It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Socialist Utopia of Venezuela Tells People to Eat Their Pets

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:09 AM
link   
The people trying to argue capitalism and not socialism is ruining Venezuela remind me of this kid:


Well Tucker...
edit on 17/9/2017 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder


The people trying to argue capitalism and not socialism is ruining Venezuela remind me of this kid:
I don't think there's much question about what is ruining Venezuela.

It's neither capitalism or socialism.


edit on 9/17/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Phage
Venezuela does not have a socialist government or society.

Your headline is inaccurate. Surprise.



They seem to be more of a corrupt capitalist economy in which the powerful elite minority have had a stranglehold over the majority.


OMG, you almost understand!


That is "Real Life Socialism". A political high / special class and the rest of us peasants. Bringing an entire population down to the lowest common denominator so that they are all equally poor (except the political class of course).

That is Real Life Socialism proven time and time again.


www.aei.org...

The Idea of Socialism is like a Religious Cult..... It has always been done wrong and we can do it right next time... LOL


That info bought to you by: The American Enterprise Institute.
Don't expect that they have much interest in seeing an autonomous state, and not letting their big boys get their grubby mitts on a piece of the pie.

Biased much?


Don't misquote me.

You just reorganized my original post as though my words came from that link. Very dishonest of you. Are you a journalist by chance?


Didn't misquote you at all. The only thing removed from your post, was the text of the quote that you had included in your post, from the AEI article. The reason was to save space, and yet still leave every word of your own intact, and specifically not to misquote you, nor to make it seem that the quotes from AEI were your own.
If anyone else honestly thinks that it still looks like you were misquoted on purpose, then will apologize, and revise my post.

Not any kind of journalist.

So: do you still support the AEI, and their opinions and commentaries on society, or not?
Lotsa funny folks at AEI: Cheney; Carlyle Group; Big pharma; banksters; ...etc.
They lobbied for carbon taxes, and against the Kyoto protocol.
Surely you understand that their commentary on any situation, is tainted by their agenda?
Still trust their opinions on Venezuela?



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Free healthcare and public education are qualities of a welfare state, not a socialist economy.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Venezuela has a mixed economy incorporating elements of many different systems including capitalism and socialism.

Like most modern economies, including the United States.

Venezuela's economy is being attacked by the United States, as we are prone to do with any country that doesn't kow-tow.

These are known facts.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
Well, there is that oil price crash.
That may have something to do with it. When one's economy is based on a single commodity it can be problematic.



edit on 9/17/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 02:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gryphon66
Well, there is that oil price crash.
That may have something to do with it. When one's economy is based on a single commodity it can be problematic.




That certainly doesn't help does it.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 03:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Venezuela has a mixed economy incorporating elements of many different systems including capitalism and socialism.

Indeed, and a socialist nation can have private corporations, people claiming that socialism means everything must be publicly owned are conflating communism with socialism. However the fact is, over time a nation can become more or less socialist due to the ideologies held by their leadership, and we can see how that effects the economy. I've never really watched Sargon before but I came across a balanced and well made video from him on this topic:



I also enjoyed this comment under the video:

Socialist had no problem calling it Socialism when Hugo Chavez was alive. I remember having internet debates in the 2009/2010 time frame. Venezuela was the go to proof of how Socialism was supposed to be done and how great it worked. Socialism is the Schrodinger Cat of economic theory. It's real until fails at which point Socialist start screaming State Capitalism.

edit on 17/9/2017 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 03:47 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Socialism is only a problem because exceedingly wealthy people (top 1%) want to remain exceedingly wealthy and will move out with their fortune when socialist policy is enacted.

If exceedingly wealthy people had a moral backbone, they would understand they could still remain very wealthy, just not excessively wealthy. But yeah, it's kind of difficult to convince people ho have accumulated over 500m to try share some of their wealth...God bless Capitalism indeed!



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChaoticOrder


The people trying to argue capitalism and not socialism is ruining Venezuela remind me of this kid:
I don't think there's much question about what is ruining Venezuela.

It's neither capitalism or socialism.






Clearly, it is a lack of edible pets......



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Incandescent
a reply to: DBCowboy

Socialism is only a problem because exceedingly wealthy people (top 1%) want to remain exceedingly wealthy and will move out with their fortune when socialist policy is enacted.

If exceedingly wealthy people had a moral backbone, they would understand they could still remain very wealthy, just not excessively wealthy.

Or perhaps many wealthy people worked hard to get where they are and don't want to see their wealth redistributed to people who've done nothing to earn it. Perhaps they don't think it's profitable to continue operating in a nation with excessive regulations and taxes when other nations offer a more business friendly environment.

What ever the reason is, it's human nature and you cannot beat it so why try, it will always result in ruin as the smartest and wealthiest people leave in search of greener pastures. This is the core lesson conveyed in Atlas Shrugged, it's about individualism and voluntarism, any why governmental coercion is not the way to get things done.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 04:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

That will be the USA next year when our economy collapses,everyone will be broke can't buy anything,so no country will import here,most of our production is done elsewhere,this will look minimal



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 04:52 AM
link   
No one is starving in Europe, and they have toilet paper, perhaps European socialism is better that the south american one ?
Probably why so many starving Africans head north, I don't see any heading for south America !



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Agree with a few other posts--you have misinterpreted the article. They aren't encouraging people to eat their pets but rather suggested an alternative protein source, bringing more rabbits on the market, but program communication was lacking so rather than seeing them as livestock, some Venezuelans are turning the rabbits into pets.

No one is encouraging people to eat their pets and most of these rabbits weren't distributed prior to this food source initiative.

It would be like giving someone a loaf of bread and they choose to use it as room decor.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: bananashooter

Quite true



Rabbit eaters, if they have no fat from another source- beaver, moose, fish (or chicken, pork, or beef)- will develop diarrhea in about a week, with headache, lassitude, a vague discomfort. If there are enough rabbits, the people eat till their stomachs are distended; but no matter how much they eat they feel unsatisfied.




Protein poisoning (also referred to colloquially as rabbit starvation, mal de caribou, or fat starvation) is a rare form of acute malnutrition thought to be caused by a complete absence of fat in the diet. Excess protein is sometimes cited as the cause of this issue; when meat and fat are consumed in the correct ratio, such as that found in pemmican (which is 50% fat by volume), the diet is considered nutritionally complete and can support humans for months or more. Other stressors, such as severe cold or a dry environment, may intensify symptoms or decrease time to onset. Symptoms include diarrhea, headache, fatigue, low blood pressure, slow heart rate, and a vague discomfort and hunger (very similar to a food craving) that can be satisfied only by the consumption of fat.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 05:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
Or perhaps many wealthy people worked hard to get where they are and don't want to see their wealth redistributed to people who've done nothing to earn it. Perhaps they don't think it's profitable to continue operating in a nation with excessive regulations and taxes when other nations offer a more business friendly environment.

Why is the accumulation of money seen as a means of success, though? It's difficult for me to comprehend the kind of mindset where people would rather see others living on the street and starving, but feeling good about their lives because they have a luxurious yacht, a mansion and a high bank balance.

Why does profitability mean so much? Are't we all humans?


What ever the reason is, it's human nature and you cannot beat it so why try, it will always result in ruin as the smartest and wealthiest people leave in search of greener pastures. This is the core lesson conveyed in Atlas Shrugged, it's about individualism and voluntarism, any why governmental coercion is not the way to get things done.

It's all motivated by greed.

edit on 17-9-2017 by Incandescent because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 05:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Incandescent


Why is the accumulation of money seen as a means of success, though? It's difficult for me to comprehend the kind of mindset where people would rather see others living on the street and starving, but feeling good about their lives because they have a luxurious yacht, a mansion and a high ban balance.

Money isn't a marker of a person who has worked hard to get where they are, that is certainly true because luck is a large part of life, but effort is also a large part of life and many people put in a lot of effort to increase their standard of living. Of course I wish no one was living on the street, from my point of view the best way humans know how to increase the standard of living for everyone is through free market capitalism and I've seen how heavy handed socialism can make people much worse off. Socialism sounds all warm and fuzzy on the surface, it appeals to our sense of morality, how could it possibly be a bad idea for the government to redistribute wealth to the poor...

It's short sightedness fueled by emotional arguments that have no basis in reality. The nations with the freest markets on Earth are usually most prosperous and have the highest standard of living. Also the simple fact is that resources are limited, we cannot all live on a river side mansion, there simply isn't enough room and there's less every day. However I would rather live in a world where living in a mansion is a possibility then one where it's not because we all want to be perfectly equal to each other. Even if none of these arguments were true I would still hold the concepts of voluntarism above governmental coercion, it's my choice if I want to help a poor person, that is what being a libertarian means.

Penn Jillette on Libertarianism:



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

No, actually none of what you said is 100% true.

A mixed economy doesn't mean, per se, that capitalism and socialism are mixed, but that the role of government in the economy is more complex. In a mixed economy there are "free" market forces as well as government intervention in the markets.

The folks challenging the simplistic answers here are right, the mark of socialism is that pure capitalism breaks down and a transitory state arises in which people willingly form groups that will own the means of production collectively. Communism is a hypothetical, idealistic end state that Marx theorized in which the ENTIRE economy functions in that fashion.

Venezuela's economy isn't failing under its own power, but indeed like most "failures" of this type, she is the victim of economic attack from the US and our allies.
edit on 17-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Rabbits re not safe for large scale food production. If the population tried this they'd have a tularemia outbreak!a reply to: xuenchen



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChaoticOrder


The people trying to argue capitalism and not socialism is ruining Venezuela remind me of this kid:
I don't think there's much question about what is ruining Venezuela.

It's neither capitalism or socialism.



I'll bite, what is or has ruined Venezuela?



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join