Bolivia wants to make us depenedant on it for lithium
In the rush to build the next generation of hybrid or electric cars, a sobering fact confronts both automakers and governments seeking to lower their reliance on foreign oil: almost half of the world’s lithium, the mineral needed to power the vehicles, is found here in Bolivia — a country that may not be willing to surrender it so easily.I think nothing in Bolivia is not a prize as long as a control freak like Evo "Evil" Morales is in charge of the country. He is another Chavez type who is big on stealing private assets for the state to manage and control.Japanese and European companies are busily trying to strike deals to tap the resource, but a nationalist sentiment about the lithium is building quickly in the government of President Evo Morales, an ardent critic of the United States who has already nationalized Bolivia’s oil and natural gas industries.
For now, the government talks of closely controlling the lithium and keeping foreigners at bay. Adding to the pressure, indigenous groups here in the remote salt desert where the mineral lies are pushing for a share in the eventual bounty.
“We know that Bolivia can become the Saudi Arabia of lithium,” said Francisco Quisbert, 64, the leader of Frutcas, a group of salt gatherers and quinoa farmers on the edge of Salar de Uyuni, the world’s largest salt flat. “We are poor, but we are not stupid peasants. The lithium may be Bolivia’s, but it is also our property.”
The new Constitution that Mr. Morales managed to get handily passed by voters last month bolstered such claims. One provision could give Indians control over the natural resources in their territory, strengthening their ability to win concessions from the authorities and private companies, or even block mining projects.
None of this is dampening efforts by foreigners, including the Japanese conglomerates Mitsubishi and Sumitomo and a group led by a French industrialist, Vincent Bolloré. In recent months all three have sent representatives to La Paz, the capital, to meet with Mr. Morales’s government about gaining access to the lithium, a critical component for the batteries that power cars and other electronics.
“There are salt lakes in Chile and Argentina, and a promising lithium deposit in Tibet, but the prize is clearly in Bolivia,” Oji Baba, an executive in Mitsubishi’s Base Metals Unit, said in La Paz. “If we want to be a force in the next wave of automobiles and the batteries that power them, then we must be here.”
...
A contract with him will be worth little if the venture proves profitable. The companies would be better off finding an alternative mineral or supplier. One thing is for sure. If we are trying to make ourselves independent on the energy front dealing with Morales is not the way to go.
I posted on this subject recently, but the Times story seems more complete.
You should read a bit more about the history of the conquest of Boiivia for the last 500 years, and think about this resource in that context. Morales is not a control freak, he's trying to get a fair price for the natural resources in the second poorest country in the hemisphere, and empower the oppressed indigenous people who have been raped and pillaged since time immemorial.
ReplyDeleteYou should read more about the past 500 years of conquest in Bolivia and reconsider the issue in that context. Morales is trying to get a fair price for the natural resources in the second poorest country in the hemisphere. For centuries, foreign powers have stripped Bolivia of its mineral wealth, or eploited it from within (as is the case with the seccessionist states in the East). Morales is trying to empower an indigenous majority that has been opressed for centuries, whose lands and wealth and lives have been stolen as a matter of course. You should go there, and see it for yourself. At the very least, do a little more reasearch about Boliviain politics and history before giving in so easily to the Bush-era dogma about Morales.
ReplyDeleteIn the coming months and years we will see an increased military presence in the region (beyond the steady buildup that's been going on there since Evo became a serious candidate for the presidency). We will see more propaganda about "socialism" (even as we nationalize our banks, auto industries, etc.) and "Evo as a puppet of Chavez" in order to justify our seizure of both the Lithium reserves and the natural gas reserves (via support of the right wing terrorist groups that are using US dollars to foment a civil war in the country as we speak).
Is every nation that has the fuel to power our millions of cars under its soil a part of the "Axis of Evil"? It appears so. This kind of dogma is a disgrace to our nation and our people.
Thank God the Bush era is over. We may be able to find diplomatic solutions to the issues that you and many others woefully misunderstand.
"since time immemorial"
ReplyDeletesure... yeah right... under 40,000 years is not that long a time...
i should also point out that until the industrial revolution, no one could move around to oppress indigenous people except them doing it to each other.
in fact if you know the history prior to ths last 500 years, you would know about violent wars and widespread cannibalism (from the north american indians all down through the south american ones). the archeological references of the natives and their practices are quite interesting.
socialists never try to get a 'fair' price... as they have no idea what that is!
market price is fair price, and when the market is hit with something that expensieve in an extortive way (and the leftist state doesnt protect the extortion), then they find a work around... the price makes the research into its own doom easier.
Don't tell me: you get your South American history from "Apocalypto".
ReplyDeleteSeriously though, what's wrong with a nation controlling its own natural resources, and sharing the profits with its poor and oppressed people?
What if foreign countries were trying to take control of our own resources, coal, for example. Wouldn't you say it was up to our government to decide the "fair price" for those resources? And if a coal boom provided a huge revenue source from foreign investors, couldn't some of that money be used to fund education programs, health programs, etc. (particularly for the poor people of Appalachia who live on top of the coal, who mine the coal?).
The Bolivian situation is viewed in this country as a black and white situation of "us vs. them". Morales is considered a socialist puppet of Hugo Chavez. Most people in this country don't even know where Bolivia is. I'm just suggesting that people here look a little deeper into the situation before rushing to the same kinds of judgements and greed that have gotten us entrenched in Iraq. When Lithium or natural gas becomes more valuable than oil, Bolivia, and other countries in South America will become the United States' new military conquest.
The free market should set the price for coal and lithium and any other commodity.
ReplyDeleteThe US has not interest in attacking Bolivia much less conquering it. Outside of the Bay of Pigs fiasco by the Kennedy administration, the US has been content for 60 years to let a commie control freak run Cuba, despite his thefts of property and his human rights abuses.
As far as Iraq oil is concerned we have paid the market price for it, the same as we have for suppliers like Canada and Mexico.
What Bolivia is proposing is to manipulate the market price for its resources above what would be the market. If private companies did that it would be called collusion and price gouging.
Don't tell me: you get your South American history from "Apocalypto".
ReplyDeleteNo, the archeological record throughout the Americas (flaying meat from bones with tools and cracking them open for the marrow leaves distinctive marks).
Where do you get your ideas about natives, from Rousseau fiction?
And your economics from a parasite named Marx?
Seriously though, what's wrong with a nation controlling its own natural resources, and sharing the profits with its poor and oppressed people?
Well, first of all, if they are oppressed, it’s the state that does that. If they are poor, it’s the state that inhibits them from changing their station.
The WRONG part is that a “nation” is not a real entity. Is a symbol. So the nation will NEVER control their own raw materials if the state controls it because the state can’t tally the desires of the nation’s people, and then act on day to day issues. What the state does is control the raw materials themselves, and pretend that every action is what the people want, because they told you that’s what it is.
You basically only have two forms of government, all the hoopla and discussion is like trying to decide between mars bars or almond joy, when the real point is the sugar.
You either have states that control the people without the peoples having much say, or you have stats in which the people control the state without the state having much say.
The US used to be the latter, communist states and totalitarian states, and fascist states, and socialist states, and on and on, are the former.
Now I am going to tell you a secret every woman knows but doesn’t realize. Its not who earns the money that counts, its who controls where its spent that counts. owning something means nothing if one cant control it, and if one is controlling it, one is the presumptive owner. Telling thousands of people that they own it, and no checks from share dividends arrive at their door. It’s like me telling you, you own my car. I drive it, maintain it, and you never see it, touch it, or are allowed to use it or even have a key for it.
States are the largest oppressors. NO state works for the people, because a state is a group of people with power. In your marx model, the state owns everything and controls everything, and the people are told they own it, just like you own my car.
Now, how does this system create economy?
You see, capitalism is not an ideology, Marx said it was, but that was only to put socialism on the appearance of equal footing. Which is why socialism has ALWAYS led to the below average non productive low life span existence!!!
You can read about primates who understand capitalism… but they completely don’t understand socialism!!! To them capitalism is fair, and socialism is unfair and they strike… guess what, that’s what happens in socialism too. The parasites claim capitalism is unfair, not because they don’t live well, but because they cant live as well as others who work hard (a parasite can only obtain as much as what others have, never more). so they get the state to redistribute this largesse, cause they think its unfair. Well the hosts that the parasites live off of, goes on strike. They stop producing (anyone want to bet how fast the guys who are in the bail out banks are going to leave now they don’t get bonuses?), and the whole system declines to subsistence, or it gets punitive trying to whip the hosts into producing enough excess so that the parasites can live better. but by this time, the only parasites that can live better are the rulers who now are oligarchs, or beuracratic lords, who own the people, because the people are on their property, and have nothing to offer them, they are spent. And so they look to other countries. [which is why all the socialist countries eventually are the real imperialists… Russia never gave back any land… and they are still occuypying Georgia, no? but is the US in control of france? Nope, quite the opposite… how about japan? Germany? Spain? South korea? ]
You don’t get this… and its sad… because you’re the kind of person who wants to be in a prison cause you like the structure and lack of failure, but we don’t mind failing as long as we can fly and do what we please…
The animal in the zoo never gets eaten like in the wild
But it doenst have a life either…
What if foreign countries were trying to take control of our own resources, coal, for example.
Well, you would have to explain what you mean by that… control in what way? Are they going to invade the country to force you to comply? Or do you see a person not willing to buy your product at an inflated price and will wait for a better price later as control?
When you talk to thinking people, please be specific, they are not idiots, and so big whooping statements like a Hitler speech don’t work… if it did you and I would not have this conversation, since the state wouldn’t let us!
Wouldn't you say it was up to our government to decide the "fair price" for those resources?
No
I know, you want a real answer. But your not going to like it since you have no idea of the meanings and implications.
The state or the company can decide the fair price of a resources but it can’t compel the buyer to buy!!!
Socialists don’t understand why so many people are happy in a capitalist state. And its easy.. if you cant get the state to set fair prices, and if the state doesn’t tax every transaction too much, and the people are left to themselves, they make deals based on the value THEY set for things based on what the VALUE is to them, they mutually decide whether they both benefit or not.
Now here is the hard part... this only works if they make each other happy. If either is unhappy, then they don’t deal. This is how capitalism works. In the US I have 305 million other people willing to make me happy for some of my money! The ones that are good at it, earn money… the ones like you that can’t figure out that the game is pursuing others happiness not selfishly pursuing yours, don’t get this…
Your 500 year statement shows that. if those poor Indians owned the sources of that gold, and not the state, who would have gotten the money? the ruler of Bolivia or the people of Bolivia? In the time period your complaining about you had the situation your wishing to have! The mines were owned by the state of Bolivia… Bolivia’s state sold the gold and other things to foreign states, the people got nothing because the state was doing the business.
Go ahead… go back to that history and look again… tell me the name of the company who on the brazilian side owned the mines and could deal internationally? (only the states could since there was no currency exchanges, and other things… one traded for value…)
Here is the problem.. The state has an agenda different than the poor.
A poor man may sell a bushel of corn for $1 (I know it’s a fake price)
The state may say, I will not sell for less than 4$
What happens to the poor now? As I said, you can set whatever price you want, but it’s the buyer that has to be willing to pay that price, and if the buyer is not willing to pay 4$, the corn rots, and the people starve, and some other producer of corn earns the dollars.
This is why socialist countries do very badly… they have no way to set value… because value is not an absolute.
What is the value of a dollar today? Is it the same value as a dollar ten years ago? will a dollar 20 years from now have the same value?
They will all be one dollar, but they all have different values. So even the currency you are using doesn’t have a fixed value!!!!!
So… here is your chance… if you can cogently explain in a way that works how the state can establish value better than distributive computing of 300 million entities can (people who think and choose based on their needs), then you will get a noble prize.. Russia and china will give you their greatest rewards, and so on. [marx conveniently left out this solution… it doesn’t exist, and because of it the system will never work… but its large and complex and you can get lost in it, and so everyone has to try it as if hitting your head with a sledge hammer will have a different result]
And if a coal boom provided a huge revenue source from foreign investors, couldn't some of that money be used to fund education programs, health programs, etc. (particularly for the poor people of Appalachia who live on top of the coal, who mine the coal?).
Ha.. I have family in Appalachia… but what gets money into the hands of the people is work…
The state just gave away nearly a trillion dollars of yours and my money, do you think they will make a better deal for the coal and not sell it cheap for sweet deal for themselves?
You need to study history… prior to the changes that moved us towards socialism Appalachia was not as bad. before the state got involved the kids had schools the parents paid for… and since the parents paid for them, they were cheap, efficient, and taught better than the left crap that cripples the minds of the kids there today.
I know beria, and Richmond, I also know hazard, and other areas..
But I also know how the kids are taught, and they cant see how capitalism works. So they cant use it to get out or improve Appalachia!
If you want a solution for Appalachia then look to the lesson of Japan.
But let me digress a second…
What you want is the wealth under the property rights held as mineral rights.
Then you should ask why did granddad sell off the mineral rights?
Because he wanted the money, and thought that it was free money since he had no use for the coal… it had no value to him.
But lets say he didn’t sell.. could he have mined his property even if it was as small as an acre? Yes of course he could… but the local state would say what? they would ask for what permits? What regulations? Was he free to do with his own property as he saw fit?
Basically the situation that your describing as a solution is what is what hurt the area in the first place.
Now back to Japan.
Appalachians problem is that it’s too concerned with what others own, and not concerned with what it can do.
Japan is a small island around the size of the California area of our country.
It has a population not all that different… so it’s a very small place with a lot of people… Appalachia is a very large place with some people.
Japan, has almost no natural resources… while the state of Kentucky has lots of resources, the people in Appalachia don’t have access to it.
Appalachia is land bound with good roads and anyone can travel and have easy access to the markets of the US, Canada, and other places without having to pay huge shipping prices to deal outside of Appalachia.
So do you want to know the problem? The people of Appalachia are lazy. Many are shiftless. They are land rich, money poor, good ole boys, who don’t want to work hard, learn, or do more than the minimum to get buy as long as they are ok. As with many other Americans they will spend a lot of time going out for quarter beers every other night, screw around, and generally not do much of anything productive with their down time.
They are their own worst enemy… and nothing, no state, or god will save them from that as long as that’s how they behave.
The Africans in Louisiana are upset because it’s now being dominated by Chinese. But why? The Chinese are not considered a minority any more. why not? they were coolies…
Ah… that’s because they are self sufficient. They don’t look to others who fail them to get what they want or need…
Here is what they can do that Appalachians can’t. They can pool their money, and make no interest loans to each other to build businesses who then put back into the pool for the next people. They are civil, the are hard working, they are organized, and they can do capitalism well (as they try to please their customers, they have mostly learned that the happier their store makes people the more money they have and the more happiness they receive).
The Africans are still waiting for what they theink they are owed.. they are waiting for something… but while they are waiting, others are working, they are teaming up.
Meanwhile back in Appalachia, they are aimless.
Kitty hawk is famous because a couple of guys who made bicycles made a plane in their spare time.
In Appalachia there is a woman named kitty, she isn’t famous, because she has two kids by a couple of guys, she sits around and complains that they and the state don’t give her enough… but rather than study on the internet, learn for free, take courses for free with the SBA… she does sudoku and kvetchs.
The Bolivian situation is viewed in this country as a black and white situation of "us vs. them". Morales is considered a socialist puppet of Hugo Chavez. Most people in this country don't even know where Bolivia is.
ReplyDeleteThe bolivian situation is not even on the radar…
Morales IS a socialist puppet of chavez who is a socialist puppet of Medvedev who is a puppet of putin, who is a puppet of…
And as far as knowing where it is… the us has so many south American Spanish here that they know where Bolivia is… in fact they learned where Bolivia is when it was famous for its crystal white flake powder it used to ship up before the Columbian cartels organized things. young people wont know, they are too busy making and blowing out their minds with crank in Appalachia.
I'm just suggesting that people here look a little deeper into the situation before rushing to the same kinds of judgments and greed that have gotten us entrenched in Iraq.
Well, that’s not why we went into iraq, and if you think that real reasons are given before a war, then you’re an idiot. Because that would tell you the objective of the war, and so, foil the reason for it.
Greed of war is a false thing. Very few people make a lot of money with war. Wars are so destructive and so destabilizing that costs go up for economies that are capitalist. To think that Halliburton (or whatever they are now) would not have made similar money without a war is absurd.
Ya want to know the real objective? You wont believe me…
But if you wanted to stop the games around Israel.
Stop the killings and games in Africa
What do you have to do?
You have to stop the weapons that supply these regimes. And Russia (sometimes china) are the suppliers. (in south America it will be chavez, since he and putin signed an agreement to let him make rpgs, ak’s and sniper rifles for urban warfare).
Supplies can be delivered in three ways. land sea or air… sea and air are the worst. Just look at recent things. weapons for resupplying hamas were captured at sea… a weapons ship from china refused to be unloaded… air is expensive, cant carry much… and so both sea and air are lousy (they even let others know in a round about way how much your moving).
So land is it. Now map man. Open up a map and mark out the routes from Russia to each of the worst hot spots.
Notice that they go through Georgia? And Azerbaijan? Wow, a real reason why these countries would be such a problem. if they are sovereign and want to be left alone, they may not let convoys of weapons through their country to the next country in the chain! The war in Georgia was to make sure that this conduit would remain open.
Then from there you have to to into turkey, iraq, or iran…
Turkey sided with the US because it has a capitalist economy and would love stability. The bombers that came from Sweden were captured, we missed the ones in spain (whose purpse was to change the state and make it friendly to ships that would cross its inspection if the rest were closed off).
Iraq we invaded… now weapons can only go through iran… but they have to take this long route down through the whole country, then either to ships, or across the straight and either to Africa or up to Israel area.
So basically if you look at a map, turkey, iraq, iran, and Afghanistan make a one country wide line that would prevent all land shipments of arms to all the places we are complaining about!!!!
So failure to support bush in favor of left communists insured that the door that the communists use to ship weapons to the politically useful areas was kept open and a future of stability in the area now fell away.
When Lithium or natural gas becomes more valuable than oil, Bolivia, and other countries in South America will become the United States' new military conquest.
Natural gas will never be more valuable than oil (when it is, they will crack oil to make it, and have more volume of gas than the oil took up before).
Its only more valuable because its so efficient!!! Meanwhile, in case you didn’t notice, Exxon made 40 billion in profits, but paid close to 200 billion to states in taxes!!!! So who is making runaway profits? The state.
The best thing that can happen is the areas are privately owned. Private ownership has liability, it can be sued, it is much more responsible than the state. They will hire people. There will need to be garages, and stores to supply things. this happens all over where these things are… mining towns.
The people need an economy… trade, business, skills, etc… they will not get that when they are ruled by the state!
I will leave you with this saying of mine.
Capitalism turned rulers into servants of the people and made it a job, while it turned people into free inviduals who could change their state in life if they wanted AND worked for it.
Socialism will turn the people who are now rulers into slaves and serfs for the rulers who will take control and own everything, just as before throughout history!
Basically it returns the free independent states into a one party ruling class over working serfs who live on the ruling classes property, do the work for them, and are told how to live…
They are denied weapons, money, property, and mobility.
They are slaves… they used to be free, till someone convinved them to try on these really neat bracelets and ankle jewelry. Then they didn’t need to pretend anymore.
Wait till you see what happens in chavez land this feb 15…