Venezuela Vs. Sweden: Why Ocasio-Cortez and American Socialists Always and Ignorantly Get it Wrong

Over the past few months we have talked about how the socialists in Washington, e.g. Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, etc., have proposed plans to turn us into a socialistic country with the government controlling most aspects of our lives and charging us ALL very high taxes to do so. We have proven over and over that their plans cannot be financed by taxing only the wealthy but they would need extremely high taxation of ALL Americans to finance their pipe dreams while stripping us of our freedom.

They make two stupid mistakes while trying to convince Americans that socialism is good. The ignore the reality that socialism in Venezuela has failed miserably, turning a once rich country into a desperate hell hole on earth. And they totally do not understand what is really going on in Sweden, a country they like to hold up as a beacon of hope for socialism.

Let’s start with how socialism has destroyed Venezuela, as described by a recent Fox News article by Maxim Lott:

• Venezuela was once the wealthiest country in South America.
• Its vast oil reserves provided a high standard of living for most people throughout the country.
• Today, its oil industry is in steep decline, millions of citizens have left the country, there is mass starvation among just about the entire population, and violence reigns supreme, which much of it carried out by government thugs.
• Consider what social activist and Venezuelan Giannini Raffo says about the current situation in his home country: “Socialism not only takes away from people the access to basic food and medicines, but also creates an environment in which life is worth nothing.” 
• The country starting slipping into this socialism hole back in the 1990s when Hugo Chavez was elected president.
• During his campaign he promised that he was not a radical socialist even though he was a great admirer and friend of Communist, Fidel Castro, claiming that he was ''neither for savage capitalism, nor socialism, nor Communism''. 
• But some Venezuelans saw through his lies and news reports reported at the time that some of the wealthier citizens had started to move some of their wealth out of the country, afraid that the socialist in waiting Chavez would start seizing assets once elected, a wise move in hindsight.
• Chavez started his term as President by re-writing the country’s Constitution in order to consolidate and grow his power.
• The new Constitution promised free healthcare, free college, and “social justice,” all of which sound like a typical press release from American socialist like Ocasio-Cortez.
• Chavez went on to stack the country’s Supreme Court with 12 additional justices, all of which he handpicked, further consolidating his control, and a tactic that liberals in this country have proposed.
• Chavez now proceeded to terrorize the country, seizing private assets, raising taxes on the wealthy, making dissent a crime, nationalizing private businesses, and generally controlling everything that went on in the country.
• And once oil prices collapsed, the industry that was holding the country together, the economy collapsed, having been destroyed by Chavez’s economic actions.
• As a result, annual inflation today is about 12,000%, oil production is down about 40% form the peak, and basics like toilet paper are in very short supply.
• Many have fled their home country, and those that stayed behind have waited in line for hours just to get some meager food supplies with studies showing that on average, the Venezuelan adult has lost 24 pounds as a result of food shortages brought on by socialism.
• A former citizen and current activist is quoted in the article: “Living in Venezuela was not living anymore. [My family] only spent their time trying to find food and medicines to survive. The apartment that [my family] left behind – my home for 24 years – is now empty. They are not coming back. Don't let someone ruin your next generations with absurd ideas of socialism. Educate and disseminate ideas of freedom as far you can.”

Nasty stuff, a country literally managed itself into oblivion with the resultant human suffering as a result of rampant socialism practices.

But wait! There is hope! Socialism politicians in this country now try to tell us that they practice a “different type of socialism,” more like the socialism in Sweden. But do they even know what they are talking about? According to a recent article by John Stossel, ”Sweden Isn’t Socialist,” they are clueless as to what actually is going on in Sweden:

• He starts out his article with the following true statement: “For years, I've heard American leftists say Sweden is proof that socialism works, that it doesn't have to turn out as badly as the Soviet Union or Cuba or Venezuela did.”
• But that is not the case, according to Swedish historian, Johan Norberg, someone who probably knows a lot more about Sweden than people like Ocasio-Cortez: "Sweden is not socialist — because the government doesn't own the means of production. To see that, you have to go to Venezuela or Cuba or North Korea," says Norberg."We did have a period in the 1970s and 1980s when we had something that resembled socialism: a big government that taxed and spent heavily. And that's the period in Swedish history when our economy was going south."
• But unlike what Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez would tell you, when Sweden started down the socliams path, GDP fell, the country’s economic growth lagged other countries, inflation increased while taxes increased.
• So the country and its socialism policies resulted in higher taxes and less economic growth.
• Taxes were so outrageously high that Astrid Lindgren, author of the Pippi Longstocking children's books, had to pay a tax of 102% on any new book she sold, i.e. by increasing her wealth she would be paying more taxes than what her marginal income was.
• But even taxing people at such ridiculous rates did not bring in enough money to fund the country’s socialism.
• "People couldn't get the pension that they thought they depended on for the future," recounts Norberg. "At that point the Swedish population just said, enough, we can't do this."
• As a result, the country took a massive step back from socialism hell, cutting government spending, reducing taxation, un-nationalizing industries, getting rid of government monopolies and selling off state-owned businesses.
• The government also reduced pension [aka their version of Social Security] promises that were not possible to be funded.
• According to historian Norberg, these steps turned an "impoverished peasant nation...into one of the world's richest countries."
• Norberg goes on to state that “when it comes to free markets, when it comes to competition, when it comes to free trade, Sweden is actually more free market."
• Sweden’s economy has fewer business regulations, fewer special interest subsidies, and no government bailouts than the U.S. government and economy.
• This decline of socialism in the country allowed the government to viably fund a national pension system, 18 month parental leave, and government paid child care.
• But while they fund these programs, the government and the Swedish political class do not operate them since when the government did run these operations it did not go well: "Having the government manage all of these things didn't work well.”
• Norberg again: "We realized in Sweden that with these government monopolies, we don't get the innovation that we get when we have competition." 
• Thus, in Sweden there is no public school, it is all voucher system to private schools, which resulted in much better education once you took the politicians out of the equation.
• The country also privatized their version of Social Security, again getting politicians out of the process as much as possible.
• According to Norberg, this switch to a private version of Social Security saved the system from financial collapse and ruin.

As a result, Sweden now ranks higher than the U.S. on many economic freedom measures, hardly making it more socialistic than us. Thus, Sweden got the government and political class out of education and retirement programs, reduced taxes, reduced government regulations, sold off assets it had not business operating in the first place, and sold off and privatized nationalized industries. All of which made it richer and stronger and provided better lives than before for its citizens.

But in this country:

• Socialists like Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders want to raise taxes and increase business regulations (e.g. the inane New Green Deal.), the opposite of what Sweden did. 
• They want to cap personal earnings (Ocasio-Cortez), the opposite of what Sweden.
• They want to give out taxpayer wealth to special business interests (crony capitalism), interests that usually align with their political attitudes and financial sources, e.g. “green businesses” like the ones that failed miserably when Obama went all socialistic with Solyndra, A123, Spectra, and a whole bunch of other Democratic run companies that siphoned off renewable energy grants before going bankrupt, the opposite of what Sweden did. 
• They want to expand government programs like Medicare and Social Security rather than getting themselves out of the business like Sweden did. 
• Others like Presidential candidate socialist Elizabeth Warren want to nationalize industries, the opposite of what Sweden did.

Given the positions that American socialism politicians are taking, it sure smells more like Venezuela than it smells of Sweden. In Venezuela the political class took over more and more of citizens’ lives with catastrophic results. In Sweden, the political class took over less and less of citizens’ lives, and wealth and freedom, with great results.

So, when people like Sanders, Warren, Ocasio-Cortez and other socialists tell you that their programs are good and humane and only the rich will have to pay, remember that Chavez told his countrymen in Venezuela the exact same thing. And now those people that believed him are hungry, freedomless, fearful, poorer, and desperate.

Side note: Sweden went and blew the whole program when they went to an open borders immigration policy, allowing millions of Middle East immigrants to enter their country without limits or background checks. As a result, rape, homicides, and other violent crime is up in the country with Swedes ever more fearful for their lives and the safety of their wives and daughters. 

Hmmm, open borders? Isn't that a rallying cry of Sanders, Warren, Ocasio-Cortez and other socialists in this country? Given how wrong these people are about Sweden's lack of socialism, I would bet they are just as wrong about open borders.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

A Politician's Creed: "Do As I Say, Not As I Do."

I always get a little suspicious when a politician tells me I should do something (pay more taxes, use less gas, etc.) for myself, my country, or the nebulous "common good." One reason for that suspicion is that many, many times the actions of those same politicians are inconsistent with their own actions.

This point was driven home recently when I came across a news report from the Mexican newspaper, La Razon. The newspaper alleged that Hugo Chavez, the very, very socialistic semi-dictator of Venezuela had placed $137 million of his family's wealth in five bank accounts in the United States. His office, of course, denied the reports, claiming that Mr. Chavez is not a rich man with only one house to his name and no car after he gave his car to his son. I do not know if the news report is true or not but I doubt that Mr. Chavez is quite as poor as he claims. How ironic it would be that as his country's economy suffers and his people suffer, this socialistic ruler was reaping the rewards, allegedly.

That brought me around to the various examples of hypocrisy that our own politicians have tried t host upon us without hoisting their opinions an dictates upon themselves:

- Late last summer, Bill and Hillary Clinton threw a huge wedding party and reception for their only child, Chelsea Clinton. Most news reports estimated that the gala cost between $3 and $5 million. I would never tell anybody how to spend their money, especially as it relates to their kids. however, I do find million dollar weddings way over the top, especially when shortly before the extravaganza Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton opined in the press that some Americans make too much money.

If this is indeed the case, I would opine that anyone that can spend upwards of $5 million for a wedding makes too much money. The Clintons have made well over $100 million since he left office but still have the audacity to say some Americans make too much money. Obviously at $5 million for a wedding and over $100 million for their earnings, she hypocritically does not include herself in that category.

- On one to of the television networks today I caught a story of the office shuffle that is going on in Washington as new people come to serve in Congress and others leave. One aspect of the story was that Senator Minority leader Mitch O'Connell was going to move into the office space that had been used by the late Ted Kennedy. No big story here except for the fact that the office space for this one Senator was a whopping 3200 square feet in size. I have never lived in a home, never mind had an office, that was 3200 square feet. I have never worked for an executive that had an office that was 3200 square feet.

As politicians talk about downsizing government and the need for the country to tighten its belt in these tough economic times, how about showing that same attitude and downsizing their own budgets and extravagances? No one in government needs an office that big. Break it up into smaller offices, bring in some cubicles like the rest of America and pocket the savings. Don't tell me to downsize when you have 3200 square feet to bounce around, whether the occupant is a Democrat or a Republican.

- My favorite piece of hypocrisy from the past year comes from the good Senator from Massachusetts, Senator John Kerry. Recall that Mr. Kerry has married into the Heinz family fortune, which puts his family wealth well north of $100 million. Also, Mr. Kerry lives in Massachusetts, summers in West Yarmouth, Massachusetts and has represented the state of Massachusetts in the Senate for years. Seems like he is Massachusetts citizen through and through.

However, according to a July 23, 2010 Boston Herald news article by Gayle Fee and Laura Raposa, that may not be the case. Apparently, the Senator recently purchased a luxury 76 foot, New Zealand built boat with "glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage." Obviously, this is not a row boat. However, rather than berth in the boat in Massachusetts where he lives, where he summers, and who he represents in Congress, Senator Kerry decided to berth the luxury sloop in Newport, Rhode Island. This action allowed him to avoid paying almost $440,000 in Massachusetts sales tax and an annual Massachusetts excise of about $70,000. Rhode Island does not levy those types of taxes on boats.

So here we are, just a month removed from the Democrats howling that those making $250,000 or more in America do not pay enough taxes and he obviously is dodging paying legitimate, existing taxes to his financially strapped home state with this little out-of-state berthing maneuver. How hypocritical can you get? He is trying to avoid in state taxes what only a small handful of Americans make in a single year. And it is not like he needs the money, given the Heinz fortune he has access to. Do as I say, pay more taxes, while I look to avoid the same fate.

- Back to the Clintons, we mentioned above that they have made over $100 million over the past decade or so. Regardless of how much money they make, they continue to get full Secret Service protection at the taxpayers' expense. However, for many of those retired taxpayers collecting Social Security, earn a penny more than what the political class dictates in a year as a threshold of earnings and start paying back a dollar to the government for every two dollars over that maximum earning level. Thus, the common American can be penalized for earning too much money but our rich politicians are never required to step up and pay for their protection regardless of how rich the became as a result of their time in office.

- Staying with the Clintons (are we seeing a trend here?), recent news reports and Congressional testimony by and about Hillary show a brazen disregard for taxpayer dollars and the taxpayers that pay them by the State Department. In Congressional testimony in February, 2010, it was revealed that the United States government was about to embark on building a $1 billion embassy in London. $1 billion for a single building. That was not to be confused with the $500 million embassy that the United States government was building in Afghanistan's capital.

Is the State Department and Congressional committees that allow this type of reckless spending to exist not aware of the hard times Americans are suffering and the skyrocketing national debt the political class is running up? $1 billion for one building is ridiculous as is 3200 square feet of space for a single politician. I guess these people are just special.

- One last action, although minor, reflects on how out of touch the politicians in this country are with the needs and issues of the ordinary citizens. Given the turbulent November midterm election results and the low approval ratings of politicians in general, you would have thought they would have gotten he message: start working on the major issues and stop working on wasteful government spending and actions that benefit no one except the political class. Democrats in Washington took a "shellacking"  (Obama's words).

But I guess one New Mexico politician did not think he needed to heed these results. Governor Bill Richardson has spent his time and  government resources of his state to work towards a government pardon of Billy The Kid over the past few months. Billy The Kid was an outlaw, there is no doubt about that, and he died almost 130 years ago, no doubt about that. But with public schools failing, unemployment stubbornly high, state governments running out of money, etc., Governor Richardson would rather work on pardoning a long dead outlaw. Get the message governor, you are not exempt from a low approval rating, work on the real issues.

I am sure we could go on and on, the hypocrisy of the political class knows no end. Unfortunately, their elitist attitudes and out-of-touch insular lives makes it very difficult for them to understand how real Americans are suffering and that maybe they should not tell us what to do while they lounge around in billion dollar embassies and 3200 square foot offices.

Several steps from "Love my Country, Loathe My Government" might help to set them straight:

• Step 1 would reduce the budget and size of the Federal government by 10% a year for five years. Maybe if the political class had less of our money to work with, embassies would be smaller, offices would be smaller, and the political class would have to learn, for the first time, to live on a budget like the rest of us do.
• Step 34 would hold Congressional committee members accountable for government screw ups, removing those committee members from their posts for those screw ups. This would force them to finally do some work and truly understand the consequences of their actions: penalties or dismissal for non-performance, just like the rest of working America.
• Step 37 would base Congressional pay raises on performance, as measured by the voters, so that the voters could punish hypocritical and excessive, elitist behavior by the political class in addition to rewarding straight forward ands effective governance by the political class.
• Step 39 would impose term limits on all politicians so that they reason for gaining a political seat is not to see how big your office could eventually become by staying in office an unlimited amount of time but to see how much you can contribute to the good of the country, while in office a limited amount of time.
• Step 42 would require ex-Presidents to start paying back one dollar of every two dollars earned, above a minimum threshold, for their Secret Service protection, just like the rest of us have to do with our Social Security payments.

Hopefully, with these steps and a better class of politicians we can return to the original tenets of the Constitution and Bill of Rigths, where every American is treated the same way and given the same opportunities, whether or not they are an elected politician of not.


Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at www.loathemygovernment.com. It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.


Please visit the following sites for freedom:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment.org