Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Empire_Engineer t1_j8ig0os wrote

Reply to comment by SteveInMotion in [OC] New Mexico Now Produces More Oil Than Mexico & Venezuela by latinometrics

Is this something you know for certain or are you just parroting what you heard on Fox News / MSNBC?

There have been instances where nationalizing resources has directly benefited the population. Here are a few examples:

  1. Norway's nationalization of oil reserves: Norway nationalized its oil reserves in the 1970s and created the state-owned company Statoil (now Equinor). The revenues from the oil industry were used to fund social programs and invest in infrastructure, education, and healthcare. This has made Norway one of the most prosperous and equal societies in the world.

2.Bolivia's nationalization of gas: In 2006, Bolivia's President Evo Morales nationalized the country's natural gas industry. This move allowed the government to increase its share of the revenue generated from the industry and invest it in social programs such as healthcare, education, and poverty reduction. As a result, poverty rates in Bolivia have decreased, and the country has made significant progress in reducing inequality.

3.Malaysia's nationalization of tin mining: In the 1970s, the Malaysian government nationalized the tin mining industry, which was previously dominated by foreign companies. This move allowed the government to regulate the industry and ensure that the profits were reinvested in the country's economic development. As a result, Malaysia was able to diversify its economy and achieve significant economic growth, which benefited the population.

2

SteveInMotion t1_j8is21v wrote

I’ve done business in Venezuela. Chavez’s family wound up with billions of dollars. Also I don’t watch TV news. Sod off.

4

10xwannabe t1_j8it8sw wrote

I believe Norway is only 2/3rd owner of Equinor last I checked after a merger with someone else years ago. Rest is public owned (my guess) as it traded on public markets.

3

GeneralNathanJessup t1_j8j8swk wrote

By 2012, Venezuela had nationalized the oil, gas, electricity, telecommunications, food, agriculture, manufacturing, mining, and finance sectors of the economy. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-election-nationalizations/factbox-venezuelas-nationalizations-under-chavez-idUSBRE89701X20121008

Norway's Equinor is 33% owned by Hedge funds, like Black Rock. https://www.equinor.com/investors/our-shareholders

And Bolivia was able to Build a skyscraper for the President to live in with all that money from nationalizing the gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casa_Grande_del_Pueblo#/media/File:Plaza_Murillo_.jpg

The largest tin producer in Malaysia is Malaysia Smelting Company, which has never been nationalized, and is owned by private investors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straits_Trading_Company

2

FlibbleA t1_j8lpotp wrote

>Norway's Equinor is 33% owned by Hedge funds, like Black Rock.

Why would this be relevant? Does 67% not give you overall control? Also how are Black Rock and other Hedge funds returns benefiting many people and not just the hedge fund?

1

GeneralNathanJessup t1_j8lwphs wrote

Yes, anything over 51% gives the government of Norway control. But they still must pay dividends to the Hedge funds that own the other 33%.

And no, those dividends paid to hedge funds do not benefit the people of Norway at all, and that was my point.

Do you think it strange that private investors and hedge funds can invest in Norway's "socialist" oil company?

1

FlibbleA t1_j8lytzk wrote

Right but the problem is that guy is responding to someone saying state business is bad because it doesn't benefit many people unlike private while you are describing how the privatised part of Norway's state oil doesn't benefit the people of Norway unlike the state. That would mean before 2001 and the partial privatisation that it all benefited the people.

1