Tag Archives: Hugo Chavez

Venezuela is imploding from years of socialism

Venezuela, an oil-rich country of more than 33.22 million in South America, is on the brink of economic collapse.

The culprit? Years of socialism, especially the 15-year presidency (1998-2013) of Hugo Chávez — the dictator who was Sean Penn’s best bud.

sean_penn_hugo_chavez_not_a_dictato

How bad is it in Venezuela?

Here are some bullets I’ve compiled from the Washington Post:

  • Instead of growing, Venezula’s economy shrank 10% in 2015 and is expected to shrink an additional 6% in 2016, according to the International Monetary Fund.
  • Inflation is now 720%.
  • Venezuela is expected to default on its debt in the very near future. The country is basically bankrupt.

What brought Venezuela’s economy to near-collapse, despite having the largest oil reserves in the world, is a combination of bad luck and worse policies:

  1. Under Hugo Chávez, the government was generous with welfare, from two-cent gasoline to free housing.
  2. But the spending was not matched by government revenue. Chávez turned the state-owned oil company from being professionally run to being barely run. People who knew what they were doing were replaced with people who were loyal to the regime. The state extracted profits from the oil company but skimped on investments to maintain the infrastructure and to blend or refine Venezuela’s extra-heavy crude — neither of which is cheap — before it can be sold. As a result, Venezuela could not churn out as much oil as it used to — its oil production fell 25% between 1999 and 2013.
  3. When the government ran out of money, it resorted to printing more money.
  4. Then in mid-2014, oil prices started collapsing, which meant even less revenue.
  5. So the government printed more money, which simply cheapened or devalued Venezuela’s currency by 93% in the past two years.

Source: dolartoday.com

Source: dolartoday.com

The results are hyper-inflation (720%!), scarcity and rationing of food and goods, and long lines for even basic commodities. Lines are so bad the government has even started rationing those, kicking people out of line based on the last digit of their national ID card.

Venezuelans line up in state-run supermarket

Beginning in February 2014, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans have protested over high levels of criminal violence, inflation, and chronic scarcity of basic goods due to federal government policies. Those demonstrations and riots have resulted in 40 fatalities.

And it will only get worse, because Chávez’s successor, socialist president Nicolás Maduro, has changed the law so the opposition-controlled National Assembly can’t remove the central bank governor or appoint a new one. Maduro also picked someone who doesn’t even believe there’s such a thing as inflation to be the country’s economic czar. New economic minister, the far-left Luis Salas, said: “When a person goes to a shop and finds that prices have gone up, they are not in the presence of ‘inflation’.” Instead, Salas insists, it’s those “parasitic” capitalist businesses that are trying to push up profits as much as possible.

Matt O’Brien of the Washington Post dolefully concludes, “The only question now is whether Venezuela’s government or economy will completely collapse first. The key word there is ‘completely.’ Both are well into their death throes.”

Given the country’s proximity to the United States, I predict that in addition to Cubans and Puerto Ricans, America’s next swarm of illegal migrants and ‘refugees’ will come from Venezuela.

map of Venezuela in South America

A quote attributed to Albert Einstein says that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting different results.

By that definition, liberals/Progressive/socialists are insane because they keep advocating and doing the same thing, while expecting socialist policies to work. Venezuela is simply the latest example of that lunacy.

~Eowyn

Iran is a terror threat to the Middle East, Latin America & USA

Did you know that in 2010 in New York City, the heads of the New Black Panthers and Nation of Islam met secretly with then-Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and forged an alliance against their common enemy — the white race?

P.S. To the bashers and mockers of conspiracy theories, here’s a real conspiracy!

Consortium of Defense Analysts

Iranian and Western officials are in Lausanne, Switzerland rushing to reach a nuclear framework agreement by an end-of-month deadline, which means today.

It doesn’t help that an Iranian defector, a journalist who was a close media aide to Iran’s president and was present at the nuclear talks, said on television after his defection that the U.S. negotiation team is an advocate (“speaks for”) for Iran at the negotiation table.

And so it is with good reason that on March 29, 2015, in Jerusalem, newly reelected Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned against the emerging nuclear deal with Iran. More ominously, Netanyahu said that “Iran is maneuvering from the south to take over the entire Middle East.” Referring to the unrest in Yemen, Netanyahu said that “While [world powers] convene to sign this deal, Iran’s proxies in Yemen are conquering large swaths of land in an effort to overtake…

View original post 1,939 more words

North Korea’s Kim: Another socialist dictator with multimillions in assets

The world sure is a strange place.

Socialist Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan dictator whose recent demise broke socialist Sean Penn’s heart, died with a family fortune worth $2 billion. (Socialist Sean Penn has an estimated net worth of $150 million.)

Similarly, the personal fortunes of the socialist Castro brothers (Fidel and Raúl) in socialist Cuba are estimated to be about $2 billion.

Now comes news that the socialist young leader of the socialist and increasingly belligerent North Korea has a slush fund of hundreds of millions of dollars secreted in bank accounts all over the world. This, in a country where reportedly, many are starving and driven to cannibalism because of years of famine and government mismanagement.

North Korea's new leader: Kim "Porky Pig" Jong Un

North Korea’s leader: Kim “Porky Pig” Jong Un

Chosun.com reports, March 11, 2013, that South Korean and U.S. authorities have found dozens of accounts presumed to belong to North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in several banks in Shanghai and other parts of China. They contain hundreds of millions of dollars.

Yet for some reason the accounts were excluded from financial sanctions under the new UN Security Council Resolution 2098, posing questions over the effectiveness of the measures.

A government source in South Korea said an investigation that lasted for several years led South Korea and the U.S. to the accounts: “We have located the names of the account holders and account numbers, some of them set up in the days of former North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.”

South Korean and U.S. officials urged China to include the accounts in the latest sanctions against North Korea, but Beijing apparently refused.

In 2005, the U.S. froze US$25 million Kim Jong-il had deposited in some 50 accounts at Macau’s Banco Delta Asia. North Korea hit back by boycotting the six-party nuclear talks, launching a long-range missile and conducting its first nuclear test in 2006.

~Eowyn

Rejoice! One of Satan’s spawn has gone home

Chavez

O Joyous Day.

Venezuela’s socialist dictator Hugo Chavez just croaked.

Only 58 years old, Sean Penn’s best bud died today in Caracas of complications from an unspecified cancer in his pelvic area.

Penn and Chavez, Dumb and Dumber

Penn and Chavez, Dumb and Dumber

Read more, here.

H/t James Habermehl

~Eowyn

Hugo Calls Obama a Clown

The best buds in happier times

BooHoo. There’s no honor among thieves grandiose narcissists.

Former Obama best bud, Hugo Chávez, is now calling him “a clown.”

Tom Phillips of The Guardian reports Dec. 20, 2011, that Chávez blasted Obama as a “clown” and an “embarrassment” who has turned the United States into a “disaster” after Obama criticized Venezuela’s ties with Iran and Cuba.

In a written interview Obama had with the Caracas paper El Universal, he questioned Venezuela’s connections to those countries. Incurring a narcissistic injury, Chávez hit back strongly at Obama on state TV Monday, saying Barry had given the interview only to “win votes” in the 2012 election.

That’s one clown calling another a clown. LOL

Hugo Chavez, Dec. 17, 2011.

He’s lost his hair from cancer treatments, but Hugo Chavez still manages to be fat despite his country, Venezuela, having a poverty rate of 66% in 1995.

So was the now-dead North Korea’s “Dear Leader” Kim Jong Il. So is Kim Jong Un, the 27-year-old youngest son of Dear Leader and the designated successor. Both are porky, although their countrymen are literally starving to death.

North Korea's new leader: Kim "Porky Pig" Jong Un

Did you know that President For Life of a socialist country Hugo Chavez — born in a 3-room mud hut into a working class family and later became a career military officer before he entered politics —  has a net worth estimated to be ONE BILLION U.S. DOLLARS?

~Eowyn

The Triple Threat

While sitting here tonight I started thinking about the repercussions of the recent events that have taken place in Libya. From a strategic viewpoint, having a radical Islamic regime backed by Iran in Libya presents a whole new threat to Europe and the U.S..

If Iranian missiles are shipped to Libya and if you combine that with the missile bases being constructed in Venezuela and on top of that the missiles in North Korea. Four unstable countries, three radical homicidal leaders, one of which is dying of cancer and all three with the desire to destroy the U.S. and it’s allies.

Of the three leaders, I consider Hugo Chavez the most dangerous at the moment. He knows he is dying, and a man in his position has nothing to lose and I’m sure he would like nothing more to leave a legacy of being the  first man to launch a nuclear missile on a U.S. city.

Kim Jong-il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez, three men who have formed an alliance that is hell bent on our destruction. I’m under no delusion that Obama will do anything to prevent an attack and probably would not take any significant retaliation if said attack took place. All we really need to understand is that while Obama is destroying our economy and is stoking class warfare across the country, our enemies are amassing strategically around and in our country and when we are weakened enough, have no doubt…THEY WILL STRIKE!

All we can do is pray and prepare, pray for the best and prepare for the worst. MAY GOD BLESS US ALL!

Tom in NC

Who Are the Top 1%?

“Those who don’t know the game or are assets and manipulators of  the game will want to ‘endorse’ people and organisations they say they support  in cleaning up America – but they will be the very people and groups that are  systematically destroying America.”David Icke, October 16, 2011

The movement that began as Occupy Wall Street in New York has spread to other cities across America as well as countries. In Italy, the Occupiers instigated a riot in Rome, torching cars and smashing windows, which required armed police to be brought in.

In the name of equity, the Occupiers say they are the 99% opposed to the top 1%, the filthy rich. So who are America’s Top 1%?

To begin, we need to define “income” vs. “wealth or net worth.”

Income is what people earn — from salaries, wages, dividends, interest, royalties, and rents from properties they own. U.C. Santa Cruz Sociology Professor William Domhoff claims that most of the income of “the rich” does not come from “working”: In 2008, only 19% of the income reported by the 13,480 individuals or families making over $10 million came from wages and salaries.

Wealth is the value of everything a person or family owns in marketable assets (such as real estate, stocks, and bonds, but not including cars and household items), minus any debts or liabilities (such as home mortgages, credit card debts and auto loans). In effect, wealth is assets minus debts, or W = A-D. That is why a better term for “wealth” is “net worth.”

High income (HI) may or may not mean great wealth because a high-income person or household may simply spend everything they make — and more, by going into debt. At the same time, an individual or household with moderate or even low income (MI/LI) may actually become wealthy by being frugal and investing their savings wisely.

Thus, HI ≠ W; whereas it is highly possible that MI/LI = W. Remember that when you decide to condemn “the wealthy.”

Wikipedia says the current per capita (per person) median income in the United States is roughly $32,000 (for those employed full-time between the ages of 25 and 64, it’s $39,000). By “median” income is meant that the figure $32,000 divides the American population into two equal halves — half (50%) of Americans make more than $32,000, and the other half make less than $32,000.

The U.S. Census Bureau offers income data by household and individual. 42% of U.S. households have two income earners; thus making households’ income levels higher than personal income levels. According to a 2008 article on the investment website My Budget 360, the median U.S. household income was $46,326. Dual earner households had a higher median income at $67,348.

Currently marketing corporations and investment houses classify those with household incomes exceeding $75,000 as “mass affluent,” while sociologist Leonard Beeghley identifies all those with a net worth of $1 million or more as “rich.” The upper class is most commonly defined as the top 1% with household incomes commonly exceeding $250,000 annually.

Income in America (source: Wikipedia)

In a recent Census report there are 110 million households in the United States. Here’s the distribution of U.S. households’ income in 2006:

  • Top third (34.73%) of households had annual gross income of $65,000 or more.
  • Top quarter (25.60%) of households had annual gross income of $80,000 or more.
  • Top quintile (20%) of households had annual gross income of $91,202 or more.
  • Top 15% (17.80%) of households had annual gross income of $100,000 or more.
  • Top 10% of households had annual gross income of $118,200 or more.
  • Top 5% of households (3/4s of whom had 2 income earners) had annual gross income of $166,200 or more.
  • Top 3% (2.67%) had annual gross income of $200,000 or more.
  • Top 1.5% had annual gross income of $250,000 or more.
  • Top 0.1% (0.12% or 146,000 households) had annual gross income of $1,600,000 or more.

The 2008 article on My Budget 360 further breaks down that Top 0.1%. At its apex are:

  • The top 0.01% (11,000 households) with annual incomes of $5.5 million or more.
  • The top 400 highest tax payers in America had annual incomes of $87 million or more.

Notice how the incomes gradually go up from the Top Third’s $65,000 to the Top 1.5%’s $250,000, but between the Top 1.5%’s $250,000 and the Top 0.1%’s $1.6 million) is a huge gap of $1.35 million!

While households in the top 1.5% of households had incomes exceeding $250,000, 443% above the national median, their incomes were still 2200% lower than those of the top 0.01% of households. One can therefore conclude that almost any household, even those with incomes of $250,000 annually are poor when compared to the top 0.1%, who in turn are poor compared to the top 0.000267%, the top 400 taxpaying households.

According to the Federal Reserve Board, here’s the distribution of U.S. households’ networths in 2001:

  • 6.9% of U.S. households had a negative networth of <$0 (i.e., those who not only have zero assets but are in debt).
  • 5.4% of households had a networth of $0-$999.
  • 2.4% of households had a networth of $1,000-$2,499.
  • 3.5% of households had a networth of $2,500-$4,999.
  • 4.7% of households had a networth of $5,000-$9,999.
  • 8.1% of households had a networth of $10,000-$24,999.
  • 9.2% of households had a networth of $25,000-$49,999.
  • 12.8% of households had a networth of $50,000-$99,999.
  • 19.2% of households had a networth of $100,000-$249,999.
  • 13% of households had a networth of $250,000-$499,999.
  • 7.8% of households had a networth of $500,000-$999,999.
  • 7% of households had a networth of $1 million or more.

Alas, the Federal Reserve Board did not break that top 7% down, so we don’t know what’s the networth of the Top 1% of U.S. households, other than that the Top 1% own 32.7% of Americans’ total networth in 2001. In contrast, 50% of U.S. households own just 2.8% of Americans’ total networth.

Here are some interesting tidbits about the above distribution of U.S. households’ networths:

  • 58% of households with negative networth were young, i.e., under 35 years old (which makes sense because many college students are poor).
  • Those with negative networth are more likely to have a less-than-high-school education.
  • Among those with negative networth, the percentage who are unemployed (but not retired) is more than twice they are in the larger population.
  • Households with negative networth are concentrated in the South and in the West.
  • 10.1% of households with networth of $1 million or more are Boomers (aged 46-55).
  • 28.2% of the Top 1% households in networth are Boomers.

The Top 1%

Leonard Beeghley called the top 0.9% the “Super Rich”, whom he described as “Multi-millionaires whose incomes commonly exceed $350,000; includes celebrities and powerful executives/politicians.” The OWS Movement say they are against the Top 1%. Here are some members of the Top 1% who are or should be targets:

Barack Obama: (supports OWS)

  •  Annual POTUS salary (not total income): $400,000
  • Net worth in 2010: $10.5 million

The 25 richest members of Congress (in Roll Call’s 2009 annual survey that gives only their estimated net worth. Under federal law, members of Congress must disclose their personal investments and liabilities, but only in broad categories, thereby shielding the exact value of any asset or debt):

  1. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass): $188.37 million
  2. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Ca): $160.05 million
  3. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Ca): $152.62 million
  4. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va): $81.50 million
  5. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas): $73.75 million
  6. Sen. Mark Warner (D- W.Va): $70.19 million
  7. Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo): $56.49 million
  8. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla): 55.47 million
  9. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ): $49.70 million
  10. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Ca): $46.07 million
  11. Sen. Alan Grayson (D-Fla): $31.41 million
  12. Rep. Harry Teague (D-NM): $25.52 million
  13. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca): $21.74 million (supports OWS)
  14. Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NY): $19.90 million
  15. Sen. James Riche (R-Idaho) : $19.69 million
  16. Rep. Gary Miller (R-Ca): $19.37 million
  17. Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-Tx): $18.41 million
  18. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn): $18.21 million
  19. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo): $15.73 million
  20. Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY): $14.90 million
  21. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine): $12.52 million
  22. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn): $12.12 million
  23. Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont): $10.90 million
  24. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz): $10.52 million
  25. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa): $10.45 million

Non-elected political figures:

The Media:

Celebrities who’ve spoken out in support of Occupy Wall Street:

  • Yoko Ono: $500 million
  • Russell Simmons: $325 million
  • Sean Penn: $150 million
  • Rosie O’Donnell: $100 million
  • Roseanne Barr: $80 million
  • Deepak Chopra: $80 million
  • Kanye West: $70 million
  • Alec Baldwin: $65 million
  • Russell Brand (networth: 15 million; combined networth with wife, singer Katy Perry: $63 million)
  • Susan Sarandon: $50 million
  • Tim Robbins: $50 million
  • Michael Moore: $50 million
  • Danny Glover: $15 million
  • Talib Kweli: $14 million
  • Mark Ruffalo: $10 million

Here are the networths of some of the Super-Rich, the Top 0.01% (from Forbes’ richest 400 in America list):

  1. Steve Jobs: $8.3 Billion
  2. Carl Icahn (leveraged buyouts): $12 Billion
  3. Sergey Brin (Google): $15.9 Billion
  4. Charles Koch (manufacturing, energy): $19 Billion
  5. Michael Bloomberg (NY mayor): $20 Billion
  6. George Soros: $22 Billion
  7. Jim Walton (of Wal-Mart): $23.4 Billion
  8. Lawrence Ellison (of Oracle): $27 Billion
  9. Warren Buffet: $50 Billion
  10. Bill Gates (Microsoft): $57 Billion

The Occupy protesters reportedly are armed with iPhones and laptops and are active in social media — the very gadgets and communications technology invented by Jobs, Brin, Ellison, and Gates. Reportedly, Soros is funding the Occupy movement.

Will irony ever end?

By the way, raging socialist and President-for-life of Venezuela Hugo Chavez has an estimated networth of $1 Billion (!) — the same as Prince Albert II of Monaco. Another raging socialist, Fidel Castro of Cuba, has an estimated networth of $900 million.

Adios for now. See you at the Revolution!

~Eowyn