Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Foreign companies own the lions share of Venezuelas oil. And what they don't already own or develop, they will own soon...same goes for just about everything else there.
"Venezuela borrowed 1.5 billion dollars from Russia, offering 49.9% of PDVSA's share in Citgo as collateral; Venezuela's high likelihood of default means Citgo could be absorbed by Rosneft in the near future."
Most every resource extraction company in the world has major offices in the main Venezuelan oil port. This would not be the case if the it was true government ownership.
Now...the Saudis....and some of the other Gulf Countries...they may own their oil fields and they are the government.
In any case, do you favor a Social Democracy? Another way to say that is "Democratic Socialist" or "Democratic Socialism". I'd count myself among them..in theory.
Are you on board? Denmark is obviously working better than this place.
Is three a reason why Russia or the Netherlands or UK or China would be better off owning US oil (for example)....than it being owned (run) by the State of Alaska, for example (alaskan oil)????
Why would Royal Dutch Shell or British Petroleum or Lukoil be a better owner of our...or anyone else's oil...then "the people" of that country?
The real "means of production" are not resources....but factories, foods, products, etc..
You might want to actually educate yourself about the failure that is the government controlled (socialism) PDVSA.
Foreign companies own the lions share of Venezuelas oil. And what they don't already own or develop, they will own soon...same goes for just about everything else there.
"Venezuela borrowed 1.5 billion dollars from Russia, offering 49.9% of PDVSA's share in Citgo as collateral; Venezuela's high likelihood of default means Citgo could be absorbed by Rosneft in the near future."
Most every resource extraction company in the world has major offices in the main Venezuelan oil port. This would not be the case if the it was true government ownership.
Now...the Saudis....and some of the other Gulf Countries...they may own their oil fields and they are the government.
In any case, do you favor a Social Democracy? Another way to say that is "Democratic Socialist" or "Democratic Socialism". I'd count myself among them..in theory.
Are you on board? Denmark is obviously working better than this place.
Is three a reason why Russia or the Netherlands or UK or China would be better off owning US oil (for example)....than it being owned (run) by the State of Alaska, for example (alaskan oil)????
Why would Royal Dutch Shell or British Petroleum or Lukoil be a better owner of our...or anyone else's oil...then "the people" of that country?
The real "means of production" are not resources....but factories, foods, products, etc..
Nationalized oil is fairly common around the world, and Venezuela has had this since the 1970s. Most countries (US included) have socialist entities. The difference with Venezuela after Chavez came along was that he wanted to gradually nationalize/socialize everything. He started a chain of gov't-owned and operated grocery stores, for example.
Quote:
In any case, do you favor a Social Democracy? Another way to say that is "Democratic Socialist" or "Democratic Socialism". I'd count myself among them..in theory.
'Democratic Socialism' and 'social democracy' are two entirely different things. Venezuela under Chavez was the former, and Denmark is the latter. And yes, I would be on board with the 'social democracy,' but definitely not on board with 'democratic socialism.' http://www.city-data.com/forum/52840982-post162.html
We will never be Venezuela or Denmark, thankfully.
Denmark is one of the happiest societies on the planet...along with Finland, Sweden and Norway...we should strive to emulate those countries. The USA ranks 18th.
Maybe every young person isn't entitled to the most desirable jobs in the most desirable cities. At the least they should have the stamina for an hour+ commute, which many of us have done for most of our working years.
That leads to a very poor work life balance...increasing stress and poorer health.
If a person points out that the Scandinavian countries do something well...........Not socialist.
If a right winger wants to point out something negative about the Scandinavian countries.........Socialist.
Besides maybe the colder climate there is nothing negative about the Scandinavian countries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
