Another Proof of Marx's Folly: Cuba

[asianobserve]

I for one agree that there must be order in Capitalism. But there's simply no substitue for property ownership and free enterprise.

 

[pmaitra]

The much trumpeted excesses (abuses) of Capitalism is nothing compared to the misery of the people in controlled societies (with controlled economies) intended to follow Marx's and Engel's flawed theory. You just make a little bit objective survey of these countries (you know them) and you'll see the light...

Of all the countries, if Cuba is the only one that detractors of Communism can come up with, then I think they need to come out of their tunnel vision and pick examples from all over the world. All the ridiculously flawed assumptions will collapse like a house of cards.

Even from a typical statistical point of view, examples of USSR and PRC are way more valid than Cuba. One could, of course, pick Haiti, a Capitalist neighbour of Cuba and compare them. Communism will look like heaven. Data and facts were provided in the relevant thread.

Actually, the intention behind the availability of easier credit for housing in the US was to allow more people to be able to afford houses, to encourage housing ownership. This intention was noble however the bubble was an unintended consequence of it. This was made even worse by the creation of funky derivatives based on housing mortgages. The latter is the product of a flawed market idea that should be regulated.

I am already aware of what happened and of course there is a big flaw in the way things were handled and a bigger flaw is this concept of letting an artificial demand dictate prices.

 

[asianobserve]

I just hope Mr. Chaves does not succumb to the same temptation as Mr. F Castro fell in - temptation of absolute and infinite power in a Socialistic (controlled along Marxist lines) society, which is where Venzuela is currently heading into.

 

[asianobserve]

All the ridiculously flawed assumptions will collapse like a house of cards.

Still dreaming of a classless society eh? Well, Haiti and Somalia are actually weighed down by a lot of factors, foremost is lack of education, tribalism (Somalia) and corruption. Note that China only progressed (this has reference to the lives of people in economic terms) when it embraced capitalism (albeit, controlled). Russia on the other hand is a victim of Socialism's collapse. It just rushed to embrace Capitalism without much thought about its utter lack of institutional preparedness for that (after decades of Marxist Socialism).

I know one spectacular success story in South Asia, where it progressed rapidly after the opening up of its economy to international capitalism...India.:thumb:

 

[asianobserve]

Of all the countries, if Cuba is the only one that detractors of Communism can come up with, then I think they need to come out of their tunnel vision and pick examples from all over the world.

Actually, Cuba is the most glorified example of Socialisms success by some hopeless Marxists...

 

[pmaitra]

Still dreaming of a classless society eh? Well, Haiti and Somalia are actually weighed down by a lot of factors, foremost is lack of education, tribalism (Somalia) and corruption.

Wait. Why are you dragging in Somalia? I am talking about Haiti, a neighbour of Cuba and roughly the same size.

Note that China only progressed (this has reference to the lives of people in economic terms) when it embraced capitalism (albeit, controlled). Russia on the other hand is a victim of Socialism's collapse.

No, not Russia, it was the USSR that collapsed in 1991, and if you must attribute that as a failure of Communism, then the collapse of the Russian Empire of 1917 must be attributed to Capitalism. You can go down to the British Empire, Byzantium, Roman Empire, Egypt, all the way upto the Hittites. All of them collapsed. Every civilisation collapses at one point. Proves nothing.

It just rushed to embrace Capitalism without much thought about its utter lack of institutional preparedness for that (after decades of Marxist Socialism).

Yes, and that collapse was helped by a bunch of morons from IMF.

I know one spectacular success story in South Asia, where it progressed rapidly after the opening up of its economy to international capitalism...India.:thumb:

The 5-year plans and market controls were not failures either. :thumb:

 

[asianobserve]

Wait. Why are you dragging in Somalia? I am talking about Haiti, a neighbour of Cuba and roughly the same size.

You were calling into attention my tunnel vision...

No, not Russia, it was the USSR that collapsed in 1991, and if you must attribute that as a failure of Communism, then the collapse of the Russian Empire of 1917 must be attributed to Capitalism. You can go down to the British Empire, Byzantium, Roman Empire, Egypt, all the way upto the Hittites.

Tsarist Russia collapsed under the unberable weight of imperial aloofness. This is actually the kind of backdrop against which the Das Kapital and Communist Manifesto were written against. (Your favorite literatures?8)

Every civilisation collapses at one point. Proves nothing.

Exactly!

Yes, and that collapse was helped by a bunch of morons from IMF.

Again, does not mean Capitalism is innately evil/destructive.



(Sorry I don't know how to make multi-quotes.)

 

[pmaitra]

Again, does not mean Capitalism is innately evil/destructive.

Nothing is. All approaches seek to bring about some benefits. So far, nothing has shown 100% success. We are watching free market economy unfold its secret at the moment. It is not looking good right now.

(Sorry I don't know how to make multi-quotes.)

This is how I edited post #26:

[quote="asianobserve, post: 345755"]Still dreaming of a classless society eh? Well, Haiti and Somalia are actually weighed down by a lot of factors, foremost is lack of education, tribalism (Somalia) and corruption.[/QUOTE]
Wait. Why are you dragging in Somalia? I am talking about Haiti, a neighbour of Cuba and roughly the same size.

[quote="asianobserve, post: 345755"]Note that China only progressed (this has reference to the lives of people in economic terms) when it embraced capitalism (albeit, controlled). Russia on the other hand is a victim of Socialism's collapse.[/QUOTE]
No, not Russia, it was the USSR that collapsed in 1991, and if you must attribute that as a failure of Communism, then the collapse of the Russian Empire of 1917 must be attributed to Capitalism. You can go down to the British Empire, Byzantium, Roman Empire, Egypt, all the way upto the Hittites. All of them collapsed. Every civilisation collapses at one point. Proves nothing.

[quote="asianobserve, post: 345755"]It just rushed to embrace Capitalism without much thought about its utter lack of institutional preparedness for that (after decades of Marxist Socialism).[/QUOTE]
Yes, and that collapse was helped by a bunch of morons from IMF.

[quote="asianobserve, post: 345755"]I know one spectacular success story in South Asia, where it progressed rapidly after the opening up of its economy to international capitalism...India.[/QUOTE]
The 5-year plans and market controls were not failures either.

 

[asianobserve]

Nothing is. All approaches seek to bring about some benefits. So far, nothing has shown 100% success. We are watching free market economy unfold its secret at the moment. It is not looking good right now.

Maybe because you're not looking hard at. Isn't India sailing smoothly to international superstardom? Or you're just being humble? In any case India's success is a testament to the benefits of Capitalsim if handled correctly. There'simply no substitute to market economy. This is the only system that brings out the immense enterprising talents in people.

 

[pmaitra]

Maybe because you're not looking hard at. Isn't India sailing smoothly to international superstardom? Or you're just being humble? In any case India's success is a testament to the benefits of Capitalsim if handled correctly. There'simply no substitute to market economy. This is the only system that brings out the immense enterprising talents in people.

Well, perhaps you can list the pros and cons of India. Yes, India is booming yet it has many problems and the rich and poor divide is getting wider day by day. I wonder if you can offer a solution?

 

[asianobserve]

Well, perhaps you can list the pros and cons of India. Yes, India is booming yet it has many problems and the rich and poor divide is getting wider day by day. I wonder if you can offer a solution?

To be honest with you, before India started coming out as one of the new economic tigers of Asia, I have not much respect for it. I saw it as a lost promise (with billions of people = huge market) wallowing in abject poverty. Now India is on course to being a true power. Just don't let those USSR-romantics control it again... :thumb:

 

[pmaitra]

To be honest with you, before India started coming out as one of the new economic tigers of Asia, I have not much respect for it. I saw it as a lost promise (with billions of people = huge market) wallowing in abject poverty. Now India is on course to being a true power. Just don't let those USSR-romantics control it again... :thumb:

It matters not whether you had respect for India or not. You personal preferences or opinions are strictly yours. India is growing, per capita income is rising while at the same time income disparity is going up. It would be rather stupid to gloat over the huge middle class population when right beside it you have a huge below poverty level population.

India will never become a true power as long as 30,51,000 families (or alternatively 40% of the population by international standards) are below poverty line. This is the harsh reality that shatters all the romanticism you are creating about India's growth.

 

[asianobserve]

It matter not whether you had respect for India or not. You personal preferences or opinions are strictly yours. India is growing, per capita income is rising while at the same time income disparity is going up. It would be rather stupid to gloat over the huge middle class population when right beside it you have a huge below poverty level population.

India will never become a true power as long as 30,51,000 families (or alternatively 40% of the population by international standards) are below poverty line. This is the harsh reality that shatters all the romanticism you are creating about India's growth.

Well, your enormous poor population will not disappear overnight. It will take some time to pull most of your people out of poverty. After all India has been lost in the wilderness (in economic terms) for a long time. The best thing going for it was its huge pool of educated population. Now it is on the right track.

It can leverage its success further by allying with the right powers... (on equal terms of course. I know this is a touchy issue for very proud Indians.)

Long term, I see India as better place (solid position) than China. It has stable institutions (needs some improvement) for a democratic society. China on th eotehr hand is a real deck of cards. It may have shoot up to economic stardom quiet spectacularly but I seriously doubt if its still centrally controlled economy is the correct way to go forward. There are just so many strctural issues with China.

 

[pmaitra]

Well, your enormous poor population will not disappear overnight. It will take some time to pull most of your people out of poverty. After all India has been lost in the wilderness (in economic terms) for a long time. The best thing going for it was its huge pool of educated population. Now it is on the right track.

No they will not disappear overnight. However, what about those that have appeared? I would like to believe that free market would drag people out of poverty. It is doing that, but at a less than desirable speed.

It can leverage its success further by allying with the right powers... (on equal terms of course. I know this is a touchy issue for very proud Indians.)

I think we are digressing now.

 

[civfanatic]

And second of all if you delusional numpty had read anything about marx then you would know that socialism was never intented by him to be applied on poor or developing countries. It was only meant of developed countries.

Apparently he has a 'political science degree', even though he doesn't have even a basic understanding of Marxism. This gives us good insight into the quality of the Malaysian education system

 

[asianobserve]

No they will not disappear overnight. However, what about those that have appeared? I would like to believe that free market would drag people out of poverty. It is doing that, but at a less than desirable speed.

Maybe you should take inspiration from the Koreans (although there are major cultural differences). They have been wallowing in poverty for a long time until the dictatorship started embracing Cheobols to jumpstart their economic trnsformation. The enormous success of their conglomerates delivered a ripple down effects to the rest of the economy. But it took a long time and a more or less compliant population. The democratisation of that country sealed their economic gains under the military dictatorship.

Of course, it helped the South Koreans enormously that they had Uncle Sam to lean on for defense. They didn't have to bankrupt their country and squander whatever economic gains made in arming themselves to the teeth to deter an ever aggressive North Korea.

 

[asianobserve]

Apparently he has a 'political science degree', even though he doesn't have even a basic understanding of Marxism. This gives us good insight into the quality of the Malaysian education system

Please stick to the issue. Ad hominem is a poor refuge for intellectuals like you... 8)

 

[pmaitra]

Maybe you should take inspiration from the Koreans (although there are major cultural differences). They have been wallowing in poverty for a long time until the dictatorship started embracing Cheobols to jumpstart their economic trnsformation. The enormous success of their conglomerates delivered a ripple down effects to the rest of the economy. But it took a long time and a more or less compliant population. The democratisation of that country sealed their economic gains under the military dictatorship.

South Korea:
GDP growth: >6%
GNP growth: >35%


Go to Flushing, New York City, and you will be in the middle of Korea. Then there is US willing to defend them. Their automobile sector is already challenging Honda and Toyota. Their agricultural sector is merely 3% of the GDP.

The differences are not merely cultural, and that is a non-sequitur anyway. We cannot afford to imitate South Korea. We can imitate any country that is roughly the same as India, for example Brazil.

Of course, it helped the South Koreans enormously that they had Uncle Sam to lean on for defense. They didn't have to bankrupt their country and squander whatever economic gains made in arming themselves to the teeth to deter an ever aggressive North Korea.

Good point.

Now look at India. It is trading with the US and we do have a trade deficit with them. Yet we are growing. PRC is also growing, by trading with the USA. I am sure Cuba would have also grown by trading with the USA. So Marx is not really the problem here, is it? If he was, then what stopped the author (OP) from picking PRC as an example to prove Marx's folly? Think!!!

 

[Adux]

I cant believe Indians are still romantic about socialism after 40 years completely stupid mixed economy causing utter poverty and license raj. I think it is mostly to do with the fact, people werent old enough or nor are they seeing the true evils of leftist ideologies.
Want to see how Unions are stiffling the country, lower standards of CBSE/ICSE Schools to be on par with Government Schools. Stop promotion of more CBSE/ICSE Schools, ensure 25% quota for seats. DEO will have complete control of a private entity. However intelligent a CBSE student is, he will always find himself 14% marks lesser than a similar kid in government schools because of mark normalization.

Basically lower standards, this is what we will give, and the population have to shut up and take it.

Basically the 3% Unionized and party affiliated population in Kerala is holding the rest of the population hostage. Unions must be banned.

 

[Adux]

"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide.