All the Reasons America is Retarded (Dona

[kthx]

Look, antifa protesters supporting the NAMBLA, and not the Marlon Brando Look Alikes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXX9k2VyLAo

[kthx]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-...e=news_central

ahahahahahahahahahahah

[Jerome Scuggs]

whoops im a bit late to the thread cuz quite frankly i was busy trolling some other MAGA chud on facebook who has mentally melted down so hard that he's straight up posting, publicly, on facebook, about how we need to homogenize our country and to prove it, he used... murder statistics from serbia?

like i know irl when you have to talk to ordinary people you don't post staged youtube videos and harass transgender people, you probably act normal, but after a year of constant maga-chud owning some of y'all are starting to lose it and watching this dude i went to hs with slowly admit that yeah, he'd totally support concentration camps for minorities... it's gold.

anyways where were we? something about those 4channers who staged some videos and more talk about venezuela, which i mean, i guess i'll just chuckle and remind myself there's a reason you never mention it's neighbor, Bolivia, also a socialist country, nor its other neighbor, Chile, who has been under the control of literal chicago school, conservative economists ever since the CIA murdered allende in '73 because his successful socialist country was literally scaring the shit out of the very elites and "mainstream" people you claim to oppose

you never mention Burka Fasino / Sankara either, which should be an easier one for you, but still, lol "venezeula venezuela venezuelaaaaAAaAAaaAaaAAAaaa"

[Dierienow]

Looking into Bolivia led me to an interesting event that I had no idea existed called the Cochamochabambaboom Water War.

The Cochabamba Water War,^[1] was a series of protests that took place in Cochabamba, Bolivia's third largest city, between December 1999 and April 2000 in response to the privatization of the city's municipal water supply company Semapa. The tensions erupted when a new firm, Aguas del Tunari – a joint venture involving Bechtel – was required to invest in construction of long-envisioned dam - so they had dramatically raised water rates.

Bechtel Corporation (Bechtel Group, Inc.) is the largest construction and civil engineering company in the United States,^[5] and the 8th-largest privately owned American company in 2017.

$32.9 bn (2017)[2][3]

Bechtel family

In April 2000, Hugo Banzer, the former President of Bolivia, signed a contract with Aguas del Tunari, a private consortium, to operate and improve the water supply in Bolivia's third-largest city, Cochabamba. Shortly thereafter, the company tripled the water rates in that city, an action which resulted in protests and rioting among those who could no longer afford clean water.^[65][66] Amidst Bolivia's nationwide economic collapse and growing national unrest over the state of the economy, the Bolivian government was forced to withdraw the water contract.

Aguas del Tunari consortium

Prior to privatization the water works of Cochabamba were controlled by the state agency SEMAPA. After pressure from the World Bank, the Bolivian government put SEMAPA up for auction for privatization but not capitalization. Only one party was willing to bid on the project.^[7] This was Aguas del Tunari, a consortium between the British firm International Waters (55 percent) - itself a subsidiary of the construction giant Bechtel Enterprise Holdings (USA) and United Utilities (UK) - the engineering and construction firm Abengoa of Spain (25 percent) and four Bolivian companies (5 percent each) including Constructora Petricevic, Sociedad Boliviana de Cemento (SOBOCE), Compania Boliviana de Ingenieria and ICE Agua y Energia S.A., all involved with the construction and engineering industry. The water network that they envisioned was projected to provide drinking water to all the people of Cochabamba. This was set to double the existing coverage area and also introduce electrical production to more of the region.^[8]

Without regard for its weak bargaining position, the Bolivian government under President Hugo Banzer agreed to the terms of its sole bidder Aguas del Tunari and signed a $2.5 billion, 40-year concession "to provide water and sanitation services to the residents of Cochabamba, as well as generate electricity and irrigation for agriculture."^[3][7] Within the terms of the contract the consortium was guaranteed a minimum 15% annual return on its investment, which was to be annually adjusted to the United States' consumer price index.^[3] The implementation of Aguas del Tunari's program was set to correlate with a government plan to present a $63 million rural development package to peasants with funds for crop diversification, and extending electric and telephone services to remote areas.^[9]

Protests and state of emergency

In April 2000, demonstrators again took over Cochabamba's central plaza. When the leaders of the resistance (including Óscar Olivera) went to a meeting with the governor at his office they were arrested. Though they were released the following day, some, fearing further government action, fled into hiding. More demonstration leaders were arrested, with some being transferred to a jungle prison in San Joaquin, a remote town in the Amazon rainforest on the border with Brazil.^[3][16] The demonstrations spread quickly to other areas including La Paz, Oruro, and Potosí as well as rural areas. The protesters also expanded their demands calling on the government to resolve unemployment and other economic problems.^[15] Soon demonstrators had most of the major highways in Bolivia barricaded.^[3] The protest even inspired officers in four La Paz police units to refuse to leave their barracks or obey superiors until a wage dispute was settled.^[16]

State of emergency

The Bolivian Constitution allows the President (with the support of his Cabinet) to declare a 90-day state of siege in one or more districts of the nation as an emergency measure to maintain public order in "cases of serious danger resulting from an internal civil disturbance".^[17][18] Any extension beyond 90 days must be approved of by the Congress.^[18] Anyone arrested at this time must be released after 90 days unless criminal charges are brought against them before a court.^[17] With the roads cut off and fearing a repeat of past uprisings, President Banzer on 8 April 2000 declared a "state of siege".^[3] Banzer said, "We see it as our obligation, in the common best interest, to decree a state of emergency to protect law and order."^[3] Information Minister Ronald MacLean Abaroa described the rationale for the decree, saying "We find ourselves with a country with access roads to the cities blocked, with food shortages, passengers stranded and chaos beginning to take hold in other cities."^[16] The decree suspended "some constitutional guarantees, allowing police to detain protest leaders without a warrant, restrict travel and political activity and establish a curfew."^[15] Meetings of over four people were outlawed, and the freedom of the press was curtailed with radio stations being taken over by the military and some newspaper reporters being arrested. The police moved in to enforce the policy with nighttime raids and mass arrests.^[10][15] At one point 20 labor union and civic leaders were arrested.^[15] The police's tear gas and rubber bullets were met by the protesters' rocks and Molotov cocktails.^[16] Continuing violent clashes between the demonstrators and law enforcement led to internal exile, 40 injuries, and five deaths.^[10][15] International Human Rights Organizations decried the "state of siege" declaration.^[17][19] This was the seventh time since Bolivia returned to democracy in 1982 that the "state of siege" decree had been employed.^[16]



On 9 April 2000, near the city of Achacachi, soldiers met resistance to removing a roadblock and opened fire, killing two people (including a teenage boy) and wounding several others. Angry residents overpowered soldiers and used their weapons against military leaders. They wounded Battalion commander Armando Carrasco Nava and army captain Omar Jesus Tellez Arancibia. The demonstrators then found Tellez in hospital, dragged him from his bed, beat him to death and dismembered his body.^[20]



Also, on 9 April 2000, 800 striking police officers fired tear gas at soldiers (to which the soldiers then fired their weapons in the air).^[20] In response the government gave a 50% pay raise to the La Paz police to end the strike. This brought their monthly income up from the equivalent of $80 to $120.^[20] The police then returned to enforcement procedures against those still demonstrating.^[20] A group of soldiers soon demanded their own raise, declaring that there was racial discrimination in the pay scale. Police in Santa Cruz, the nation's second largest city, also went on strike demanding a raise.^[20]

Resolution

After a televised recording of a Bolivian Army captain, Robinson Iriarte de la Fuente, firing a rifle into a crowd of demonstrators wounding many and hitting high school student Víctor Hugo Daza in the face, killing him, intense anger erupted.^[3] The police told the executives of the consortium that their safety could no longer be guaranteed. The executives then fled from Cochabamba to Santa Cruz.^[3] After coming out of four days of hiding, Oscar Olivera signed a concord with the government guarantee the removal of Aguas del Tunari and turning Cochabamba's water works over to La Coordinadora. Detained demonstrators were to be released and Law 2029 repealed.^[4] The Banzer government then told Aguas del Tunari that by leaving Cochabamba they had "abandoned" the concession and declared the $200 million contract revoked. The company, insisting that it had not left voluntarily but been forced out, filed a $40 million lawsuit in the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, an appellate body of the World Bank, against the Bolivian government, "claiming compensation for lost profits under a bilateral investment treaty."^[10] On the day following Víctor Hugo Daza's funeral, Óscar Olivera climbed to his union office's balcony and proclaimed victory to the exhausted crowd.^[3] The demonstrators declared that they would not relent until Law 2029 was changed. To get a quorum to amend the law the government even rented planes to fly legislators back to the capital. In a special session on 11 April 2000 the law was changed.^[20]

Aftermath

On 12 April 2000 when asked about the outcome in Bolivia, World Bank President James Wolfensohn maintained that free or subsidized delivery of a public service like water leads to abuse of the resource; he said, "The biggest problem with water is the waste of water through lack of charging."

Legal settlement

On 19 January 2006 a settlement was reached between the Government of Bolivia (then under the Presidency of Eduardo Rodriguez Veltze) and Aguas del Tunari, it was agreed that "the concession was terminated only because of the civil unrest and the state of emergency in Cochabamba and not because of any act done or not done by the international shareholders of Aguas del Tunari". With this statement both parties agreed to drop any financial claims against the other.^[23]

Who needs water when you can have the delicious thirst-quenching bottle of Coca-Cola? Ahhh, that hits the spot.

[Zeebu]

yeah, not sure what to make about that. the bolivian govt made a stupid agreement with a company that had no business investing that amount of money to a country ill-equipped to provide an adequate return on investment. the world bank should have stayed out of it unless they were willing to fork over their own money with generous rates to the bolivian govt.

ultimately, the bolivian govt effed that business up under pressure from world bank. i dont see any fault in the private investors.

[Jerome Scuggs]

yeah, not sure what to make about that.

privatization is just as extreme a concept as nationalization, and this is one of the great examples of this

[Jerome Scuggs]

btw ltc is taking off, kthx if you'd put 30 bucks into ltc when i posted, you'd have 90 now

ofc as soon as i hit "post reply" its going to crash to 50 cents but whatever, this has been a fun ride

[Zeebu]

privatization is just as extreme a concept as nationalization, and this is one of the great examples of this

so the world bank folks should have stayed the hell out of it?

[Jerome Scuggs]

so the world bank folks should have stayed the hell out of it?

I suppose so, but they were nowhere near Flint or Flint's water supply and the privatization effort there... well, I don't think I have to explain what's *still* going on there

[Dierienow]

The things that stood out to me:

- price of water increased 3x. This had to be done either through the state or a private company, but at least through the state they can keep the price of essential resources artificially low through subsidies, shifting priorities, raising taxes and tariffs. This is assuming the state isn't already corrupt. But a private "consortium" has two options: raise the price to make a profit or turn the taps off. It's never even a consideration that this company would use some of its 32 billion in revenue to keep the cost of water low, but the state has this this in their self-interest.

- The consortium wanted a guaranteed minimum return on investment, per year, of 15%. It's insane to expect a guaranteed return in any project but especially a utility company in South America. One, because there is no such thing as a guaranteed return as evidenced here. And two, they were the only bidders on the project and likely had an upper hand in the bargaining so they can ask what they want and the gov't isn't exactly in a position to say no. Three, the consortium lacked the cultural knowledge (or just didn't care) to know that such a price increase would be gouging customers and turning their $7/month water into $20/month water when the average Bolivian's budget is $100/month. They still have rent, food, and other utilities to pay as well. And they likely understood that their project was funding corruption but didn't care as long as they had their return.

- Obviously corrupt local governments are partly to blame. Part of the contract was that the consortium would finance building the rest of a dam that was favoured by the local politicians but the World Bank warned against it. "Had the advice of the World Bank been followed, the construction of the dam would not have been part of the concession, the tariff increase would have been unnecessary and Aguas del Tunari would have had to face competition in its drive to win the Cochabamba concession." But that doesn't say anything against socialism, only against corrupt, poor South American governments that just exited 20 years of military dictatorships in 1985. And the dam was likely a vector for illegal funds to gov't officials, since the deal was the consortium would fund the construction, not build it themselves. The funding side would have no idea about the true cost of the project and would be overcharged. The companies doing the project had to have known this.

- The gov't turned on its own citizens because they couldn't leave the contract without putting up a fight or they'd be out tens of millions over nothing. They probably had no qualms about turning on them anyway, but they couldn't easily revert or fix the situation either without co-operation from the private consortium. You can see in the Aftermath section, they tried to sue afterwards for $40 million due to "lost profits" which is ridiculous considering the original terms and the state of Bolivia. As a result people died (with many more injured), property was destroyed, freedoms withheld, some were temporarily jailed. The company that caused the outrage to begin with, though, was essentially untouchable.




I just found it ironic how someone mentioned Bolivia, someone before mentioned Venezuela and how the government is repressing voters or something. As if repressing voters is a socialist thing, get the fuck out of here idiot. Then I find a perfect, well-researched example about one of the more flagrant abuses of privatization from an American company no less and there is no way capitalism as an ideology can't be held partially responsible in this case. In America you see the good and the bad side of capitalism, but if you want to see the ugly side you need to look at the real vulnerable, fucked up parts of the world. The reason your living condition is so good, kthx, isn't because you're smarter, better, or anything greater than anyone else sorry to say. It's because what you see is the result of plundering the world through business, and you were lucky enough to be born in America and not some street in Bolivia. And I assure you street kids without ever having a computer or book to read have NO idea what is happening or why they are poor. You DO have the possibility knowing and you act like a complete twat - you know we're right you just like the idea that you have it better off than someone else (let me guess you did it all yourself, too?) You know none of these articles prove your point, you're just wasting the potential for dialogue and shutting down genuine conversation . You're so much fucking smarter than everyone else why don't you do something useful with your time and make the world a better place? You cant start by helping your country and not working against them - the ideology you've divined from years of Fox News is not helping anyone outside of the 0.2%.

[Dierienow]

Anyone else watching the Alabama election? Roy Moore 49.9%, Doug JONES 48.6%. 79% counted. The guy that's ahead usually wins tbh kind of like kill-o-thon. SPeaking of kill-o-thon, if Alabama elects a literal child predator and independent voters fuck up another election, who else is going on one? I kid (and Roy Moore liked it). Jones has been catching up the past few minutes but I'm trying not to be overly optimistic

Moore 49.3% Jones 49.1% let's fucking go boys put on your comeback goggles and plug in those twang guitars it's happening

LMFAO Jones 49.7 Moore 48.7 87% of da votes

[Jerome Scuggs]

kind of a tragic fucking election to watch, no idea who doug jones is but i'm sure he's going to suck shit, but gotdamnit i just wanna know how this fits in with trump's brilliant 4d chess he's supposedly doing.

and 2018 is right around the corner. another fun year in america. i fucking love this country for real, and 2018 is going to be hilarious, just somehow even more bizarre and fucked up than 2017 was

any of yall see the daniel shaver video?

[Zeebu]

didnt roy moore basically go into hiding the last week? i feel like witness protection is not a good look for a candidate. i'll bet over the last 2 weeks alone 10% of the votes shifted away from him

[Jerome Scuggs]

roger stone is already writing a book about trump's downfall. kek

[Zeebu]

i mean yeah, flint is bad and all, but:

pay your fuckin water bill