Chavez redistributing the sun to the poor

[nivi]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUKN2328980320070823

ARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has changed his country's name, redesigned its flag and rejigged its coat of arms in his drive for a socialist state.

Now the leftist reformer, highly popular for redistributing oil income, is seeking to move the country's time zone to offer a more equitable distribution of sunlight.

Venezuela in September will turn clocks back by 30 minutes as it switches time zones to boost the amount of natural light to residents, a government official said on Thursday.

Next month Venezuelan clocks will be set at Greenwich Mean Time minus 4-1/2 hours, compared to the previous GMT minus four hours, Science and Technology Minister Hector Navarro told reporters at a news conference.

He said the measure sought "a more fair distribution of the sunrise," which would particularly help poor children who wake up before dawn to go to school.

"Very rigorous scientific studies have determined that ... the metabolic activity of living beings is synchronized with the sun's light," he said.

Navarro said the government is planning to announce additional measures to "make more effective use of time."

Venezuela, which under Chavez was officially changed to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, adopted its current time zone in the 1960s.

It makes sense (maybe), but is still funny.

 

[luiz]

Maybe it is a good idea, I don't know. But his rhetoric, as usual, is stupid and demagogic and makes the whole thing annoying.

The venezuelan opposition should have killed them when they could, now they are stuck with a new dictator for life. Oh well, that is how it goes in South America.

 

[Aramazd]

It doesn't seem like a bad idea, but I'm sure he'll find some way to mess it up.

 

[JZ_UK]

Its funny as a headline... but not as funny as people claiming changing daylight saving times is a leading cause of global warming...

 

[Godwynn]

What did he change the name of Venezuela to?

 

[luiz]

What did he change the name of Venezuela to?

Bolvarian Republic of Venezuela. He wants to put "Bolívar" in every single word. He calls his politics "bolivarianism", or "bolivarian socialism".

Even though Bolívar was a liberal who admired the USA and would abhore a ridiculous tyrant like Chávez.

 

[Phlegmak]

It's like Simon Bolivar is the now revered in the same way as Karl Marx, Ronald Reagan, and Jesus.

 

[Godwynn]

It's like Simon Bolivar is the now revered in the same way as Karl Marx, Ronald Reagan, and Jesus.

Thank you, I can die a happy man now.

 

[skadistic]

Isn't Newfoundland on a 0:45 difference?

 

[Princeps]

now they are stuck with a new dictator for life.

I know, help the poor, give the petrodollars to the poor, nationalize your resources and you're a tyrant. His enemies have tried everything thus far, Coup d’État, oil strike, flow of capital, plots, but that thank god there's an incompetent man in charge in Washington. If Clinton had been in charge, he'd be staging coups in Venezeula and restoring corporate pillage, instead of wasting the Empire's resources in Iraq.

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

Isn't Newfoundland on a 0:45 difference?

It is on a 30 min difference.

 

[Godwynn]

I know, help the poor, give the petrodollars to the poor, nationalize your resources and you're a tyrant.

Don't forget shutting down an opposition television station.

 

[amadeus]

Don't forget shutting down an opposition television station.

That was a puppet of the Je... United States neo-conservative neo-imperialist Halliburton Bush ...or something.

 

[skadistic]

Don't forget shutting down an opposition television station.

And kicking out priests who dare to really help the poor or god forbid speak out against the benevolent father. And stacking the congress so you can implement laws and changes that secure your the "elected" leader for life. Did I miss anything?

 

[Princeps]

Don't forget shutting down an opposition television station.

Yeah, well the channel has resumed its programs by cable and satellite from July 16, despite the fact that it participated in a coup attempt.

Also, Chavez refused to renew its license, he did not immediately shut it down. What if, in France, a leftist channel would participate in a coup against the president? Do you think that channel would remain on air for a long time?

Besides, Venezeulan media is very right wing and what Chavez did, is far from the typical dictator-behaviour. Take for example the US backed ultraviolent right-wing regimes in Central America, they burned down the dissident radio-stations and mutilated the people who operated them and threw them into a ditch.

And kicking out priests who dare to really help the poor or god forbid speak out against the benevolent father.

Like when the Cocaine Importing Agency waged war against the Chatolic Church in central America. Oh, wait, they assassinated the dissident priests.

 

[luiz]

I know, help the poor, give the petrodollars to the poor, nationalize your resources and you're a tyrant. His enemies have tried everything thus far, Coup d’État, oil strike, flow of capital, plots, but that thank god there's an incompetent man in charge in Washington. If Clinton had been in charge, he'd be staging coups in Venezeula and restoring corporate pillage, instead of wasting the Empire's resources in Iraq.

No, I don't call him a tyrant for his assistencialist, short-sighted populistic policies that will only keep the poor where they are and at the same time bury any possible prospect of development for Venezuela. For that I call him a terrible ruler.

I call him a tyrant for abolishing presidential term limits (but not governor and mayor term limits!!!), sacking the Supreme Court, making Congress powerless with the "habilitating laws", creating armed militias that shoot at political opponents, shutting down the oppositionist media, and so on.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

when will he realize that the sun distribution is only optimal in a free market?

 

[Princeps]

No, I don't call him a tyrant for his assistencialist, short-sighted populistic policies that will only keep the poor where they are and at the same time bury any possible prospect of development for Venezuela.

So, uh, you'd rather keep spouting these indoctornated neoliberal mantras?

First of all, Chavez's economic policies are not far from Nordic ones... But I guess, brown Venezeulans cannot demand Nordic privileges -- instead they must accept Washington's dicates and "free markets"... it'll be good for their character, I suppose.

You know, between 1999 and 2005, poverty dropped from 42.8% to 33.9% according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

And read this.

http://rujournalism.blogspot.com/2007/06/business-week-chavez-not-so-bad-for.html

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_26/b4040048.htm

For that I call him a terrible ruler.

No, you keep repeating the same vulgar neoliberal lines that the big media keeps broadcasting.

I call him a tyrant for abolishing presidential term limits (but not governor and mayor term limits!!!),

Yes, well, if 80%-70% of the people want to vote for him and if majority accepts that, I don't object.

making Congress powerless with the "habilitating laws"

You mean the acts that gave him a rule-by-degree for a limited period of time in pre-determined areas?

, creating armed militias that shoot at political opponents,

You mean the militia's he created to defend against future US aggression?

I'd do that.

shutting down the oppositionist media, and so on.

Nonsense as I just explained.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I call him a tyrant for abolishing presidential term limits (but not governor and mayor term limits!!!),

Yes, well, if 80%-70% of the people want to vote for him and if majority accepts that, I don't object.

You swear you don't see any problem with that?

 

[luiz]

So, uh, you'd rather keep spouting these indoctornated neoliberal mantras?

So, uh, you'd rather keep praising an obvious and vulgar tyrant just because he is a communist like you? (yes, you are a communist. Keep the denial for your psychologist).

First of all, Chavez's economic policies are not far from Nordic ones... But I guess, brown Venezeulans cannot demand Nordic privileges -- instead they must accept Washington's dicates and "free markets"... it'll be good for their character, I suppose.

Dear God... you keep sinking.
First of all, Chávez policies don't have much to do with the nordic ones. They rather resemble those of the communist states, where a small elite (members of the party) is granted some privilleges (like the right to import stuff) and become fabulously wealthy, while the rest of the country is unable to further develop... the "bolistocracy" is well known for their apartments in Miami and huge SUVs. Importing became a great business after Chávez killed off the venezuelan industry.

Second, I am also a Latin American, a "brown" if you will, and I wouldn't use racist arguments against my neighbours. Spare me of your insulting (and really bad) arguments.

You know, between 1999 and 2005, poverty dropped from 42.8% to 33.9% according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

You know, poverty actually increased on Chávez's first years, and is still at an astounding 37,5%, despite the fact that oil prices increased many times under his reign. And the per capita income is yet to recover...

No, you keep repeating the same vulgar neoliberal lines that the big media keeps broadcasting.

Yes Princeps, the truth is in your marxist BS papers. The big media is wrong, all economic analysts are wrong, Noam Chomsky is right. Yeah!

Yes, well, if 80%-70% of the people want to vote for him and if majority accepts that, I don't object.

It was something like 65% at his peak, and most new polls show his popularity sinking fast... Now it is barely above 50%, I would suppose.
Anyway, why not extend the unlimited terms for governors and mayors? Could it be that Caracas (and the other places with an educated population) have oppositionist as rulers? Hum? Don't justify what can't be justified (oh, I forgot, everything is justifiable for socialism!)

You mean the acts that gave him a rule-by-degree for a limited period of time in pre-determined areas?

The acts that gave him dictatorial powers for the rest of his term, which apparently will last as long as his life.

You mean the militia's he created to defend against future US aggression?

No, I mean the militias that have shot oppostitioners. Do you agree with shooting oppositioners? What if the US National Guard shot Chomsky? Would you cry?

The militia created to defend against future US aggresion does not exist, because the US does not want to attack Venezuela and if they did Chávez militia would only serve as practice for cluster bombs.

I'd do that.

Of course you would, Stalin-boy.

Nonsense as I just explained.

Nonsense was your explanation. What good is cable when the only people who have cable are those who already oppose Chávez? Furthermore he wants to kick them out of cable too, as well as kicking out other TV stations such as CNN and BBC.

But it is all good for you, as long as he keeps his childish socialist and anti-american rhetoric.