Thursday, January 29, 2009

Online poll on the amendment Venezuela 2009

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

From 5 to 25 January 2009, we made the following question to the visitors of our Spanish website Morochos.org:

Do you agree with the constitutional amendment that Hugo Chavez wants to allow indefinite presidential reelection in Venezuela?

These were the results:

- Yes, 22.83%

- No, 77.17%

Observations:

During the first days of this survey, the percentages of "Yes" and "No" were 35% and 65% respectively. At that time, Chavez was proposing to allow indefinite reelection for the President only.

Then came the second version of the amendment, which seeks to approve indefinite reelection for all popular elected offices in Venezuela. Since then, we note that the votes for the "No" were intensified and took advantage, putting the proportion at 73% for the "No" and 27% for the "Yes". So we could say that the idea of indefinite reelection for all provoked more rejection among our visitors than the original proposal.

Also, another thing we noticed during the implementation of this test on the Internet, was that as time passed, the rejection of the Chavez's amendment was more marked, until the publication date of this report.

Click on the image to enlarge it


Related articles:

- Morochos Focus Group: What happens if the "No" wins?

- Keller's survey on Chavez's proposal for indefinite reelection

- Venezuela amendment 2009: Datanalisis and Consultores 21 polls

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Study: What happens in Venezuela after February 15th?

Authors:
Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

On January 20, 2009, we did a focus group composed of Chavez's supporters and opponents, to find out their perceptions about what will happen after the upcoming elections on February 15, 2009.

These were the most relevant conclusions:

- If the "No" wins, Chavez's opponents believe that the Venezuelan President will again attempt to reform the Constitution before the end of his term, or will seek other legal trick to try to retain power. It is obvious that this group is pessimistic about the meaning of a “No” victory on February 15, because they don't see this hypothetical achievement as a final event that results in the end of all Chavez's ambitions. Nevertheless, we note among these Chavez's opponents that they will continue pushing for their cause.

- For their part, chavistas believed that if "No" wins again, President Chavez will try a third time to propose his reelection amendment in referendum, or will design another way to remain in power. We noted that they are optimistic, confident that even losing in the upcoming referendum, Chavez will not abandon the government in 2013.

- It is interesting that chavistas and opponents share the view that if the amendment is rejected next February, Chavez will try to invent something to continue in office beyond 2013.


Related articles:

- Venezuela amendment 2009: Datanalisis and Consultores 21 polls

- Keller's survey on Chavez's proposal for indefinite reelection

- Venezuela amendment 2009: New Chavez's proposal is worse

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Venezuela Amendment 2009: Datanalisis and Consultores 21 polls

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

The Datanalisis poll, taken in December 2008, showed the following results:

- 52% of respondents said they would vote against the amendment

- 37.7% in favor

With a margin of error of 2.72%.

While a Consultores 21 poll, also taken in December 2008, showed this data:

- 56.8% said they would vote “No” to the amendment

- 41.8% would vote Yes

With a margin of error of 3.2%.

The two surveys provide a considerable advantage for the “No”. And in both outcomes, even adding the margin error to the “Yes”, the “NO” wins. This leaves almost no hope for the Chavez amendment, according to these measurements.

Update: Datanalisis’s January poll showed the following results: 51 percent of Venezuelans support the amendment, while 48 percent are against it. The poll of 1,300 households has a margin of error of 2.72 percentage points.

Click on the image to enlarge it


Related articles:

- Keller's survey on Chavez's proposal for indefinite reelection

- Is indefinite reelection the best option for Venezuela?

- Venezuela amendment 2009: New Chavez's proposal is worse

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Spain's labor crisis: Zapatero's fiscal policy is inappropriate for a recession economy

Authors:
Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

According to the latest employment report submitted by the government of Spain, unemployment in the country rose 47% in the past twelve months, leaving Spain with an overall unemployment figure above 13%, the worst employment data in the Euro zone.

U.S. unemployment is at 6.8%, UK 6%, Germany 7.2%, France 8%, Canada 6.4%, Italy 6.8%, Mexico 4.7% and Japan 4%. Much better numbers than the Spanish economy.

It is clear that the variable that has most contributed to this situation is found in the world financial crisis, however, we could say the same thing for the rest of the nations that comprise the European Union, but these countries are not as bad as Spain in employment. What makes us suspect the existence of an additional factor that makes Spain the region with the worst unemployment statistics in Europe.

For us, the answer lies in the public spending as a percentage of GDP determined by the Spanish government. Because while other governments in developed countries have faced the crisis putting the foot on the accelerator of public spending to push their economies, Spain's government has done the opposite.

For example, the UK last year rose by 28% its public spending as a percentage of GDP, Canada increased its spending by 11%, France and Germany remained constant, and the U.S. government increased by over 30% its public spending as a percentage of GDP.

Unlike in Spain, the government cut its public spending as a percentage of GDP by -20% last year, which at the present time of world economic crisis was a fatal error. The worst thing is that by 2009 the Spanish government will make a similar cut in this variable. A decision that, coupled with the current context of divestiture and low consumption, cause a worsening of Spaniards' employment prospects.


Related articles:

- The 2008 U.S. financial crisis: Origin & ideological implications

- Barack Obama’s economic background is his Achilles' Heel

- Correa's energy policy is causing problems in Ecuador

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Five points against the Peak & License Plate Scheme

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

The “peak and a license plate” is a plan designed to reduce traffic in large cities, that consists fundamentally in limiting the number of vehicles in use during the peak hours according to the vehicle registration plate. This traffic program has been tested in cities such as Bogota, Sao Paolo, Mexico City, Santiago, Manila and Athens. But according to our view, the peak and license plate plan have five controversial points:

First, the peak and license plate plan is a complicated policy that causes unease in the population and consumes a lot of resources to achieve little results. It is inefficient to dispose a governmental team to supervise vehicles during the peak hours to reach negligible reductions in traffic volume.

Secondly, it is a discriminatory policy that, in practice, imposes sacrifices on the middle class only. The peak and license plate plan does not affect the rich or senior bureaucrats, since wealthy people can buy other cars with different registration plates to avoid the measure, and high government representatives can obtain special licenses to circulate without restrictions.

Thirdly, the peak and license plate plan is a short-term solution that contradicts the expansionary trend of big cities. The results of the peak and license plate plan are doomed to fade in the long run, unless more restrictions are imposed, but this would provoke more discomfort.

Fourthly, the peak and license plate pretend full crowd management, and assumes that people can easily dispose of other transportation options. Two unrealistic ideas.

And fifth, although the peak and license plate plan has been tested in the cities mentioned above, it has not aroused the interest, nor has been implemented in the metropolises of the world's most developed countries, which is suspect.


Other articles:

- First criticism of Liberation Theology

- U.S. 2008 financial crisis: Origin & ideological implications

- Is Obama preparing a hard-line diplomacy with Clinton?

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Venezuela Amendment 2009. New proposal of indefinite reelection for all popular elected offices is a worse mistake

Authors:
Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

Chavez is concerned because Venezuelans do not want to accompany him in this new race for his indefinite reelection. That is why the current President of Venezuela has changed the proposed constitutional amendment announced at the beginning, and now proposes to allow indefinite reelection for all popular elected offices in Venezuela. With this movement, Chavez is trying to create an incentive for governors, mayors and deputies -interested only in power- to help him harm the Constitution.

But the new amendment multiplies the error of the original proposal. A country infested with national and regional lifetime authorities is more vicious than a country with a national lifetime authority only. So, if Venezuelans were disappointed with the original amendment, our rejection of the modified amendment should be more pronounced.


Related articles:

- Is indefinite reelection the best option for Venezuela?

- Constitutional amendment for indefinite re-election in Venezuela

- Keller's survey on Chavez's proposal for indefinite reelection

Tuesday, January 6, 2009

Questions after 50 years of Castrist revolution in Cuba

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

On January 1, the revolution that Fidel Castro and his henchmen imposed on Cuba completed 50 years. However, after 5 decades of socialism, Castro's political system still leaves several questions unanswered:

1. Why when the revolution triumphed, Fidel Castro announced that he was not interested in power and criticized the Batista's dictatorship, if in later decades he would establish an indefinite dictatorship?

2. Why after 46 years and a half as a dictator, Fidel Castro handed over power to his brother, without a referendum or elections? Could it be that this status is privatized for the Castro family?

3. If Fidel Castro is an example of morality, why he came to power in an armed revolution, formed guerrillas in various parts of the world and was involved in the nuclear threat of the USSR against the USA?

4. If the Cuban regime is an example of political achievements, why political parties are not allowed, many dissidents are kept prisoners, labor unions are prohibited and human rights are not respected?

5. There is talk about the benefits of Castro's educational system, but why are its technological and scientific achievements nonexistent?

6. If the Castro regime has made Cuba a sovereign country, why was a satellite state of the Soviet Union until the fall of the Berlin Wall, and today is so dependent of the dollars sent from Venezuela and the United States?

7. If the Cuban medicine is so advanced, why Fidel Castro was treated by a Spanish specialist -Dr. Jose Luis Garcia Sabrido- when he fell into serious health conditions?

Over the time that has passed, the castrist model has nothing to promise, because it has a history of 50 years of failures that speak for themselves.


Related articles:

- Obama's victory will give a blow to the Latin leftism

- The invasion of Georgia and the leftists' double standards

- Is indefinite reelection the best option for Venezuela?