Venezuela on the path of recovery?

[Husar]

After many years of far too left-wing politics, Venezuelans have had enough of the economic downturn and empty supermarkets and have voted a new party into their parliament. A resounding defeat for the Chavez-politics of the last decade or two.

Apparently basing an entire country's economy on oil is not such a great idea and political prisoners may be released as well now.
Here's hoping that the country recovers from ruinous politics that made the people suffer.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35019111

After years of political setbacks and infighting, the broad opposition coalition says it is up to the challenge of running the National Assembly.
Senior coalition strategist and veteran opposition politician Julio Borges told me what their legislative priorities would now be.
"Our chief aim is to promote a bill of rights so we can begin the process of releasing political prisoners," he said.
"Secondly, to push the government to take measures to improve the economy."

[Fragony]

assaination 3 2 1

[Husar]

assaination 3 2 1

Assassinate whom? The >100 members of the parliament that hold the new majority?
And why would the CIA want to do that?

[Crandar]

The situation was worse then the right parties were in power. It's actually a reactionary movement, instigated by the wealthier classes.

[Sarmatian]

After many years of far too left-wing politics, Venezuelans have had enough of the economic downturn and empty supermarkets and have voted a new party into their parliament. A resounding defeat for the Chavez-politics of the last decade or two.

Apparently basing an entire country's economy on oil is not such a great idea and political prisoners may be released as well now.
Here's hoping that the country recovers from ruinous politics that made the people suffer.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35019111

It is a serious error to place current Venezuelan troubles at far too left policies or Chavez.

It is mix of a global recession and failing oil prices.

Under 14 years of Chavez rule, Venezuelan GDP per capita went from roughly 4000$ to over 10000$ and extreme poverty fell from 24% to 8%.

Could he have done better? Most certainly. Corruption was a huge issue, but he was also facing a hostile regional hegemon who was very angry at losing the biggest slice of that oil cake.

To answer the initial question, no, Venezuela is not on the path of a recovery. Probably on a course of stagnation, with a few other heavily corrupted politicians turning over the control and profits of oil back to US companies.

[Montmorency]

It is mix of a global recession and failing oil prices.

Under 14 years of Chavez rule, Venezuelan GDP per capita went from roughly 4000$ to over 10000$ and extreme poverty fell from 24% to 8%.

The dissonance here is profound.

Violent crime in Venezuela is the most evident Chavez legacy.

[Sarmatian]

The dissonance here is profound.

Violent crime in Venezuela is the most evident Chavez legacy.

Why?

[Montmorency]

'Chavez raised incomes/wealth and reduced poverty, only for it to be undone by the oil dip' is a narrative easily flipped on its head.

[Sarmatian]

'Chavez raised incomes/wealth and reduced poverty, only for it to be undone by the oil dip' is a narrative easily flipped on its head.

How?

By pointing out violent crimes?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Chavez bribed the people with oil money while refusing to diversify the country for long term growth. This is 100% the fault of him and the party.

[Fragony]

Assassinate whom? The >100 members of the parliament that hold the new majority?
And why would the CIA want to do that?

Not the CIA but their own. He wouldn't be the first

[Pannonian]

Not the CIA but their own. He wouldn't be the first

If you're bemoaning the likely fate of a right wing government being toppled by left wingers via targeted assassination, note that that method has traditionally been (mostly) the preserve of rightists, not leftists. Leftists gain power through revolution, not assassination. For rightists, it's vice versa.

[Husar]

Not the CIA but their own. He wouldn't be the first

Who is "he"? Are you saying the right-wingers are going to assassinate president Maduro?
And why would this election lead to this?

As for the economic problems, my impression is that indeed, Chavez and Maduro did not diversify the economy enough, made it dependent for the most part on oil sales and let the government decide so many economic things that now that the government is bankrupt due to low oil prices, it cannot even refill the supermarkets.
I don't know if the right-wingers are much better, but they seem to be more of a center-right coalition anyway.
If it were to blame only on the oil prices, why are Norway and other oil-producing countries not going bankrupt? I assume the difference is that they have a more flexible economy that does not hinge entirely on the oil price.

[Fragony]

If you're bemoaning the likely fate of a right wing government being toppled by left wingers via targeted assassination, note that that method has traditionally been (mostly) the preserve of rightists, not leftists. Leftists gain power through revolution, not assassination. For rightists, it's vice versa.

left right, all dangerous there

[Sarmatian]

Chavez bribed the people with oil money while refusing to diversify the country for long term growth. This is 100% the fault of him and the party.

Not exactly. He had to deal with external and internal threats that wished a return to a previous state where most of the oil profits ended up with US companies.

US government took a hostile stance to Venezuela for that reason, which also stifled growth and diversification.

He is partially to blame, no doubt about that, but not 100%.

[Sarmatian]

Chavez bribed the people with oil money while refusing to diversify the country for long term growth. This is 100% the fault of him and the party.

Not exactly. He had to deal with external and internal threats that wished a return to a previous state where most of the oil profits ended up with US companies.

US government took a hostile stance to Venezuela for that reason, which also stifled growth and diversification.

He is partially to blame, no doubt about that, but not 100%.

[Myth]

I don't see this bright sunshiney future for Venezuella you all seem to prophesize. They're in for a ride now: a bunch of cleptocrats and ex members of the party / secret police will now controll the most lucrative businesses: energy, agriculture, telecommunications, weapons, prostitution, drugs. They and their children will become the white collar feudal lords that rule other "democratic" countries. The IMF and WB will happily spirall the country into a black hole of self-perpetuating debt. And the people will now have McDonald's and Nike, but their lives will not improve.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

There's definately an element of class here - something which is quite obvious in Latin America because there's more Spanish and less Amerindian blood in the upper classes.

However, I think it's clear that Chavez did squander the oil wealth and his successors continue to do so. What he did was use the oil to give poor people grain and money - rather than to improve infrastructure and pump money into other sectors of the economy to make them more competitive

[Kralizec]

This is a long time overdue. I didn't like Chavez or Maduro and how they've run Venezuela. I don't like their habit of denouncing all their political opponents as USA collaborators, the way they've politicized all the state's institutions, busted independent unions...the list goes on for a while.

But regardless, changes in government are a natural event in any functioning democracy. The socialists in Venezuela have been in power for 16 years, a good portion of which they had near-absolute control. Now it's entirely possible the new majority will screw up, but it's their turn to do so.

[Papewaio]

Again mineral and oil dependent nations do not do enough to develop there people just rely on a get rich quick extraction.

Venezuela got some of it right (like nationalizing the resources).

But did they pump the money into diversification, education or have a sovereign fund?

Most of the nations with easy access oil get over dependent on it. I can only name one that has used its own oil to improve its nation in a meaningful manner.

[Strike For The South]

Chavez was a dictator who used bread and circuses to remain in power.

Live by the petrodollar, die by the petrodollar.

[Sarmatian]

I can only name one that has used its own oil to improve its nation in a meaningful manner.

Interested to hear which one.

[Beskar]

Interested to hear which one.

Norway? I know they invested the money into a massive stockpile so they can finance themselves in the future. I believe they have roughly kr1,000,000 per citizen or so saved or something like that if I remember correctly.

[Papewaio]

Norway of course

[Husar]

I would generally agree, but on the other hand Norway is already developed enough to be able to afford spending that oil money on other things. It also has the benefit of oil + small population, so there is more oil money per citizen than in some larger countries like Venezuela.
Of course that does not excuse the lack of infrastructure and other developments in Venezuela, which could have been financed using the oil money. That does however seem to be a problem not entirely unique to Venezuela, infrastructure does not always seem to be at the top of mind in Colombia for example either. And I heard the roads in Dubai are a mess as well.
However, these other countries do not have empty shelves as far as I can tell. They've got to do something better.

[Sarmatian]

Norway of course

That's natural gas mostly, though, so I wasn't sure if you're talking about Norway.

Anyway, is there a comprehensive research on the state of the infrastructure in Venezuela, pre and after Chavez? I'm pretty sure there's a significant difference.

I know the line is Chavez ruined Venezuela, which is the narrative championed by US and supported by the western media agencies, but numbers paint quite a different picture. From the few sources I encountered, Venezuela has the largest and most developed highway network in the Latin America, electricity in more than 90% of households, and in general it is the most developed country in the Latin America.

[Idaho]

Chavez was a dictator who used bread and circuses to remain in power.

Live by the petrodollar, die by the petrodollar.

Lolz.... From an American this is hilarious.

[Husar]

I know the line is Chavez ruined Venezuela, which is the narrative championed by US and supported by the western media agencies, but numbers paint quite a different picture. From the few sources I encountered, Venezuela has the largest and most developed highway network in the Latin America, electricity in more than 90% of households, and in general it is the most developed country in the Latin America.

http://lpi.worldbank.org/international/global

I don't know about the development over time, but it is certainly not the most developed Latin American country.
On the overall logistics performance sore you will find Chile, Peru , the Dominican Republic, Panama and El Salvador before Venezuela if I didn't miss any during a cursory glance. The infrastructure score alone is also not really the highest as all the mentioned countries seem to have a better score in that department than Venezuela as well.
None of that does however change that the people can't buy sufficient things for their daily needs and that the capital city is one of if not the most dangerous city in the world.

[Montmorency]

That's natural gas mostly, though, so I wasn't sure if you're talking about Norway.

Anyway, is there a comprehensive research on the state of the infrastructure in Venezuela, pre and after Chavez? I'm pretty sure there's a significant difference.

I know the line is Chavez ruined Venezuela, which is the narrative championed by US and supported by the western media agencies, but numbers paint quite a different picture. From the few sources I encountered, Venezuela has the largest and most developed highway network in the Latin America, electricity in more than 90% of households, and in general it is the most developed country in the Latin America.

Your information is 20 years out of date. Shocking...

[Sarmatian]

Your information is 20 years out of date. Shocking...

Might be. I don't have in depth knowledge of Venezuela infrastructure or economy. Almost none, actually. I just opened the first few links google came up with.