<p>What do you think about the economic liberalism that the Scandinavian countries have adopted? They are doing much better than us in many ways.</p>
<p>Sevansalari,</p>
<p>They engaged in this liberalism after having already taken care of the root cause of Dutch disease and developing their economies to the point that they could actually sustain their models.</p>
<p>Developing nations are much more fragile than well-developed economies.</p>
<p>“That doesn’t make sense.”</p>
<p>What doesn’t? That people will be better educated? That literacy will increase? That they will have fewer children? That they will be less sick, and more productive? That they will see greater economic opportunity? I thought these were “engines of capitalism”.</p>
<p>My offer still stands.</p>
<p>Who took care of the problems of Dutch Disease? How did they develop their economies? Didn’t they use the government for that? Care to explain?</p>
<p>Sevansalari,</p>
<p>Keep in mind that Dutch disease didn’t rear its head in the region until after those nations were already well-developed nations. The governments took care of it by NOT spending the petrodollars. Well…the Netherlands didn’t, but that’s why we call it Dutch disease now. Norway stuck it all in a pension fund, for example, keeping the dollars off the market, and keeping the exchange rate from going too high. </p>
<p>Those nations developed their economies long before resource exports…</p>
<p>mini,</p>
<p>No, what doesn’t make sense is that exports will increase. </p>
<p>You don’t need to engage in populism to deal with the aforementioned problems. Japan, for example, developed without it…</p>
<p>Yes, that is why free-market capitalism has worked out so well. Tell that to the 20 percent of this country below poverty line. More than half of them under the age of 18.</p>
<p>Or let’s ask about the side effects of capitalism, human trafficking, the Iraq War, World War II. The capitalists have had their success because they march with the rifle.</p>
<p>Sevansalari,</p>
<p>You’re not responding to my arguments, and instead putting up straw men.</p>
<p>The Japanese, after WWII, had equal numbers living just at the point of subsistence. Look at today.</p>
<p>Policy matters.</p>
<p>
…as the fog begins to lift: some clarity.</p>
<p>Hang on DPX…no need to goad. Let’s not make this into a flamewar.</p>
<p>consider it done.</p>
<p>You are doing quite well on your own. Continue…</p>
<p>What gets me about the Chavez cult of personality is how people ignore that this is the same guy who attempted a military coup in 1992. </p>
<p>But nevermind that.</p>
<p>What about the fact that per capita GDP growth has been tepid at best? That PPP growth hasn’t been exceptionally robust? Or that the manufacturing sector is floundering?</p>
<p>Economics is dismal for a reason, I suppose.</p>
<p>"No, what doesn’t make sense is that exports will increase.</p>
<p>You don’t need to engage in populism to deal with the aforementioned problems. Japan, for example, developed without it…"</p>
<p>With huge, massive foreign aid, and hundreds of thousands of troops spending hard cash in their market for a generation.</p>
<p>What Chavez is doing is (with payment to the owners) repatriating the profit potential of the oil industry back to his nation. THE PETRODOLLAR PROFITS WERE BEING SPENT ANYWAY, just not for the people of Venezuela. Instead of those profits (which would have been banked in any case) going to oil millionaires, they are going to education, literacy, health care, and small business opportunities, the engines of capitalism. Exports will increase as the small business sector develops, and establishes regional trading partnerships.</p>
<p>In the meantime, people outside of penthouses will have something to eat.</p>
<p>“What about the fact that per capita GDP growth…”</p>
<p>WHOSE GDP growth, kimosabe? ;)</p>
<p>(Still no takers on my offer?)</p>
<p>mini,</p>
<p>Japan’s growth was augmented by the US, but foreign aid was not very high there. They did most of it through shrewd economic policy, delayed gratification, and a willingness to scrimp for a generation.</p>
<p>Again, repatriating the oil dollars is all well and good, but spending the dollars on populist projects is not going to keep Venezuela developing forever. If there’s an oil shock any time soon, Venezuela is even more screwed than the Arab oil exporters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I repeat: this is not how it works. Small businesses cannot hope to compete if the exchange rate is through the roof.</p>
<p>“Again, repatriating the oil dollars is all well and good, but spending the dollars on populist projects is not going to keep Venezuela developing forever.”</p>
<p>You are absolutely correct. An educated, healthy citizenry, with opportunities for small domestic business development, will. </p>
<p>Neighborhoods littered with dead infants, illiterate peasants, and cities filled with farmers kicked off their lands, don’t develop.</p>
<p>If there is an oil shock soon, the U.S. is screwed most of all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, you’re not engaging me on the exchange rate/Dutch disease issue. What is Chavez doing to stop this? I don’t see much.</p>
<p>Furthermore, if the economy is stalled, and you have smart people, all you’re going to get is brain drain. Think India a la 1970-90.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not really. The US economy will slow, but oil exporters have NOTHING ELSE to rely on, economically.</p>
<p>Ari, let’s cut the crap and look at case studies of these neoliberal policies that you love and are so successful.</p>
<p>Japan during WWII, due to capitalist pressures, were tempted to capture Asia to gain raw resources it lacked in Japan.</p>
<p>Germany did the same to increase its industrial base i n WWII.</p>
<p>Other countries are now trying to industrialize and face the same pressures. They either can exploit natives, the preferred Western way, or try to rein in the economy through populist and statist measures.</p>
<p>The only difference between Japan,Germany and the new industrializing vs US,UK, Netherlands is that they did their expolitation earlier and now think they are economic goddesses, although they were successful merely because they mastered exploitation and slave labor.</p>
<p>Capitalisn and peace (no exploitation) are not bedfellows. Never have been. Never will.</p>
<p>Sevansalari,</p>
<p>I’ve never said that I’m for neoliberal policies. You’re assuming that.</p>
<p>And your argument falls short of explaining post-WWII Japan by quite a bit.</p>
<p>Post war Japan is even easier. We’ve been protecting the borders of these people and paying for their military although Japan deserves to be annexed by China and Korea and exploited dry.</p>