One of the perennial complaints made of investment analysts is “why didn’t you warn me about this before the crash?” While difficult, it is sometimes possible to identify the makings of a country’s downfall beforehand, while the news about it is still positive. One such situation is Venezuela.
Right now Venezuela is riding high on a wave of high oil prices. With approximately 70% of the country’s net exports coming from state-owned oil production, and oil near ten-year highs, the government’s revenue has substantially increased. GDP growth and economic indicators are positive.
Venezuela’s external debt represents only about 30% of GDP, lowest among the major Latin American economies. Furthermore, Venezuela’s economy is experiencing the only current account surplus among the major Latin American economies. All of these factors are considered positive, yet I will argue that a major decline in Venezuela’s economy is becoming increasingly likely.
In the longer term, it is ideas, and the social, political, and economic environment that ideas produce that determine a country’s economic results. Right now, the greatest threat to Venezuela’s economic future lies within its ideological direction, specifically the anticapitalist and statist philosophy espoused by its popular president, Hugo Chavez.
Chavez took power in December 1998, promising to reform a corrupt government. Since then, he has instead led a “political revolution” designed to elevate his personal power within the government, and of the government over its citizens. Chavez has removed the checks against his power held by Congress and the Supreme Court. And Chavez’ ultimate goal appears to be ruling Venezuela by personal decree – i.e. dictatorship.
Chavez gravitates towards the dictatorial left, and has explicitly struck out against America’s dominant status in the world and the “savage capitalism” it promotes. He has gone out of his way to visit and praise Fidel Castro, Jiang Zemin, and Saddam Hussein, and has cited the government of Libya’s Col. Muammar Qaddafi as a model of democracy. Regarding Cuba and Venezuela, Chavez stated that both countries were “swimming together towards the same sea of happiness.”
There are ominous parallels between Castro and his admirer Chavez. Like Castro, Chavez was a failed baseball player, and like Castro, came to power as a “reformer.” Both were originally hailed as “reformers” and “pragmatists.” Now, like Castro and numerous past revolutionaries, Chavez erects massive posters of himself, and lectures the country for hours on the wickedness of capitalists, the necessity of class warfare, land redistribution, and the delights of delivering a “knockout punch to the counterrevolution.”
Those productive and wealthy Venezuelans on the receiving end of Chavez’ abuse aren’t waiting around for his “knockout punch.” They appear to be voting with their feet and checkbooks. Capital flight is substantial, estimated to be about US$1 billion per month.
Despite his anti-capitalist rhetoric, Chavez is hoping to raise money from foreign and private investors by partially privatizing the telecommunications and energy industries. So far investors have been distrustful of Chavez’ contradictory policies, and incoming investment has slowed, with foreign investors reluctant to invest even in oil ventures, let alone non-export industries.
With state oil revenues generating a windfall of government funds, Chavez is expanding government spending at an even faster pace. Chavez recently announced plans to spend additional billions this year to inaugurate a new stage of “economic revolution.” Though details are lacking, given Chavez’ background, his economic revolution is likely to entail confiscation and redistribution of wealth, and an increase in government interference in the economy.
Even with $30 oil, Chavez is spending beyond the government’s means, given that government expenditures are expected to reach 20% of GDP. This has led Chavez to raid $2 billion from the central bank, crushing its fa
