I also thought that Hugo might like a vocabulary lesson. Today's word is called "fungible."
Meaning, "If you don't want to sell us your oil. Fine. We'll just buy it from somebody else. And we'll probably not pay any more for it since by you supplying a different country really doesn't lower the global supply of oil and thus has no real effect on supply and thus price."
Of course you really could affect the price of oil by not selling oil at all. That would increase prices. But then half of the Venezuelan budget would go unfunded.
And then how would Hugo bribe the masses then?
Hmmmm.
ReplyDeleteActually I believe the oil from Venezuela is heavily saturated with sulphur and so needs special equipment to refine. This not only increases the expense but it also limits the potential number of customers.
If we can replace Venezuealan oil, then we can replace Saudi oil, which makes for some very interesting implications with respect to American foreign policy n the Mideast.
ReplyDeleteThis has nothing to do with your oil post... but I received this today from a friend and knew you would love to watch it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE-LDfroa1w
Its about the year 2007, banking/investments highs and lows...
-Brad
that's right memomachine. and combined with the growing scarcity of essential goods (due to price fixation) it would be only a matter of time for an uprising. But I think Hugo is not that moron... is easier to talk loud against USA to the economic ignorant masses than demonstrate how the economic reality looks like (and by the way be abashed of course).
ReplyDeleteI seem to be making a lot of posts lately that consist of nothing more than a link to a picture. A combination of inertia and apathy virtually guarantees that this trend will continue into the foreseeable future.
ReplyDeletehttp://people.csail.mit.edu/adonovan/dilbert/dilbert-19-02-2006.gif
Hmmmmm.
ReplyDelete1. Chavez's days are numbered. The key to being a despot is that you can never show weakness. And Chavez has failed that rule a few times already.
2. IMO the biggest problem with Central and South America is their continuing dabbling in socialism. It's amazing to think that, at the turn of the century, Argentina was an international powerhouse that greatly eclipsed America.
3. The recent innovation of using silicon nano-wires to store li-ion atoms and it's ability to store 10x+ energy with little degradation holds the promise of replacing gasoline in most recreational and non-commercial uses.
An electric car currently only has a range of about 120 miles, not very useful. But an electric car with a range of 1,200 miles without a recharge is extremely useful.
At that point we can start considering shifting to an all-electric transportation grid supported by safe nuclear reactors.
4. IMO the only way nuclear power is really going to "come back" in this country is to put it in the hands of those that Americans trust: US Navy.
I could see a system where nuclear power plants built on federal land and supervised by US Navy nuke techs would be able to provide the necessary power *and* provide people with some aspect of security.
"IMO the only way nuclear power is really going to "come back" in this country is to put it in the hands of those that Americans trust: US Navy."
ReplyDeleteI really don't like the idea of having a nationalized power industry. Given their ham handed regulations on the semi-private system, I don't think it would work very well.
It is glaringly unfair to paint Chavez as a maniacal dictator without mentioning the ongoing efforts of the U.S. to topple the Venezuelan government.
ReplyDelete3 assassination attempts by the C.I.A. have rightfully caused Chavez to treat us as an enemy.
Its hardly a black-and white issue on 'ownership of the oil resources' that you say he stole. You might well argue that he repatriated the resources from the American corporations (rubber, oil, sugar and bananas primarily) that have pillaged south america and interfered with the sovereignty and self determination of South American countries since before the 20th century.
Stop ignoring historical fact just because it paints a picture of the U.S. without the halo that we like to imagine is there
Doh...missed again! We gotta do better next time.
ReplyDeleteWe tried to assassinate Chaves, eh? Sure, we did. I get the feeling that "Anonymous" is an idiot.
ReplyDelete"Its hardly a black-and white issue on 'ownership of the oil resources' that you say he stole. You might well argue that he repatriated the resources from the American corporations (rubber, oil, sugar and bananas primarily) that have pillaged south america and interfered with the sovereignty and self determination of South American countries since before the 20th century."
What are you smoking? Foreign investment is a good thing. Nobody would work for those companies if they weren't offering a better deal than anything else available. Would you take those people's jobs away and tell them they have to take some second-best option just because it chafes your idiotic notions of national sovereignty? Self-righteous son of a bitch.
"Stop ignoring historical fact just because it paints a picture of the U.S. without the halo that we like to imagine is there"
Nobody's imagining the US with a halo, but you clearly are unaware that US foreign policy isn't dictated by Pat Robertson.