This thread had some potential, in spite of its originator, until mambagrl came in and gayed shit up.

7/29/2010 2:33:12 AM

For this to be successful there needs to be busing involved. We need to bus people from poor nations and mix them in with the rich, and vice versa, to better distribute wealth, resources, and ideas.

7/29/2010 9:35:38 AM

ZING!

7/29/2010 9:36:23 AM

Quote :

"I mean socialism works.... just look at Greece."

Or China.

Quote :

"but in reality, the massive amounts of power that the royal family had was basically just shifted to the KGB and their cronies, while the majority of the population remained lower class"

That is just not true. The USSR's GDP grew by leaps and bouds every decade. Per capita GDP went up, household consumption went up, infant mortality went down, and life expectancy increased. By most every measure, the quality of life of the average person was dramatically improved under Soviet rule.
(http://wdi.umich.edu/files/publications/workingpapers/wp812.pdf)

Quote :

"Not to mention, all the things you mention are things that capitalism is perfectly capable of providing."

It may be possible, but it's not as good at it. Just look at the technologies that have fueled recent growth, telecommunications and the internet are both a result of government investment in research that has become useful for the private sector. The argument isn't whether or not the private sector can do it, I'm sure it can inefficently or on a long enough timeline, but the government does that kind of stuff better.

Quote :

"And if anything, the U.S. government has used its military to drive up the price of oil, since if all we wanted was cheap oil, we could have just lifted the embargo on Iraq. Instead, we embargoed and bombed the place into the ground, devastating Iraq's ability to produce enough oil for itself, never-mind export. "

I'll agree with that, war and agression is far more detremental to the world economy than cartels or small pockets of corruption.

Quote :

"Fidel Castro is one of the 500 wealthiest men in the world"

Not correct. He is on the Forbes "500 Wealthiest Men in the World" list, which is a claim that they have shown absolutely no evidence for, despite Castro promising to resign should they show a single cent in an offshore account.

7/29/2010 12:41:43 PM

Quote :

"By most every measure, the quality of life of the average person was dramatically improved under Soviet rule."

There is no dispute here, Stalin did manage to industrialize Russia. Just goes to show, if you kill enough people, you too can industrialize your country to a degree on par with fascist Spain. If only mankind knew of another way to industrialize a country without so many dying in the Gulag...

Quote :

"but the government does that kind of stuff better."

Facts not in evidence.

Quote :

"Not correct. He is on the Forbes "500 Wealthiest Men in the World" list, which is a claim that they have shown absolutely no evidence for, despite Castro promising to resign should they show a single cent in an offshore account."

It is entirely possible for Bill Gates to not have a single cent in an offshore account and still be Bill Gates. As such, this sounds like a non-denial denial. All this would show is that Castro is not planning to flee the island in the usual dictatorial fashion. Such makes him novel, but no less kleptocratic. That said, Castro never struck me as all that interested in amassing wealth. I believe it is the pursuit of Power that keeps Castro up at night.

7/29/2010 2:16:11 PM

That and cuban hookers.

7/29/2010 2:25:12 PM

Who cares how rich Fidel Castro is? He's rich because he's a dictator - regardless of socialism.

7/29/2010 2:53:59 PM

Quote :

"If only mankind knew of another way to industrialize a country without so many dying in the Gulag..."

You could have children die in factory accidents, that's how most of the western world got through it.

The Gulags had more to do with Stalin being a sociopath than the economic system he claimed to promote, while the economic success is much more to blame on an economic system that engendered growth.

Quote :

"Facts not in evidence."

I suppose you won't take the fact that none of the examples you gave were sufficient until the government stepped in and took them over as evidence.

Quote :

"It is entirely possible for Bill Gates to not have a single cent in an offshore account and still be Bill Gates."

Sure, he could be dirt poor and still be bill gates, but he would no longer be one of the worlds richest men.

Quote :

"All this would show is that Castro is not planning to flee the island in the usual dictatorial fashion. Such makes him novel, but no less kleptocratic."

If you want to state he's kleptocratic, show some evidence to prove that. If he's not saving this money somewhere, and he's still living a modest life, where is all the stolen merchandise? If they wanted to pick a kleptocrat, they should have gone with Putin, he actually steals.

Quote :

"That said, Castro never struck me as all that interested in amassing wealth. I believe it is the pursuit of Power that keeps Castro up at night."

If he was craving more power, wouldn't he be attempting to aggressively extend his reach into other countries? Hell at the very least he would be aggressively imposing a stricter rule, which he's not doing either of.

Quote :

"That and cuban hookers."

Interesting that you mention prostitutes when those are one of the reasons Castro began his revolution. Cuba was becoming America's brothel and crack house, and most likely would have been had Castro not thrown the american mafia and corrupt cuban regime out. Castro has fought an extremely successful campaign against drugs, prostitution, and violent crime. If nothing else, he should be revered as a Christian hero.

7/29/2010 6:31:27 PM

Quote :

"Castro has fought an extremely successful campaign against drugs, prostitution, and violent crime."

The accounts of Cuba I've read from people who have traveled there suggest that prostitution is still big (though probably not Batista big, and I'll grant that dictatorships have a pretty good track record on restricting drugs and violent crimes not perpetrated by the state).

Quote :

"If he was craving more power, wouldn't he be attempting to aggressively extend his reach into other countries?"

Of course, he's tried that before -- Castro had a hand in a few commie intrigues in the region. But no, he wouldn't be aggressively doing anything because of the consequences of such action. I crave booze but I don't drink it for breakfast, because I wouldn't last long doing that. Castro doesn't invade Jamaica because we would kill him.

There's another logic restricting the aggressiveness of people who crave power. I also crave sex, but I don't solicit prostitutes. I could have all kinds of sex for a while, but eventually I'd be spread so thin financially speaking that nobody would have sex with me. Likewise Castro would have a hard time retaining the power that he's got if he tried to go around spreading it, an expensive proposition both politically and economically.

7/29/2010 7:19:30 PM

Quote :

"while the economic success is much more to blame on an economic system that engendered growth."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Stalin basically abandon true marxism and begin paying factory workers based on performance by the late 1920s in order to keep up with western economic growth?

7/29/2010 7:28:30 PM

Quote :

"The accounts of Cuba I've read from people who have traveled there suggest that prostitution is still big"

It wasn't when I went there, granted that was quite some years ago.

Quote :

"But no, he wouldn't be aggressively doing anything because of the consequences of such action."

Then is he really that "obsessed with power"?

Quote :

"I crave booze but I don't drink it for breakfast, because I wouldn't last long doing that. Castro doesn't invade Jamaica because we would kill him."

Then you aren't an alcoholic, and Castro isn't "power obsessed".

Quote :

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Stalin basically abandon true marxism and begin paying factory workers based on performance by the late 1920s in order to keep up with western economic growth?"

I'm sorry, is the argument now "was russia communist"? I had thought that was assumed.

7/29/2010 7:41:09 PM

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just asking because I know that you're more educated on the subject than I am.

7/29/2010 7:42:59 PM

Sorry I didn't mean to sound that defensive. Khrushchev had far more capitalist tendencies than Stalin, but I think both did too few. A Chinese style balancing act is really the best approach.

7/29/2010 8:02:14 PM

Once humanity reaches a new low after decades of social injustice and abandonment of morals, the world will unite to create a new world order.

7/30/2010 12:38:38 AM

Quote :

"It wasn't when I went there, granted that was quite some years ago."

I haven't been, so I won't claim for sure. All I've got is what I've read from the accounts of others, most of which imply regular contact of some kind with prostitutes. Also refer to the rest of my post -- I'm not arguing that Castro didn't reduce prostitution, but rather that I have accounts that claim it's still rather more visible there than it is here.

Quote :

"Then is he really that "obsessed with power"?"

Well, at some point there's an element of semantics here. Anybody that actively pursues power must be, at the very least, highly desirous of it. That goes for Barack Obama and George W. Bush as well. Castro not only sought power, he sought greater degrees of it and has refused to give it up for half a century or so.

Quote :

"Then you aren't an alcoholic, and Castro isn't "power obsessed". "

Well, I see your point to a degree. I don't think that Castro is "obsessed" in the sense that he is blinded to all other motivations. But I'm confident that every time he can grab more power without equal or greater consequences to his regime, he will grab it. And at times in the past he has been willing to risk a great deal to grab more power. Siding with the Soviets is one great example -- we had more ample opportunity to kill him than Ivan ever did. Inviting their nukes to his country is another example.

7/30/2010 12:47:55 AM

Quote :

"But I'm confident that every time he can grab more power without equal or greater consequences to his regime, he will grab it. And at times in the past he has been willing to risk a great deal to grab more power. Siding with the Soviets is one great example -- we had more ample opportunity to kill him than Ivan ever did. Inviting their nukes to his country is another example."

He could certainly run a more "Kim Jong Il-esque" regime if he wanted to. And as far as the Soviets, I'd argue that he did that more as an effort of self preservation. He needed allies considering we've taken every opportunity presented to us to try to kill him.

Regardless, I don't think the desire for more power keeps him up at night, I could see Chavez being described like that, but not Castro.

7/30/2010 12:54:06 AM

Yeah, he could be worse, but I don't think a desire for power equates to a desire to oppress your people. It just means you want to be in charge of their lives, perhaps because you think you know better.

We weren't all about assassinating the man until he lined up with the Soviets, as I recall. That said, yes, I'm sure some of his decisions were driven by self-preservation, but that in itself involves a degree of desire for power. He probably could've arranged something that would end his regime and keep him out of the firing squad or prison. He never has, even when things were at their worst. I think he's more interested in preserving Castro as presidente than he is in preserving Castro el hombre. This is also why he hasn't really retired, in spite of being older than dirt.

Quote :

"Regardless, I don't think the desire for more power keeps him up at night"

I don't think it's power per se. I think he is legitimately concerned with the Cuban people -- problem is, he seems quite convinced that he knows what is best for them, no matter what. And that reflects a major concern with power, even if it is disguised or joined with more altruistic motives.

7/30/2010 1:05:02 AM

Quote :

"We weren't all about assassinating the man until he lined up with the Soviets, as I recall."

The CIA and mafia were both trying to kill him as soon as he got in power.

Quote :

"I'm sure some of his decisions were driven by self-preservation, but that in itself involves a degree of desire for power."

That's a bit of a stretch, so everything that is driven by self preservation has a desire for power?

Quote :

"He never has, even when things were at their worst. I think he's more interested in preserving Castro as presidente than he is in preserving Castro el hombre. This is also why he hasn't really retired, in spite of being older than dirt."

In all fairness, that's not a good thing for cuba, it would probably begin to decline to the level of some of it's neighbors.

Quote :

"I think he is legitimately concerned with the Cuban people -- problem is, he seems quite convinced that he knows what is best for them, no matter what."

Has he really been wrong? Wouldn't you love for Haiti, Jamaica, or the DR to be as successful as Cuba?

7/30/2010 1:29:45 AM

Because our goal for the carribean should be an impoverished police state? It seems to me the goal should be more like Puerto Rico, only less like a personal fiefdom of Washington D.C.

If I remember, at the time of the revolution Cuba had a per-capita on par with Alabama. Fifty years later, the people of Alabama have made great strides in escaping poverty, Cubans have trouble with running water outside the tourist areas. There are better ways to cut down on illegal activity (mob, prostitution) than nationalizing coffee plantations.
http://www.desdecuba.com/generationy/?p=1704

7/30/2010 2:17:13 AM

Quote :

"The CIA and mafia were both trying to kill him as soon as he got in power."

I've no doubt the mafia was. To the best of my recollection, however, there was some lagtime with the CIA.

Quote :

"That's a bit of a stretch, so everything that is driven by self preservation has a desire for power?"

Pardon, let me clarify. I meant the "self" in "self-preservation" to refer to his regime rather than to his physical person. I believe the next part of my post that you quoted implies as much, at least.

Quote :

"In all fairness, that's not a good thing for cuba, it would probably begin to decline to the level of some of it's neighbors."

It seems silly to suggest that Castro and only Castro is capable of keeping Cuba at its current level, which is only remotely appealing if you compare it to the worst of its neighbors.

Quote :

"Has he really been wrong? Wouldn't you love for Haiti, Jamaica, or the DR to be as successful as Cuba?"

Cuba did tolerably well when it suckled on the teat of the Soviet Union. It hasn't exactly been flowering since the collapse of its benefactor.

8/1/2010 1:29:38 AM

Quote :

"It seems to me the goal should be more like Puerto Rico, only less like a personal fiefdom of Washington D.C."

Puerto Rico isn't really a fair comparison, considering it's more or less a US colony.

Quote :

"If I remember, at the time of the revolution Cuba had a per-capita on par with Alabama."

Perhaps, probably due to the lack of a US embargo and the large numbers of casinos and prostitutes.

Quote :

"I've no doubt the mafia was. To the best of my recollection, however, there was some lagtime with the CIA"

They worked together from the start. The CIA would refer to them as Cuban business owners, but they and everyone else knew they were a criminal organization.

Quote :

"It seems silly to suggest that Castro and only Castro is capable of keeping Cuba at its current level, which is only remotely appealing if you compare it to the worst of its neighbors."

You could compare it with most of their neighbors. You might not realize how bad things are in the Caribbean.

Quote :

"Cuba did tolerably well when it suckled on the teat of the Soviet Union. It hasn't exactly been flowering since the collapse of its benefactor."

They weren't really suckling on the teat, they had a trading partner. Now they are only able to trade with shaky international companies, but even still they are the world's second largest exporter of physicians.

8/1/2010 2:04:59 AM

Quote :

"You could compare it with most of their neighbors. You might not realize how bad things are in the Caribbean."

Yeah, the whole place is poor, and it's mostly had really, really awful governments -- believe it or not, even ones we didn't impose on them!

Quote :

"They weren't really suckling on the teat, they had a trading partner."

They had a very favorable trading partner who lavished aid on them.

Quote :

"even still they are the world's second largest exporter of physicians."

Hahahaha, I guess there's a way to spin this in such a way that it sounds better than "A shit-ton of our doctors are desperate to leave"

8/1/2010 2:11:26 AM

Quote :

"Now they are only able to trade with shaky international companies"

Only because Castro often refused to pay his bills, nevermind on-time. Venezuela too is finding it more and more difficult to get shipping companies to operate on promises to pay.

Cargo carriers are flagged wherever they want to be. And like all capitalists, they will do whatever it takes to earn an extra penny per ton. But communist regimes never learned the capitalist virtue of cash on delivery. Having an entire sector of your economy under a monopoly ruins it for everyone, even when Castro is the CEO.

8/1/2010 3:06:01 AM

Quote :

"Only because Castro often refused to pay his bills, nevermind on-time. Venezuela too is finding it more and more difficult to get shipping companies to operate on promises to pay."

The US embargo is based on nothing more than blind hate.

[Edited on August 1, 2010 at 11:35 AM. Reason : ]

8/1/2010 11:35:23 AM

And ignorance. Don't leave out the ignorance. Either that, or the intent of the embargo is to keep the communists in power for as long as possible. If so, it is working. I suspect many a politician gets elected in Florida thanks to communist Cuba.

Then again, it is entirely possible the communists would still be in charge without the embargo. From reading a blog published from Havana, I am struck by how much of the communist crap the government imposes is honestly cheered by many Cubans. They honestly enjoy ratting out their neighbors to the secret police, smashing the dreams of many and sending some to prison for either thought-crimes or crimes of commerce. Owning one too many freezers was a favorite. I know such people exist in all societies. I am reminded of East Germany. But after so long of regular emigration, the Cuban system has selected for such people, as those that don't enjoy it left long ago. Those that remain don't mind having their entire life run for them, as long as they get to do the same to everyone else.

8/2/2010 3:08:37 AM

Quote :

"I am struck by how much of the communist crap the government imposes is honestly cheered by many Cubans."

8/2/2010 7:59:37 PM

It is a conflict. As a libertarian, I don't think the Cubans have the right to impose poverty upon themselves. No matter how much they want to, the rights of the individual should supersede the desires of the Cuban establishment.

8/2/2010 9:54:41 PM

but isn't it every individual's god given right to form groups together and create rules for themselves?

8/2/2010 11:28:50 PM

Yes, for themselves. As I said in the other thread:

Quote :

"Contracts exist for a reason. They allow the long arm of the government to define and enforce rules without any legislature anywhere taking any action. Those involved figure out what rules operate best, agree to contractually abide by them, and if anyone breaks the rules the government will wallop them for damages. As most legislatures spend much of their time retarding the right to contract, they are interfering with the people's ability to quickly define rules to manage new situations."

[Edited on August 4, 2010 at 1:05 PM. Reason : .,.]

8/4/2010 1:04:18 PM