Saturday, April 1, 2017

Venezuelan Supreme Court Reverses Decision To Annul The Opposition-Led Congress

Reuters: Called 'dictator,' Venezuela leader tries to defuse court protests

Seeking to cool protests and international outrage, socialist Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said on Saturday the Supreme Court would review its move to annul the opposition-led congress, which critics decried as a lurch toward dictatorship.

"This controversy is over ... the constitution has won," Maduro said in a televised speech just after midnight.

He was flanked by senior officials on a specially convened state security committee that ordered the top court to reconsider its rulings.

While Maduro, 54, sought to cast the move as the achievement of a statesman resolving a power conflict, his foes said it was a hypocritical row-back by an unpopular government that overplayed its hand.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The Venezuelan Supreme Court has reversed their order .... Venezuela court drops bid to strip congress of power (AFP). but this does not change anything .... the Supreme Court justices are appointees/allies of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro .... they tried and failed to get rid of the opposition in the Congress. As to the real reason on why they were forced to reverse their order .... it is because of this .... Venezuela bonds crash as political standoff escalates (Reuters). If no one wants to buy the government's bonds .... and who would want to in a dictatorship .... the government will then not be able to finance their operations. Unfortunately .... the damage has already been done. Venezuela is now entering a very dangerous phase.

More News On The Crisis In Venezuela

As Criticism Mounts, Venezuela Asks High Court to Revisit Power Grab -- NYT
Venezuelan court reverses move to strip National Assembly of power -- CNN
Venezuela: Supreme court backtracks on powers bid -- BBC
Venezuela's Descent Into Dictatorship -- New York Times editorial


B.Poster said...

"...and who would want to in a dictatorship..." Very respectfully I'm not sure the form of government has anything to do with it. Those who would invest in a government's bonds are more interested in what rate of return they can get and how much risk they are taking. Investors, at least those who are successful at investing, could probably care less what form the government takes.

Actually, all else being equal, investors would probably rather invest in dictatorship than in democracies. Dictatorships tend to be very stable. Stability is good for investors as they like to be assured that policies will remain constant, the rate of return will be as sure as it can be, and the level of risk will not deviate substantially over time.

This is in contrast to "democracies" who are subject to complete change at the next election cycle based upon the whims of voters who often lack the basic sense to be making such decisions. As such, the incoming government could completely change policies making the bonds riskier or perhaps refusing to pay altogether.

The reason that no one wants to invest in Venezuela has nothing to do with the fact that Maduro and his team is a "dictatorship." The real reasons are twofold. 1.)The current Venezuelan government is a kleptocracy stealing (nationalizing) assets left and right and is not to be trusted. To invest money in that government would place it at grave risk of being expropriated on the whims of the government who might choose not to honor the bonds. 2.)The leadership of Venezuela lacks basic common sense. They stake their economic future on oil prices at $100+ per barrel. As I stated at the time when the price of oil was at this level, this price would not be sustainable and would fall sooner rather than later and anyone staking their economic fortunes on this was headed for ultimate disaster. While the fall in price took slightly longer than I expected, events proved my prediction right. Basically team Maduro is not a sound money manager. He and his team are unable to create wealth or create anything of value. The only wealth they can acquire is that which they transfer to themselves from others. In plain language, the only wealth they can acquire is that which they can steal. Prudent investors don't like to have their money stolen.

Essentially the Venezuelan government are den of thieves who lack basic business acumen. This is why no one wants to invest. The fact that the country is a dictatorship is at most a non factor. In fact, as stated all other factors being equal investors would prefer to invest in dicatorsh8ips due to the fac tthey tend to be more stable.

D.Plowman said...

"Dictatorships tend to be very stable."

"I'm not sure the form of government has anything to do with it."

"Investors would probably rather invest in dictatorship than in democracies."

"As such, the incoming government could completely change policies making the bonds riskier or perhaps refusing to pay altogether." - O yeah... so when Chavez died, there was no anarchy, was there? Everything was hunky dory, right? ... No, everything was not grand, and now you are seeing a result of that. Sound familiar to the above quote?


Maybe you should have a read -

B.Poster said...


Not sure what you mean by *facepalm*. Essentially the theory is investors who buy government bonds aren't generally worried about the form of government. Such people focus on things like rate of return and risk all over the time they are seeking to invest. Anyone who studies investing even on a cursory level knows this to be the case. Stability is going to be an important factor. The big investors of Wall Street and others look closely at this. This is true accross the world.

So called "dictatorships" are the norm throughout human history. "Democracy", "Republicanism", or whatever we wish to call it as exibited in the so called "West" is an anomaly. Nature tends to prefer that which is more stable. Only in the case of extreme advantages in instability is the risk of such prefered by nature or investors. Given the prevalence of "dictatorships" over "democracies" means it a reasonable conclusion that such "dictatorships" are more stable.

Note: I did NOT say nor did I imply dictatorships are better or preferable. Merely tgey are more stable. Again, this is a very reasonable conclusion.

As stated, the main reasons for the reluctance of investors to invest in Venezuelan bonds is because the Venezuelan leadership has shown complete and utter incompetence in managing the nation's economy. Perhaps as important is these people are thieves. Investors aren't going to invest money where it is likely to be stolen. The editor of ghis site has provided many links from multiple sources to support such a contention.

Thank you for the link. I will check this out.

B.Poster said...


As stated, thank you for the link. While I'm familar wuth the assertions made in the piece, I will nevertheless give it consideration. Perhaps there's something new to learn. Perhaps if I read it 10 times the messagw mighr change and tbere might be something profound and useful here.

Very respectfully I hope they didn't actually pay someone to compose this!! Oh well there is a HUGE market for compiling reports that tell the users what they want to see/hear as opposed to facts.have

America's foreign policy is based upon the promotion of "democracy" as opposed to advancing the interests of the American people in a pragmatic way. When ideology and reality collide, it generally ends quite badly for ideology.