
How Venezuela Struck It Poor - dsr12
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/16/how-venezuela-struck-it-poor-oil-energy-chavez/
======
juliazxu
It seems like Venezuela was hit with a perfect storm of extremely unforgiving
factors. The combination of the erosion of rule of law, populist leaders who
are ignorant of economic management, and the resource curse keep driving
Venezuela into a downward spiral. I have a feeling things will get even worse
before they get better.

~~~
Grue3
Perfect storm makes it sound like there was any randomness involved in
Venezuela's downfall. However it was predictable from the start. It's been
known for a long time that socialism always leads to extreme poverty. As we
say in Russia, don't step on the same garden rake twice and expect a different
result.

~~~
leonk
>> It's been known for a long time that socialism always leads to extreme
poverty

I don't think this is a well known, or even considered true. Take the biggest
socialist countries, Russian and China. Compare them to what the conditions
were like in those countries before socialist states took over. You will see
massive improvements.

~~~
ddnb
Exactly. Not to mention the Soviets were able to beat the US in almost all
steps of the space race, starting with the first satellite as soon as 1957!
I'd say what the soviet style of economic development was very good for was
rapid industrialization from the ground up.

~~~
pasabagi
I'm sympathetic to this position, but I don't know if it's the whole story.
Russia, before the revolution, was a country of extremes. On the one hand,
there were farmers who were living in a similar manner to 5th century
peasants. On the other, there were some of the largest industrial complexes in
the world.

I think the Soviets did achieve incredible things, but I think that's largely
the result of abandoning profit as the sole criterion of whether an activity
is worthwhile: capitalist societies tend to spend most of their productive
labour on keeping profitable hamster-wheels spinning (like the housing market,
for instance).

------
captainbland
It's worth noting that many modern proponents of democratic socialism have
learned these lessons already and reject state control as the sole means of
'worker ownership'. Socialism and Co-operation are on a collision course. We
are working more towards co-operative ownership, mutualisation and municipal
ownership based solutions which take the best of liberal markets, where
appropriate, and combine them with fair worker and community ownership models.

~~~
andrenth
What’s the definition of markets being appropriate, and what’s your course of
action when you decide they ceased to be?

~~~
captainbland
Basically wherever there's not a natural monopoly, otherwise markets are
generally appropriate. Examples of natural monopolies generally include things
like water, rail and healthcare where competition does not easily take place
either because of its reliance on exclusive access to limited natural
resources, space or just the vast upfront cost of entering into competition
because of infrastructure. Where there is, sometimes the state is the right
thing to run it (either directly or maybe as a part of an independent body
which receives state funding) - sometimes it's better broken down into
municiple level entities and run at the local level.

~~~
andrenth
Would you be open to exploring the idea that natural monopolies are in fact
anything but natural, being instead a result of government intervention?

~~~
AstralStorm
They are not. Please read up the story on forests and lumber business in the
United Kingdom.

Also what happened to certain kinds of river transport when cities happened to
privatize parts of rivers with tariffs.

Or desirable farmland in the United States more recently. (vs bisons)

Usually what happened is that the strongest choke point or first mover on a
truly limited resource gets to monopolize or.

~~~
andrenth
Could you provide some links?

------
hkai
Great reminder that populists on both sides, not just the right wing ones, are
dangerous.

~~~
vixen99
Some definitions for 'populist'

" (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a political strategy based on a
calculated appeal to the interests or prejudices of ordinary people" and

" the political doctrine that supports the rights and powers of the common
people in their struggle with the privileged elite"

Unfortunately use of the emotive and clichéd word 'populist' shuts down any
further discussion, a bonus point for most people who use it.

