An Influx to EC From a So. American Country Where It's All Gone Wrong

suefrankdahl wrote:

suefrankdahl wrote:

j600rr wrote:

. Already have a glut of oil, and no one seems willing to cut back on the output.

Excerpt from Bloomberg.

"U.S. output climbed to 9.14 million barrels a day through Dec. 12, the highest in weekly estimates that started in January 1983, according to the EIA. OPEC's 12 members, which supply about 40 percent of the world's oil, pumped 30.24 million a day in December, exceeding their collective target of 30 million for a seventh straight month,."

Maybe OPEC wants to keep it's 40% share and stick it to the US. They can hold out a lot longer with depressed prices. Yes our friends the Saudis....business is business, right?

What is this Economics 101 or just idle armchair speculation?

Economics 101, with no help for Venezuela or Ecuador in the near future, probably get worse.

suefrankdahl wrote:

j600rr wrote:

SawMan wrote:

.

It has been well documented that as a whole that generation was a generation of spend, spend, spend, save nothing, and when you can't afford to spend then just pass it on to your children, and grandchildren.  Good news is you boomers set the standards so low it would be almost impossible to do any worse.

I think an apology is in order sir and maybe an attitude adjustment

Oh no, don't get mad at me Sue
Won't put any one individual as fitting into a certain group, or put blame on any one individual, but as a whole, you may want to take a look at the overall accomplishments, and failures of your generation since it has been in a leadership position. Think one of your fellow baby boomers sums my view, and the view of younger generations pretty well about our overall feelings.

http://www.the-american-interest.com/20 … has-begun/

Just for good measure here's some frightening numbers.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/eri … -education

In case that 1 link doesn't go through. It's the top article. Also has more articles that validate my feelings.
Again not aimed at any particular individual, but a group. Hey, I have boomer parents who worked hard, were responsible, and have gotten royally screwed. I know a lot of you from that generation have gotten the short end of the stick.

http://www.the-american-interest.com/?s=baby+boomers

I don't believe in collective guilt - there are people in any generation, who act and live and vote responsibly.  There are also people who do not.

The latter group seems to outnumber the former, and has for some time now.  Once that group realizes they can vote themselves "free" stuff without considering the long-term consequences, the slide into decline begins.

An early observer of our country foresaw all of this.

“When the taste for physical gratifications among them has grown more rapidly than their education . . . the time will come when men are carried away and lose all self-restraint . . . . It is not necessary to do violence to such a people in order to strip them of the rights they enjoy; they themselves willingly loosen their hold. . . . they neglect their chief business which is to remain their own masters.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America Volume 2

Valid points Mr. Osage. It's unfortunate that people such as yourself are not in a leadership position. In all fairness, the u.s. was on a run away train long before the baby boomers came into power. From an overall perspective you had a runaway train (government), economy starting to become outdated, and stagnant, globalization, and incredible pace of new technologies. A perfect storm for a disaster. Pretty sure any generation facing that would have had bad reults. Life goes on, and you move on. Truthfully, my life has still been pretty darn good. Of which I am thankful to the older generations for, but I'm not going to apologise for stating the obvious that the last 20+ years have been almost comical in how poorly, and incompetently things have been run.

Read my last paragraph

j600rr wrote:

Valid points Mr. Osage. It's unfortunate that people such as yourself are not in a leadership position. In all fairness, the u.s. was on a run away train long before the baby boomers came into power. From an overall perspective you had a runaway train (government), economy starting to become outdated, and stagnant, globalization, and incredible pace of new technologies. A perfect storm for a disaster. Pretty sure any generation facing that would have had bad reults. Life goes on, and you move on. Truthfully, my life has still been pretty darn good. Of which I am thankful to the older generations for, but I'm not going to apologise for stating the obvious that the last 20+ years have been almost comical in how poorly, and incompetently things have been run.

Where we find ourselves economically as a country has a whole lot less to do with age or generation than you think.  Fiscally conservative politicians expressing concerns over growing, unsustainable debt (whether in Chicago, the state of Illinois or the U.S. Congress) are cast as uncaring, mean and spiteful.  Changing will be more and more difficult until it reaches a point in which continued spending is nearly impossible.  Hoping the next generation will change habits is less and less likely as more and more people are dependent on government for their support and existence.  Remember, when the government robs Peter to pay Paul it can always count on Paul's support.  We may be past the tipping point as there are more and more "Pauls" and fewer and fewer "Peters."  The generations following the Boomers are loaded up with "Pauls."

SawMan wrote:

Where we find ourselves economically as a country has a whole lot less to do with age or generation than you think.  Fiscally conservative politicians expressing concerns over growing, unsustainable debt (whether in Chicago, the state of Illinois or the U.S. Congress) are cast as uncaring, mean and spiteful.  Changing will be more and more difficult until it reaches a point in which continued spending is nearly impossible.  Hoping the next generation will change habits is less and less likely as more and more people are dependent on government for their support and existence.  Remember, when the government robs Peter to pay Paul it can always count on Paul's support.  We may be past the tipping point as there are more and more "Pauls" and fewer and fewer "Peters."  The generations following the Boomers are loaded up with "Pauls."

Can't imagine much money being left for Pauls past my generation. Maybe the millennial generation gets some? Can't imagine much beyond that. Of course you also have to consider people are living longer these days. Just read that a child born today that they expect the average lifespan to be around 115. At any rate I expect the boomer generation will probably start pushing the average lifespan to 85-90, and my generation will probably get up to around 90-95. Might be able to push it towards 100. Guess the point is it doesn't bode to well for the finances of all the entitlement programs. Personally I enjoy working, and can't imagine ever fully retiring, but I guess that adds even more problems. Maybe we should just all start cooperating, and start dying around 65-70.

I blame the parents.

mugtech wrote:

I blame the parents.

Amen... how we indulged our children...some of us even worked are way through school so we didn't rack up as much debt and maybe our parents couldn't afford it anyway Granted college is more expensive but we didn't want our kids  to have to struggle as we did. Some of sacrificed our retirement money to make that happen.

j600rr wrote:

SawMan wrote:

Where we find ourselves economically as a country has a whole lot less to do with age or generation than you think.  Fiscally conservative politicians expressing concerns over growing, unsustainable debt (whether in Chicago, the state of Illinois or the U.S. Congress) are cast as uncaring, mean and spiteful.  Changing will be more and more difficult until it reaches a point in which continued spending is nearly impossible.  Hoping the next generation will change habits is less and less likely as more and more people are dependent on government for their support and existence.  Remember, when the government robs Peter to pay Paul it can always count on Paul's support.  We may be past the tipping point as there are more and more "Pauls" and fewer and fewer "Peters."  The generations following the Boomers are loaded up with "Pauls."

Can't imagine much money being left for Pauls past my generation. Maybe the millennial generation gets some? Can't imagine much beyond that. Of course you also have to consider people are living longer these days. Just read that a child born today that they expect the average lifespan to be around 115. At any rate I expect the boomer generation will probably start pushing the average lifespan to 85-90, and my generation will probably get up to around 90-95. Might be able to push it towards 100. Guess the point is it doesn't bode to well for the finances of all the entitlement programs. Personally I enjoy working, and can't imagine ever fully retiring, but I guess that adds even more problems. Maybe we should just all start cooperating, and start dying around 65-70.

Those kind of life expectancies would blow out the programs for sure!  I suppose developments in medical science have led and will continue to lead to longer lives, but when I look around we see nothing but fat asses everywhere sucking 64 oz Cokes and eating daily at McDonald's. (Okay, maybe I exaggerate!).  The point is that obesity is growing - literally - and is leading in all the problems that lead to disability, which explains why Social Security disability runs out next year.  Although I am opposed to government telling folks what they can or cannot eat, it does seem that a large (no pun intended) portion of the population lacks a modicum of willpower to close their mouth and not eat everything bad.  Saw this article in which the argument is made that relaxing conditions for government benefits simply leads to greater dependency.  Undoubtedly, there is a "right" balance between helping someone verses removing what little incentive and motivation they had to work!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08 … oving-job/

OsageArcher wrote:

I don't believe in collective guilt - there are people in any generation, who act and live and vote responsibly.  There are also people who do not.

The latter group seems to outnumber the former, and has for some time now.  Once that group realizes they can vote themselves "free" stuff without considering the long-term consequences, the slide into decline begins.

That's pretty offensive too...and sounds kind of ignorant for someone who can quote de Tocqueville.

There's a good reason politics is verboten on the Forum.  And there's a good reason that politics and religion are subjects not supposed to be discussed

Sorry for    rant. Only EC politics have some relevance here

suefrankdahl wrote:

Sorry for    rant. Only EC politics have some relevance here

Lol. Think I'm the one that initially got us off topic. Tend to do that a lot.

Can we be friends again Sue?

Drinks are on me if were ever in Ecuador at the same time in the future.

SawMan wrote:

Those kind of life expectancies would blow out the programs for sure!  I suppose developments in medical science have led and will continue to lead to longer lives, but when I look around we see nothing but fat asses everywhere sucking 64 oz Cokes and eating daily at McDonald's. (Okay, maybe I exaggerate!).  The point is that obesity is growing - literally - and is leading in all the problems that lead to disability, which explains why Social Security disability runs out next year.  Although I am opposed to government telling folks what they can or cannot eat, it does seem that a large (no pun intended) portion of the population lacks a modicum of willpower to close their mouth and not eat everything bad.  Saw this article in which the argument is made that relaxing conditions for government benefits simply leads to greater dependency.  Undoubtedly, there is a "right" balance between helping someone verses removing what little incentive and motivation they had to work!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08 … oving-job/

The U.S. isn't quite as bad with obesity as it's made out to be. Granted it's not exactly a model of health, but improving, and think there has been a strong emphasis on trying to implement a healthier more active lifestyle for all age groups. The scientific advancements coming out in the next 15-20 years will be mind boggling. Ability to live into the 80's, 90's, and beyond still enjoying an active life isn't that far off. So, yeah, it's important for everyone (all generations) to start coming to some compromises, and solutions (economically and socially). Have no desire to eliminate, or gut the vast majority of social programs, but given demographic changes, technological changes, and aging changes, things just won't work structured the way they are today.

Sorry    again.

Hi everybody,

Can we please make an effort and avoid drifting this discussion off topic?   

Also note that it would be great if we can avoid unnecessary fights on the forum, it is not helpful at all !

Thanks,

Priscilla

P.S Please avoid talking on politics on the forum, this is against our laws !

j600rr wrote:

suefrankdahl wrote:

Sorry for    rant. Only EC politics have some relevance here

Lol. Think I'm the one that initially got us off topic. Tend to do that a lot.

Can we be friends again Sue?

Drinks are on me if were ever in Ecuador at the same time in the future.

And dinner

suefrankdahl wrote:

j600rr wrote:

suefrankdahl wrote:

Sorry for    rant. Only EC politics have some relevance here

Lol. Think I'm the one that initially got us off topic. Tend to do that a lot.

Can we be friends again Sue?

Drinks are on me if were ever in Ecuador at the same time in the future.

And dinner

You drive a tough bargain, but deal

As for your previous question about economics 101 or speculation? Would say it's a little of both. Saudis clearly wanted to drive oil prices down, and the u.s. is or was producing a ton of oil. Now, the speculation part is that the Saudis want lower prices to push u.s. producers out of the market, so they can keep marketshare. Of course I don't think they expected prices to remain low for as long as they have, and looks like they will continue to remain low for the forseeable future (speculation). Problem with economics, it's not as black and white as people would like it to be. Conditions are constantly changing, which constantly changes predictions, and outcomes of forecasts. Think that with any economic forecast there is always a bit of speculation that is part of the equation. Key is trying to make an educated speculation on the known facts, and likely outcome.

This thread is full of insults, personal attacks and very controversial politics.
Perhaps it's time to calm down a little

Fred wrote:

This thread is full of insults, personal attacks and very controversial politics.
Perhaps it's time to calm down a little

Perhaps.

I am one of those Venezuelans living in Venezuela, and one of the few who does not want to leave my homeland but may be forced to. i would like to know your insights about the true situacion in Ecuador. The place is advertised as a great haven for Italian pensioneers (like my mother), but Correas' closeness to Venezuela makes me suspicious. Also, I am reading local news and it seems that Ecuador also has a high crime rate, maybe less than Venezuela, but then is this a decision based on the less evil of the two?

Hi Laura

Ecuador is hyped to North Americans as well   to be the newest and greatest place to retire with a low cost of living. There are estimated to be as many as 5K gringos  living in EC now. They may get a pensioner's visa with a minimum of $800USD a month and $900 with dependents. Most of them are in Cuenca. Because of this the cost of living has gone up and some believe has contributed to the increase in crime. Although the rate of violent crime is much less than the US. The cost of living now is actually estimated to be $1200 to $1500 a month for anything even close to the standard of living the typical American is used to.

There is political unrest now perhaps not on the scale of that in Venezuela. In a speech last night Correa claimed there had been an attempted "soft coup" and there were destabilizing forces trying to destroy "patriotic, progressive leftist" governments in South American countries . He gave Argentina and Venezuela as examples of countries where this is occurring

So, I am American and have never been there. I know much less than you about Correa's relationship with Venezuela. I have been following the EC Forum for about three years so this is where I have learned about the country

Sue.

Fred wrote:

This thread is full of insults, personal attacks and very controversial politics.
Perhaps it's time to calm down a little

And we need you as a censor from Indonesia. We censor ourselves and the Expat.com team does it as well when they feel the need to. Each Forum is different

Thank you Sue. I really don't know how Venezuelans can leave our country to go live under Correa and listen to the same thing over and over again. I would get sick. By the way, there is no political unrest here. In fact, people here seem to be on drugs. Just a few of us dare to raise their voice. I think most of us are too tired and too disappointed, we just want to survive, to get food and medications. I would really like to keep fighting, to keep looking for a solution to this, but there are few like me. Most middle class just flees the country. A pity and a shame.

cccmedia wrote:

24,763 Ven. homicides recorded last year, according to the non-governmental group Venesuelan Violence Observatory -- a rate of 79 per 100,000, one of the highest murder rates worldwide.  And the local rate in the capital, Caracas, is more than 50 percent higher than that.
    The U.S. State Department says that there were 625 Ven. kidnappings reported last year but that 80 percent of kidnappings go unreported, so the true number could have been upwards of 3,000.

Ecuador had demonstrations yesterday and Guayaquil has had a sad history of 'express kidnapings' of taxi riders. 

But Ecuador has not produced anything like the above Venezuelan statistics.  The Ecuador homicide rate is about one-fourth that of the Ven. stat posted above, according to the 2014 EC result posted at www.nationmaster.com ....

Almost 25,000 homicides in a year in Venezuela -- producing one of the world's highest murder rates -- with a 50 percent higher rate of homicides in Caracas than the rest of the country!  Wow!

cccmedia in Quito

Hi Laura
I guess I am remembering your last presidential election and the controversy that surrounded it. In the US the news has it's own bias so we never know what is actually going on. But cameras don't lie.

From some of the international news media reports Correa still has a  47% approval rating. Although it is his lowest.. The middle class are said to be the most disaffected. As far as raising one's voice it has become apparent what a dangerous thing this can be in Ecuador as well

Don't give up hope. Things in Latin America are more unpredictable. Positive changes have occurred in other countries in SA with new leadership, and revolutions that arise because of such intolerable conditions that you describe. If there is corruption I don't think it is on a scale of some African countries. If you have to flee there is always the chance to go back.

Sue

Bloomberg has an editorial entitled "If Venezuela Implodes, Will Its Neighbors Be Ready?"

Ecuador is not, of course, strictly speaking a neighbor, but close enough to be impacted. I think many here will find the item and its numerous links interesting.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2 … ian-crisis