Comments by "" (@shauncameron8390) on "Zimbabwe’s Currency Crisis: the worthless $100 trillion bill" video.

  1. <These are vigilantes, without much thought behind their actions.> Like most revolutionaries and social justice warriors.
    2
  2. <rightfully given back to the people.> Who had no idea how to farm and couldn't sustain the productivity levels the white farmers established leading to their own famine.
    2
  3. Because they were of little consequence as Mugabe and his policies did the most damage. Just like Venezuela with Chavez and Maduro decimating the local economy en route to making Venezuela oil-dependent which they mismanaged.
    2
  4. Rich in resources, but poor in expertise, skills, etc. to do anything worthwhile with them.
    2
  5. Because Mugabe done a much better job destroying the local economy.
    2
  6. No. It's because of Zimbabwean mismanagement.
    2
  7. Botswana would like a word with you on that. Part of Africa's problem was the leadership it had once it got its independence having kleptocrats and Marxists run the show.
    2
  8. <Zimbabwe earned this fate for taking over Rhodesia> With plenty of help from the UK in its mission to de-colonize the world.
    1
  9. And in Zimbabwe's case, a far-left Marxist one.
    1
  10. LOL. Not really.
    1
  11. Until Britain sanctioned them out of power.
    1
  12. <but they were always in correct side during any war> Like Afghanistan?
    1
  13.  @afaxmachine5045  But Mugabe was a socialist.
    1
  14. Zimbabwe is landlocked. What sea is there for them to throw the money out to?
    1
  15.  @abs2ray  <you have clearly bought the narrative.> How so? This is how virtually all socialist land reforms play out. And Zimbabwe was no exception. Take from the successful and productive, give to political loyalists and those not up to the task often resulting in production declines, shortages, eventual famine and having to import. <As for Venezuela they were crushed due to their popular socialist policies which lifted perhaps millions out of poverty into the middle class.> LOL. While destroying the private sector in the process of having to import most of their goods as barely anything was produced locally anymore. Besides, Chavez lifted no one out of poverty. All he just did was throw money at the problem and buy votes. Chavez was popular namely with the poor and illiterate who are easy to get approval from.
    1
  16. Zimbabwe was prosperous at the time Mugabe took over.
    1
  17. Compassionate socialism or really just perpetual vote-buying?
    1
  18. You mean Lenin as the kulaks were victims of his Red Terror campaigns.
    1
  19. And the UK's ruling Labour Party of the day.
    1
  20. Especially in the late 1990's and early 2000's.
    1
  21. It was. Mugabe redistributed the lands to political friends and amateurs allowing said lands to go to waste.
    1
  22. Zimbabwe is not exactly a victim.
    1
  23. Only for us to pick up right where they left off as we're every bit as corrupt and greedy as they are.
    1
  24. Yet Fidel sided with Russian Imperialists.
    1
  25. And sought independence from during de-colonization while Ian Smith was in charge.
    1
  26. As long as the ANC are still in power.
    1
  27. Not nearly as much as Zimbabwe having no real local economy.
    1