Venezuelan Government Announces Measures to Overcome Food Shortages

[Catherina]

I meant to post this yesterday but got distracted with a movie about Che. Since this article, there's been an update that Maduro and Mendoza had constructive talks and reached an adult agreement. The update is at the end of this post.

----

Venezuelan Government Announces Measures to Overcome Food Shortages

By Ewan Robertson

Mérida, 14th April 2013 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government has announced a range of measures to overcome the increase in food shortages in the country.

In recent months shortages of some basic products such as milk, butter, cornmeal and sugar have been observed throughout Venezuela. Last month shortages reached their worst levels since April 2009, according to the country’s Central Bank.

On Monday night Vice President Jorge Arreaza announced a range of government measures to resolve the problem.

The regulated price of chicken, beef, milk and cheese will be increased by 20% to stimulate production. Most of these products last saw price rises in 2011, with price controls on basic goods introduced to ensure affordability for the poorest Venezuelans.

Other measures focused at increasing production of basic foodstuffs include removing income tax on primary agricultural production, introducing state subsidies for sugar production, and granting increased prices to sunflower oil producers.

The government will also directly invest in a 1,000 hectare greenhouse complex and re-organise state agro-industrial production.

Officials attribute the increase in food shortages to an “economic war” by the private sector against the government, citing high consumption and accusing food makers of reducing production and hoarding food in order to create scarcity.

Meanwhile, some economists and the conservative opposition argue that government price controls on basic goods and the lack of foreign currency granted to food producers are to blame for the shortages.

Opposition leader Henrique Capriles criticised the increase in some regulated food prices as “starving (the country)” and accused the government of being “irresponsible and lying”.

The government has also signed deals with Mercosur allies such as Brazil to import around 700,000 tons of foodstuffs in the coming days in a bid to end shortages.

Meetings with the Polar Group

The government is also holding several meetings with Venezuelan food giant Polar to help resolve food shortages in the country.

On Saturday President Nicolas Maduro accused Polar of participating in an “economic war” against the government by reducing production and hoarding to purposefully create scarcity.

According to the company’s own statistics, Polar produces 48% of the products of Venezuela’s basic food basket. Its president, Lorenzo Mendoza, is the second richest person in Venezuela and 329th richest in the world, Forbes magazine states.

On Monday night Mendoza held a press conference in which he called Maduro’s accusations “false” and argued that his company had increased production of cornmeal, the country’s staple, by 10% so far this year.

Venezuelan foreign minister, Elias Jaua, countered Mendoza’s statements, saying that both the government and Mendoza “have responsibility” for food supply in Venezuela. He further argued that Polar could “produce more, distribute more, cooperate with supply, and help against hoarding”.

On Monday night Mendoza and government representatives met to analyse Polar’s production chain to help ensure the supply of basic foodstuffs to the Venezuelan population.

Vice President Arreaza later reported that the meeting was “productive”. He also said that Nicolas Maduro was committed to dialogue with the private sector to find a “point of balance” over the granting of foreign currency to food producers for imports.

Nevertheless, Arreaza warned that “economic actors should keep to the margins of party political activity and dedicate themselves to production”.

Maduro is also set to hold a second meeting with Mendoza today, where he has promised to “make him (Mendoza) work for the country’s interests”.

Published on May 14th 2013 at 9.29pm

This work is licensed under a Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives Creative Commons license

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/9312

Wednesday May 15, 2013 04:41 AM

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and Lorenzo Mendoza, the CEO of Polar Group, a major food manufacturer and distributor, held on Tuesday a meeting to find a solution to the issue of foodstuffs in short supply throughout Venezuela.

"We exchanged very useful information for the wellbeing and tranquility of the Venezuelan people. The important thing is the production at full capacity in companies in the market of food, and the commitment to dialogue, building up of confidence, knowledge, and outspoken, smooth communication. Let's take aside all related sometimes to unfounded, evil attacks, envy, complexes arising in such situations," Mendoza said in leaving the meeting.

Mendoza recalled the corporate track record; he noted that the corporate purpose is of an economic nature and they have no intention of engaging in politics.

...

http://www.eluniversal.com/economia/130515/venezuelan-government-polar-group-join-efforts-against-shortage

[naaman fletcher]

1. In other words:

The regulated price of chicken, beef, milk and cheese will be increased by 20% to stimulate production.

Price controls did exactly what everyone who ever took econ 101 would say they would do.. cause shortages.

Anyway, we will see is 20% rise is enough. Given 30% inflation, it probably isn't.

[joshcryer]

2. And, the wage increase is invalidated for those products.

Funny how this shit works. Fucking shameful.

[Marksman_91]

3. What's worse is that the country enjoys the highest oil prices in its history...

And yet shit like this is happening. What is more mind boggling is that people are actually still defending these delinquents despite all the evidence of the shortages, uncontrolled crime, blackouts, poor infrastructure, lack of production on the state's part, and so on. But who cares, right? As long as the government claims to be anti-capitalist and left-leaning (even though they're really not), they get a free pass. *smh*

[joshcryer]

5. Let's see if the Maduro government fixes the issues.

Unlikely. Still, bookmarking for future reference since so many deluded people think that Maduro is a good president, indeed, the OP thinks Chavez was influenced by the homophobic bigot!

[Catherina]

15. Naw, I'll tell you what's really mind-boggling

Last edited Thu May 16, 2013, 09:09 PM - Edit history (1)

It's someone supporting a rightwing candidate like Capriles pretending to care about clean asses for the masses while, at the same time, calling them "ignorant parisites".

Now that is truly *mind boggling*, especially on a Democratic website.

Of course, maybe that someone's else saying such a vile thing about the majority of his countrymen? If so, I recommend a different moniker next time because google is too easy. It was also too easy to make the connections to student opposition movements within that family.

I have tried to avoid you since you got here because that was so vile. Would you please return the favor?

[Marksman_91]

16. I see no reason why I should avoid you. This is a free world, after all :)

[Catherina]

18. Yeah but I prefer that freedom to be democatic with real respect for differences of opinion,

especially when they're based on economic exploitation and hardship, especially for those stinking laborers the elite classifies as *parasites*. Still, you get major points for the best answer possible under the circumstances.

[Marksman_91]

24. I admit, I was harsh with the "ignorant parasites" phrase

I must actually commend you for your Googling skills. Caught me red-handed. It's not a comment I'm actually proud of for saying. Emotions were running high during that moment. That tends to happen when you don't get what you want, especially if it's something you REALLY want I actually did a lot of thinking after Chávez won, and I said to myself "can you really blame them?". Before, the poor didn't have much of a voice within the country, and yeah, sure, a lot of wealthy people exploited them. But that's no excuse for Chávez to start an all-out socio-cultural war against everyone who has money, discriminating them and being hostile to them all the time. That's certainly not how Mandela did it, and I believe it brought better results.

I'm not gonna be the extremist and say that this government didn't do some good things. Chávez gave the poor many benefits they didn't have in the past, and more importantly a voice, on that we can agree with. What I do disagree with is the methodology for achieving such a thing, such as what I mentioned before: calling everyone with wealth an enemy of the poor and seizing many of the private sector's assets. Maybe in an ideally Marxist society there is no need for a private sector, but the reality is that a balance between State and private power must exist: there can't be any extremes, and I believe the Venezuelan government has taken it way too the extreme. We've been seeing for the last few years now the real negative results of their efforts (or lack thereof), and if you are gonna deny the facts in front of you that show that this government is bringing Venezuela to the brink of ruin, for which the government is blaming other entities, even though they've been in power for almost 15 years of high oil prices, then it is clear you're allowing your ideological ideas to cloud your rationality. The only thing I ask of you and the others is that you treat me with the respect that I have come to treat you with, meaning that you stop with the name-calling, and that you stop generalizing anyone who doesn't agree with the Chavista regime as "right-wing fascists". Let's be honest, I HIGHLY doubt most of those 7.2+ million people who voted against Maduro are all "rich oligarchs". And before you call out anything regarding a supposedly uncivil and/or disrespectful manner in which some of us express ourselves, I urge you that you actually watch/listen to how most of the top in the Venezuelan government, including Maduro, express themselves, and see just who is being more uncivil.

One more thing: I find it rather unfair that you hold that comment against me so badly, especially since I didn't say it in a discussion board in this website. Hell, it was made in a personal journal in a VIDEO GAME community website, not really the best place for political discussions (you COULD go to the Politics & Current Events forum within it, though, but that's besides the point. The point is, it was done on a journal entry to express my thoughts with the community). If you're gonna get riled up about someone calling another group outside this site something offensive, you need only look in the mirror: http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1108&pid=12922

[Judi Lynn]

29. You have proven wealth has NEVER been an indication of dignity. n/t

Last edited Fri May 17, 2013, 12:27 AM - Edit history (1)

[Catherina]

30. I commend you for your honesty

and for recognizing it was a terrible comment. It's been burning me up for months now, especially because it's a typical, common comment you constantly hear from the upper crust of Latin American/Caribbean society. The part about looking in the mirror? Since we're being honest, that was aimed directly at people who classify their fellow countrymen, especially the working class, as 'ignorant parasites'. You may be ashamed, or rather 'not proud', of that comment now but it's unfortunately a very prevalent and ugly attitude in Latin America and the Caribbean. It's ok if you tell me to look in the mirror, I don't mind. I looked into it a long time and didn't like what I saw about my nonchalance towards poverty when I was younger or the nonchalance of the *rich little shits* I knew. I stand by that comment. But there's hope for you yet Marksman.

I think Chavez tread a difficult line trying to balance the private sector and the needs of the poor. For that he earned a lot of criticism from both sides. I don't think the Venezuelan government took it to any extreme. If anything, I admire its patience for trying so hard to try to accommodate both extremes which earned it tons of criticism from the Right and from the Left.

While we're on the subject of civility, which we differ on, there's also the incivility of lies. Capriles knows he lost. His campaign managers know he lost and admitted he's doing all this for a show. MUD deputies stated he lost. For me, incivility is sending your supporters out to destabilize a country and unfairly, loudly, viciously, contesting election results in a manner that left 9 dead. It's sending tweets that Cubans are hiding ballots in the CDIs and getting poor people killed as they go defend their clinics. Incivility is also pretending those things didn't happen or whitewashing them. There's also, right here, the incivility of turning a blind eye to lies about both Chavez and Maduro or not speaking up when Chavez supporters are labeled as *pigs*. See it works both ways. You're also asking for the impossible on a US Democratic forum when it's our right wing, and the same international right wing pushing austerity on us, that vehemently supports the neoliberal candidate. I already admitted that I have Venezuelan family members who supported Capriles. Never ever have I called them right wing fascists so I'd appreciate it if you could find a post where I've done that so I can apologize to them. But I do believe they're too stuck in the "me, me, me" world to look past their good times and their pocket books. And they're far from "rich oligarchs" (another term I don't believe I've ever used).

Venezuela is not on the brink of ruin. Brink of ruin are countries where increasing numbers of people aren't sheltered or fed, like many other countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain, the US or France today, and where an increasing number of young people have nothing to look forward to except maybe slaving away in a factory.

Like I said earlier, I stand by my "rich little shits" comment but don't take it personally because it's not just Venezuela. It goes for the US, France, Guatemala, Spain, Germany, India and every other country in this world. It's nothing personal and I hope that even if we vehemently disagree now, that one day we'll amicably agree. If there's only one chicken on the table, 2 diners can't eat the whole thing and wonder why everyone else is hungry. It's even more obscene when they tell the hungry diners to tighten their belts and maybe they won't feel so hungry. 20 years ago, I probably sounded a lot like you because I didn't know. I hadn't seen, I hadn't thought about it and I certainly hadn't tortured myself with questions that have no real answer except to try to make things better. I'll treat you with respect as long as you treat the poor, and their defenders, with respect. Deal?

When I feed the poor, they call me a saint, but when I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a communist.
-Dom Helder Camara .

And I'll meet you halfway because you're right. You've been upfront and polite and don't resort to personal attacks or lies, just opinions I disagree with and that's just life. I wish you well, in the same vein that I wish the Venezuelan people to keep freeing themselves from this:

(If the subtitle captions don't appear, just choose them under 'cc')

--Edit for English Subtitles--

[naaman fletcher]

17. Democratic website

Now that is truly *mind boggling*, especially on a Democratic website.

I understand we are not going to see eye to eye on many things, but please stop with the idea that some of us here somehow don't belong when WE are the ones who are generally in tune with the policy of the Democratic Party and or democratic president.

[Catherina]

19. LMAO! Too funny

All your little tricks tripped you up too much for that to be taken seriously. How about you stop with your pretenses and your twisted attacks?

What chutzpah. I took you off ignore for a few minutes just to reply since I had the stupidity of reading this thread without being logged in. I hope that never happens again because that's 5 minutes of my life gone for nothing. May that never happen again.

[Catherina]

22. How many lies can you fit into that url? Got any proof? Didn't think so lol.

Pathetic. Just more of your vicious lies and inability to understand what you read. It's sad for you that you don't see how ugly you come across.

[Daniel537]

21. Oh yes, and i'm sure St. Capriles would have solved all these problems

with his shock capitalism which surely would have convinced all the criminals in Venezuela to turn in their weapons, and food to magically appear on every person's table. A pure libertarian paradise, no doubt.

[Marksman_91]

23. I'd like for you to show me what convinced you that that's the way he would have solved things n/t

[Daniel537]

25. Well then what would he have done differently to improve Venezuela?

If he hated the socialist model so much clearly he would have wanted to scrap it as soon as he could. Or are you saying, like i've heard some of his supporters claim, that he would have just tweaked the system a little bit? If its the latter, then clearly things in Venezuela are not dire, otherwise a full-blown transformation would be needed, so which is it?

[Marksman_91]

26. Where has he said verbatim that he hates the socialist model?

[Flatulo]

4. Cue the 'Five Year Plan'.

[Judi Lynn]

6. What a shock, a government the US hates having shortages. Amazing.

What is clearly a destabilization tactic, given ample media amplification, produces scoffing among the right-wingers, waiting with baited breath to see another leftist administration go up in flames.

That's the way it works, if things go as planned.

Does anyone recall the events orchestrated by Nixon's CIA in Chile, after Republican President Richard M Nixon told his CIA head, Richard Helms, that he wanted to "make the economy scream?" Does anyone recall what happened when they went about achieving that goal?

It would make so much sense if people took a tiny bit of time to research, then it wouldn't be possible to get all flipped out about a misunderstanding of events when they see them happening AGAIN.

Nixon/CIA's manipulation of Chile's economy as it pertained to the ordinary citizens, and the food supply:

~snip~
Why was it so vital to the USA that the Government of Salvador Allende NOT continue to function? So important that the US had to resort to bribing the Truckers Union, threatening legislators, laundering secret money and encouraging Chilean military officers to rebel? By 1970, the US had already engaged in numerous political, economic and military interventions in Latin America. Much has been written about the overthrow of Árbenz in Guatemala, the serial occupations of Haiti, the hundreds of assassination attempts against Fidel Castro in Cuba and the military occupation of Dominican Republic. Nevertheless, Chile in the early 1970s represented a totally new type of threat, a socialist government, which had come to power peacefully through a democratic election. The danger of a good example—should the pacific, intellectual, humanistic and avowedly socialist Salvador Allende succeed in empowering the working people of Chile in transforming their society and establishing a socio-economic model independent of the US power—was too much of a risk to leave to chance.

Therefore, the United States embarked upon a crusade of destabilization (a recurring theme in the United States’ intervention in Chile and in Latin America) that would topple Allende’s regime and his proposed “Chilean road to Socialism.” Much like the case of Guatemala, when the US Government allied with the United Fruit Company in bringing down the democratic government of Jacobo Árbenz, the Nixon administration at the highest level collaborated with U.S. based multinational corporations such as International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) company and Anaconda Mining Company to topple Allende.[17]

~snip~
Chief among these efforts figured the financial incentives provided to the Truckers Union to halt distribution of basic foods and household products. Chile’s very geography requires smooth transportation of produce; sandwiched between the Andes and the Pacific Ocean, it is a long, narrow country measuring over 6,000 kilometres in length and barely 90 kilometres in breadth in some parts. Capital-centric like so many Latin countries, Santiago has always been the hub and Valparaiso constitutes the chief port for importation and subsequent distribution of goods. In the early 1970s, right-wing groups organized the closing of stores and the hoarding of goods. By the final months of the Allende Government, working class families survived thanks to monthly ration cards and long lines formed at central distribution centres. The relatively small investment by the US Government in the truckers union, to persuade them to park their vehicles and block highways between major metropolitan areas, was sufficient to wreak havoc in local stocks of basic supplies, access to markets and levels of household food security in urban areas. US President Nixon notoriously instructed the CIA to, “make the economy scream” in Chile.[19]

U.S. ambassador to Chile in the early 70s, Edward Korry emphasised, “Once Allende comes to power, we shall do all within our power to condemn Chile and the Chileans to utmost deprivation and [poverty].”[20] CIA analysts predicted that to engineer a coup in Chile there must be “dire economic conditions throwing the country into chaos,” while also finding a military leader that was supported by most of the armed forces. By cutting all foreign aid, funding massive disinformation campaigns through right wing newspapers, and paralysing the Chilean economy through a countrywide truckers strike subsidised by the CIA, the United States Government created the conditions and general environment for a coup. Although Allende managed to retain popular acceptance for the most part of his time in power (1970-1973) the crashing economy orchestrated by the United States set up the coup in September of 1973.[21]

More:
http://stnfrdstatic.com/2012/01/26/the-danger-of-a-good-example-us-involvement-in-911-1973/

[center]~~~~~[/center]
~snip~
Despite failing to prevent Allende's election to the presidency, The CIA nor the United States government stopped working against Allende. Henry Kissinger was the architect of the idea of an economic blockade of Chile. As Chile depended largely on the US dollar and US materials for its industries, The United States was able to cut loans, foreign aid, financing and materials, plunging Chile into an economic crisis.[15] President Nixon's order to “make the economy scream” was becoming a reality.[16] In August of 1972, a series of strikes began in Chile. At the head of these actions were the truck drivers. Chile had little in the way of a railway system so the vast majority of goods had to be moved by truck. The stop work action crippled the Chilean economy, stopping the delivery of food and sowing discontent amongst the population. According to a CIA intelligence bulletin, the Chilean Department of Investigation had received requests to investigate foreigners living in Chile who were manipulating the strikes.[17] It has since been discovered that the CIA were manipulating the strikes as part of the Track II plan to cripple Chile's economy.[18] The PDC was a strong supporter of the strikes and had been receiving funds from the CIA since Track I was put in place. These funds were passed onto the strikers, prolonging the strikes and bringing the Chilean economy to a halt. Striking truck drivers interviewed by Time Magazine admitted that money for food came from the CIA.[19] As a result of the strike, Allende was forced to use the military to bring an end to the strikes, reopen roads and stores who's owners had joined the truckers.[20] This hardline approach was not received well and Allende popularity fell as a result. It didn't help that the strikes had affected the planting of crops, causing a decrease of 16 percent in harvest forcing Chile to import more food, adding to the already mounting debt the country had.[21] While the CIA continued to strangle the Chilean economy, the US military continued to provide arms and armament to the Chilean military.

Despite a promise from US Ambassador Korry to Allende's predecessor Eduardo Frei in 1970 that “not a nut or bolt would be allowed to reach Chile under Allende,”[22] the US continued to provide assistance to the Chilean military in the form of hardware and training. This has been interpreted as encouragement for the Chilean military to intervene in the government.[23] This interpretation is strengthened by the actions of the Nixon administration in March of 1970. The Chilean military presented a shopping list of weapons and vehicles to the US valued at seven million dollars. This list included recoilless rifles, helicopters, artillery pieces and C-130 Hercules aircraft. Kissinger advised Nixon to offer the requested items to the military on credit as a refusal to supply the weapons could “cause resentment in the Chilean armed forces and sever our tenuous relations with them while there is still a possibility they might act against Allende.”[24] It is clear that the Nixon administration was planning to use the military against Allende. In direct violation of their own policy of strangling Chile's economy, the US increased assistance to the Chilean military from 3,221 million dollars in 1970 to 13,540 million dollars in 1972.[25] Assistance from the US government to the Chilean military was not only in the form of money but in training as well. Joint naval manoeuvres were held annually with the United States Navy and the training of Chilean personnel in the Panama Canal Zone.[26] Figures garnered from the Church report into the CIA's covert operations state that the number of Chilean
personnel trained in Panama increased in each consecutive year of Allende's term.[27] It is certain that the cooperation between the US and the Chilean military allowed the CIA to gather intelligence on possible coup plotting as well as approach Chilean officers about the possibility of organising a coup.[28]

More:
http://historum.com/blogs/son+of+cathal/396-united-states-responsible-1973-coup-chile.html

There's an enormous fund of references you can draw from, describing the fact that the truck strike kept the food from getting to the stores, and other strikes resulted in imported food supplies, and other regularly used products delivered by ship, merely sitting in the water, waiting helplessly until the dock workers would decide to get back to work and unload their merchandise. Even products like cigarettes, and booze became scarce, just as a kicker, to drive some Chileans wild, until there was horrendous discomfort felt by a large part of the population.

It's all right there, within your reach, and should be noted by the same people who won't take the time to realize this has ALL HAPPENED BEFORE, and the same idiotic media trumpeted it loudly, playing to the idiot gallery, expecting them to simply REACT rather than to think about it. For those with short attention spans, specifically.

[Catherina]

7. As you well noted. Same old players, same old script

This was written in response to President Nixon's “feeling” that the socialist government of President Salvador Allende in Chile “won’t last long.”

Inside Chile
March 9, 1972
Nina Serrano, Haskell Wexler, Paul Jacobs, Saul Landau, and Elizabeth Farnsworth


In fact, Chile’s food shortages and economic difficulties have been exploited by President Allende’s opposition and misunderstood by the US press. In its first year of power, the Allende government has stimulated economic growth and begun to redistribute income through higher wages for workers, which in turn created a significant rise in the demand for consumer goods (including food) and services.

Moreover, Allende inherited Chile’s food shortages, caused by an inefficient and unequitable agricultural system. Shortages of such items as meat, milk, and coffee became marked during the Christian Democratic Administration of Eduardo Frei (1964-70). By early 1970, months before Allende’s victory, Chilean markets sold meat only a few days of each month, and the milk supply was sporadic. After Allende’s inauguration (November, 1970), new obstacles were thrown in the way of food production: 1) indiscriminate slaughtering of herds and refusal to plant by landowners whose properties faced expropriation; 2) the earthquake and resulting dam age in July, 1971; and 3) the heavy snows, which killed crops and poultry.

The upper class (which these 5,000 women represented) never experienced hunger pangs, as Chile’s poor have for decades. Only when meat became difficult to obtain under Allende did these privileged women march in the streets with empty pots which had previously been used only by their servants.

...

The recent disruptions demonstrate the right’s determination to overthrow Allende’s government and stop programs designed for the welfare of the Chilean poor. Herbert Klein’s statement may express US policy rather than his “feeling.” As individuals who believe the US government should keep its hands off Chile’s internal political affairs, we are alarmed and angered by Klein’s statement, and we reaffirm our support for the Popular Unity government as it struggles to meet the needs of the Chilean people.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1972/mar/09/inside-chile/?pagination=false

Bang those pots and pans lol. Heaven forbid people who tried to overthrow Chavez in 2002 experience the terrible oppression of having to sell their second condos and go into shock when our own courts tell them they're full of shit.

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals recently decided an asylum case related to the changing political conditions in Venezuela. The 8th Circuit denied the asylum claim of Ninoska Lopez-Amador. Lopez-Amador was a relatively wealthy mid-level executive for a phone company in Venezuela.

She came from a politically active family that is opposed to the government of Hugo Chavez. Lopez-Amador is also a lesbian and claimed that she would likely face persecution if returned to Venezuela because of her sexual orientation.

...

These new arguments were also to no avail, as the 8th Circuit agreed with the BIA that Lopez-Amador would not likely face persecution if she was returned to Venezuela. They held that loss of her passport and being forced to sell her second condominium did not rise to the level of persecution.

...

http://madikazemi.blogspot.com/2011/09/venezuelan-lesbian-refused-us-asylum.html

[Judi Lynn]

8. They were hot to stop Allende's programs for welfare for the poor. Figures.

That came from the U.S., as we know. Sounds exactly like what our own Congress has been doing any and every chance it gets, when there are enough right-wingers parking their fat asses in the House of Representative.

The very idea of a cent going to help the poor instead of into financing greater wealth for the rightwing greedy, simply drives them wild.

They want ALL help, assistance, emergency care for the suffering cut completely as soon as possible, and forever, with more opportunities for them to live beyond the reach of taxing, while using full services of the state.

Finally, what they really want is a small stall for each poor person to stand in all night long as he/she learns to sleep standing up, and factories or fields placed nearby so they can walk to work, to work 20 hours a day, until he/she drops in his/her tracks. They also would like these work areas made sound resistance so they can't hear the poor should they fall ill, and try to call out for help.

Our hearts go out to pitifull Ninoska Lopez-Amador. How can she live with such adversity in life?
Oh, the pooor never have to worry about that problem, oh, noooo, they've got it easy!

[Catherina]

9. Just like right here

Trillions going to the US elite while services are cut for the poor and for lower/middle-class taxpayers.

And in Spain, and in Greece, and in France, and in the UK...

More huge sucking sounds as the same international cartel of criminals who caused these problems keep rake up trillions.

Manny nailed it here:

...

Well-off Americans have gained a full 5.6 trillion dollars since the start of the Obama recovery! $5.6 trillion is one hell of a lot of money, don't you agree?!

And those who aren't rich have only lost 600 billion. You little people should be damned grateful!

...

It's the same everywhere. Like we can't hear the sound of their heavy international austerity boots.

[Judi Lynn]

10. Argghhhh. That's so wrong! Didn't know. Thanks for the link. Shouldn't be possible. n/t

[Marksman_91]

12. Still playing the ol' "Blame the US for Everything Bad that happens in every country" game, I see...

Even though the evidence clearly shows that the one that has the most responsibility for the shortages is the Venezuelan government itself. You just won't stop sinking any lower.

[Bacchus4.0]

13. The US is funding the "revolution" in Venezuela through oil purchases

The revolution's failure can't be attributed to the US.

[Judi Lynn]

27. Put a sock in it. Clearly you haven't bothered to learn history about US presence in LatAm.

DU'ers here, and people of good conscience everywhere are learning more day by day, and the whole world is waking up. Everyone is other than the scumbucket oligarchs who actually have been benefiting from the nasty way things have been going at the extreme cost in suffering to the massive poor population of the planet.

You're not impressing anyone by repeating "language" used to death by visiting antagonistic rightists who come here to disrupt conversations within the progressive community. Fun for you, but it makes you a conspicuous keeper of the conservative flame at a democratic site.

[Marksman_91]

28. I'm not saying the US doesn't have a dark history, especially in LatAm

But I'd say it's a bit over-the-top to think that they are behind every single bad thing happening in every country, like you seem to believe. Do you honestly believe that every single government in LatAm right now is made up of nothing but goody-goody two-shoes and that those countries' problems have absolutely nothing to do with the governments ruling them? Seems quite an unrealistic view of the world.

[ocpagu]

11. Good news.

Let's hope Mendoza will stick to his words and the food producers in Venezuela will feel compelled to cooperate. Glad to see Jaua's remarks, it's always good to have someone to remind us of the HUGE responsibility of the private sector in food production and cost - something that so many caprilistas here on DU seem to forget. Thanks for the news, Catherina.

[Catherina]

14. I hope so too.

I also hope that, if any of these guys are practicing Catholics, they'll pay attention to the Pope's message today, one of the most important lines being

"This imbalance results from ideologies which uphold the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation, and thus deny the right of control to States, which are themselves charged with providing for the common good."

His words are very timely especially at a time that "profits obtained by trans-national companies in Latin America and the Caribbean multiplied by five in the last ten years, going from $20.4 billion USD in 2002 to $113.6 billion USD in 2011." This according to the CEPAL report

Edit: English version here: http://www.eclac.org/cgi-bin/getProd.asp?xml=/prensa/noticias/comunicados/8/49848/P49848.xml&xsl=/prensa/tpl-i/p6f.xsl&base=/prensa/tpl-i/top-bottom.xsl