I'm thoroughly confused by Mr Owens post.
In one case, a duly "elected" dictator is threatening to nationalize a telephone company; government stealing it from the private owners. Not unlike what happens in communist countries. I think Castro nationalized some Cuban industries as well when he took over.
Stealing? Like the recent US Supreme court ruling that extends eminent domain for the seizing of private property for use other than public?
What happened at UAL? Didnt the employees own UAL? Did they choose BK reorganization? How much of UAL do the employees own now, in addition to their paycuts?
Chavez Nationalizes, the US Capitalizes. In one case it goes to the public, in the other it goes to the rich.
In the other case, crappy management at several airlines including USAir (twice), UAL, DAL, NWA, and CO (twice but not recently) resulted in bankruptcy.
Crappy management that the courts more often than not determined were entitled to recieve bonuses, so they would stay and continue to do a crappy job, as the workers got raped.
Is Mr Owens applauding the dictator's actions? Or merely criticizing the US diplomats for their criticism of the dictator?
Both.
I don't see how strongman dictator theft is equivalent in any way to airline mismanagement. Color me confused.
Mismanagement? If thats the case then how come there hasent been a purge of these incompetants? If the courts felt that these people mismanged the airline they OK bonuses for their terrible performance instead of terminating them?
Strong man dicator theft? Well the fact is that phone lines tend to run on private and public property, maybe he was just taking it back.
When the rich steal from the poor its simply "the way it is", when the people steal it back all of a sudden its an intolerable injustice.
commavia
In 2005, over 10,000 Venezuelans sought permanent residence in the U.S."
And thats about how many Mexicans and other South Americans from "proper" dictatorships come over in a day.
So let me get this straight...a democratically elected president is a good thing unless the US doesn't approve of him.
Congratulations! Youve learned the first lesson in right wing thinking!
Free market capitalism has done more to alleviate poverty in the world than every single government program on the face of the earth put together.
Yep, once the poor starve to death then there will be less poverty right? Either that or simply give them the weapons they need to kill each other off.
The thousands upon thousands of people each year that are literally risking their lives by floating on tires or seeking political asylum as they fall all over themselves to get out of Haiti, Cuba, Venezuela and other failed “socialist utopias†throughout Latin American certainly seem “tired of the status quo.â€
Haiti a socialist utpoia? OK, if you say so. What about the millions that came here and continue to come from our staunchly Capitalist partners in South America? Certainly the largest contingient of Latins come from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, Equador, Dominican Republic etc, all countries that were either right wing dictatorships or Capitalist democracies.
Perhaps I haven’t made myself clear enough. First off, even using the term “poor ignorant Latins†is racist and offensive, and I never said it nor would I ever. Latins are just as capable of running their own affairs as anyone else on earth – that was never even in question. This whole thread is about Hugo Chavez, and not Latins in general. As you might say, a typical “head-in-the-clouds liberal†response.
Well in country after coutry the Latins are going left and they are doing it through the ballott box.
Hugo Chavez may not be a prince, and maybe he has strongarmed some powerful allies of the United Staes who are working to undermine his Presidency, but lets step outside for a moment. Chavez apparently sees these Capitalist owned institions, probably majority owned by foreigners to his country, as formenting resistance to the policies that the people of his coutry elected him to put in place. So he uses the powers at his disposal to limit their efforts. He sees the US as a hostile country intent on inflicting their will upon his country, and history would support his paranoia so he takes steps to resist. Some of these steps involve limiting the rights of certain people and entities.Sine he sees these institutions acting in concert with foriegners to undermine the expressed will of the people of Venezuela he probably sees them as traitors.
Now here in the US where we pride ourselves on our strict adherence to safeguarding the rights of individuals we were attacked by terrorists, who although they may be able to inflict death and destruction on a relatively small scale compared to what we are able to do, are really in no way a threat when it comes to overturning our institutions, yet despite this we have the Patriot Act which authorizes the governmant to pretty much do everything that you are accusing Chavez of doing.
No, a democratically elected president is always a good thing, whether the U.S. likes them or not. That is, of course, as long as they don't take away their people's rights, shut down press that criticizes them, and set aside the constitution and install themself as a dictator who can rule by decree and ignore the legislature.
Hmm, thats pretty much what the Republicrats have done.
For over a decade over 85% of the people felt that the minimum wage was too low and should be raised. The Republicrats ignored the people despite granting themselves several raises over the same period of time.
Look at the recent ruling by the court ignoring the RLA and forcing the APA to adhere to a contract they never agreed to.
Too bad all of their Venezuelan brothers and sisters who don’t have enough money to escape baby Hugo’s economic tyranny can’t get their chance to go clubbing in South Beach. So sad, so sad.
Too bad most Americans cant escape Bush's economic tyranny and go party in South Beach either.Look at the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration claiming that the oil wealth of Iraq will be used to enrich the people of Iraq when the people of Alaska see the oil wealth of Alaska piped right past their homes and have to accept Venezuelan charity to heat their homes.
The fact is we are the richest country on earth yet we have poverty. Venezuela has poverty as well. They are trying to redistribute the wealth to eleviate poverty. Will they eliminate it? Doubtful. Here in this country we are also seeing a redistribution of wealth but its being done in a much more complex way and instead of going from the rich to the poor its going from the poor to the rich.
When the S&L system crashed Ralf Nader described it as "The Greatest transfer of Wealth to the rich in the history of civilization". The government sponsored attack upon workers wages and benifits. The confiscation of the private property of the working class for the use of the rich that we see with court injunctions and court rulings, the redistribition of the tax burden and scores of other incremental steps that all have the same ultimate result-the transfer of wealth from the many to the few.
I applaud Chavez's actions and his thumbing his nose at the New World Order that redistributes wealth in such an unfair way. Even if he is a fake, hoarding wealth for himself at least he is showing the worlds people that they can say No to the direction his enemies are taking us.
