Chavez's land "reforms" a total failure.

[Kuciwalker]

Despite large amounts of state intervention, the basic governing principle of their economy is the exchange of goods for currency and currency for goods in a decentralized way through independent actors, with state control of only certain sectors of the economy (e.g. oil).

[Dinner]

Communism it is not despite the American right wings love of calling everything socialism or communism. Hell, those idiots even think Obama is a socialist but that guy won't even pass a bill giving people access to the basic right of health care.

And yes it is a right.

[Solomwi]

And yes it is a right.

Well, I know I'm convinced now. Glad that's settled.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Despite large amounts of state intervention, the basic governing principle of their economy is the exchange of goods for currency and currency for goods in a decentralized way through independent actors, with state control of only certain sectors of the economy (e.g. oil).

Quite right.

[Felch]

Despite large amounts of state intervention, the basic governing principle of their economy is the exchange of goods for currency and currency for goods in a decentralized way through independent actors, with state control of only certain sectors of the economy (e.g. oil).

Like I said, you've got a broad definition. Just about anything could fit into it, short of the Great Leap Forward. Even Lenin's NEP allowed for small businesses.

Steel, cement, banking and other industries have been at least partially nationalized along with oil. Many people buy staples in government run stores. Price controls are in place that prevent normal market functions.

I'm not saying that it's communism, but it's not a free market either. It's a bungled ****-up of a system. I'd say it's best description would be to call it a politicized economy. Really politics is the only rationale behind what Chavez does. If he could win elections by adopting anarcho-capitalism, I think he'd be doing just that.

Of course, since I'm not slobbing Kuci's knob, I'm an idiot.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, he has the most correct definition .

You do realize there is such a thing as market socialism as well, right?

I mean, really, does China not have a market economy either?

it's not a free market either

Yeah, and no one called a "free" market either...

[Kuciwalker]

Like I said, you've got a broad definition. Just about anything could fit into it, short of the Great Leap Forward. Even Lenin's NEP allowed for small businesses.

No. The basic governing principle (i.e. the mechanism for determining the allocation of most economic activity - GDP would be a reasonable standin here) must be a market of independent actors.

I'm not saying that it's communism, but it's not a free market either.

As Imran says, and as should be obvious from my usage, market economy != free market economy.

Of course, since I'm not slobbing Kuci's knob, I'm an idiot.

That's only one reason you're an idiot. The othe reason is that you don't understand what a market economy is.

[Felch]

What situations would not meet your definition of market economy?

[Kuciwalker]

The Soviet Union for most or all of its existence (I'm not familiar with the details of its economy in the very earlier or very late days).

[Drake Tungsten]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

[Kuciwalker]

The Khmer Rouge.

[Drake Tungsten]

Cuba

[Kuciwalker]

Quebec.

[Dinner]

Quebec? I assume that's tongue in cheek.

[Drake Tungsten]

You've obviously never been there.