Comments on: Crude populism

By: robinhio

robinhio — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:47:12 +0000

I don’t think this is propaganda it’s just the way Chavez does business.

As with the Cuban doctors for oil.

Cheap heating oil for the American poor, now that’s propaganda.

You’re not gonna hear me complaining though.

By: The Blind Winger Jones

The Blind Winger Jones — Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:38:58 +0000

Barter is an excellent system of exchange in places that hold little store by the value of paper money. In some of the more isolated Pennine villages of my era it was common for locals to offer their daughters in exchange for a monagram of Prince Albert from travelling tinkers. Who can say that was any worse than handing over a couple of pennies for a Ipeapod or Blueberry communications device as is common in the present day ?

Good luck to Dr Livingston and King Hugo of the Chavs with their swapsies arrangement.

By: Omri

Omri — Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:13:02 +0000

What Chavez could be doing to unload petrodollars and stabilize the Bolivar is to fund public works projects. I hear the highways around Caracs are in bad shape. And the hospitals in the hinterlands are deteriorating. And the favelas could always use more paving, sewer lines, and the like.

And Bechtel is bidding…

By: Omri

Omri — Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:07:38 +0000

Given that those “valuable UK services” include installation of CCTV systems, you can color me skeptical.

By: Donald/TheJarndyceBlog

Donald/TheJarndyceBlog — Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:46:41 +0000

1. Alternatively, countries experience the resource curse because they're authoritarian - not because of capitalist relations of trade. Full expropriation of the oil sector is difficult, due to the specific technology/knowledge and access to international markets required. So, the economy is skewed towards oil, because people will invest in the sector without fear of losing the lot. See Stephen Haber's chapter in this book. 2. That article you cite doesn't say London has some of Europe's poorest districts, merely some of Britain's. Unless I missed something, that hardly bears comparison with the Italian Mezzogiorno, or Slovakia outside central Bratislava, or plenty others. 3. Having said that, Chavez is the elected leader of Venezuela, so he's free to deal with whomever he likes. I can't see why a supposed "liberal" and a Tory should object to him doing business in a free market - the oil's certainly better swapped for consultants than pissed away on Kalashnikovs for FARC or trips to Iran. As Phil says, it's propaganda, but that in itself doesn't tell us whether it's a good idea or not. And using the oil to fund free travel for poor Londoners seems unimpeachable, too.

By: clampett

clampett — Mon, 18 Sep 2006 03:49:33 +0000

Perhaps the boys in caracas care more about political leverage against the ‘war on terrorism’ than about losing a bit of cash on a minor shipment of Oil, so when this arrangement is criticized as propaganda, really, it’s being critical of the British poor/working class’ ability to see thropugh the lies of the domestic English upper classes…so PH is right, sour grapes.

By: Not Saussure

Not Saussure — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 21:23:19 +0000

Barter is inefficient. ThatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s why money was invented.

Bit of an over-simplification, surely? In general, it’s true, of course; but if you’ve got something I want, I’ve got something you want, and we agree we’re happy to do a straight swop, that’s considerably more efficient than involving third parties in the transaction as either middlemen or as someone from whom I can buy the money to pay you for what I want, thus enabling you to give me the money straight back in return for what you want.

By: Phil Hunt

Phil Hunt — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 10:47:07 +0000

Some random observations:

1. Bray is right, what Livingston and Chavez are doing is propaganda. Of course it is, they are politicians and that’s what politicians do. If Bray was mayor of London, she’d be doing things for propaganda too — different things no doubt. So her criticism is really just sour grapes.

2. Barter is inefficient. That’s why money was invented.

3. Cheap oil is a good deal for London.

4. Whether this is a good deal for Venezuela, I don’t know. Certainly London is a large, rich, successful city (people in the West often underestimate how successful their societies are, because most of the time everything “just works”). Conceivably London has useful skills it could teach Caracas and other Venezuelan cities.

By: MatGB

MatGB — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 01:24:31 +0000

I thought that name was familiar. It's not the first time Tuffrey's pronounced something stupid, he also decided to call for term limits on the mayoralty, on the "if you can't beat him, ban him from standing" model. I tend to avoid economics discussions, not really my field, but I did think the idea was quite a good one, and payment in kind isn't a bad form of barter. I really dislike the opportunists, but, be honest, they exist in every party, it's not just the LibDems.