rob - 11-20-2005 at 09:50 AM
I ran across this item on a BBC World Service page. I pass it on for your interest.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=354&...
Rob
Marie-Rose - 11-20-2005 at 10:08 AM
I'm sure this will generate much discussion and I will be interested in everyone's comments. Being a Canadian, and not extremely knowledgable about
American and Mexican politics, I do not have any opinions to share. I do know that I have heard Fox being referred to as "in the States' pocket".
I quess this should be moved to the political discussion area but have no idea of how to do this!!!
[Edited on 2005-11-20 by Marie-Rose]
[Edited on 2005-11-20 by Marie-Rose]
comitan - 11-20-2005 at 10:29 AM
The above site is not really current, the following is a much better site for Mexico news.
http://www.mexicopost.com/
burro bob - 11-20-2005 at 11:34 AM
Rob
Why would you get your info about mexico from the BBC. As Comitan siad this is old news.
No one I know of considers the BBC to be a good source of unbiased news.
The problems between Mexico and Venezuala are totaly the fault of Chavez and his insults of the Mexican people and its leaders. My neighbors talked
only about this for several days. None of them blame Bush.
The report form the BBC is typical of left wing newspapers trying to blame the US of A for all problems in the world.
burro bob
bajajudy - 11-20-2005 at 12:38 PM
Thanks for that link, Comitan
I check El Universal everyday but this looks even better.
Has anyone seen a video of Chavez singing the mariachi music with the sombrero on...that would be a hoot.
BBC
rob - 11-25-2005 at 11:02 AM
Yeah - http://www.mexicopost.com/ is much superior!
Burro Bob - I do not as a rule RELY on BBC for Mexican news - rather world news, where its coverage is unequalled.
I simply ran across it and thought it might interest my fellow Nomads.
JESSE - 11-25-2005 at 11:48 AM
Mexicans don't share Vicente Fox's enthusiasm over free trade so i think he was wrong to push so hard for a pact that his citizens don't support, on
the other hand, Chavez is an idiot, and Vicente is a far bigger idiot for getting caught in this stupid game with a well known clown of international
politics.
yosemitejim - 11-26-2005 at 06:42 AM
Americans are brainwashed by the mainstream media to think Chavez is a fringe leader. Nothing could be farther from the truth. He is wildly popular
(twice as popular as bush is in the US). In fact, a pact between Venezuela and Columbia (erstwhile US ally) was approved a day or two ago regarding
energy, trade, and other issues (over the US objections). The recent "free trade of the americas" summit completely repudiated bush's free trade
policy. A recent Pew research poll indicated that South American's view of Chavez dramatically improved and bush's declinec after this summit. While
South American elites support bush, the vast majority of the people support Chavez.
Mexico presidential preference polls indicate that the Mayor of Mexico City (a leftist in the Chavez mold) is the leading candidiate. The
conservative PAN is behind the PRI and PRD. Fox and PAN have suffered for close ties to the US.
The problem conservative Americans have with Chavez is that he does not cow tow to the US. By the way, opposing the US is wildly popular for
politicians around the globe these days.
Big Al - 11-26-2005 at 10:44 PM
It's like sports, everyone loves to hate the perenial leaders.
Everyone hates the US, while their citizens are killing themselves trying to get into the country. They are doing it by plane, by boat, by car and by
foot. The US must not be all that bad if people are hiding themselves in false gas tanks of vehicles trying to immigrate into the country.
Chavez may be popular, but he is in charge of a country that is spinning out of control financially and socially.
yosemitejim - 11-27-2005 at 06:54 AM
Al, I can appreciate your comments regarding illegal immigration. However, you can count the illegal immigrants from Venezuela on one hand.
Venezuela has a budget surplus, universal health care, universal education, a growing lower and upper middle class, and the Venezuelan oil company is
providing heating oil at below cost to low income US citizens. Compare this situation to our country and I would wonder which country is "spinning
out of control financially and socially". When the US spent over $100 Million (via the foundation for democracy) to destabilize the
legitimatly-elected Venezuelan government, the situation was tense but the country rebounded impressively.
Nice place, hope to visit again real soon.
Big Al - 11-27-2005 at 08:52 PM
Not from what I read. Things are improving at the current time but primarily because the oil prices are SO high. Their Gov. just like any other big
oil company are seeing record profits currently. Chavez is looking like a savior right now, but when oil prices drop he will have a tougher time
economically. See the excerpt below.
"Venezuela continues to be highly dependent on the petroleum sector, accounting for roughly one-third of GDP, around 80% of export earnings, and over
half of government operating revenues. A disastrous two-month national oil strike from December 2002 to February 2003, temporarily halted economic
activity. The economy remained in depression in 2003, declining by 9.2% after an 8.9% fall in 2002. Despite continued domestic instability, output
recovered strongly in 2004, aided by high oil prices. Both inflation and unemployment remain fundamental problems."
The most recent high poverty rate was 54%, it is down to 38%. That is HUGE. The reason the government helps the poor so much is the fact they have a
huge poor population. One of the reasons Chavez is so popular is that with so many people below the poverty line, they are looking for the
government to supply them with what they need. That is the perfect scenario where socialism makes sense, a large poor population with a government
owned oil company supplying income. I just don't want to see that many people trying to live off the Gov. in the US.
In 2004 the inflation rate was 22.4%. In 2004 the government ran a 4 billion dollar defecit. Therefore, there was no government surplus, the surplus
is in 2005 and is most likely temporary and due to oil prices. The oil that was supplied to our poor was supplied at 40% below market value, not
below costs. There is a difference. I understand that this is still a great gesture, but remember where oil prices are right now. They are not
giving anything away.
Socialism may be working now, but when oil prices fall so will the support for the government. It wasn't very long ago, 2003, when there was a big
strike of the oil workers and a lot of political unrest.
My two cents
Big Al
What concerns me is the possibility....
neilm - 12-29-2005 at 02:29 PM
of the triangle - Chavez, Morales, & Obrador - with Fidel smiling in the background...
what's the old Chinese curse? 'May you live in interesting times...' that'll be '06 for sure.
Neil
comitan - 12-29-2005 at 02:35 PM
Neilm
Thats scary when you live full time in Mexico and own property.