Chavez calls time on whisky boom

Source: BBC

Venezuelans are to face a limit on the amount of luxury goods they can import, says President Hugo Chavez.

He singled out the high consumption of whisky as an example of the way consumerism was harming society.

In 2006, Venezuelans drank 106m bottles of Scotch whisky - almost four per person, and nearly 10% of UK exports.

Mr Chavez said he was ashamed of this "excessive" consumption and would curb importers' access to dollars for purchasing whisky and other luxuries.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7021870.stm

Death to consumption! (As I consume energy from San Onofre Nuclear Plant to type this, and you consume from your power plant to reply to me)

would react if Bush started limiting Americans access to liquor or other "luxuries"...

But then again the BBC is little more than another front in the corporate media's war on Uncle Hugo.

any more it's a necessity when living in bush's america.

are pretty much a staple of the anti-WTO faction. It the last thing Bush would be expected to do. The novelty here is that the elimination of trade quotas has become erased from people's memories.

to be considered a "memory."

but putting controls on imported goods is NOT a sign of totalitarianism. It is the normal historical pattern of international trade, and has been just as widely practiced under monarchies and democracies.

To retain high-profit manufacturing, producing countries often attempt to limit exports of raw materials and make finished goods locally. Consuming countries often attempt to buy raw material and set limits on imports of finished goods.

For example, 15th century England was a developing country which exported large amounts of wool to the continent. They abruptly stopped the export of raw wool in order to sell more finished cloth. In some cases, their trading partners retaliated or tried to avoid the controls, or else just conceded if they had no leverage. It's a pattern that's been repeated hundreds of times with different countries and products.

Free trade used to be considered an impractical, idealistic proposal which would have ruinous consequences. Only in the last few decades has it really taken hold.

Glad he can't though.

As for Hugo, I don't like the idea of someone acting all Big Brotherish, and pretending to know better than I what I should and should not spend my money on.

and an armed kidnapping of their elected President.

The following also took place:

~snip~
Pedro Carmona, the chairman of Venezuela's largest chamber of commerce, was installed as president. He proceeded to dissolve the legislature, the Supreme Court, the attorney general's office, the national electoral commission, and the state governorships. Carmona then decreed that the 1999 constitution, which had been written by a constitutional assembly and ratified by a wide majority of voters, following the procedures outlined in the previous constitution, was to be suspended. On top of all this, the new regime raided the homes of various Chávez supporters.
(snip)

http://members.aol.com/essays6/venez.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Somewhat less likable than a quota on imported whiskey.

What does that have to do with the point of this thread? Or you don't have any point and just want to throw some other topic into the mix? :eyes:

are free to use quotas, but Venezuela may not?

Took a quick google run to see if anything surfaced I could use on quotas, and found this:

In the United States, the decade from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s saw import quotas placed on textiles, agricultural products, automobiles, sugar, beef, bananas, and even underwear—among other things. In a single session of Congress in 1985, more than three hundred protectionist bills were introduced as U.S. industries began voicing concern over foreign competition.

Many U.S. companies headquartered in the United States rely on manufacturing facilities outside of the country to produce their goods. Because of import quotas, some of these companies cannot get their own products back into the United States. While such companies lobby Congress to change what they consider to be an unfair practice, their opposition argues that this is the price to be paid for giving away U.S. jobs to foreign countries.

Nearly every country restricts imports of foreign goods. For example, in 1996—even after the new version of GATT went into effect— Vietnam restricted the amount of cement, fertilizer, and fuel and the number of automobiles and motorcycles it would import. The import quotas of foreign countries can adversely affect U.S. industries that try to sell their goods abroad. The U.S. economy has suffered because of foreign import quotas on canned fruit, cigarettes, leather, insurance, and computers. In a market that has become overcrowded with U.S. entertainment, the European Communities have chosen to enforce import quotas on U.S.-made films and television in an effort to encourage Europe's own industries to become more competitive.
(snip)

http://www.answers.com/topic/import-quota?cat=biz-fin

~~~~~~~~~~
Of course there are better links, but that's the one I posted which should assist anyone wandering in darkness about those nasty "quotas" that mean Hugo Chavez has on his mind.

I don't mind quotas per se, but thanks for the information anyway.

What bothers me are quotes like "Mr Chavez said he was ashamed of this "excessive" consumption". I don't like the morality aspect of his quote. It is similiar to the efforts to limit the European Day After pill, not for economic reasons, but for moral and "execessive consumption" reasons.

Who is anyone to decide what level people should consume whiskey or be ashamed at a level they don't agree with?

Tom's taking a toot on a "Hoyo de Monterrey double corona!"
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1054968,00.html

These things cost "about $25.00 when purchased overseas." Hey, nothing but the best for our Tom!

when having a Cuban. That'll go away and they'll be common place after the ban is lifted.

However, the ban is stupid.

You can still buy it or import it yourself and consume it as you wish. This is just for wholesale import who generally ask for dollars from the central bank, and even then there would be no ban, just tightening up.

Lets recap:
Buy, consume a cuban cigar in the states and face penalties (prison?)
Buy, consume foreign whisky in Venezuela perfectly legal (you obviously would need the money).

hampers the attempt to politicize it far more. Pity!

It's almost as if the wire service writers go to great lengths to obscure the events in these articles, and I'm not kidding, and it's almost an insult if anyone is asked to wait until learning more before jumping to conclusions.That takes all the fun out of things.

... but single-malt? That is simply uncalled for.

But they can still import Whiskey?

How can he build his socialist workers paradise if everyone's passed out???

:boring: