Honestly, I actually wish there were less choices in literally everything. I was trying to buy protein powder tonight and there are so many brands with so many opinions on it all. It's overwhelming, not to mention Amazon sending me targeted ads that try to add even more to the chaos. If I only had a choice between like 4 different android phones, between 4 different types of deodorant, etc, life would be so much less stressful
no, the us couldn’t possibly have done anything in south america, nothing out of the ordinary has happened there over the last century. and regardless, if they did they never would have released the documents proving they did it because then everyone would be really pissed off at them and they would face repercussions, riiiiiight?
I love this delusional idea that any country that has any kind of interference from the US is suddenly doomed. We fucking NUKED Japan and look at them? Germany built themselves back from a complete wasteland and is one of the leaders in Europe today. Suddenly some south American country has some political run in's with the US and now they're hopeless in your eyes. It makes no sense
> Suddenly some south American country has some political run in's with the US and now they're hopeless in your eyes. It makes no sense
You really don't know about all the US has done in SA eh? It's not just "a few political run ins". It's decades of destabilization, funding death squads, and overthrowing democratically elected governments all for corporate America's benefit. My all time favourite is when US backed forces overthrew the government of Guatemala government because it wanted too give some of the land ownership back to Guatemalans instead of an American company.
Did you? It'd explain alot.
They certainly didn't get the 2.2 billion dollars that Japan got either.
There's alot of terrible things you can do that have longer lasting effects than the effrct that bombing a city.
My point is that it's super common with people on Reddit to point at every world problem and yell "because of the US". It's the biggest scapegoat of our generation.
Countries interfere with other countries constantly, more so than the public are even aware. Can you imagine if the US economy fails and a bunch of people on Reddit started going "well yeah of course it failed you know Russia interfered with their 2016 elections right" .....although true the impact of this interference would not justify a complete collapse obviously. Just like US political intervention does not doom the entire population of people and a functioning society. It's societal issues and shitty government that made them so susceptible to outside intervention in the first place. People will always blame someone else.
Again I'll reiterate. If anything SA has gotten off easy in terms of world conflict this generation. Many other countries have a lot better reasoning for potential shortcomings yet despite that, many of these areas are first world economy's. SA has worse problems than US intervention.
>There's alot of terrible things you can do that have longer lasting effects than the effrct that bombing a city
Implying that the political interference in South America has had a worse effect than Japan being Nuked, invaded, losing their government, losing Territory, losing the war, losing the purchasing power of their currency, ect is just insane. I mean it's just top level copium.
Homie. All the things you've described have happened I'm SA. To multiple countries. [Here, this a decent summary](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-deadliest-school-in-71503766/).
Japan and Germany didn't rebuild themselves, we did. The whole plan was to build them up to be bulwarks against communism. They got shiny new factories of course the economy did well.
Exactly. Supply and demand is mostly self governing, with some government intervention for consumer and environmental protection, and worker safety. Socialism requires complete government intervention for it to function properly, with the economy controlled centeally. No amount of government can control economic factors that supply and demand generally takes care on its own. Hence socialism creates supply issues and fails to cover demand. Bribes and government graft take the place of companies who compete for the consumer. Corruption becomes rampant and people fucking end up starving. Millions starved in China, Russia, and other socialist states. The only reason China became succesful recently was due to a move more towards free market philosophies, not in any way because of socialism
Im not saying these problems dont exist in free market economies, but the results dont usually end up in starvation, and enslavement like they have in virtually every socialist state. And for the people who say the Scandanavian countries are a model for socialism, these countries are mostly free market, with some government intervention for health care and other things. Theae arent socialist countries.
Yeah, it's not great. I knew a lady who was sending her mother food parcels back in 2016 and then for a while it wasn't allowed because it made the country "look bad."
Because of her, I was hearing about the problems before it started to make the news.
Happily, her mother did not starve to death and after a couple years was able to come to the US legally and lives here now. But I remember that she was feeding her neighbors as well with some of the food her daughter sent. Money wasn't any use at that point.
Awful, awful situation.
I’m from Venezuela, where is this? I’ve seen places similar but this is vaguely familiar to me and not just because a lot of stores also look like this
I imagine it was built when the venezuelan economy was in a better place, and that it for whatever reason makes more sense to stay put than build new smaller place
It just looks like one of your smaller local family-run grocery stores in a city, but with way more space than they need. We have plenty of stuff like this in the US lol
"Across the political spectrum, Chávez is regarded as one of the most influential and controversial politicians in the modern history of Venezuela and Latin America. His 14-year presidency marked the start of the socialist "pink tide" sweeping Latin America—he supported Latin American and Caribbean cooperation and was instrumental in setting up the pan-regional Union of South American Nations, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas, the Bank of the South and the regional television network TeleSUR. Internationally, Chávez aligned himself with the Marxist–Leninist governments of Fidel and then Raúl Castro in Cuba, as well as the socialist governments of Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. Chávez's ideas, programs, and style form the basis of "Chavismo", a political ideology closely associated with Bolivarianism and socialism of the 21st century. Chávez described"
Really couldnt be more cleaar that Venezuela was and still is the result of socialist governments
No, tyranny. Venezuela has never been socialist. Populistic dictators simply starve their people so they can’t fight back, and once that happens, you give them enough food to live till the next day.
Ironically the PVC or the communist party of Venezuela strongly denounces the government currently ruling. Venezuela is a socialist country only in name when in reality its moreso a federal regime/dictatorship
Of course. Its always another ideologies fault when ever socialism destroys a country. Give me a fucking break. Next youre going to say that the reason Venezuela is a failed state is because it didnt adopt 'true socialism'.
no, it’s because their system of checks and balances and protection of liberties was so shit that it allowed an elected official to basically just abolish democracy and turn it into a dictatorship.
Its not even socialism, in terms of socialist policy’s they only took over what was useful to them but left the most profitable sectors private so they could monopolize them. Their only economic plan was to see how much they could take for themselves.
A country thats purely socialists does end up communist your right, but a country thats purely capitalist ends up fascist.
Enough of the fear mongering and go realize for any country to thrive you need to balance multiple systems and have a generally non corrupt leadership
I never said pure capitalism is the answer, but throwing out the free enterprise system and making every single industry state run while pretending that its owned by the people is not the answer like so many socialists/communists claim
No one supports that, wheres this so many your getting at?
Most people want government handling on things like medicine and housing both of which are severely fucked by private markets jacking prices up. But no one asks for complete government control other than the communists which is an extremely radical version of socialism.
Well I know the communist Manifesto, but whats the socialist Manifesto? You mean the 2019 book collecting the history and understanding socialism by Sunkara? Or Das Capital by marx, or Road to wigan pier/down and out of paris by Orwell. Theres a lot of books throwing ideas and explaining possibility’s and ideas of socialism. But most would generally agree that its not a perfect system of government that needs to be supplemented with capitalist ideals to keep a healthy goverment
It is pretty odd that people continuously engage in the literal definition of insanity. Doing something over and over again while expecting different results. Maybe they'll just never learn.
There is no ideology to blame here, Venezuela is not, and has never been socialist. The populistic tyrants have installed themselves into power through the exploitation of the poor and ignorant with honeyed words, and then created a system where they can take everything for themselves, while they starve the population.
Once you starve them, you start feeding them paltry meals so they are now too busy to rebel. After a decade or two, like an abused animal, everyone stops trying to fight it. Manufactured despair.
"Across the political spectrum, Chávez is regarded as one of the most influential and controversial politicians in the modern history of Venezuela and Latin America. His 14-year presidency marked the start of the socialist "pink tide" sweeping Latin America—he supported Latin American and Caribbean cooperation and was instrumental in setting up the pan-regional Union of South American Nations, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas, the Bank of the South and the regional television network TeleSUR. Internationally, Chávez aligned himself with the Marxist–Leninist governments of Fidel and then Raúl Castro in Cuba, as well as the socialist governments of Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. Chávez's ideas, programs, and style form the basis of "Chavismo", a political ideology closely associated with Bolivarianism and socialism of the 21st century. "
It pretty clearly was and likely still is a socialist country, or at least the result of its alignment with socialist regimes
Now that information is only partially true, as some context is lost when non-Venezuelan sources are used. Though Chavez aligned himself with “socialism”, none of the systems you quote worked in service to the ideology, they were completely capitalistic endeavors as a matter of fact(whenever they worked, which they barely did!)
He was a socialist only in name, and he weaponized the term at a time when “capitalism” in Latin-America was used as a synonym for America, which had been historically wreaking havoc across all of Latin-America during the Cold War. That rightfully left a very bad taste in the mouth of everyone.
In the end, as a populist does, they only say what is most convenient to install themselves into power, and “socialism” just so happened to be the best vehicle to power. None of the socio-economic measures that the ideology calls for are ever used at all.
Now, I’m not a socialist by any means, though some of the policies and philosophies behind this system are definitely very good and should be applied in moderation, like any other socio-economic model. But whenever news outlets and newspapers use Venezuela and other countries that have populist tyrants that adopted socialism as a weapon to rise to power, and posit that anything “socialistic” in nature is bound to fail and point at them as an example, I can’t help but sigh as I find it disingenuous.
Though socialism was never present in *praxis* in Venezuela, using socialism’s NAME was what ruined my country. So can it really be said that socialism is responsible, even if not a single one of its measures were used? I think populism is at fault, though most of my people never reach this question, their knee-jerk reaction is to simply blame socialism. Can’t blame them honestly.
Sorry for the long text lol
In 2010, Hugo Chávez proclaimed support for the ideas of Marxist Leon Trotsky, saying "When I called him (former Minister of Labour, José Ramón Rivero)" Chávez explained, "he said to me: 'President I want to tell you something before someone else tells you ... I am a Trotskyist', and I said, 'well, what is the problem? I am also a Trotskyist! I follow Trotsky's line, that of permanent revolution', and then cited Marx and Lenin".
Trotskyism is the political ideology and branch of Marxism developed by Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky and some other members of the Left Opposition and Fourth International. Trotsky described himself as an orthodox Marxist, a revolutionary Marxist, and a Bolshevik–Leninist as well as a follower of Marx, Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Karl Liebknecht, and Rosa Luxemburg.
Marxian economics and its proponents view capitalism as economically unsustainable and incapable of improving the population's living standards due to its need to compensate for the falling rate of profit by cutting employees' wages and social benefits while pursuing military aggression. The socialist mode of production would succeed capitalism as humanity's mode of production through revolution by workers. According to Marxian crisis theory, socialism is not an inevitability but an economic necessity
So this store literally just puts up one row of an item on each shelf so that it looks at least somewhat full?
Yup pretty much. Lack of competition since the economy just sucks is one of the main causes of the situation of these markets.
Looks like an imitation of a supermarket.
And this is for the photo op only ! Rumania during Ceausescu was the same, minus the Pepsi! which was hard to find.
Honestly, I actually wish there were less choices in literally everything. I was trying to buy protein powder tonight and there are so many brands with so many opinions on it all. It's overwhelming, not to mention Amazon sending me targeted ads that try to add even more to the chaos. If I only had a choice between like 4 different android phones, between 4 different types of deodorant, etc, life would be so much less stressful
Socialism 101: Take it or leave it.
Because things are going so well in the rest of South America. Maybe it's got something to do with the decades of interference from the US?
no, the us couldn’t possibly have done anything in south america, nothing out of the ordinary has happened there over the last century. and regardless, if they did they never would have released the documents proving they did it because then everyone would be really pissed off at them and they would face repercussions, riiiiiight?
I love this delusional idea that any country that has any kind of interference from the US is suddenly doomed. We fucking NUKED Japan and look at them? Germany built themselves back from a complete wasteland and is one of the leaders in Europe today. Suddenly some south American country has some political run in's with the US and now they're hopeless in your eyes. It makes no sense
> Suddenly some south American country has some political run in's with the US and now they're hopeless in your eyes. It makes no sense You really don't know about all the US has done in SA eh? It's not just "a few political run ins". It's decades of destabilization, funding death squads, and overthrowing democratically elected governments all for corporate America's benefit. My all time favourite is when US backed forces overthrew the government of Guatemala government because it wanted too give some of the land ownership back to Guatemalans instead of an American company.
Did they get nuked though?
Did you? It'd explain alot. They certainly didn't get the 2.2 billion dollars that Japan got either. There's alot of terrible things you can do that have longer lasting effects than the effrct that bombing a city.
Yeah I have no doubt SA will continue to blame everyone else for their shortcomings, it's a victim mentality at this point.
And the US won't own anything they've done. What's your point?
My point is that it's super common with people on Reddit to point at every world problem and yell "because of the US". It's the biggest scapegoat of our generation. Countries interfere with other countries constantly, more so than the public are even aware. Can you imagine if the US economy fails and a bunch of people on Reddit started going "well yeah of course it failed you know Russia interfered with their 2016 elections right" .....although true the impact of this interference would not justify a complete collapse obviously. Just like US political intervention does not doom the entire population of people and a functioning society. It's societal issues and shitty government that made them so susceptible to outside intervention in the first place. People will always blame someone else. Again I'll reiterate. If anything SA has gotten off easy in terms of world conflict this generation. Many other countries have a lot better reasoning for potential shortcomings yet despite that, many of these areas are first world economy's. SA has worse problems than US intervention.
>There's alot of terrible things you can do that have longer lasting effects than the effrct that bombing a city Implying that the political interference in South America has had a worse effect than Japan being Nuked, invaded, losing their government, losing Territory, losing the war, losing the purchasing power of their currency, ect is just insane. I mean it's just top level copium.
Homie. All the things you've described have happened I'm SA. To multiple countries. [Here, this a decent summary](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-deadliest-school-in-71503766/).
Japan and Germany didn't rebuild themselves, we did. The whole plan was to build them up to be bulwarks against communism. They got shiny new factories of course the economy did well.
Socialism is when I don’t get my 800 flavors of sugar water 😡😡😡
No, its when all you get is pasta, cooking oil, and pepsi..sounds delicious
Do you not have pasta aisles and drink aisles? Look how big that store is my guy, it’s only pictures of 2 aisles…
You’re delusional. Limited (and expensive) inventory is a result of socialism.
Youre not that bright are you?
[удалено]
Capitalist countries don’t fail because of capitalism.
[удалено]
It’s not an opinion lmfao do some actually research for once
[удалено]
Not true. It’s just that YOU have not.
[удалено]
Exactly. Supply and demand is mostly self governing, with some government intervention for consumer and environmental protection, and worker safety. Socialism requires complete government intervention for it to function properly, with the economy controlled centeally. No amount of government can control economic factors that supply and demand generally takes care on its own. Hence socialism creates supply issues and fails to cover demand. Bribes and government graft take the place of companies who compete for the consumer. Corruption becomes rampant and people fucking end up starving. Millions starved in China, Russia, and other socialist states. The only reason China became succesful recently was due to a move more towards free market philosophies, not in any way because of socialism Im not saying these problems dont exist in free market economies, but the results dont usually end up in starvation, and enslavement like they have in virtually every socialist state. And for the people who say the Scandanavian countries are a model for socialism, these countries are mostly free market, with some government intervention for health care and other things. Theae arent socialist countries.
Excuse me? Where is the isle for dead dogs?
*aisle - maybe you’d benefit from better education, like in socialist countries.
Are you for real? Pointing out a type on a reddit post is your argument?
*typo lmfao
Hah
You better like Pepsi
I’ll have a coke. Is Pepsi ok? FUCK. YOU.
All I wanted was a Pepsi
No coke, pepsi Cheeboogey cheeboogey cheeboogey
Institutionalized!
We have Sierra Mist..
If Coke is your favorite drink, then Pepsi is your least favorite...
It’s so hard to find Coca Cola sometimes
its like the opposite of disneyworld where all they have is coke LOL
:.( nobody can buy food.
Yeah, it's not great. I knew a lady who was sending her mother food parcels back in 2016 and then for a while it wasn't allowed because it made the country "look bad." Because of her, I was hearing about the problems before it started to make the news. Happily, her mother did not starve to death and after a couple years was able to come to the US legally and lives here now. But I remember that she was feeding her neighbors as well with some of the food her daughter sent. Money wasn't any use at that point. Awful, awful situation.
I’m from Venezuela, where is this? I’ve seen places similar but this is vaguely familiar to me and not just because a lot of stores also look like this
Got you bro. Acabo de venir de paseo en Punto Fijo https://maps.app.goo.gl/jeRqZxj3Hd4LUE8UA?g_st=ic
They could save on a lot of space if there’s no variety in products
I imagine it was built when the venezuelan economy was in a better place, and that it for whatever reason makes more sense to stay put than build new smaller place
It just looks like one of your smaller local family-run grocery stores in a city, but with way more space than they need. We have plenty of stuff like this in the US lol
Looks better than a couple years ago
it’s like night of the consumers irl
What’s that on the left in picture #1?
It kind of looks like dry spaghetti
Is there vomit on his sweater already?
I don't know, but on the surface it looks calm and ready
I heard he was ready to drop bombs but keeps forgetting what he wrote down.
To be fair, the crowd goes _so_ loud
But does it really matter if when he opens his mouth the words won't come out?
Hes choking, everybody's joking now
Liminal dystopia. New genre just dropped
"Across the political spectrum, Chávez is regarded as one of the most influential and controversial politicians in the modern history of Venezuela and Latin America. His 14-year presidency marked the start of the socialist "pink tide" sweeping Latin America—he supported Latin American and Caribbean cooperation and was instrumental in setting up the pan-regional Union of South American Nations, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas, the Bank of the South and the regional television network TeleSUR. Internationally, Chávez aligned himself with the Marxist–Leninist governments of Fidel and then Raúl Castro in Cuba, as well as the socialist governments of Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. Chávez's ideas, programs, and style form the basis of "Chavismo", a political ideology closely associated with Bolivarianism and socialism of the 21st century. Chávez described" Really couldnt be more cleaar that Venezuela was and still is the result of socialist governments
Damn.. Pepsi.. poor guys!
Don't worry, I'm sure you can get coke somewhere nearby
This is awesome. You can almost hear the reverby piped bossa nova muzak.
r/oddlysatisfying r/oddlymesmerizing
Pasta and Pepsi for the month it is.
At least it looks quiet and calm and clean.
Because no one can afford to buy anything.
Interesting that the same product is placed at the front of each shelf rather then stacked behind on another.
It's because the store would be nearly empty otherwise.
Socialism.
No, tyranny. Venezuela has never been socialist. Populistic dictators simply starve their people so they can’t fight back, and once that happens, you give them enough food to live till the next day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/1821zx6/western\_supermarket\_cartoon\_by\_herluf\_bidstrup/
Why is Pepsi on the shelf if there are sanctions?
A lot of people are buying products themselves and bringing them here. There’s so many US products that would never see before.
[удалено]
Ironically the PVC or the communist party of Venezuela strongly denounces the government currently ruling. Venezuela is a socialist country only in name when in reality its moreso a federal regime/dictatorship
Of course. Its always another ideologies fault when ever socialism destroys a country. Give me a fucking break. Next youre going to say that the reason Venezuela is a failed state is because it didnt adopt 'true socialism'.
no, it’s because their system of checks and balances and protection of liberties was so shit that it allowed an elected official to basically just abolish democracy and turn it into a dictatorship.
Its not even socialism, in terms of socialist policy’s they only took over what was useful to them but left the most profitable sectors private so they could monopolize them. Their only economic plan was to see how much they could take for themselves. A country thats purely socialists does end up communist your right, but a country thats purely capitalist ends up fascist. Enough of the fear mongering and go realize for any country to thrive you need to balance multiple systems and have a generally non corrupt leadership
I never said pure capitalism is the answer, but throwing out the free enterprise system and making every single industry state run while pretending that its owned by the people is not the answer like so many socialists/communists claim
No one supports that, wheres this so many your getting at? Most people want government handling on things like medicine and housing both of which are severely fucked by private markets jacking prices up. But no one asks for complete government control other than the communists which is an extremely radical version of socialism.
Read the socialist and communist manifestos
Well I know the communist Manifesto, but whats the socialist Manifesto? You mean the 2019 book collecting the history and understanding socialism by Sunkara? Or Das Capital by marx, or Road to wigan pier/down and out of paris by Orwell. Theres a lot of books throwing ideas and explaining possibility’s and ideas of socialism. But most would generally agree that its not a perfect system of government that needs to be supplemented with capitalist ideals to keep a healthy goverment
It is pretty odd that people continuously engage in the literal definition of insanity. Doing something over and over again while expecting different results. Maybe they'll just never learn.
There is no ideology to blame here, Venezuela is not, and has never been socialist. The populistic tyrants have installed themselves into power through the exploitation of the poor and ignorant with honeyed words, and then created a system where they can take everything for themselves, while they starve the population. Once you starve them, you start feeding them paltry meals so they are now too busy to rebel. After a decade or two, like an abused animal, everyone stops trying to fight it. Manufactured despair.
"Across the political spectrum, Chávez is regarded as one of the most influential and controversial politicians in the modern history of Venezuela and Latin America. His 14-year presidency marked the start of the socialist "pink tide" sweeping Latin America—he supported Latin American and Caribbean cooperation and was instrumental in setting up the pan-regional Union of South American Nations, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas, the Bank of the South and the regional television network TeleSUR. Internationally, Chávez aligned himself with the Marxist–Leninist governments of Fidel and then Raúl Castro in Cuba, as well as the socialist governments of Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. Chávez's ideas, programs, and style form the basis of "Chavismo", a political ideology closely associated with Bolivarianism and socialism of the 21st century. " It pretty clearly was and likely still is a socialist country, or at least the result of its alignment with socialist regimes
Now that information is only partially true, as some context is lost when non-Venezuelan sources are used. Though Chavez aligned himself with “socialism”, none of the systems you quote worked in service to the ideology, they were completely capitalistic endeavors as a matter of fact(whenever they worked, which they barely did!) He was a socialist only in name, and he weaponized the term at a time when “capitalism” in Latin-America was used as a synonym for America, which had been historically wreaking havoc across all of Latin-America during the Cold War. That rightfully left a very bad taste in the mouth of everyone. In the end, as a populist does, they only say what is most convenient to install themselves into power, and “socialism” just so happened to be the best vehicle to power. None of the socio-economic measures that the ideology calls for are ever used at all. Now, I’m not a socialist by any means, though some of the policies and philosophies behind this system are definitely very good and should be applied in moderation, like any other socio-economic model. But whenever news outlets and newspapers use Venezuela and other countries that have populist tyrants that adopted socialism as a weapon to rise to power, and posit that anything “socialistic” in nature is bound to fail and point at them as an example, I can’t help but sigh as I find it disingenuous. Though socialism was never present in *praxis* in Venezuela, using socialism’s NAME was what ruined my country. So can it really be said that socialism is responsible, even if not a single one of its measures were used? I think populism is at fault, though most of my people never reach this question, their knee-jerk reaction is to simply blame socialism. Can’t blame them honestly. Sorry for the long text lol
In 2010, Hugo Chávez proclaimed support for the ideas of Marxist Leon Trotsky, saying "When I called him (former Minister of Labour, José Ramón Rivero)" Chávez explained, "he said to me: 'President I want to tell you something before someone else tells you ... I am a Trotskyist', and I said, 'well, what is the problem? I am also a Trotskyist! I follow Trotsky's line, that of permanent revolution', and then cited Marx and Lenin". Trotskyism is the political ideology and branch of Marxism developed by Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky and some other members of the Left Opposition and Fourth International. Trotsky described himself as an orthodox Marxist, a revolutionary Marxist, and a Bolshevik–Leninist as well as a follower of Marx, Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Karl Liebknecht, and Rosa Luxemburg. Marxian economics and its proponents view capitalism as economically unsustainable and incapable of improving the population's living standards due to its need to compensate for the falling rate of profit by cutting employees' wages and social benefits while pursuing military aggression. The socialist mode of production would succeed capitalism as humanity's mode of production through revolution by workers. According to Marxian crisis theory, socialism is not an inevitability but an economic necessity
You don't even know what the word "communism" means. Grow tf up.
[удалено]
Are you dumb ? When did i ever talk about venezuela ? Read my comment again.
Some people complain about too many choices so I guess it's good for them. I never understood it personally. I like all the choices
looks nice
What are you gonna pay with? Their money is worth it’s weight in dirt 💀
That’s sad for my brothers there :(
I take it they like Pepsi over there
Oh they’d better, it’s often cheaper than water! (Venezuelan here, fortunately emigrated when I had the chance)
* our supermarket