The ultimate proof 
ow this link is interesting on the US economy:
http://www.axisoflogic.com/
artma...cle_18220.shtml
and this one on Venezuela
http://www.axisoflogic.com/
artma...cle_18172.shtml
I wouldn't smile too broadly about this.
Afterall--remember how the capitalists made the Ven. economy really scream when Chavez started asserting rather modest controls and reforms.
The strikes/lockouts and the disinformation campaign is the standard game.
More, growth doesn't necessarily translate into elevating the standard of living--though it does have a one-to-one relationship on the number of jobs created.
The goal is to develop well paying jobs and to increase the amount of wealth created and spent 'in-country'--this wealth will have a multiplier-effect through which more wealth will be created and enjoyed.
However, this is exactly the model that the transnational capitalists hate most of all==because the goal is to maximize their profits, the people be damned.
Thankfully Venezuela has a cushion against speculation on the currency (restrictions/controls) and the increase in oil profits because of high ppb is another factor that has strengthened the Bolivarian government's hand.
But, again, the goal must be to realize an increased standard of living by massive investments in education, health, and infrastructure. This must be accomplished while nascent industries are developed in-country.
The social elites would rather destablize and expatriate their capital than to see Chavez' program become sucessful. Classic vedepatria spoiled brats.
But the above is not to put a damper on the numbers, because these numbers do bolster arguments in favor of the Chavez program.
Expect more destablization from Washington and the Vendepatrias, however. These people play for keeps--and sucessful independent economic nationalism is the worst nightmare to the parasite classes and their masters in Europe and Washington.
Richard,
Good articles. Any idea when Gotts book is coming out. There are supposed to be 3 or 4 books on Venezuela coming out but they are taking a while.
Jim,
Ven has high growth, social programs, and capital controls. All means much more wealth is tending to the most marginalized. So things are working.
On the sabatage - I'm sure they'd love to try but I tend to doubt they can.
Ok OW--I concur. And I definately think that Chavez et al are entirely correct to stress in-country development. This is exactly what the paid-for economists hate, the model that they belittle as 'export-substitution'--this is a fancy word for the economic program that must be followed by any economically marginal country if they are ever to really develop in a sound, sustained manner.
The neoliberal model is bankrupt-and it is amazing to how indoctrinated LA elites are in seeing this perverted model as the only way toward prosperity.
They pimp perpetual poverty for the people--while they take regular vacations in Miami.
On the sabatage - I'm sure they'd love to try but I tend to doubt they can.
Im hope im correct about this, but i think Chavez have made it clear that the government will not accept any more "boss-strikes". If a factory or company will try to blackmail the people once again by closing down the state will immidiatly react and take charge of the company.
I doubt that we will see any lockouts anytime soon.
"but i think Chavez have made it clear that the government will not accept any more "boss-strikes""
The reason that can't do it again is that now they are shut out of the oil industry. Without the PDVSA management walking out the "paro civico" wouldn't have made it past a week. Their only realistic hope of ousting Chavez was litteraly breaking the countries economy and starving the people. For the poor things were indeed extrememly difficult but they never lost their discipline and dind't turn on Chavez the way Guisti and others hoped.
The other thing is the pricks who did this got taught a real lesson. They lost their jobs, their money, their status, etc. Now that people know Chavez isn't playing it will be a while before someone tries that stunt again.
I don't know, this is kind of lame. One quarter only and you already jump to conclusions? Do you have the numbers over the last 4 years? Wouldn't that be a better comparison?
Analysis based on one quater was meant tongue in cheeck. Looking over 4 years wouldn't be possible as a number of these people haven't been in office for four years. For example, Kirchner hasn't. But if you go back as far as he has been in office he has had very high growth. Same goes for Chavez since the end of the opposition strike/sabotage - very high growth. So Kirchner and Chavez would still be prosiding over the highest growth and Fox of Mexico probably the lowest.
So interestingly enough there is something of a patter here. And of course this is to say nothing of which country is helping its people the most through social programs.
Commenting by HaloScan
