Caracas SHTF survival experience

[zatoh]

A pretty good account of the experience in the aftermath of their extended blackout:
https://www.caracaschronicles.com/20...5EtoANj5i7UaV8

[twinfin]

Prophetically this was written on August 17th, 2018:

...One day, when daily inflation is at Zimbabwe levels, the electric grid will fray and all the engineers that can repair it will have quit. One day, when PDVSA [national oil co.] is pumping just a few hundred thousand barrels a day, the turbines at the main hydropower plant will blow out and there won’t be money to repair them. And that’ll be that—power will go out for a whole city or state, and not just for 24 or 72 hours but for good. Same for waste collection, telecom and water.
One day, when daily inflation is at Zimbabwe levels, the electric grid will fray and all the engineers that can repair it will have quit.
Then it’s anybody’s guess...

https://www.caracaschronicles.com/20...percent-later/


Venezuela is the situation to be watching as a case study in the collapse of society. If we watch closely, we can learn lessons for ourselves that may assist in our own preparation efforts to anticipate and prepare for what may happen in a future crisis of our own.

[nick]

Socialism is a crisis on is own. Everything else is just symptoms.

[wpage]

Our country needs real leadership to digitization and artificial intelligence. We have fallen in the last decade from being #1 to 11th. Our leaders are so partizen they get nothing done.

Caracus Venezula is a example of failed leadership gone unchecked. We must work to have the right leaders in our country.

[poppa p]

Originally Posted by nick

Socialism is a crisis on is own. Everything else is just symptoms.

It's appealing to blame "socialism" for problems such as this. For some that justification will work and will reinforce their own beliefs. However, the true problem is "corruption." This is something that plagues every society and unfortunately, is something that many will blindly ignore just because it's easier to hide from the eyes of most people.

Venezuela's problem is the corruption of it's President and other leaders at the expense of its citizens. However, blaming socialism is much more simplistic in thinking and much more aligned with current political beliefs in the US.

[Spanky8601]

Yeah, it is appealing to blame socialism. You are right about the corruption of its leaders...just like Mao, Stalin and Castro along with a host of other "leaders" of the socialist belief. Problem is trying to get rid of the socialist leader, unlike "leaders" who leave when they are voted out of office.

While I disliked having Obama as the President he did leave office when he was no longer the elected "leader".

Our system in the USA is not perfect, but it sure is a whole lot more reasonable than if we just try "socialism one more time we might get it correct". The biggest problem is corruption. As the saying goes Power corrupts and absolute power corruptions completely.

[Bakersfield_Grizzly]

When I was in Israel, It was repeatedly said that the kibbutz for the most part had failed. They were set us as communes where each does his own share but very quickly they found that the major share of the work was done by a few and there were those hungry for power, and those that contributed little. When those hungering for power teamed up with those not willing to work, they Kibbutz failed. Only when there was strong leadership did a Kibbutz succeed and all profited. They ended up paying those who worked for their labor and those who did not got a meager stipend. The result, communes fail, capitalism saves.

[elSquid]

Originally Posted by poppa p

It's appealing to blame "socialism" for problems such as this. For some that justification will work and will reinforce their own beliefs. However, the true problem is "corruption."

Socialism would work great, were it not for human nature.

The problems aren’t just “corruption”, but “incentives” and “productivity” and “efficiency” and “accountability” and “centralized decision making” and “enshrined bureaucracy” and...

Other than all that, socialism would be great!

— Michael

[SamIAm]

Even the Soviet system created incentives (better housing, better food, cars, phones, TVs, etc.) for higher achievers such as scientists, athletes, etc. (and, of course, for the politically connected).

[anthonyca]

Originally Posted by nick

Socialism is a crisis on is own. Everything else is just symptoms.

Truth right tbere.

[elSquid]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

Even the Soviet system created incentives (better housing, better food, cars, phones, TVs, etc.) for higher achievers such as scientists, athletes, etc. (and, of course, for the politically connected).

...and you can’t spell accountability without the letters “g”, “a”, “l”, “u”, and another “g”.

— Michael

[jyo]

Wow---watching Venezuela melt-down is very distressing---this was a rich country not that long ago---modern (in many areas)---rich with resources---it's long downhill slide just didn't happen overnight---they worked at it long time---now it's down to the level of a third-world country or even less where it's difficult to even lay your hands on a roll of toilet paper---this could be us if we're not careful---stay strong---be as prepared as you can...

[zatoh]

Originally Posted by jyo

Wow---watching Venezuela melt-down is very distressing---this was a rich country not that long ago---modern (in many areas)---rich with resources---it's long downhill slide just didn't happen overnight---they worked at it long time---now it's down to the level of a third-world country or even less where it's difficult to even lay your hands on a roll of toilet paper---this could be us if we're not careful---stay strong---be as prepared as you can...

Yes, this is pretty much my sendiment. Not so much a statement on socialism but rather the experience from the blackouts and preparedness in general. Preaching to the choir maybe? Probably so. In either case this first hand account is compelling. We could lose power for an extended period for a lot of reasons. AWeek in and most people would be inconvenienced. A month in...... Who knows?

[CPRAFAN]

The problem with socialism in Venezuela (and Cuba, North Korea, the USSR, etc) is they had the wrong leaders who didn't understand Marxist Leninism well and knew how to make a Socialist Worker's Paradise work right! We need to send them strong leaders like Bernie, Hillary, Obama, AOC, Danny Glover, Sean Penn, Gavin Newsom, Pelosi and Charles Schumer who will turn Venezuela into the Workers and Peasant Socialist paradise showcase! Think of what these US politicians and Hollywood intellectuals could do to Venezuela! Freebies for all! (FYI, watch out for mobs of starving socialist cannibal drugged out zombies after these geniuses fix the Venezuela economy!)

[bv141]

FWIW:

The corrupt bankers that run the American system are no better than the Socialists that run Communists or Socialist countries.

Did ONE Banker from the 2008 banking crises go to jail? ANS: NOT ONE.

WHEN THIS SYSTEM FAILS, many hard working Americans, are going to pay dearly. Just as the Venezuelans have.

The world's Central Banks are increasing global debt levels at the rate of $1.5 Trillion PER MONTH. In July 2016, Global debt was $225 Trillion. Now Global debt is over $250 Trillion. We are approaching 400% Global Debt to Global GDP.

I recently spoke to a retired friend, he is familiar with prepping, has large solar and 1000 gallons of stored water, in the Silicon Valley. For the first time in ten+ year of talking about prepping, I heard genuine fear in his voice regarding Venezuela's collapsing power grid. Most people around him are stuck in the normalcy bias mode of nothing will ever change (including his kids.)

Learn the lessons form Venezuela now.

[RockBottomInc]

The system is both strong and fragile at the same time. Yes, there is a strong and stable government with a strong economy.

But everything is globalized, compared to the 1990s, when jobs and opportunities were plentiful in the US. For instance, if anything happens in China overnight, by 5am the US stock markets feel the pain accordingly.

A global meltdown would mean electricity and basic services potentially freezing up until the economy returned to a sense of normalcy. Even an EMP or solar flare could stop all digital transactions in an instant. Since money is increasingly all digital, it would be a shock for billions of people to resort to paper money and coins again.

[Californio]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jerrybo.../#3fbcb1c6dfe1

It is wrong to say that American was founded by capitalists. In fact, America was founded by socialists who had the humility to learn from their initial mistakes and embrace freedom.

[harbormaster]

People voted in the socialist; sorry no empathy they voted for it. Blaming corruption and not socialism is ignoring the FACT that socialism is CORRUPT. I would hope you could see that in America right now? The people elected an anti socialist and look what the opposition / media have conspired to do on behalf of the socialist agenda?

Originally Posted by poppa p

It's appealing to blame "socialism" for problems such as this. For some that justification will work and will reinforce their own beliefs. However, the true problem is "corruption." This is something that plagues every society and unfortunately, is something that many will blindly ignore just because it's easier to hide from the eyes of most people.

Venezuela's problem is the corruption of it's President and other leaders at the expense of its citizens. However, blaming socialism is much more simplistic in thinking and much more aligned with current political beliefs in the US.

[tsmithson]

America is at an ugly point in it’s loss of FREEDOM. The Constitution has been stabbed in the back and left bleeding on the ground to die. Socialist leaders in our government Supported by their evil twin sister the media are spewing propaganda against FREEDOM and the Constitution. The theft of Trillions in America goes on as politicians look the other way, busy lining their pockets with family and friends.
May God strike the evil and corrupt down fast and low.

[nick]

Originally Posted by poppa p

It's appealing to blame "socialism" for problems such as this. For some that justification will work and will reinforce their own beliefs. However, the true problem is "corruption." This is something that plagues every society and unfortunately, is something that many will blindly ignore just because it's easier to hide from the eyes of most people.

Venezuela's problem is the corruption of it's President and other leaders at the expense of its citizens. However, blaming socialism is much more simplistic in thinking and much more aligned with current political beliefs in the US.

This is BS. For one, you talk about being simplistic, and then proceed with doing exactly the same thing, blaming everything on "corruption". Well, we have corruption here in the US, there's plenty of it in most other places in the world, yet it's Venezuela and many other such places that have these issues.

Secondly, corruption is more of a symptom of the problem here. Yes, corruption naturally follows socialism, as when you have some people tasked with and controlling the central distribution of wealth and resources, corruption is inevitable. But the problem in Venezuela and other socialist countries (and I've lived in one of them and visited and observed quite a few) is much much deeper, and it's the socialism itself:

- socialism strives (at least, in its claims) to provide equal outcomes, so a brain surgeon and a janitor at the same hospital have comparable incomes while needing very different effort to get to and stay in that position. As such, there's little incentive, other than pure enthusiasm (and that's rare) for someone to spend all this time and still be not far removed in practical outcome from those who spent much less effort. So you have fewer specialists.

- the planned economy means that the allocation of resources is very inefficient, and it much less reflects the real needs (as provided by the market) than what those in power think or want to think the real needs are. You can see it in all socialist countries: they produce a bunch of stuff nobody wants and have a deficit of the things that are in demand. Confiscation/nationalization of private businesses doesn't help either: even the best governments are generally inefficient when running a business, even without all the ideological garbage that a socialist government entails.

- socialism is a populist religion, and as such it requires a lot of money to buy that popularity. It's also, once the cost of socialism becomes apparent to the population, socialism requires a lot of money to maintain the repression apparatus.

- socialism generally doesn't tolerate heresy and doubts, whereas thinking humans tend to have doubts and different opinions. Which further reduces the pool of available specialists.

- socialism also doesn't tolerate wealth outside of its ranks. So in order to have wealth and privilege, you have to join the ruling apparatus. As a result, smart and ambitious people join the part of the country that doesn't generate wealth (the government) rather than something that does generate wealth.

- soon after a country becomes socialist, the main goal of its government becomes hanging on to power at all costs, while the country is slowly or quickly crumbling around it. As such, indoctrination in schools becomes much more important, and preferable to) education. So you have another reason for fewer specialists.

The results are pretty much the same in each socialist country: the economy crumbles, or becomes so weak that any even small push or crisis pushes it over the edge. The lack of specialists becomes critical, and the infrastructure crumbles, as well as the industry and anything else that generates wealth. Even the crude oil extraction and shipping deteriorate, as is the case with Venezuela (and was the case with, for instance, the USSR): the government nationalized that industry, thus removing the foreign specialists who set it up and made it running, and it didn't have enough specialists of its own. Not to mention that many of the specialists eventually either ran away from the socialist paradise, or were removed from their jobs for being politically unreliable. So Venezuela, which completely depends on crude (even for satisfying the corruption), is unable to even extract and ship it, thus spinning even farther down the crapper.

So yeah, socialism is not the problem. They just didn't build it right... just like in every other country where it was successfully attempted

[njineermike]

Originally Posted by nick

This is BS. For one, you talk about being simplistic, and then proceed with doing exactly the same thing, blaming everything on "corruption". Well, we have corruption here in the US, there's plenty of it in most other places in the world, yet it's Venezuela and many other such places that have these issues.

Secondly, corruption is more of a symptom of the problem here. Yes, corruption naturally follows socialism, as when you have some people tasked with and controlling the central distribution of wealth and resources, corruption is inevitable. But the problem in Venezuela and other socialist countries (and I've lived in one of them and visited and observed quite a few) is much much deeper, and it's the socialism itself:

- socialism strives (at least, in its claims) to provide equal outcomes, so a brain surgeon and a janitor at the same hospital have comparable incomes while needing very different effort to get to and stay in that position. As such, there's little incentive, other than pure enthusiasm (and that's rare) for someone to spend all this time and still be not far removed in practical outcome from those who spent much less effort. So you have fewer specialists.

- the planned economy means that the allocation of resources is very inefficient, and it much less reflects the real needs (as provided by the market) than what those in power think or want to think the real needs are. You can see it in all socialist countries: they produce a bunch of stuff nobody wants and have a deficit of the things that are in demand. Confiscation/nationalization of private businesses doesn't help either: even the best governments are generally inefficient when running a business, even without all the ideological garbage that a socialist government entails.

- socialism is a populist religion, and as such it requires a lot of money to buy that popularity. It's also, once the cost of socialism becomes apparent to the population, socialism requires a lot of money to maintain the repression apparatus.

- socialism generally doesn't tolerate heresy and doubts, whereas thinking humans tend to have doubts and different opinions. Which further reduces the pool of available specialists.

- socialism also doesn't tolerate wealth outside of its ranks. So in order to have wealth and privilege, you have to join the ruling apparatus. As a result, smart and ambitious people join the part of the country that doesn't generate wealth (the government) rather than something that does generate wealth.

- soon after a country becomes socialist, the main goal of its government becomes hanging on to power at all costs, while the country is slowly or quickly crumbling around it. As such, indoctrination in schools becomes much more important, and preferable to) education. So you have another reason for fewer specialists.

The results are pretty much the same in each socialist country: the economy crumbles, or becomes so weak that any even small push or crisis pushes it over the edge. The lack of specialists becomes critical, and the infrastructure crumbles, as well as the industry and anything else that generates wealth. Even the crude oil extraction and shipping deteriorate, as is the case with Venezuela (and was the case with, for instance, the USSR): the government nationalized that industry, thus removing the foreign specialists who set it up and made it running, and it didn't have enough specialists of its own. Not to mention that many of the specialists eventually either ran away from the socialist paradise, or were removed from their jobs for being politically unreliable. So Venezuela, which completely depends on crude (even for satisfying the corruption), is unable to even extract and ship it, thus spinning even farther down the crapper.

So yeah, socialism is not the problem. They just didn't build it right... just like in every other country where it was successfully attempted

This.

[nick]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

Even the Soviet system created incentives (better housing, better food, cars, phones, TVs, etc.) for higher achievers such as scientists, athletes, etc. (and, of course, for the politically connected).

Well, not really. It created those incentives for the very few of those, and only as long as they were loyal and politically connected. Which already meant that they wouldn't necessarily promote the best, but rather the more loyal and willing to kiss the right asses. At the same time, there was no such incentive for most of the population: since it was a WORKERS' paradise, those had to be promoted. So an engineer or a doctor would generally make less money than a menial worker, while having to spend more time acquiring his profession. And a country cannot survive with only the top scientists and athletes: they need a lot of support from the other professions. For example, top scientists need research associates, lab technicians, engineers, etc.

Also, as I mentioned in the previous post, thinking people tend to doubt and to have different opinions - an unforgivable sin in a socialist country. So that severely limited the pool of those specialist who could be allowed the special privileges.

Moreover, since much of what the USSR produced for the civilian market was pure crap, and only the few privileged had the access to the special stores where they could buy something decent (either made with better quality, or imported), the rest of the population spent most of its time off work (and some time at work) trying to either make some money on the side, so they could pay the extortionist prices on the black market, or hunting the goods at different stores. The most common feature of the Soviet stores was empty shelves, or shelves filled with crap nobody wanted. And HUGE lines when some store would get something people wanted. In a way, it was a brilliant (albeit amoral) way of population control: people weren't really hungry, but they had to spend all of their time hunting for anything beyond that. That's in addition to a job (since not working was a crime in the USSR), so they had no time to plot or even think about treason. However, since eventually the socialist Soviet economy couldn't provide even the bare necessities, the part about not being really hungry changed, and we've all seen the result: the USSR is no longer with us, may whatever god rot its already rotten soul (yeah, I'm not a big fan of the USSR, I was raised there). The fact that, despite the Soviet government propaganda's best efforts, a lot of people was able to compare the life in non-socialist developed countries to that of their country, didn't help the USSR either.

Here's a fun fact for you: the 1940 The Grapes of Wrath movie was purchased for showing in the USSR, as it was supposed to show the horrors of a capitalist society (after all, it is about the Great Depression). However, it was quickly pulled from the movie theaters and banned instead. The reason: where the government functionaries saw the hard life of American farmers during the Great Depression (and as such - the proper thing to show to the Soviet population), the said Soviet population saw a POOR farmer loading his belongings into a CAR and heading for the better life elsewhere. A CAR!!! Something very few Soviets could dream of ever owning

We're seeing the same thing in Venezuela. It's scary familiar, at least, to those of us raised in the USSR. Hell, the USSR had its own well-known power problem as it was deteriorating. Ever heard of Chernobyl? It was the result of incompetence on many levels coupled with butt-covering (a very important survival trait in a socialist country). Mind you, it was just the more spectacular and well-known event, but the Soviet infrastructure always did suck. And power outages were quite normal. For that matter, what's happening in California, including the Democrat rhetoric, is also scarily familiar to those of us raised in the USSR.

[tsmithson]

It’s like Cinderella. The children in America have been made to be the servants of the nonresidents. They receive all the fat of the house while the children of the house get the lean. Nonresidents get Free place to stay, free food, free healthcare, free school. While the rightful heirs house falls into disarray and goes bankrupt. The heirs of the house have become 2nd class in treatment for health and school.

[SamIAm]

I visited the USSR in 1989, before it collapsed. The absence of private vehicles was the biggest shock to me. Major streets in major cities were pretty much empty during what we would consider the hours of rush hour traffic.

The story about Soviet subjects understanding how bad they had it from American movies? Absolutely true. Even movies that depicted the life of the poor in the U.S. showed luxuries that most Soviet subjects could only dream about -- or had to wait years to get: private cars, telephones, and TVs.

[Californio]

My youngest shadowed in a Spanish hospital one summer, the doctors are paid about $60,000 per year but they get free education. During a Surgery the anesthesiologist walks out of the O.R. for 15 minutes and then comes back. In the USA he would be fired. The O.R. was warm about 73f, great place for bacteria to grow, so in Spain if you need surgery, you have a real threat of infection and a real chance of dying on the table, this is socialism.

Originally Posted by nick

This is BS. For one, you talk about being simplistic, and then proceed with doing exactly the same thing, blaming everything on "corruption". Well, we have corruption here in the US, there's plenty of it in most other places in the world, yet it's Venezuela and many other such places that have these issues.

Secondly, corruption is more of a symptom of the problem here. Yes, corruption naturally follows socialism, as when you have some people tasked with and controlling the central distribution of wealth and resources, corruption is inevitable. But the problem in Venezuela and other socialist countries (and I've lived in one of them and visited and observed quite a few) is much much deeper, and it's the socialism itself:

- socialism strives (at least, in its claims) to provide equal outcomes, so a brain surgeon and a janitor at the same hospital have comparable incomes while needing very different effort to get to and stay in that position. As such, there's little incentive, other than pure enthusiasm (and that's rare) for someone to spend all this time and still be not far removed in practical outcome from those who spent much less effort. So you have fewer specialists.

- the planned economy means that the allocation of resources is very inefficient, and it much less reflects the real needs (as provided by the market) than what those in power think or want to think the real needs are. You can see it in all socialist countries: they produce a bunch of stuff nobody wants and have a deficit of the things that are in demand. Confiscation/nationalization of private businesses doesn't help either: even the best governments are generally inefficient when running a business, even without all the ideological garbage that a socialist government entails.

- socialism is a populist religion, and as such it requires a lot of money to buy that popularity. It's also, once the cost of socialism becomes apparent to the population, socialism requires a lot of money to maintain the repression apparatus.

- socialism generally doesn't tolerate heresy and doubts, whereas thinking humans tend to have doubts and different opinions. Which further reduces the pool of available specialists.

- socialism also doesn't tolerate wealth outside of its ranks. So in order to have wealth and privilege, you have to join the ruling apparatus. As a result, smart and ambitious people join the part of the country that doesn't generate wealth (the government) rather than something that does generate wealth.

- soon after a country becomes socialist, the main goal of its government becomes hanging on to power at all costs, while the country is slowly or quickly crumbling around it. As such, indoctrination in schools becomes much more important, and preferable to) education. So you have another reason for fewer specialists.

The results are pretty much the same in each socialist country: the economy crumbles, or becomes so weak that any even small push or crisis pushes it over the edge. The lack of specialists becomes critical, and the infrastructure crumbles, as well as the industry and anything else that generates wealth. Even the crude oil extraction and shipping deteriorate, as is the case with Venezuela (and was the case with, for instance, the USSR): the government nationalized that industry, thus removing the foreign specialists who set it up and made it running, and it didn't have enough specialists of its own. Not to mention that many of the specialists eventually either ran away from the socialist paradise, or were removed from their jobs for being politically unreliable. So Venezuela, which completely depends on crude (even for satisfying the corruption), is unable to even extract and ship it, thus spinning even farther down the crapper.

So yeah, socialism is not the problem. They just didn't build it right... just like in every other country where it was successfully attempted