Be kinde to folk. This changeth the whole habitat.
- Manlobbi
Personal Finance Topics / Macroeconomic Trends and Risks
No. of Recommendations: 5
https://www.ft.com/content/48be0c3d-0a37-4aac-be47...
Donald Trump said the US had captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro after launching an attack on the country.
Caracas was hit by multiple explosions early on Saturday.
Residents of the Venezuelan capital reported dozens of aircraft flying low.
Videos appeared to show strikes on a military installation and an air base.
The strikes come after weeks of escalating pressure from Washington.
Allies of Venezuela, including Russia and Cuba, have condemned the strike by Trump. Other countries have called for de-escalation.
The US president is set to hold a press conference at 11am in Florida.
No. of Recommendations: 15
The Peace President strikes again.
On the one hand, I am happy for our past PDVSA co-workers, assuming they are still alive. We could never reach them after they were repatriated. On the other hand, my mind is spinning with what happens next. Was this well planned, with next steps in place, or just another seeming action of middle school bullies?
IP,
who suspects the only plans in place are where the resorts and golf courses will be built, and how to stabilize the environment for investment by the oil companies, recouping the investments lost via Maduro
No. of Recommendations: 9
how to stabilize the environment for investment by the oil companies
_______________________________________________
Venezuela nationalized its oil industry on January 1, 1976, under President Carlos Andrés Pérez, forming the state-owned company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) to take control of foreign-owned oil operations and assets. Most affected by the takeover were American subsidiaries such as Exxon Corporation, the Gulf Oil Corporation and the Mobil Oil Corporations which had at the time invested more than 5 billion dollars in the industry. The nationalization aimed to assert greater national control over oil resources and revenues, marking a significant shift in the country's energy policy.
Venezuela did offer compensation when it nationalized oil assets, first in the 1970s (paying with debt bonds) and later under Chávez (offering less), but foreign companies like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips argued it was insufficient, leading to lengthy international arbitration where Venezuela was ordered to pay billions, though full payment remains disputed.
Donald Trump claimed Venezuela "stole" U.S. oil assets during nationalization, demanding their return and imposing a naval blockade in late 2025, insisting the U.S. should get back its "oil, land, and other assets," but he didn't mention compensation; instead, he demanded the return of the assets themselves, stating that Venezuela used the "stolen" oil to fund illicit activities, viewing it as theft of American wealth, not a matter for monetary payment.
If I was running the country of Denmark, I would be trying to draw my European allies close, but the taking of Greenland would be the final snip in cutting the US from Europe. While many Americans would would probably be swayed a a "Manifest Destiny" drum beat, I think the taking of Canada would be a bridge too far for most Americans.
When it comes to an overt foreign policy designed around a transactional accumulation of other's assets, our foreign policy seems to have become Spaghetti alla Puttanesca.
Jeff
No. of Recommendations: 7
Wag the dog.
Diverts attention from the Epstein Pedofiles, massive increase in health care costs, Trump’s health, affordable food & housing, murderous attack in Nigeria, dead U.S. soldiers in Syria, ICE-CBP running roughshod over the Constitution, ....
No. of Recommendations: 0
Diverts attention from...
Sad to say that is just par for the Trump course.
IP
No. of Recommendations: 0
Iran next.
No. of Recommendations: 3
"well planned" ?
there is never a plan, only MAGA wishes
- i wish we could have someone else's oil\land\etc
- i wish we could reshore blue collar jobs and run a trade surplus with china
...
noted economist j.schussfort took a detailed look at trump's economic policy, and attempted to understand whether even retrospectively the end goals were clearly sensible. he did not consider whether trump friends&family would personally benefit, a rather naive but benevolent approach. (in the rollback of many but specific tariffs, most recently pasta, should one assume trump reached a binary outcome for bribes, or some higher level of reasoning?)
almost all policy goals were fuzzy at best, and better described as aspirations. in the few situations worth benefit-of-doubt, the means and execution towards those goals was utter garbage, and not uncommonly contradictory. consideration that other nations could\would respond seemed missing.
now apply this to all trump policy, not just economic.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Putin won't let that happen.
