A few tips for the front runner


Tomorrow, Miranda Governor Henrique Capriles will officially launch his campaign for the opposition’s Presidential nomination. Flimsy phone-polls and chutzpah-filled, self-proclaimed surge claims notwithstanding, he continues to be the front runner.

It’s the job of bloggers to sit in the sidelines and throw peanuts at everyone and anyone who doesn’t do what we want them to, right? So, in that spirit, here are some tips for Henrique as he puts the finishing touches on his speech.

1. Don’t tell us who you’re not, tell us who you are. Define yourself. Tell us what moves you, what you believe in. Don’t limit yourself to talking about what you’ve done in Miranda, how many schools you’ve built, or how many times you’ve met with chavistas. Yes, that stuff is important, and I’m sure you will talk about them. But you need to go beyond that. You need to nail the vision thing. More importantly, tell us why you’re better than the others. No need to zing them, just differentiate yourself from the pack in a clear way. Remind us of this guy, and this guy.

2. Don’t be afraid to go wonky once in a while. Whether it’s conditional cash transfers, crime, infrastructure, or Cadivi, we need a few more specifics. Don’t make the speech all wonk, but don’t be afraid to put some meat on the bone. And throw in a surprise or two to grab the headlines.

3. Talk about the challenges you will face. Whether it’s the Cubans, the Armed Forces, or the boatload of chavista institutions you will inherit, you should tell us what we can expect from you. Don’t get bogged down in details, but at least acknowledge that these will be crucial issues that will need to be resolved. And while you’re at it, throw some red meat to the opposition’s base. This is a primary after all, the general election is months away.

4. Bathe yourself in symbolism. Quote Bolívar, beisbol, Miranda, Bello, Teresa de la Parra, Gallegos, Radio Rochela. Any of them, all of them. Make the speech folksy and understandable in Los Palos Grandes, Petare, Borburata, and Upata.

5. Have fun. Smile. You’re in the lead!

Our expectations for this one are high, Henrique. Please meet them.

Disclaimer: As many of you know, I’m a member of Primero Justicia. I don’t know Henrique Capriles personally, and I don’t work for his campaign, but I’ve been in touch with them and may help out in the near future. I’m going to continue blogging about him and the election, and both Quico and I thought it was important to clarify where I stand.

Caracas Chronicles is 100% reader-supported. Support independent Venezuelan journalism by making a donation.


  1. ” Los Palos Grandes, Petare, Borburata, and Upata.”

    OK, I will be fastidious. The only place you mentioned that is Chavista is Borburata, with 5.265 voters and 42% abstention. You could have mentioned Libertador or Los Guayos, which have more than 100 000 voters, are still Chavista territoriries and are never visited by PJ even if the places are so incredibly close to where a lot of oppos live.

    I know you just used those places “as an example”, but my fear, my big big fear is that few at Primero de Justicia seem to fully grasp the dynamics of Venezuelan demographics…it seems as if they had never seen a map of population density and compared that to CNE results.

    So, I’d rather recommend: Maturín, Calabozo, El Tocuyo, Punto Fijo and…yeah, Palos Grandes if need be.
    And more important than “Venezuelan” symbols is regional knowledge: get to talk about those places.
    I wrote something on that at Miguel’s blog here:


    • As a side note, you reminded me something about the last federal election here. Harper (the prime minister seeking reelection and majority in the parliament) went all over the country but didn’t campaign in Calgary. Why? He’s from here, everybody knows him and already had the majority, so no need to waste the time. Instead, he spent the time going everywhere else.
      I don’t think the Capriles needs to campaign too much in Miranda. I hope he understands that.

      • I hope so. He is speaking better and better but I miss something: he MUST speak about Maturín, about Punto Fijo, about those places. Those sounds need to come out of his mouth: Pun-to Fi-jo…and something related to the place…Gua-ji-ra…and something that makes sense to Guajiros. Capriles has addressed other people already but mentioning mostly “Venezuela” and “Miranda”. I am going to say it in French: most people who are not from Miranda will think: “f*ck Miranda, what do you say about MY region?”
        That is what a Caraqueño, Valenciano or Maracucho need to learn

        • Bon point, pardon my french. To continue with the Canadian example, the national paper (a yuppie rag mostly, though once very serious) and the national broadcasting corporation, rely heavily on a Toronto-centric vision. It annoys the hell out of westerners, in particular, those from British Colombia (a joke on the last word), to say nothing of maritimers.

        • P.S. to the candidate.
          Henrique: Be your intrepid self in the areas Kepler has mentioned, and keep releasing bold photo opps. Include your experiences in as many outerlying regions as possible. You are no longer going for the governorship of MIranda, but the presidency of a nation.

  2. Good on the disclaimer.

    Let´s see how he handles it, although I´m no PJ fan, specially after what happenned in Bolivar las elections, I have very high hopes for HCR. Let´s see how he plays his campaign.

    • The Fœtus,
      Art thou perchance Guayanés? (and I agree the mess about Bolívar was embarrasing, even if they are not the only ones: we lost Valencia due to the Salas-Feo clan)

      • Hey Kep, I´m actually caraqueño. I used to love Primero Justicia and Proyecto Venezuela, as most caraqueños sifrinos like myself did. I have good friends within the party and support them, I´m happy with the job Ocariz is doing as well as HCR, and have my fingers crossed for primaries in Chacao, as Grateron is a moron and Ramón Muchacho would do a great job for sure.

        What really irks me though is some of the shit they pulled like Borges´ Presidential campaign, the Bolívar stunt, as well as Borges politically operating for Wilmer Ruperti, also, RJ Medina´s links to shady banker Víctor Vargas (they where college buddies, nowadays RJM is/was in BOD Board) and finally some of the rumored links between HCR and the Banvalor Castillo Bozo brothers… In the end all politicians/political parties have “uncomfortable” friends/allies, it comes with the territory no doubt, however, I expected a little more from PJ. If I was forced to choose a party to join I would still go with PJ, but there is definetly room for improvement/cleansing?

        PS: Not meaning to hijack the post, just merely stating my posture on the PJ´s “cúpula”.

  3. “Nail the vision thing” Hardly! The vision thing is just one more “handlers’ parameter” touted by handlers seeking to make particular impressions, deemed by them in their wisdom-of-the-moment to be what’s ‘needed’. If Capriles or anyone else wants to nail something in that area, it ought to be the “vision”, not the vision thing. Yes, I am aware that this comment is a rehash of one very similar given to George Bush senior during his presidential campaign.

  4. I feel compelled to join in-The overarching message is :please get out and vote.
    and we are united in one thing- against chavismo. Had more than enough…
    Women vote is the key, I believe-avoid machismo.

    • I’m glad he’s doing it. I think his candidacy was hurting his chances of re-election. He needs to focus on Táchira’s many problems, and his candidacy never got any traction.

  5. HCR: Unconditional Cash Transfers

    WINS election,
    ELIMINATES poverty,
    RESCUES economy,
    KILLS petrostate model,
    MAKES news,

    and HISTORY!

  6. Now, going back to campaigning everywhere: how does one deal with something like this?

    I think Borges behaved well, didn’t respond aggressively, and at the end, he and the others had to be protected physically.
    I am not sure how I would have reacted. I hope Henrique thinks about how to deal with these things before going into those areas. I guess that would be another recommendation.

      • Indeed. Kudos to Borges for going there. I think they should be doing it by steps:

        1) try to do it in those places where PSUV has 49 to 55% of votes and there are more than 100 000 voters. Democrats will appear.
        2) then proceed – together with more people from PJ – to those areas with 56-65% of Chavismo.
        3) and then to regions like Boconó.
        Also: they should try to gather as many witnesses as they can…journalists from Venezuela and elsewhere if possible

        • Just wondering: how was the abstention rate on the last election?
          If it was high, shouldn’t the oppo focus on gaining those voters before trying to convince a die-hard chavista? For some reason I feel it’s a waste of time to try to argue with these fanatics.

          • Fanatics are fanatics, but I don’t think, unlike others, that there is a clear-cut thing.
            Look: there are Chavistas who will always be chavistas. There are those who felt rejected for a long time and are still clinging to Chávez because every time he hears things like “esos monos” he gets mad. Then there are those who like la papa pelada, then there are those who would have to walk 5 km. in election time OR get into a PSUV van to go to the polling centre…some of them fearing “Chavistas know for whom you vote” (yes, still now).

            Things are changing but we need more presence. I refer again to Los Guayos and Guacara: densely populated regions. The first one is still Chavistas, but less so…if the oppo appeared there from time to time with a Los Guayos-related message they could win more and more votes. Guacara, poor area, used to be Chavista. It is now more oppo and that was achieved last year. I know quite some people who worked on that, even if they are in no party and did it just because they are truly committed to a change.

            We need to start in those places, then start appearing in such locations as Punto Fijo, El Tocuyo, etc. But we cannot go there without having a clue about the history and the problems of those areas. It’ more than baseball. It’s know-the-local-myths and traditions. Leaders can get briefed.

            As I commented in Miguel’s post (see above), we also need to give messages, even before going there, to special communities like the Wayuus. Guajira has one of the highest abstention rates and there are about 400 000 Wayuus in Venezuela. Only a minority lives in la Guajira now but they will pay attention to whoever knows a thing or two about the Wayuus.

            Chávez’ knowledge about Venezuelan indians can be probably stored in less than 90 bytes (like he knows the Pumes are the ones in Apure…not hard as he spent lots of time there). The problem is that the average Venezuelan’s knowledge about Venezuelan indians is 10 bytes. It is not so hard to go to 1 kilobyte.

          • it would have been useful to have a more wide-angle view, say from the top of the PJ van, or even one of the buildings, in order to get an idea of the size of the protest. Looked mostly like a narrow age group demographic at the front.

            also, I wondered: Are these protesters from the town itself, or are they chavista rabble-rousing imports from Caracas or other parts of Venezuela?

          • I’m asking Guido, who is a proud Trujillano, for more information on Trujillo. 🙂
            My bet is these are locals. Still, bear in mind lots of people work for the mayor and every mayor and the governor are rojos rojitos. The alternative forces were not present there until now. Only Adecos were timidly present. Trujillo is really really really really isolated.

            Trujillo has actually a very weird abstention pattern.
            Look at this map:


            In dark blue the municipios with abstention 50%. Look at Trujillo. It seems like an island also in this sense.

            Why? No idea.

          • Sorry, no more time now to add that to the image, it is part of a post I made some months ago.

            But basically: the map is about abstention in the 2010 elections, per municipio. Red is high abstention, dark blue low abstention. Francisco Toro, as far as I remember, was crossing his fingers in 2009 for Chavistas not to go to vote. I think the strategy should be to move people in the secondary cities to vote. Firstly we need to learn who are those who are NOT voting at all and where and why. Some are just too lazy, but some are approachable and could be won over. We can decide to say: oh, bastards, they are just stupid…or perhaps try to see if some of them can be motivated

    • Heaven to Betsey ….Borges who usually lacks positive aggression was lucky to have lacked it here.

      I can’t see how anything good could have possibly come from this little excursion.The only political view that could work under this sort of circumstance is that of an unreconstructed situationist.God bless his heart for trying 🙂

  7. Dear Extorres Sir/Ma’am, The sole shortcoming of that suggestion would lie in the ‘unconditional’ part: dictionaries “made in socialism” are bereft of the term altogether.

    • The proposal is capitalism with zero poverty. Socialism can’t trump that. Heck, even any other kind of capitalism can’t trump that.

      • capitalism with zero poverty

        That’s it boys….. not sure how it translates, but that’s your slogan right there.

        Capitalism and the promise of a decent life for all.

        Yes, I’m serious.

        • Harnessing Capitalism for the Peeps, every man a king every man a shareholder. Everyone fully invested in their own country and working towards a decent, achievable future for their children.

  8. The proposal is capitalism with zero poverty. Wow! Then you’d have to give a hint as to whose cash is being ‘unconditionally’ transferred to whom, what?

  9. A good book for delineating the ineluctable relationship between freedom private property and freedom is “Property and Freedom” by Richard Pipes, despite his being, in the event, a Russia specialist. As for the paranoia and gringos, I know not whereof you speak. Were it to be the case that I am in the crosshairs there, I am neither gringo nor have I ever been accused (or diagnosed!) of being paranoid. It’s thundering like dingledongle here, I’m off!

    • must be English. No offense to reasonable English the world over, but there’s a reputation out there that not a few English with a smattering of education have: they love to drop words for which most people need a dictionary. The why is OT.

      Neddie: Your recommended book might help Quico with his insomnia

  10. I guess it’s just as well that this bit is called ‘join the fray’; it seems to fit the bill. As for ‘my stance’, Gee, Sir, I haven’t even taken a stance; and how can you call that other bit, ‘hiding behind a book’? The guy spells out, all inexorably, how freedom and private property are joined at the hip: the capitalism/zero poverty post didn’t mention freedom. I just stuck it in for the sake of completeness. As for words/dictionaries, which word were you on about? I looked back there and saw nothing particularly outlandish.

    • You’ve tacitly taken the “mustn’t spread the wealth!” stance (which is a stand made popular recently by paranoid gringos).

      I am sure mr. Pipes has (had?) an opinion on free market values, but that doesn’t change the fact that the money for Torres’ idea for the UCT would come from a source that is already being used for a wealth distribution scheme (aka the government, though in practice much of it goes to corruption).

    • Neddie…..”I guess it’s just as well that this bit is called ‘join the fray’”

      haha…yes we are certainly frayed when we leave here – a bit like what happened to Borges in the above video….same mentality no doubt 🙂 LOL

  11. It’s gotta be hard to take any stance tacitly but even so, “mustn’t spread the wealth” is a new one, or rather, an old one, nearer to medieval than 21stC. There are some seeming slip-in concepts too, for instance, ‘the wealth’, as though it were some phenomenon hanging around awaiting its fate. Hardly. As for any stance being made popular by paranoids, it’s difficult to see how: you’d need the numbers — oodles of paranoids — to achieve that. It is well to look at where it is proposed that the money, as opposed to wealth, should flow: the last station on the line is people, individuals. While regimes are duty-bound to act to prevent hunger, misery and illiteracy, beyond that, things get fuzzy, what benefit do individuals making up a population draw from a public policy of giving them money instead of multiple opportunities to earn it and generate real wealth to boot? Just the other day, there was discussion here on how to raise the gasoline price, a quintessential sharing of wealth, it could be said: nobody argued for keeping things as they are then. Heigh Ho!

    • Heigh Ho?

      It was my mistake to assume you were aware of the noisy objections raised by paran- I’m sorry- kantankerous republicans to Barrack Obama when he was running for president. He once said he wanted to “spread the wealth” a little and it was turned into some kind of scandal. A plumber was involved.

      Anyway, the points you raise are too many and most have what seem to me to be obvious answers. Perhaps you should read the posts on this blog about UCTs (maybe Torres is reading this and still has the links handy?).

      “The proposal is capitalism with zero poverty. Wow! Then you’d have to give a hint as to whose cash is being ‘unconditionally’ transferred to whom, what?”

      At the very least you will be answered this question.

  12. Neddie, “capitalism with zero poverty”, is a way of putting things into a nutshell of four words. Personally, I see freedom as implicit in capitalism, and that’s besides the fact that capitalism itself is a loaded word. I didn’t expand because most readers at this blog know my extended version, and I was only hoping HCR, or someone in contact with him, would perk up with my four words. See the words as a title to an extended government platform.

    To answer your specific question about the source of the money, I see the money flow as follows: The government charges for every barrel of oil extracted and puts the revenue in a fund. The rate would be based on a free, competitive market rate. The daily revenue put into the fund is averaged over time to determine the daily cash taken out of it. 100% of the cash taken out of the fund is distributed, daily, via a debit card to each and every registered, living citizen. This amount is sufficient to lift all citizens out of poverty, while empowering them to spend it, capitalistically. Thus, the four words: capitalism with zero poverty.

    • One thing concerns me and that is the word “capitalism”. After 12/13 years of a broken record, it has become a dirty word with some segments of the electorate. So here’s just a suggestion. How about this:
      Long version: “petro-benefits for all with zero poverty”?
      Short version: “petro-benefits, zero poverty”. (Petro beneficios, zero pobreza)

      • I agree. I wouldn’t use those four words as a slogan, in part for the reason you give.

        la misión: Cero pobreza!
        la promesa: Te daremos toda tu plata del petroleo, cada gota, cada dolar.

        Ten tu plata! Todos los dias, y de por vida, para tí y para todos los tuyos.

        • Hmmm, Te daremos toda tu plata del petróleo is misleading, I think. Might conjure in people’s minds that all the money from the sale of oil is theirs to be had.

          Here’s another phrase, instead of petro-beneficios. How about petro-inversión.

          So, la misión: Cero pobreza!
          la promesa: Te daremos la plata de tu inversión, tanto en el petróleo como en el futuro de Venezuela. Cada gota rinde beneficios para ti y tu familia.

          Bueno, por ahí. Maybe you can improve on the spin. Ahí tienes, vale.

          • Syd: “Might conjure in people’s minds that all the money from the sale of oil is theirs to be had.”

            As I propose it, 100% of oil sales revenues would be distributed. In fact, 100% of all non taxed money gets distributed. The government only gets to spend taxed money. This is what kills the petrostate model.

          • So, under your proposal, ET, how do you allocate funds to R&D (research and development), etc. Sorry, your 100% distribution of oil revenues to the pueblo just doesn’t make sense.

          • syd, I’m guessing that you mean R&D for the oil industry.

            The goverment should begin inviting all oil companies to Venezuela, and have PDVSA begin paying for the crude the same as expected of any other oil company. 100% of the crude sales would go into the buffer fund for cash distribution. PDVSA and each oil company gets to decide what to do with the monies derived from doing whatever they do with the crude, R&D included. And the government gets to tax them as it taxes any other business, then spend it any way any other government gets to spend taxation monies.

            Making sense?

          • Kepler, I’m assuming you mean R&D in other sectors paid for by government. That would come from taxation. Consider the two options:

            1) R&D is paid from from taxes. The money came mostly from the rich.

            2) R&D is paid from crude sales. The money came mostly from the poor.

            Your choice?

          • Kepler, I should specify, the government should not really be spending on any industry’s R&D. That industry should be doing that from the monies they derive from doing business. As far as the market is concerned, the government should be focusing on helping the market be as free and competitive as possible, while vigilant of bad practices, not meddling in it. If politicians who want to be making market decisions should leave government and join the market.

        • very risky. But you never know. In any event, it’s good that second tier pols try things out (market testing), rather than having principal candidates risk these phrases. Ya veremos.

    • carl, not that this is relevant until we get closer to the time that oil runs out or loses value, but I disagree. UCT is the answer even in nations without natural resources, I dare say especially those. The difference in the cases in which natural resources does not cover the poverty line is that a limit must be placed on the amount distributed, which would be, in my book, the poverty line, itself.

      For example, revenue from oil in Venezuela currently translates to about 10 USD per person per day ($dp). Poverty line is at about 2$bp. So, currently, the government would get to spend 100% of taxation money on its budget (OT: I would have a buffer fund for spending, as with the distribution fund). If oil prices fell to 1$bp, the oil money would only cover critical poverty but not non critical poverty. So, the government would make up the difference with taxation money. Whatever it has left after poverty line is met with UCT, is what it has for budget spending.

      So, UCT, under the implementation that I support, would eliminate poverty for good, because even as currency valuation and market prices change, the poverty line gets adjusted, to which the UCT is indexed.

  13. I am not counting who believes this and who doesn’t-Extorres has been very much
    a gentleman and a good spokesman on this issue. I say we are friends, but I
    remain unconvinced but I thank him for lots of good information -certainly to consider.
    Each should study and consider it.
    This issue keeps reappearing here, Neddie.
    I went overboard calling them names as well- but I stopped (I hope),
    I guess my point is – these and other things we disagree on -but we all agree on
    one thing- we have had more than enough of Chavez and are ready for change.

    • CharlesC: “we have had more than enough of Chavez and are ready for change”

      That’s a bonus of UCTs that I don’t mention often enough: chavez cannot trump a UCT platform! And even if he wins, the concept of UCTs will mine the minds of his supporters wondering why he’s not giving them 10USD/day/person. Consider, if you would be happy to get 3,650 USD/year, how do you think a poor person from the interior would feel when chavez refuses to give them that when that’s what the opposition is offering?!

      You want to guarantee that chavez goes? UCTs are the answer.

  14. I would at least ask him to promise to give each Venezuelan a yearly receipt that indicates how much their individual share of the net oil income amounted to, so as to give them an opportunity to agree with if it has been well spent or not… That receipt should of course also include, on a separate line, the amount each Venezuelan could have earned had the gas been sold at international prices instead of being given away.


      • Exchange controls are never removed “bit by bit”, if politicians don’t do it at once, they never do. You have to have a plan of measures, including a devaluation, some form of subsidy to the poor, real interest rates, Central Bank measures. But the controls are perverse, distortive (?) and destructive. Leave them one week and is one week too long. Make the currency float, say its Bs. 10 the first day, it will go down to Bs. 7 in no time. Bye Cadivi, bye corruption, bye bureaucracy.

          • None of the candidates would dare eliminate Cadivi on the first day. It has to be carefully planned.

          • And the exchange rate would go to 12 or 15, inflation would skyrocket, and his government would collapse.

            Come on guys, did we learn nothing from Paquetico? He can’t come in and undo Cadivi on the first day. He has to shore up some reserves, devalue a bit, and then get the fixed exchange rate closer to equilibrium.

          • If all Bolivars are converted to US$, the implicit exchange rate would be around Bs. 11.5, since people and companies need money to function, the market rate would be well below that. This happened in 1995 (0r 6?) when Petkoff became Minister of Planning, the parallel rate was Bs. 540 , the official rate was Bs. 270, within a week the market rate was at Bs. 450 where it stayed for a couple of years…I see no reason why it would be any different, more so with the amount of money (Bs.) held by public institutions. If you simply say public institutions have to ask for permission from the Government to buy dollars, you “freeze” a good fraction of M2 that will not go to the dollar.

        • Or… devalue Cadivi to, say, 6, and see what happens. Shore up some reserves, reach a consensus on what the best exchange rate policy will be moving forward, get your handle on the realities of the BCV’s balance sheets … and then you dismantle Cadivi.

          Besides, who ever said promising shock therapy was good politics?

          To me, this is the best part of his speech. Impeccable political instincts.

          • Politics > Economics.
            CADIVI has to be abolished immediately. No ifs, ors and buts. Historical evidence proves what me and Miguel have said right.

            Devaluate CADIVI and shore up some reserves and you will end up in the same spot. There will not be any consensus, this is the kind of the where decision you need someone with balls.

          • Apples and oranges.

            I agree that something as the oil subsidy can’t be removed in a day. But removing CADIVI will not end in “El Caracazo reloaded”.

            Someone very close to me was the person who pretty much convinced Petkoff to do it in 1996. It worked, the same thing needs to be done.

            You could keep subsidies for very basic staples such as food and medicine but that’s about it.

  15. Why continue subsidizing the rich? That is all CADIVI at Bs. 6 would do. The rich can continue to import olives, cars and queso manchego at subsidized prices. You can keep price controls on basic staples for a year or two, but subsidies for the rich have to end.

    • From Bloomberg:

      “Henrique Capriles Radonski, the current governor of Miranda state and frontrunner to win an opposition primary to choose a candidate, said he wouldn’t end the system of a fixed rate for the bolivar against the dollar if he couldn’t guarantee the exchange rate wouldn’t jump, according to the Caracas-based daily.

      The issue of companies that have been expropriated by Chavez’s government would have to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, El Mundo quoted Capriles as saying. Inflation would be tackled by increasing the supply of goods, Capriles said, according to El Mundo.”

      • So hes pretty much saying status quo, exchange rate will fluctuate at any point you make any drastic change such as removing control measures.

        Pan para hoy, hambre para mañana the cost of keeping the exchange rate till we reach “consensus” will be very high.

  16. Everyone in Venezuela must believe one thing-Yes, we can.
    That one line. Meaning- Yes, we can get rid of Chavez (and
    yes he will have to go when he loses.)If Chavez had the decency
    he would resign. And, if it looks like he will certainly lose -I DO EXPECT
    trouble. But, Chavez is not god and will have to go.
    Too many people -believe it can’t be done, my vote will not count,
    he will not go, the military will keep him in power…
    Ask everyone to believe in the people of Venezuela.
    More than a majority have already seen enough and know they
    do not want any more of Chavez’s insanity.

  17. There was no Caracazo after 1996, why do we focus on the first shock and not the second one?

    What did Caldera and Petkoff do right?

    They sold the program to the people. As simple as that.

    • Perdon, Caldera y Petkoff desmontaron el control de cambios, pero eso fue despues que ellos mismos lo habian montado. Lo hicieron escogiendo ellos su propio tiempo.

      Mira, yo creo que es sumamente prudente de Capriles decir que las circunstancias determinaran el como y el cuando se desmonta Cadivi. Prometer barrer con Cadivi de buenas a primeras es simplemente una locura, sobre todo considerando que no se sabe con que condiciones financieras se va a encontrar.

      • Nope, Caldera lo monto y trajo a Petkoff de Ministro mucho despues. Fue Julio Sosa Rodriguez quien presidio el conyrol de cambios de Caldera. Petkoff acepta con la condicion de que se quite el control de cambios, Creo que pasaron 30 dias entre el nombramiento de Petkoff (15 de Marzo o algo asi) y la eliminacion de los controles de cambio. (22 de Abril?). Tambien se llevo el precio de la gasolina al valor FOB en varias etapas, pero se comenzo inmediatamente con Petkoff todas las noches en TV explicando lo que se estaba haciendo. (Ya Caldera ni hablaba por TV)

        Caldera puso los controles el 11 de Julio del 94 (dolar a Bs. 170) devaluo a 290 el 12 de Diciembre del 95, Petkoff entra como 15 de Marzo y el control lo quitan el 22 de Abril. Habia cambio paarlelo, Petkoff entra y dice en un mes quitaremos controles, el dolar estaba como en Bs. 540, el dia que quitaron los controles ya habia bajado a 500, cerro el 96 en 476 y se quedo un buen tiempo por ahi. Pero se tomaron medidas de absorcion de liquidez, tasas de interes y se anuncio privatzacion de cantv.

        Es muy sencillo, la economia venezolana funciona a Bs. 8.5, pero se compram miles de cosas (inclyendio computadoras) a Bs. 4.3 , pero el consumidor no sabe cual es cual. Devaluas a Bs. 8.5 y claro habra un salto en la inflacion, pero no sera tan grande y quitas todas las distorsiones que hay. Hacerlo de otra manera es priviligear a unos y evitar la economia se haga mas competitiva. Los politicos no sueltan los controles, Caldera lo hizo porque la inflacion anaulizada estaba en 109%.

    • Yep.

      I was a little boy when Caracazo, but I remember that El Paquete was pretty much a slap to the face of people that wanted a return of the good old times (cargo cult politics, if you ask me). CAP seemed to think he was so loved that he could do anything and people would just obey.

      OTOH, Caldera spoke about sacrifices and hard work. He spoke a lot about “sweat”, so much that a puppy that my dog had was named “sudor”.

  18. Nope, para nada, en Enero 1996, la inflacion fue de 8.1% que anualizado era 100% si continuaba. En Abril, después de la devaluacion fue 8.55% y en Mayo 7.1%, después bajo, de Julio a Diciembre (después de la devaluación) todos los meses fueron mas bajos que de Enero, Febrero, Marzo (antes) y que los dos meses después de la devaluación. Caldera se chorreo cuando vio la inflación, se dio cuenta su pana ingeniero (Sosa) no sabia donde estaba parado. Boto hasta a su hijo del Gobierno. Petkoff era economista con muchas horas de vuelo y discusión con Cardozo de Brasil.

    • Bueno Miguel, pero en ese caso se cumple lo que dice Capriles: si se puede desmontar Cadivi sin que se disparen el dólar y la inflación, lo hacen. Pero tú no puedes decir que en enero del 2013 la situación va a ser como para que eso se de, hay que esperar y ver si tienes suficientes reservas como para defender la moneda en caso de un ataque especulativo. Fíjate que hoy salió que el 43% de la base monetaria son pagarés de PDVSA al BCV, qué molleja!

      • Mientras se mantenga el control de cambio post enero 2013 las cosas empeoraran. El precio de petroleo no va a seguir subiendo… hasta cuando esperamos? hasta el 2014? 2015? 2021?

        Si nos quedamos esperando a que las condiciones se den nunca se levantara el control de cambio. Hay que levantarlo pronto y rapido.

      • No, Capriles dijo en este momento no estan dadas las condiciones. No dijo si estan dadas lo quito. Yo si creo se puede desmontar, creo que es esencial hacerlo. Si no se hace, el que venga sera un fracaso. Pienso hacer un post al respecto. El control es lo peor que tenemos en la economia, crea corrupcion, distorsion, perversion, subsidios, burocracia, ineficiencia y arbitrajes y ganancias absurdas para muchos.

        Hare un post al respecto.

  19. Yo lo que creo es que un nuevo Presidente que no lo desmonat etsa entrampado poara siempre. Nunac habara la oportunidad de desomtarlo. Creo se pueden tomar medidas en 30 dias, como hizo Teodoro para hacerlo, si no somos osados, Venezuela se frego.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here