One Picture Of The Timeline of Venezuela Proves Socialism Destroys Lives

WATCH: Joe Lieberman views Ocasio-Cortez as more socialist than Democrat

This timeline of Venezuela shows the ugly reality of socialism. As does every other time it has been tried. I pray Bernie Sanders, AOC, and the rest of the Democratic party stop ignoring history and start looking at the facts all around them.

Imagine being so blind that you like Venezuelans are “living the American Dream better than Americans.” Hard to fathom someone like that can be a frontrunner in one of the two major political parties in this country. #Facepalm

From Fox Business:

They say the road to Hell is paved with good intentions and when it comes to the current state of Venezuela, that’s both accurate and descriptive.

As we watch the horrifying images of violence in the wake of disputed President Nicolas Maduro’s regime trying to resist the uprising of Juan Guaido’s opposition, it’s heartbreaking to see the suffering of people who have been struggling to find enough food to eat and who have seen their economy and their lives destroyed in such a short period of time.

Venezuela was, in the not-too-distant past, a well-off country with democratic leanings. In fact, in the mid-20th century, its GDP ranked fourth in the entire world.

Maduro’s predecessor Hugo Chavez worked to increase government control, central planning and entitlements, expanding social programs and nationalizing industries (it is reported that he nationalized thousands of companies and/or the assets of companies). These changes initially curried favor with the poor and working class, as the re-alignment of the economic system created more initial wealth and “equality.” Until it didn’t, because socialism over time always ends up failing.

As Margaret Thatcher said, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

In Venezuela’s case, their main resource of oil saw pricing volatility. When they ran low on surplus oil money to redistribute, the scheme all fell apart. While socialists are adept at spending money, they can’t compete with the innovation of the free markets when it comes to allocating resources and efficiently producing goods and services, as had been the norm in the country pre-Chavez.

Socialism is quite like robbing Peter to pay Paul—once Peter has no more money—and if he has no incentive to make and create more wealth since he is getting robbed—Paul stops getting paid.

It’s really not complicated.