Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowperson
Do you seriously think American paratroopers are going to imminently rain down on Venezuela?  
Yes, that is very funny.
As to a coup, I wasn't talking about a coup but, when someone else brought it up, noted that Chavez knows all about them. |
I think you should look at the US' record in Latin America, and I think you will realize how not-shocking it would be if the US was to install a dictator in Venezuela, like they've done many a time before in many states. Hell, look what they're doing in Iraq, Afghanistan... What makes you think Venezuela, of all states, has immunity from the US? Does the name "Pol Pot" ring any bells? How about "Guevera". Or what about Cuba... are you unfamiliar with Cuba's situation? I could go on if you like. I have a feeling you're one of those people that will not consider this until Faux News is reporting Al Queda in Venezuela.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowperson
As far as I am concerned, oil-economics and regular economics are two completely seperate things. The regularities (supply/demand, invisible hand...) disapear whenever oil is involved. I honestly do not think any country, with the vast supply of oil that Venezuela has, has to worry about their economy. They don't need investment, we're not talking about Ethiopia here, they're self-sufficent. It's not like foreign governments are going to say "Hey, this oil came from Venezuela, let's not pay the market price per barrel." Where's the logic? The only end result would be, that I can see, is Venezuelian (government owned) oil companies making the huge money rather than the typical big oil and the money going back to the people of Venezuela. Ignoring their huge oil reserves and saying their economy will fail is not very realistic.
I chalk your mentality up to NEP flashbacks, which really, is not applicable in this situation
So a Petro-country can ignore the world around it?
That's not usually the case.
One example:
Iran's oil industry has raked in record amounts of cash during three years of high oil prices. But a new U.S. campaign to dry up financing for oil and natural gas development poses a threat to the republic's ability to continue exporting oil over the next two decades, many analysts say.
The campaign comes at a moment of unique vulnerability for Iran's oil industry, which also faces challenges from rising domestic energy consumption, international isolation, a populist spending spree by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and trouble closing contracts with foreign oil companies — a recipe for potential disaster in a nation with one of the world's largest reservoirs of oil.
"If the government does not control the consumption of oil products in Iran … and at the same time, if the projects for increasing the capacity of the oil and protection of the oil wells will not happen, within 10 years, there will not be any oil for export," Mohammed Hadi Nejad-Hosseinian, Iran's deputy oil minister for international affairs, said in a telephone interview.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...home-headlines
|
From that article, I get the impression that there is more to this story than you're catching on to.
The efforts by the United States and its allies over the last few months to persuade international banks and oil companies to pull out of Iran threaten dozens of projects, including development of Iran's two massive new oil fields that could expand output by 800,000 barrels a day over the next four years.
And as nations such as Japan begin to back out of Iran oil development under U.S. pressure, the government in Tehran is being forced to dig into its own reserve funds to get crucial new projects off the ground.
But Nejad-Hosseinian said Iran had recognized the gravity of the threat and launched steps to head it off, including new "smart" rationing cards, scheduled for distribution in March to check skyrocketing sales of cheap gasoline, and an overhaul of Iran's historically stingy contract terms in an attempt to lure big oil companies into skirting the U.S. roadblocks.
Iran also is hoping to turn to China and Russia for help. But U.S. officials already have warned that they will seek to hold China accountable under Washington's unilateral sanctions laws if it proceeds with a $16-billion project to develop Iran's North Pars gas field. China also has signed a memorandum of understanding under which it may take on development of the Yadavaran field in southwestern Iran, expected to boost production by 300,000 barrels a day.
What is going on in Iran, has almost absolutely nothing to do with oil companies, but rather the US wanting to put embargos on Iran with a political motive. According to your own article, the US is not allowing anyone to deal with Iran, which obviously will lead to a level of desperation for Iran to cooperate.
Are you unfamiliar with the Bush administration and the huge stake they have in oil? The only saving grace Iran has is that they are NATIONALLY starting projects because no international organization, state or corporation is allowed to. IF Iran had a nationalized oil company, they wouldn't have to rely on foreign investment, as that oil would be already be flowing. But since they are not nationalized they are now the US' bitch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowperson
Another example is Mexico and its publicly owned oil industry:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGAAJN9JG1.DTL
The problem tends to be a drying up of investment capital . . . . the problem of money flowing where its most welcome and avoiding places where it isn't.
Cowperson |
I love it when people's links blow up in their face. Yes, let's look at that article, shall we?
Despite its troubles, Pemex is still a giant. It is the largest corporation in Mexico and the fifth-largest oil firm in the world, with average daily production in 2005 of about 3.3 million barrels of oil, 4.8 million cubic feet of natural gas and 435,000 barrels of natural gas liquids. It is the second-largest oil source of U.S. imported oil, after Canada, at a daily average of 1.9 million barrels.
The huge rise in international petroleum prices has been a godsend for the nation, if not for Pemex itself.
The price rise -- from about $12 per barrel in 1999 to more than $70 currently -- has injected tens of billions of dollars into the federal government's coffers. Pemex's revenues this year are expected to be about $89 billion, with 59 percent of this amount siphoned off by the government through tax and dividend payments totaling about $52 billion.
This flood of revenue has allowed Fox to opt for a conservative version of economic pump-priming. Instead of boosting spending, he has overseen strengthening government reserves and cutting federal borrowing, thus allowing bank credit to expand by almost 500 percent during his term, according to government data. The result has been an explosion of consumer purchases and home building.
Lopez Obrador hopes to spread around that wealth in a more traditional Mexican way -- slashing Pemex's gasoline pump prices, which average about $2.50 per gallon, and cutting taxes on natural gas and electricity.
Mexico is a third world country, and while corupt as ****, at least some of the revenues are going to the poor people of that country - which is more than what would if it was big oil.
Dude, you need to read more than the first three paragraphs of these articles you're linking.