No it doesn’t. And citation needed for “social security net is being gimped to provide corporate tax breaks.”
Most recent.
Food actually the cheapest in America.
Subsidized pink goo in fast food stores isnt food. That is beyond the fact that that statistic is not relevant to the argument — pink goo may be cheaper in US. And yet that may be outside the budget of many people as referenced before.
We have already established they can afford junk food. And cooking is cheaper than junk food. How is this complicated?
We didnt establish that.
There are 40 million people in US who lack food and who go to bed hungry frequently. Who rely on food banks to survive, when they can. That’s hunger.
The ships may have been, but the claim that it’s simply soy is from the Vice-President.
There is no objective reason to discredit the Venezuelan government or their spokesperson. None of those people have been found to be lying at any point in time, or misrepresenting things.
Don’t really care about the whataboutism, do you have evidence the said report is false?
What you call ‘whataboutism’ in US is called objectivity elsewhere. If you go about labeling this or that person as credible or non-credible, you have to provide an objective framework to evaluate those claims.
UN report has no need of being false. Active economic warfare — internal and external — embargo, sanctions, do create scarcity in a country in whatever item targeted.
Really, no room to question the motives of the genius who claims “capitalist hoarding” is responsible for hyperinflation? Really?
What relevance does that even have.
And all I can see is a guy in a supermarket. Tell me how I am supposed to verify it is in Caracas
Its a part in an entire series in which that person has live-broadcast his stint in Venezuela from his landing until his leaving. Its not something that has been contested by anybody. And it is shown as reference in numerous independent outlets. You are the first one ever to contest the reality.
You can just watch his series on the topic. There is no need to entertain such ‘skepticism’ on my part.
When you have to reach back to WWII for whataboutism genetic fallacy, lol… Anyway to state the obvious, you haven’t disproved UN or Amnesty’s reporting. Iraq is not relevant either.
I wont reiterate the fact that before making analysis about things, one needs to present an objective framework.
And when such an objective framework is presented, then every single source you put your faith in, fall below the line for minimum trustworthiness that is acceptable.
Iraq is relevant. A lie that was sold for 8 years by entire establishment, with every singular cited ‘reliable’ organization participating in it, cannot be irrelevant to a topic of trustworthiness.
More like the excuses start as soon as socialism starts failing for the umpteenth time.
I have cited you public information posted on CIA’s own website, detailing how they have destroyed entire Chilean economy with $10 million budget on Nixon’s orders.
After that point, such a statement as you made just comes off as being made in bad faith.
No surprise you ended your comment the way you ended it — a statement of belief, in lieu of objective facts presented. When non-manageable, just denying existence of the uncomfortable truth.
That’s belief. Its religion.
…
Since you started resorting to self-reinforcing faith-based statements, its easy to see that this discussion has outlived its productivity.
Therefore i will stop participating at this point. No point in reiterating faith based statements on your side, and no point in me providing historical, publicly available information that contest those.
Thank you for the discussion, and good evening.
