Bolivia re-nationalises gas fields back from foreign firms.

#1
The age old commie tactic of re-nationalisation to subdue the people is back in fashion.

Bolivia's President Evo Morales sent the military to seize the country's natural gas fields and threatened to evict foreign companies unless they sign new contracts within six months giving control over the energy industry to the state.

"The time has come, the awaited day, a historic day in which Bolivia retakes control of our natural resources," the president said.

telegraph
 
#2
How are the people being subdued?
 

Ex_ex

War Hero
#3
Do you think they'll "suez" arrse for doing that?

I think it was a "gad daffy" thing to do (sorry) :)
 
#4
I disagree. Many S.American countries sold off their resourses and were screwed over under the deals they signed. Many multinationals inflated the prices of natural resourses to such a level that many people in the poorer countries can not afford to pay for water, gas etc. Just look at the price rises in the UK. Are they justified? Possible, but when companies report record profits off the back of these then there is definately something amiss.
 
#5
PartTimePongo said:
How are the people being subdued?
Not in the conventional sense of the word, but subdued in their poverty and the poor state of the country. El Pres is using the old trick of blaming foreign companies (and governments) for the state of the country/economy, rather than look at his (and past) governments failures to do anything positive for the people.
 
#6
Speedy said:
I disagree. Many S.American countries sold off their resourses and were screwed over under the deals they signed. Many multinationals inflated the prices of natural resourses to such a level that many people in the poorer countries can not afford to pay for water, gas etc. Just look at the price rises in the UK. Are they justified? Possible, but when companies report record profits off the back of these then there is definately something amiss.
The main reason for the high price of oil is the bottleneck in the petrochemical industry, namely the low number of refineries that transform oil into it's numerous by-products. Governments are loathe to approve the construction of more of these facilities as they are not welcomed by the environmental lobbies or planning officials.
 
#7
I'm not totally with you there Agent smith, a lot of these oil companies go in and do a lot of damage not only to the local environment but the local people. As has already been said, they are all recording record profits off the back of high oil prices thats we are paying. Bolivia are well within their right to renationalise oil fields as long as a, they pay some compensation to these countries and b, they aren't discriminating; which by the sounds of it they aren't. When Libya did it they only appropriated from U.S firms, seems bolivia are doing it off all.

It is yet to be seen if Bolivia is doing this for the good of their people, but good on them if they are. Its about time some countries started standing up to these Multinationals who think they can go into countries that have weak or poor governments and take over. A bit more Corporate Social Responsibility on their part and this may not have happened.
 
#8
I think you should read through this before lumping Morales in the "Filty commie" bracket Agent_Smith.

Yes he is a socialist, but there seems to be a genuine grievance or injustice here , as alluded to by Speedy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivian_Gas_War
 
#9
Agent_Smith said:
Speedy said:
I disagree. Many S.American countries sold off their resourses and were screwed over under the deals they signed. Many multinationals inflated the prices of natural resourses to such a level that many people in the poorer countries can not afford to pay for water, gas etc. Just look at the price rises in the UK. Are they justified? Possible, but when companies report record profits off the back of these then there is definately something amiss.
The main reason for the high price of oil is the bottleneck in the petrochemical industry, namely the low number of refineries that transform oil into it's numerous by-products. Governments are loathe to approve the construction of more of these facilities as they are not welcomed by the environmental lobbies or planning officials.
A_S

You are incorrect.

Oil is traded on the open market and therefore market forces set the price, the drivers are political uncertainty (Iran/Iraq and Nigeria) coupled with high demand (China) and limits to how much more can be pumped out of the ground by the producing nations.
Petrol prices respond to the Oil Price (especially Brent crude, West Texan Intermediate and Saudi crude) because these are the best for refining into petrol. To an extent Refinery Capacity also affects the price (on supply vs demand model) but this has little impact in this country because of Taxes and that the EU has common standards for Fuel. Refining Capacity does influence US Petrol prices because each State set its own standard for Petrol and therefore bulk production is relatively difficult.

Blaming environmentalist and NIMBY’s is bollox,....

As for Bolivia, he has not as I understood it re-nationalised the industry, he has merely requesting that all Oil/Gas that is produced in Bolivia is sold to the government whom will sell it on. I suspect that with the current high prices this unlikely to hamper the oil producers (provided the government cut is relatively small) but in turn may mean that Bolivians get slightly cheaper fuel.

Long Term, what BP, Shell, Exxon, ESSO and Total do in Bolivia will be determined by the Price of Crude and the size of their cut. This does not affect us as most the oil/gas goes straight to the US.
 
#10
As I understood it (caught the world service driving back this morning) he is only allowing the foreign companies to take 19% of their profits and the rest is to be spent in country by the Gov't and mostly on indiginous population (I believe that he is descended of an indigenous tribe).
 
#11
PartTimePongo said:
I think you should read through this before lumping Morales in the "Filty commie" bracket Agent_Smith.

Yes he is a socialist, but there seems to be a genuine grievance or injustice here , as alluded to by Speedy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivian_Gas_War
Hadn't read that and known the full detail but it backs up my orginal statement and is quite interesting to know. This isn't the only country where this has happened. A lot of these multinational Oil companies use countries with weak or opressive regimes to get forced labour, cheap labour and be able to ignore legally set working conditions. Seems to me that the people finally won this battle, its just a shame the International community didn't do more to help them as it should have done. I for one, hope that more countries follow in Bolivia's footsteps.
 
#12
What should the West do in this situation:

1. Accept it as is.
2. Apply a diplomatic pressure.
3. Impose sanctions.
4. Complain to UN SC.
5. Economical blockade.
6. Military invation (liberation).
 
#13
KGB_resident said:
What should the West do in this situation:

1. Accept it as is.
2. Apply a diplomatic pressure.
3. Impose sanctions.
4. Complain to UN SC.
5. Economical blockade.
6. Military invation (liberation).
It can't do much really. Countries affected can take the case to the International Court of Justice but Bolivia have the right to renationalise, as does any country. The only chance anything can be done about it is if they have acted against international law. It doesn't look like they have discriminated against certain countries, it is the interests of their people and economy. The only point any country will have to argue on behalf of its Multinats is if they haven't offered 'just' compensation. In this case it will be illegal but all Bolivia then have to do is pay the actual compensation for the loss. I am sure Bolivia will know all of this and will have paid 'just' compensation to the firms.
 
#14
Look guys, it's all very well saying 'It's not a bad move actually, the Bolivian people will benefit'

Since when has a population ever benefited from the re-nationalisation of an industry? Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy as is always the case in places like Bolivia. This has been done purely to appease the far-left (quasi-commies) by making it look like the government are taking steps to better the lives of the population.

How would you feel if Mugabe did the same thing? Would you all be clapping him on the back and saying 'Well done Bobby, that's a sound peice of political thinking that will help your population'

Would we f*ck!
 
#15
Agent_Smith said:
Look guys, it's all very well saying 'It's not a bad move actually, the Bolivian people will benefit'

Since when has a population ever benefited from the re-nationalisation of an industry? Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy as is always the case in places like Bolivia. This has been done purely to appease the far-left (quasi-commies) by making it look like the government are taking steps to better the lives of the population.

How would you feel if Mugabe did the same thing? Would you all be clapping him on the back and saying 'Well done Bobby, that's a sound peice of political thinking that will help your population'

Would we f*ck!
Although I see your point since have 3rd world countries benifited from privatisation?

Fundamentally, provided the president enables good goverment and governance of the public financies it is likely that the Bolivians will benefit.
 
#16
Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy as is always the case in places like Bolivia
Agent Smith , you are making an assumption that has not come to pass under Morales thus far. I really suggest you go and read the link I provided , to get a better insight into the background of this decision.

Morales came to power on a ticket pledging to fight the very things you accuse him of, and those very people he has pledged to help , will be watching him.

What I can be sure of though , is the exploration companies will be getting their respective 'skunk works' in gear.
 
#17
Agent_Smith said:
Since when has a population ever benefited from the re-nationalisation of an industry? Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy...
I believe that mr.Abramovitch would wholeheartedly agree with you mr.Smith.
 
#18
Agent_Smith said:
Since when has a population ever benefited from the re-nationalisation of an industry? Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy...
So it will just be the same as when the Oil companies have it. At least the people may have some chance of seeing the benefits of it now.
 
#19
KGB_resident said:
Agent_Smith said:
Since when has a population ever benefited from the re-nationalisation of an industry? Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy...
I believe that mr.Abramovitch would wholeheartedly agree with you mr.Smith.
Sergy, what are you suggesting about our beloved chairman?
 
#20
drain_sniffer said:
KGB_resident said:
Agent_Smith said:
Since when has a population ever benefited from the re-nationalisation of an industry? Any money that it makes for the country will not be spent on the people. Instead it wll be spent corruptly and be kept from the needy...
I believe that mr.Abramovitch would wholeheartedly agree with you mr.Smith.
Sergy, what are you suggesting about our beloved chairman?
Instead of spending Russian oil money inside Russia (in the corrupt way of course) it would be better (from point of view of mr.Abramovitch) to spend them on development of English football.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top