5 ms·

I can't stand this ideological sports-team type of commentary, so just to add some real information and context (after my downvote): Venezuela produces ~70k ba

I can't stand this ideological sports-team type of commentary, so just to add some real information and context (after my downvote): Venezuela produces ~70k barrels per person per day. Norway produces a little more than half as much total oil, but with one-sixth the population it works out to ~330k barrels per person per day. An order of magnitude per-capita difference.

namdnay 7y ago
If Venezuela had a fund of 20k per citizen they would definitely not be in the same state as today...
throwaway2019V 7y ago
That's not an order of a magnitude. Even then, so, Venezuela produces 1/5th per capita the oil of Norway. Why doesn't there exist a fund with $37k/person in Venezuela?
- kwhitefoot 7y ago
  You could ask a similar question of the UK.
  - conjectures 7y ago
    This is a question I ask. The UK policy was, effectively, 'paaarty!'
    - sgt101 7y ago
      Well - capitalise trade in The City of London; without the oil it's pretty clear London wouldn't have developed the way it did.
      - conjectures 7y ago
        Rather than the story of financial degregulation? Sceptical.
    - smcl 7y ago
      Sad but true. One shining light in this dismal situation however is that Shetland managed to do something similar to Norway: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/gavin-mccrone-shetland-shows-the-way-to-oil-wealth-1-1803090/amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/g...
  - notJim 7y ago
    And North Dakota. The resource curse can happen anywhere.
  - laurencerowe 7y ago
    The UK has the same amount of oil spread across 12x as many people. Yes, the Tories wasted it but it could never have had the same impact on the whole UK that it had on Norway. Perhaps if Scotland had been independent (most of the UK's oil is in its waters) it would have been similar.
    - kwhitefoot 7y ago
      Nonetheless it would have ha some positive impact, And, while I'm as anti Tory as anyone there does not appear to have been a lot of objection to the way the oil income was handled from other parties.
- throwaway8119 7y ago
  Norway had a per-capita GDP 10x that of Venezuela when they launched their fund. The option was a luxury that they were granted by already being a fairly wealthy country. Also, consider if 25% of Norway's oil revenue is sufficient to provide a basic functioning government. Now you have Norway saving 75% of their oil revenue every year, and Venezuela still sucking 5% out of other funds, resulting in a long-term extremely wealthy Norway and a destitute Venezuela.
  - chrisco255 7y ago
    Venezuela was the 4th highest GDP as recently as the 50s. It saw sharp declines in economic health after Chavez and Maduro.
- hdfbdtbcdg 7y ago
  Venezuelan oil costs more per barrel to extract than Norwegian oil...
dbatten 7y ago
While your point about per-capita production is well-taken, I don't think the original comment was intending to score ideological points. It simply said the Venezuelan crisis was avoidable and happened due to mis-management, not that Chavismo is an inherently evil ideology...
- lr4444lr 7y ago
  Yes, thank you. I deliberately avoided attributing anything to ideology. At the end of the day, both countries are chiefly comparable in having nationalized their oil resources for the public benefit, at least de iure. Also Venezuela was actually doing quite well I believe in 2013 when prices were high. It was a singular failure of their stewards not to diversify the profits.
SteveGregory 7y ago
First, a nitpick - your numbers should be per million people, not per person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ... Second - the output itself depends on management, so I'm not sure it would be fair to compare current production numbers to show the potential help to the population. In fact - Venezuela has more proven reserves per-capita than Norway, by an incredible margin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oi...
rolltiide 7y ago
You sure? Venezuala's problem was just overleveraging They basically got margin called on their long oil position, and then their political ideology became apparent

namdnay 7y ago

If Venezuela had a fund of 20k per citizen they would definitely not be in the same state as today...

throwaway2019V 7y ago

That's not an order of a magnitude. Even then, so, Venezuela produces 1/5th per capita the oil of Norway. Why doesn't there exist a fund with $37k/person in Venezuela?

kwhitefoot 7y ago
You could ask a similar question of the UK.
- conjectures 7y ago
  This is a question I ask. The UK policy was, effectively, 'paaarty!'
  - sgt101 7y ago
    Well - capitalise trade in The City of London; without the oil it's pretty clear London wouldn't have developed the way it did.
    - conjectures 7y ago
      Rather than the story of financial degregulation? Sceptical.
  - smcl 7y ago
    Sad but true. One shining light in this dismal situation however is that Shetland managed to do something similar to Norway: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/gavin-mccrone-shetland-shows-the-way-to-oil-wealth-1-1803090/amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/g...
- notJim 7y ago
  And North Dakota. The resource curse can happen anywhere.
- laurencerowe 7y ago
  The UK has the same amount of oil spread across 12x as many people. Yes, the Tories wasted it but it could never have had the same impact on the whole UK that it had on Norway. Perhaps if Scotland had been independent (most of the UK's oil is in its waters) it would have been similar.
  - kwhitefoot 7y ago
    Nonetheless it would have ha some positive impact, And, while I'm as anti Tory as anyone there does not appear to have been a lot of objection to the way the oil income was handled from other parties.
throwaway8119 7y ago
Norway had a per-capita GDP 10x that of Venezuela when they launched their fund. The option was a luxury that they were granted by already being a fairly wealthy country. Also, consider if 25% of Norway's oil revenue is sufficient to provide a basic functioning government. Now you have Norway saving 75% of their oil revenue every year, and Venezuela still sucking 5% out of other funds, resulting in a long-term extremely wealthy Norway and a destitute Venezuela.
- chrisco255 7y ago
  Venezuela was the 4th highest GDP as recently as the 50s. It saw sharp declines in economic health after Chavez and Maduro.
hdfbdtbcdg 7y ago
Venezuelan oil costs more per barrel to extract than Norwegian oil...

dbatten 7y ago

While your point about per-capita production is well-taken, I don't think the original comment was intending to score ideological points. It simply said the Venezuelan crisis was avoidable and happened due to mis-management, not that Chavismo is an inherently evil ideology...

lr4444lr 7y ago
Yes, thank you. I deliberately avoided attributing anything to ideology. At the end of the day, both countries are chiefly comparable in having nationalized their oil resources for the public benefit, at least de iure. Also Venezuela was actually doing quite well I believe in 2013 when prices were high. It was a singular failure of their stewards not to diversify the profits.

SteveGregory 7y ago

First, a nitpick - your numbers should be per million people, not per person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ... Second - the output itself depends on management, so I'm not sure it would be fair to compare current production numbers to show the potential help to the population. In fact - Venezuela has more proven reserves per-capita than Norway, by an incredible margin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oi...

rolltiide 7y ago

You sure? Venezuala's problem was just overleveraging They basically got margin called on their long oil position, and then their political ideology became apparent