from the Spanish, that never fails to result in what we see in Venezuela. “Patronage”. The true definition of it. It is so deeply rooted culturally that they almost automatically line up behind whoever promises to give them the most stuff, because that’s how things work.

 

[YW 525]

Very few people do [send their children to universities in the USA], mainly because mostly your universities are seen to be only prestigious, without any actual difference, or difference towards negative, in the quality of teaching.

We're not so different after all.

 

[Cubanodun]

Venezuela: dying from scarcity of food and medicines

Maduro: Ok lets solve the problem by opening a factory to make a stupid ass copy of the AUG

 

[Libtard-Wrecking Krogoth]

Venezuela: dying from scarcity of food and medicines

Maduro: Ok lets solve the problem by opening a factory to make a stupid ass copy of the AUG

View attachment 770239

Qu'ils mangent du plomb

 

[Ghostse]

With the amount of class & ethnic violence poised to go down once the floodgates start, it makes sense to try to capture the market with a local product.

 

[Affluent Reptilian]

The actual formula is "Stable homogenous population with a near zero population Delta + Exploitable natural resource = somewhat functional socialism, until one of those two elements changes". Or to quote from a college discussion group with the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan " Socialized Medicine or Open Immigration? Pick one because you can't have both!"

I don't think Scandinavian nations are socialist. Resource allocation is driven by the market and private business and by some metrics Scandinavian economies are actually freer than the US. There is merely more wealth distribution than in the US. The possible exception is Norway, where government is much more active in driving the economy through their state-owned resource industry, but even there it's not like the state has a monopoly on economic activity.

 

[Zaryiu]

The difference between Venezuela and Scandinavia is the firstone is ruled by relative of spaniards

 

[Ghostse]

The difference between Venezuela and Scandinavia is the firstone is ruled by relative of spaniards

The Spainish: giving Italians healthy competition for title of "the pale niggers of Europe" since 1450.

Scandinavia is also not overun with malaria. Fucking white people and their mosquito privilege.

 

[Coleslaw]

The Spainish: giving Italians healthy competition for title of "the pale niggers of Europe" since 1450.

Scandinavia is also not overun with malaria. Fucking white people and their mosquito privilege.

We like to give the French shit for surrendering, but we forget that the Spanish didn't even fight, for a country that had bailed them out from communism a few years back, no less.

 

[JosephTX]

We like to give the French shit for surrendering, but we forget that the Spanish didn't even fight, for a country that had bailed them out from communism a few years back, no less.

That was because the head of German Military Intelligence who was #fuckhitler #toothbrushmanbad told Spain not to join the Axis as Germany was more than likely going to lose the war

 

[AnOminous]

We like to give the French shit for surrendering, but we forget that the Spanish didn't even fight, for a country that had bailed them out from communism a few years back, no less.

The Spanish lost to England when they had the Armada.

Arguably this is because they ran into the worst weather possible, but that just proves even God hated them.

 

[ColtWalker1847]

That was because the head of German Military Intelligence who was #fuckhitler #toothbrushmanbad told Spain not to join the Axis as Germany was more than likely going to lose the war

Spain was too broken and disorganized in the 1940's to contribute much anyways. It could add to the war effort a few poorly supplied and equipped Hungary/Romania-like divisions of dubious quality at best. The rest of their resources would be spent (poorly) guarding their coastline.
As distasteful as historical economic determinism is sometimes, it is often true. Toothbrushman was going to get his shit pushed in no matter what. He just didn't have control of the resources and manpower needed to enforce a peace against enemies that wouldn't rollover and quit. Just a matter of time until the country exhausted itself and got rolled by the more powerful alliance arrayed against it.

Same thing happened to Napoleon.

 

[Ghostse]

We like to give the French shit for surrendering, but we forget that the Spanish didn't even fight, for a country that had bailed them out from communism a few years back, no less.

A friendly, neutral spain gave Germany territory to launch clandestine operations out of, and territory which the Allies couldn't use in their invasion plans, so Spain probably did more for the Axis effort by staying neutral.

Spain still didn't have their shit together (when did they ever amirite?) and would probably have been more of a liability than an asset. Their navy, which was outdated before the civil war, was pretty much non-existent after, so they wouldn't have been able to pressure the British navy in any appreciable way let alone be able to aid in something like securing the British channel - so no direct water routes would have been available between Germany and Spain. Its not a case like Hilter's groupies in South Eastern Europe where they were close to at least ostensibly friendly waters, far from any hostile nation, and Germany still had to send divisions to support them.

Even if we pretend Spain would have sent competent troops, with France folding within days, they would have needed to have been shipped (and supplied) a few thousand miles to make it to the disaster that was the Eastern Front. Where unless they had all been literally Rambo, they wouldn't have made any appreciable difference in the outcome.

edit:

Spain was too broken and disorganized in the 1940's to contribute much anyways. It could add to the war effort a few poorly supplied and equipped Hungary/Romania-like divisions of dubious quality at best. The rest of their resources would be spent (poorly) guarding their coastline.
As distasteful as historical economic determinism is sometimes, it is often true. Toothbrushman was going to get his shit pushed in no matter what. He just didn't have control of the resources and manpower needed to enforce a peace against enemies that wouldn't rollover and quit. Just a matter of time until the country exhausted itself and got rolled by the more powerful alliance arrayed against it.

Same thing happened to Napoleon.

Sort of but not quite. Napoleon made some real boner moves toward the end, like backstabbing Spain and Portugal, which not only sapped his forces as allied troops from those countries promptly said "fuck this" and joined the opposition, but turned previously peaceful territory into partisan-ridden hostile country that took troops off the the front line to secure.