Slashdot Mirror
Venezuelans Flock To Cryptocoins Amid Spiralling Inflation (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader quotes Bloomberg:
Demand for digital coins is soaring in Venezuela amid an escalating political crisis that has protesters demanding that President Nicolas Maduro step down. Inflation has spiraled to the triple digits, debasing the bolivar and depleting savings, while citizens struggle to find everything from food to medicine on store shelves. "If you're going to be in something volatile, you might as well be in something that's volatile and rising than volatile and falling," says Ryan Taylor, chief executive officer of crypto currency Dash Core, the third-largest digital coin by number of transactions... Bitcoin trading volume in Venezuela jumped to $1.3 million this week, about double the amount that changed hands two months ago, according to LocalBitcoins.com...
Venezuela's currency has become nearly worthless in the black market, where it takes more than 6,000 bolivars to buy $1, while bitcoin surged 53 percent in the past month alone. But it's not just about shielding against the falling bolivar, as some Venezuelans are using crypto currencies to buy and sell everyday goods and services, according to Jorge Farias, the CEO of Cryptobuyer.
Venezuela's currency has become nearly worthless in the black market, where it takes more than 6,000 bolivars to buy $1, while bitcoin surged 53 percent in the past month alone. But it's not just about shielding against the falling bolivar, as some Venezuelans are using crypto currencies to buy and sell everyday goods and services, according to Jorge Farias, the CEO of Cryptobuyer.
Never change, snowflake.
It's only a matter of time now. Maduro has armed tens of thousands of militia gang members. The criminals are also armed and looting and killing at will. People are starving to death and will eventually face a choice between a slow lingering death or going down fighting. It will happen quick once it gets started. Mobs will break into the arsenals and loot the weapons. Military units will face a choice of whose side to join, as they did in Syria. Maduro has made many enemies who will take the opportunity to settle scores and lots of hungry young men with nothing to do and no prospects will relish the chance to bleed the elites. All that's needed now is a spark and Maduro is sure to bungle into one sooner or later.
No, this is the point where you use basic political science definitions and point out that the thing that shitty governments tend to have in common far more than economic leanings is being authoritarian. Venezeula isn't shitty because they have universal healthcare, they are shitty because they have a dictator, and with a dictator, you tend to not actually fall within the ideals of any popular economic model.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Right now a lot of people use Bitcoin as a gold substitute. It's valuable because it's (relatively) secure and rare, exactly why people used gold for so long. But like gold, it's not actually practical for using as an everyday means of exchange.
Currency exchanges take too long to verify (half an hour or more), cost too much to do so (minor transactions can cost more to verify than exchanged hands), and the whole system sucks up a lot of power. While cryptocurrency as a valid backstop against incompetent governments is a great idea, a more technically proficient cryptocurrency, better designed for everyday transactions, would be a huge boon.
Except authoritarians ruling capitalist countries tend to do far better economically than authoritarians ruling communist countries. Examples: Pinochet's Chile, Nazi Germany, modern day China.
Authoritarianism is bad.
Communism is bad.
But the combination is even worse.
There are always crazy Venezuelan gang bangs on chaturbate. They must be really desperate.
Venezeula isn't shitty because they have universal healthcare, they are shitty because they have a dictator
Is Maduro a dictator? IIRC he was regularly elected. Now he refuses to step down from presidency after opposition won majority in parliament, but the consitution allows that: his opponents will have to win the presidential election to kick him out.
An economic model is not supposed to be popular, if it is a popular one it means it is one that gives government power, removes power from individuals and all of this is done either for 'the good of the public' or for 'the good of the nation' (socialism/communism vs fascism/nazism), pick your hemlock.
An economic model is supposed to follow sound ideas of money being created by productive work, of people having to exchange the fruits of their labour in a free market where the prices are not dictated but discovered, where production is encouraged and not taxed, savings are encouraged and not taxed, where if you have to tax something it has to be on the consumption side, where interest rates are set by demand and supply in the free market, where money is created by the work of the people rather than on the whim of any government or a pseudo government agency, where prices are not fixed on neither products, nor labour, nor capital, where people are allowed to fail, where failure is not seen as something bad but as something cleansing. Where failure and debt restructured is the preferred way of dealing with failure rather than any form of a subsidy or a prop up by any form of government.
The health of the economy cannot be sacrificed in the name of any form of economic justice, any form of protection, any form of safety, any form of stability, the economy is a living, breathing, constantly changing organism that develops and evolves and survives because it is the best fit organism in the existing environment at any moment in time.
Individuals need to be free to create, to save, to work, to produce and to consume if they choose to consume instead of saving. Individuals make the weather, not collectives, individuals make the choices, not collectives, individuals make purchasing and selling decisions, not collectives, individuals own property and run businesses, not collectives, individuals trade with each other, not collectives.
Individuals do not need any form of protectionism, individuals do not need any form of a 'trade agreement', they just trade voluntarily for their mutual benefit (or at least for what they perceive is their mutual benefit) in the absence of an oppressive regime. Individuals must be allowed to fail, they must be allowed to die trying, they must be free. Individuals build economies, individuals set priorities, individuals make choices. Collectives must not be allowed to stand in the way of individuals.
You can't handle the truth.
An entire ocean separating them from Europe either, so they can't just go to Europe and call themselves climate refugees like the Africans either.
Chile collapsed so quick that Friedman had to cry that he meant to do that.
Bullcrap. Pinochet ruled Chile for 17 years, while the economy prospered, and then peacefully transitioned Chile to democracy. He was a brutal but competent dictator.
Germany and China had the benefit of being strong, economically robust states
More bullcrap. Germany was a basket case when Hitler took over. He immediately launched a massive Keynesian expansion that pulled not just Germany, but much of Europe out of the Great Depression.
Under communism, China was one of the world's poorest countries, and experienced the worst famine in all of history. Then in 1979, they switched to capitalism while keeping the authoritarianism in place. Since then, their economy has expanded ten-fold.
Look at the graph on this page: Historical GDP of China. Under communism, China's economy was flat for decades. Then in 1979 it was like turning on a light switch from "poverty" to "prosperity". There is a clear inflection point.
Is Maduro a dictator?
Yes. He is ruling by decree. He ignores the legislature, and has packed the judiciary with his cronies.
IIRC he was regularly elected.
Being elected doesn't make you a non-dictator. Hitler was elected. Maduro became president when Chavez died, and was re-elected soon after by a razor thin majority that is widely viewed as fraudulent.
his opponents will have to win the presidential election to kick him out.
Since Maduro controls the army, the judiciary, and the election infrastructure, that may prove difficult.
The techniques failed, not the political philosophy.
This is Leftism in a nutshell. It is never the fault of the ideology when 30 million people starve to death, and a billion are impoverished. It is only because someone failed to tweak the "purity" knob on the policy dashboard. Whatever.
>Communism will work! The only reason it hasn't happened so far is because
we keep running out of Other People's Money, for some reason.
The relevant question is: is that allowed by the constitution?
Constitutionality is decided by the judiciary. Maduro owns the judges. So the constitution means whatever he says it means.
You are talking about Communism when you say Socialism. There are less extreme versions of socialism that aren't dictatorships. Having the government build and maintain roads is socialism, so is a government run police department or army. Having the government subsidize farmers and the "War on Drugs" is classic Socialism straight out of Karl Marx but Republicans have no problem with those.
Post chavez Venezuela is still one of the most unequal societies in the world (check out the chick related to chavez who became a billionaire while he was alive). Just a lot hungrier.
The second biggest issue of our time is probably the recent world recession. Bush inherited a balanced budget (surplus even - from Clinton's small tax raise), gave out the biggest tax cut to the rich in who knows how long, and a few years later we had the great recession. If you want to get into details, there's multiple reasons for that, but the one thing it proves is that doling out tax cuts for the wealthy in America can't save the economy, not in our time at least. If you're pragmatic, you have to bet that it actually does a lot of harm.
The right is sooo idealogical. The left, sometimes talks ideology, but usually looks at every situation and tries to choose what's actually best for everyone, even the right. We've seen that trickle down economics, invented on a napkin by politicians, has failed miserably, so we don't believe in it. We've seen that starting stupid wars is ... stupid. People die (good people, a lot of righties even). If you're going to war, make sure it's for the right reasons.