Dec. 31st 2005, The end of homelessness

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Jmman
Uh, I take it you have never been to Venezuela. Well I have. My first wife is from there, and truthfully the country is pretty bad. For all of this so-called "progress" that Chavez is supposedly making, the entire population of Venezuela would come here in a heartbeat if they could. That says an awful lot, now doesn't it?

A lot changes in a few years, latley a lot more.

Saying everyone there would abandon their country is a huge generalzation.

Not everyone is your wife.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
I mean nazi in a friendly way as in "facsist iron grip". Not that it is a fascist market system...

And no Dissapate I know what you mean and I do not trust human nature and greed tendancies to regulate.

We are too fvcked up in the head from recent history of our race to be free like that imo.

What makes you think that government agents are immune to human nature? If you are skeptical of human nature, the last thing that you would want to do is give one group of people all the guns and expect them to regulate themselves through these so-called 'checks and balances.'

The government is one of the greediest entities around (if not THE greediest). It taxes everything it can get its dirty little mitts on, and monopolizes every sphere of human activity it can muster popular support for.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Oh yeah, and I forgot to mention. Northern Paris is not an example of anarchy, it is an example of state failure. Conflating the two is a major logical fallacy.

Article that addresses this common fallacy.

I think people simply tend to confuse anarchy with chaos.

Right. But in fact, they should really think of government as chaos. The government has imposed a chaotic state of law, in which one can be subject to coercion at any time for almost anything. And remember the mantra of all good authoritarians: "Ignorance is no excuse."

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Venezuela, Cuba? Oh man, you are so predictable, but then the right wingers are not known for creativity.

Hehe. Steeplerot, finding new ways every day to reduce his credibility.

 

[sandorski]

Hopefully this leads to a better life for many in Venezuela.

 

[Steeplerot]

Well Dissipate I do distrust humanity, and I distrust the government a good deal also, but how to bridge the gap?

How does the corruption end and who is to say the trust can begin outside of our own choices then?

We are not ships alone in the night, nor do the tides bend to individual will in most cases.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

OK, so now you have a bunch of poor people with houses. Now what? Does it change the underlying problems of poverty? Do those houses suddenly employ those people?

 

[glenn1]

What?! Feeding the homeless! But that is simply antithetical to the great American way! Chavez simply MUST be a terrorist!

This is a fine and noble aim, but I would urge you to not look at the results in a vacuum. Capitalism might have its downsides in some ways, but as a mechanism to allocate resources most efficiently it is without parallel. In this case, the 14M houses being built are undeniably a good thing, as is providing them to the homeless. However, you should look at the big picture and consider the following:

1. what the opportunity costs were (maybe 1 million people could have been fed instead) 2. how economically efficient the use of the capital was in this project (e.g. toilet seats are an undoubted economic good, but much less so if they were the $600 Pentagon variety which governments tend to get when they go shopping).
3. what the source of the funds for this project was (see Zimbabwe's taking of white-owned farms for dubious reasons and for the benefit of Mugabe's cronies as an example of this).

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: glenn1

What?! Feeding the homeless! But that is simply antithetical to the great American way! Chavez simply MUST be a terrorist!

This is a fine and noble aim, but I would urge you to not look at the results in a vacuum. Capitalism might have its downsides in some ways, but as a mechanism to allocate resources most efficiently it is without parallel. In this case, the 14M houses being built are undeniably a good thing, as is providing them to the homeless. However, you should look at the big picture and consider the following:

1. what the opportunity costs were (maybe 1 million people could have been fed instead) 2. how economically efficient the use of the capital was in this project (e.g. toilet seats are an undoubted economic good, but much less so if they were the $600 Pentagon variety which governments tend to get when they go shopping).
3. what the source of the funds for this project was (see Zimbabwe's taking of white-owned farms for dubious reasons and for the benefit of Mugabe's cronies as an example of this).

I am trying to translate some between posting but the funding seems to be the same, oil profits from venezualan oil companies siezed back by the state from us multinationals.

I don't see this as bad, the multinationals are known for predatory profiteering off of third world countries, Chavez is pumping the profits back into his people.

Seems to make sense a developing country would assert themselves for their own resources to help grow.

Regardless the country has grown greatly as far as health and education and now housing to even rival the usa itself.

Action speaks louder then any lofty notions of government imo.

 

[glenn1]

I am trying to translate some between posting but the funding seems to be the same, oil profits from venezualan oil siezed back by the state from us multinationals.

Venezuela nationalized its oil assets 30 years ago and do business under the Citgo banner which is a wholly-owned state corporation. I think it's probably safe to say that the cash flow from the one-time event of nationalization dried up long ago. Evil U.S. energy multinationals aren't plundering their oil, if you didn't already know the Venezuelan government is selling the refinieries they own in the U.S. for cash (Valero was the buyer IIRC).

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
plenglish.com

The Venezuelan government will distribute 14,000 houses before the end of 2005, as part of socio-economic programs promoted by President Hugo Chavez.

Housing Minister Luis Figueroa said Saturday that by December 31 no Venezuelan will remain in a shelter.

Figueroa said the government provided funds to purchase houses and will construct others to help reduce housing problems.

Venezuela is currently operating Mission Habitat to solve construction problems faced by families and create communities possessing all necessary services, from education to health.



What?! Feeding the homeless! But that is simply antithetical to the great American way! Chavez simply MUST be a terrorist!

It is good to see those oil profits instead of going to rich american CEO's going to a REAL use.

I really am suspicious but Chavez seems to be steadily keeping his promises.

Regardless more power to him I am proud to say Chavez is a neighbor with efforts like these.

I wonder if they will look the apartments that the sovient union built....

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
plenglish.com

The Venezuelan government will distribute 14,000 houses before the end of 2005, as part of socio-economic programs promoted by President Hugo Chavez.

Housing Minister Luis Figueroa said Saturday that by December 31 no Venezuelan will remain in a shelter.

Figueroa said the government provided funds to purchase houses and will construct others to help reduce housing problems.

Venezuela is currently operating Mission Habitat to solve construction problems faced by families and create communities possessing all necessary services, from education to health.



What?! Feeding the homeless! But that is simply antithetical to the great American way! Chavez simply MUST be a terrorist!

It is good to see those oil profits instead of going to rich american CEO's going to a REAL use.

I really am suspicious but Chavez seems to be steadily keeping his promises.

Regardless more power to him I am proud to say Chavez is a neighbor with efforts like these.

I wonder if they will look the apartments that the sovient union built....

Dunno, can't be much worse then a doorstep though.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Well Dissipate I do distrust humanity, and I distrust the government a good deal also, but how to bridge the gap?

How does the corruption end and who is to say the trust can begin outside of our own choices then?

We are not ships alone in the night, nor do the tides bend to individual will in most cases.

Corruption can only be kept at bay by competing private interests. The reason why the free market is not just one big scam is because of private interests competing against each other. In the free market you have to have something to bring to the table.

When it comes to government, all bets are off. With government there is no competition in private interests. The government's private interests trump all others. And if that ceases to be the case, say hello to the government's little friends called 'law enforcement.'

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: glenn1

What?! Feeding the homeless! But that is simply antithetical to the great American way! Chavez simply MUST be a terrorist!

This is a fine and noble aim, but I would urge you to not look at the results in a vacuum. Capitalism might have its downsides in some ways, but as a mechanism to allocate resources most efficiently it is without parallel. In this case, the 14M houses being built are undeniably a good thing, as is providing them to the homeless. However, you should look at the big picture and consider the following:

1. what the opportunity costs were (maybe 1 million people could have been fed instead) 2. how economically efficient the use of the capital was in this project (e.g. toilet seats are an undoubted economic good, but much less so if they were the $600 Pentagon variety which governments tend to get when they go shopping).
3. what the source of the funds for this project was (see Zimbabwe's taking of white-owned farms for dubious reasons and for the benefit of Mugabe's cronies as an example of this).

I am trying to translate some between posting but the funding seems to be the same, oil profits from venezualan oil companies siezed back by the state from us multinationals.

I don't see this as bad, the multinationals are known for predatory profiteering off of third world countries, Chavez is pumping the profits back into his people.

Seems to make sense a developing country would assert themselves for their own resources to help grow.

Regardless the country has grown greatly as far as health and education and now housing to even rival the usa itself.

Action speaks louder then any lofty notions of government imo.

LOL, housing rivals the USA. No country rivals us as far as housing goes.

 

[Steeplerot]

I just cant see the companies staying straight in the long run, they are profit driven not people driven.


Sounds to me like a corporate authoritarian nightmare Dissapate.

There just is not money in a lot of menial things that need to be taken care of.

Without the state at this point I can only see more victimization over profit.

How would you organize large public works and such that are not fast money?

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: glenn1

I am trying to translate some between posting but the funding seems to be the same, oil profits from venezualan oil siezed back by the state from us multinationals.

Venezuela nationalized its oil assets 30 years ago and do business under the Citgo banner which is a wholly-owned state corporation. I think it's probably safe to say that the cash flow from the one-time event of nationalization dried up long ago. Evil U.S. energy multinationals aren't plundering their oil, if you didn't already know the Venezuelan government is selling the refinieries they own in the U.S. for cash (Valero was the buyer IIRC).

I am sure they realize some ongoing profit from the takeover. Margin from oil and refined product sales that would go to shareholders now goes directly into the government coffers. That said, the sale of the US refineries would seem to indicate that Chavez needs more cash for his social programs and has decied to sell the assets when they should be at nearly peak value. This would however cut off a large chunk of long term profit.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: glenn1

I am trying to translate some between posting but the funding seems to be the same, oil profits from venezualan oil siezed back by the state from us multinationals.

Venezuela nationalized its oil assets 30 years ago and do business under the Citgo banner which is a wholly-owned state corporation. I think it's probably safe to say that the cash flow from the one-time event of nationalization dried up long ago. Evil U.S. energy multinationals aren't plundering their oil, if you didn't already know the Venezuelan government is selling the refinieries they own in the U.S. for cash (Valero was the buyer IIRC).

I am sure they realize some ongoing profit from the takeover. Margin from oil and refined product sales that would go to shareholders now goes directly into the government coffers. That said, the sale of the US refineries would seem to indicate that Chavez needs more cash for his social programs and has decied to sell the assets when they should be at nearly peak value. This would however cut off a large chunk of long term profit.

The us is not his only customer who can build refineries if they are needed though.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
I just cant see the companies staying straight in the long run, they are profit driven not people driven.


Sounds to me like a corporate authoritarian nightmare Dissapate.

There just is not money in a lot of menial things that need to be taken care of.

Without the state at this point I can only see more victimization over profit.

How would you organize large public works and such that are not fast money?

Corporations are products of the state. They are not representations of true capitalism. Corporations are constantly currying favors from the state, just like every other interest group tries to do.

Eliminate the state and what was once a corporation would merely become a private firm.

What do you mean by victimization over profit? Profits don't victimize anybody. They are the incentive for firms to produce products that are for the public good (the public good being the sum of private interests).

What do you mean by 'large' public works? The free market can produce anything of any size. It will always match output to demand.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: glenn1

I am trying to translate some between posting but the funding seems to be the same, oil profits from venezualan oil siezed back by the state from us multinationals.

Venezuela nationalized its oil assets 30 years ago and do business under the Citgo banner which is a wholly-owned state corporation. I think it's probably safe to say that the cash flow from the one-time event of nationalization dried up long ago. Evil U.S. energy multinationals aren't plundering their oil, if you didn't already know the Venezuelan government is selling the refinieries they own in the U.S. for cash (Valero was the buyer IIRC).

I am sure they realize some ongoing profit from the takeover. Margin from oil and refined product sales that would go to shareholders now goes directly into the government coffers. That said, the sale of the US refineries would seem to indicate that Chavez needs more cash for his social programs and has decied to sell the assets when they should be at nearly peak value. This would however cut off a large chunk of long term profit.

The us is not his only customer who can build refineries if they are needed though.

I never said they couldn't but it makes little sense. The short transport haul and existance of an already equiped refinery base (to handle the high sulfer crude Venezuela extracts) makes us the ideal customer.

I could see China maybe building the required refineries, but they have more attractive options closer to home.

 

[Steeplerot]

We are more convienent as far as distance but the us has already tried to unseat him from power and there are threats thrown around, besides the us is not exactly popular.

Taking his buisness elsewhere is probaly in his best interest unless the government gets off his nuts and accept him as what he is, democraticlly elected.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Dissipate


What do you mean by 'large' public works? The free market can produce anything of any size. It will always match output to demand.

I just cant see taking one authoritarian system away and making thousands more to be of any help.

Too many cooks spoil the soup. And I cannot see why some things the market would have any interest in making as some things are detrimental to profits in the first place.

imo it is the competitive aspect that brings the authoritarian opression.

Some things have to be shared, yet property is theft still in this scenerio.

Just sounds like your looking to multiply the problem into a decentralized profit-driven world still fueled by class war.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Dissipate


What do you mean by 'large' public works? The free market can produce anything of any size. It will always match output to demand.

I just cant see taking one authoritarian system away and making thousands more to be of any help.

Too many cooks spoil the soup. And I cannot see why some things the market would have any interest in making as some things are detrimental to profits in the first place.

imo it is the competitive aspect that brings the authoritarian opression.

Some things have to be shared, yet property is theft still in this scenerio.

Just sounds like your looking to multiply the problem into a decentralized profit-driven world still fueled by class war.

How is the free market an authortarian system? I've never seen the free market force anyone to do anything they didn't want to. It has never been the free market that has forced people to fight and die in a war overseas. Furthermore, the free market doesn't go around confiscating people's income and regulating everything in sight.

Sure, your boss at work might seem like an authority figure. But your bosses' authority extends only as far as the workplace goes. Beyond that he can't do a thing to you, and of course you always have the option of quitting.

If the free market does not produce something then it shouldn't be produced because this means that no one wants to spend their earned resources on producing such a product.

If you don't like competition, then stay out of it. You can go live in a cave and never have to compete with anyone again. However, In a world where consumers demand maximum value, competition will always be a factor in economic life. This is unavoidable.

Who said there would be no sharing without a state? In fact, even with all the land privatized, I'm sure there would still be public spaces. But unlike the hobbesian free-for-all on public streets, these public spaces could be patrolled by private police forces with the power to permanently expel bad guys.

The world would not be all profit driven, any more than it is now. People would not suddenly turn into power hungry, maniacle profit getting machines. Business would only be one sphere of human life, as is the case now. However much you would want business to be a part of your life would be your choice. You would even be allowed to start a voluntary communist commune out in the sticks where everyone worked 1 day a week.

As for class warfare, that is something the state creates. The state is constantly trying to pit one group against another and spread lies in order to conjur up support for using force against a particular group.

Outside of politics, I see poor people and rich people getting along everyday.

And of course, the number of poor people would be less in a totally unhampered free market. I would venture to guess that without the state we would see a mutliple fold increase in economic output, bolstering the middle class into what we consider to be rich, and poor people into what we consider to be middle class.