[omegaword]

I've made three threads in as many days and this will be the last for a while.

One of the important new reforms in cuba is that some private industry has been allowed, with an interesting new approach to private coops. I personally support this, but I am interested in surveying the forum for opinions about how this will effect the economy, whether this is a retreat from or advance to socialism, and especially how how actual Cubans feel about it. Even social critic (though I may regret that).

[Rainbow Crow]

Co-ops aren't very efficient, otherwise there would be more of them, but for Cuba it might be a step in the right direction.

[omegaword]

Co-ops aren't very efficient, otherwise there would be more of them, but for Cuba it might be a step in the right direction.

Well arguably "efficiency" is not as relevant to socialist industry as to capitalist. The workers and people its being provided for (ideally) come first. A grocery store which provides cheap food to a poor area does not need to make a profit to be "successful", just feed poor people.

[Poelmo]

I don't know much about these reforms but I suspect they are just a way to let the population get used to capitalism without too much of a shock, not a way to save communism by altering it slightly. Cuba will probably follow the Chinese model, this will lead to higher absolute prosperity for most, but also more crime and economic inequality.

[Rainbow Crow]

Well arguably "efficiency" is not as relevant to socialist industry as to capitalist. The workers and people its being provided for (ideally) come first. A grocery store which provides cheap food to a poor area does not need to make a profit to be "successful", just feed poor people.

That sounds nice but in reality, how to get the money for the food and the electricity for the grocery store if it's not turning a profit?

Cuba has a large black market like all communist countries, I'm sure they already understand capitalism. This is just a grudgingly made small step towards reality.

[omegaword]

I don't know much about these reforms but I suspect they are just a way to let the population get used to capitalism without too much of a shock, not a way to save communism by altering it slightly. Cuba will probably follow the Chinese model, this will lead to higher absolute prosperity for most, but also more crime and economic inequality.

That is certainly not an unreasonable view. But if you look, what cuba is doing is different from what china has done. In my opinion a coop can be an expression of communist industry. It's run and owned by workers, they make most of the money.

[omegaword]

That sounds nice but in reality, how to get the money for the food and the electricity for the grocery store if it's not turning a profit?

Cuba has a large black market like all communist countries, I'm sure they already understand capitalism. This is just a grudgingly made small step towards capitalism

Well there are a couple of ways you make money. In centrally planned communism money comes from other sectors which are making a profit. Or in council (soviet) communism it might be supported by local councils of of buisnesses.

And I'm sure Cubans comprehend capitalism. But according to a report I saw by Al Jazeera,most Cubans do believe in basic egalitarianism.

[Social_Critic]

They are moving towards capitalism. This isn't a backward step from socialism, it's a forward step away from a failed system. They are not using coops as such. They allow individuals to own small businesses, but the regulations and taxes are raw. I know because I have relatives making proposals, they require hard currency funding, but I don't see anything that's really viable.

They also are giving title to real estate to those who occupy the site. This of means the party big wigs get to own the mansions and so on down the line. I've been approached to buy real estate using relatives to front for the deal, but I'm afraid there's going to be a huge legal battle in the future. So I'm trying to see if we buy the land the government stole from us many years ago, and use it for a mini golf, paint ball cages and horse rides. The problem is the government gives better terms to foreign corporations and oligarchs via joint ventures. The regime prefers capitalism fascist style. This means its more interested in keeping the population poor and powerless.

I would of course love to start a newspaper which publishes real news, and could have sections devoted to real history, political debate, the failure of communism around the world, and important documents such as the declaration of the rights of man and the human rights conventions. I think a simple newspaper like that would sell very well. And of course I'd like to have a TV channel oriented to local news. And where we could discuss the historical reasons why Fidel Castro's son is such a good golf player and why Che's son Camilo is such a hedonist and nouveau riche.

And then we could also discuss the way Fidel killed the Cuban biofuels industry basing himself on a flawed article by Atilio Boron. Or why is It Cuba can't feed itself anyway? And why did the government shoot Cubans who wanted to leave? And why did Fidel Castro never hold elections? And finally, what should we do about Fidel and Raul once we change the government, have anew Costitution and the dictatorship is gone? Should we execute them? Such a TV and newspaper combination would be a huge exit, I'm sure.

[Oakwood]

So how will these co-ops work exactly? Is it similar to owning shares in a company and distributing the profits to the share holders? Would the shareholders have equal shares and that way avoid anyone having more money than others in the company?

I don't know much about these reforms but I suspect they are just a way to let the population get used to capitalism without too much of a shock, not a way to save communism by altering it slightly. Cuba will probably follow the Chinese model, this will lead to higher absolute prosperity for most, but also more crime and economic inequality.

Are you saying that capitalism will bring more crime to Cuba? If you are, I don’t think I agree. The pay in Cuba is generally low already and although communist countries are supposed to have 0% unemployment, that’s not actually the truth.

You could be right in saying that petty crime would go up as a result of the transition to capitalism, because as has been seen in the past, unemployment spikes when artificial price ceilings and subsidies are removed. However, my understanding is that serious, dangerous and organised crime would go down because of capitalism. And ironically, I think this improvement in the level of major crime would be thanks to income inequality.

Economic inequality is often necessary in a strong and progressive state. Most people have a great desire to have more than the others around them, and being able to have more money/power is an outlet for the frustration of these people.

Under a system where everyone is supposedly equal, these people are likely to rebel against what they see as the injustice of them not being able to have more than the person next door who is less able and less willing to work hard. So they will resort to crime to earn money and power because they can’t do it through the legal means that capitalism would provide them with.

“No one became a tyrant because they didn’t want to be hungry and cold”

If I’ve gone off on a tangent and misunderstood what you meant though, I apologise of course

[Poelmo]

Are you saying that capitalism will bring more crime to Cuba? If you are, I don’t think I agree. The pay in Cuba is generally low already and although communist countries are supposed to have 0% unemployment, that’s not actually the truth.

You could be right in saying that petty crime would go up as a result of the transition to capitalism, because as has been seen in the past, unemployment spikes when artificial price ceilings and subsidies are removed. However, my understanding is that serious, dangerous and organised crime would go down because of capitalism. And ironically, I think this improvement in the level of major crime would be thanks to income inequality.

More economic inequality will bring with it a rise in crime, all sorts of crime, especially in countries where people are not used to inequality and where shady figures can make a lot of money real quick during the transition to capitalism. This has been the norm in every comparable country so far and even in developed nations crime is linked to (local) inequality. You will have ambitious individuals who will want to achieve what the fast risers (nouveau rich) have achieved and they'll be strentghened by the knowledge that the nouveau rich more or less stole their riches too (like the Russian oligarchs and the Chinese real estate "businessmen"), you will have people struggling with unemployment (for example when employers start to demand you have a mobile phone, so it stops being a luxury, but you still can't afford one) and mentally unstable people who can't deal with the cutthroat system (so even the number of rapists and crazy serial killers will go up).

[omegaword]

In response to social critic, I think that there are a few more tax breaks for coops than regular private buisnesses. So in the short term at least those may have an advantage.

Oak wood, I think that your comparison to stock holders is pretty good, but everyone has equal stock. I don't have any details on their inner workings though.

[Poelmo]

In response to social critic, I think that there are a few more tax breaks for coops than regular private buisnesses. So in the short term at least those may have an advantage.

Oak wood, I think that your comparison to stock holders is pretty good, but everyone has equal stock. I don't have any details on their inner workings though.

You also have to work for the coop or be retired after years of working there to get and keep a share.

[Oakwood]

More economic inequality will bring with it a rise in crime, all sorts of crime, especially in countries where people are not used to inequality and where shady figures can make a lot of money real quick during the transition to capitalism. This has been the norm in every comparable country so far and even in developed nations crime is linked to (local) inequality. You will have ambitious individuals who will want to achieve what the fast risers (nouveau rich) have achieved and they'll be strentghened by the knowledge that the nouveau rich more or less stole their riches too (like the Russian oligarchs and the Chinese real estate "businessmen"), you will have people struggling with unemployment (for example when employers start to demand you have a mobile phone, so it stops being a luxury, but you still can't afford one) and mentally unstable people who can't deal with the cutthroat system (so even the number of rapists and crazy serial killers will go up).

I agree that crime would go up during the transition period because of the lack of jobs and subsidies that they had before. But once a decent system of capitalism was in place, serious crimes that affect the stability of the state would be lessened.
In the developed countries that we see having problems with gun crime etc, would this be better or worse under communism? Are these people not killing the people who live near them, people who enjoy a similar standard of living to them? Poor people aren’t going up to rich areas to shoot rich people because of their displeasure at knowing they’re richer than themselves.

I think that in a system where there is no legitimate means to gain more wealth, man’s seemingly innate desire to have that wealth and power would come out in some illegal way. And are these people shooting each other just because of income inequality or is it also because it’s part of their culture? With the transition to capitalism you can still have a big influence over the media to drive culture in the direction you want it. Economic freedom doesn’t always have to come with press freedom.

I can’t really speak on your China example because I don't know anything about it, but with your Russian example, that would basically be Boris Yeltsin’s government’s disgraceful management of the transition. In trying to be a man of the people, he gave away almost everything Russia had to the people in the form of a voucher for every person. He had some ridiculous dream that Russia would be more participatory and democratic if everyone had a tiny stake in the economy. Anyway, all the vouchers put together valued Russia's economy/assets at about $10 billion. People who were merely “rich” before, bought these vouchers and became the all powerful oligarchs you know them as today. I wouldn’t go down the Boris Yeltsin route.

As for people who are mentally unstable serial killers and rapists, again, would they somehow be different people under communism? There’s no way of knowing.

[Poelmo]

I agree that crime would go up during the transition period because of the lack of jobs and subsidies that they had before. But once a decent system of capitalism was in place, serious crimes that affect the stability of the state would be lessened.

Yes, but it's hard to tell how by how much crime will go down in the long term and those problems with mentally unstable people ensure the rate of such crime will always remain higher than it was under Cuban communism.

In the developed countries that we see having problems with gun crime etc, would this be better or worse under communism? Are these people not killing the people who live near them, people who enjoy a similar standard of living to them? Poor people aren’t going up to rich areas to shoot rich people because of their displeasure at knowing they’re richer than themselves.

They're shooting each other over turf wars, turf that they need to sell drugs to become as rich as the local rich people.

I think that in a system where there is no legitimate means to gain more wealth, man’s seemingly innate desire to have that wealth and power would come out in some illegal way.

Indeed it does, it just so happens that in all the countries where the comparison could be made, it turned out crime was higher during the capitalist era. Higher crime doesn't mean crime was non-existent in the communist era (burglaries do happen on Cuba). Under communism natural predators become criminals, under capitalism "ordinary" people become criminals (who will marry you if you're at the bottom of the payscale?) and there are more of the latter than of the former.

As for people who are mentally unstable serial killers and rapists, again, would they somehow be different people under communism? There’s no way of knowing.

Yes there is, enough research has been done for this. It's quit a phenomenon in China these days: young men who have trouble finding/maintaining a good job and can't find a wife, they just snap in ways they wouldn't have decades earlier, it's a lot like the American phenomenon of "going postal".

[Oakwood]

Yes, but it's hard to tell how by how much crime will go down in the long term and those problems with mentally unstable people ensure the rate of such crime will always remain higher than it was under Cuban communism.

You seem to place a lot of emphasis on mentally unstable people, maybe you think there’s a lot of them. What do they do in communist societies that’s so different to in a capitalist society? How are problems with them going to “ensure” that the crime rate will be higher under capitalism than under Cuban communism? Are they going to be model citizens under communism then start rioting and raping when capitalism comes along?

They're shooting each other over turf wars, turf that they need to sell drugs to become as rich as the local rich people.

So you think that’s it then? They just want to be on par with their rich neighbours? I live in an area where just a few minutes’ walk from me are people who are 1000x richer - big houses, nice cars etc and I don’t have that much money believe me. People in my area don’t go around shooting each other so we can become as rich as the local rich people.

Indeed it does, it just so happens that in all the countries where the comparison could be made, it turned out crime was higher during the capitalist era. Higher crime doesn't mean crime was non-existent in the communist era (burglaries do happen on Cuba). Under communism natural predators become criminals, under capitalism "ordinary" people become criminals (who will marry you if you're at the bottom of the payscale?) and there are more of the latter than of the former.

I can’t speak for these countries because I’m not there, but communist countries were never known for their honesty in reporting how their countries were to the outside world. “Higher crime” is not very specific, especially when I said petty crime could increase, but seriously state disruptive crime wouldn’t. And what constitutes a crime of any sort can easily be changed by definition.

“Natural predators” implies you think these people are like that by nature. Do you think then that these people who are fighting in turf wars in capitalist countries might just be like that by nature as well? And being at the bottom of the pay scale doesn’t mean you won’t get married either or that you will somehow turn into a knife wielding maniac if you don’t. There are always going to be potential wives in a similar socio-economic situation to yourself. I'm quite interested to know where you get your ideas from.

Yes there is, enough research has been done for this. It's quit a phenomenon in China these days: young men who have trouble finding/maintaining a good job and can't find a wife, they just snap in ways they wouldn't have decades earlier, it's a lot like the American phenomenon of "going postal".

Not finding a wife in China probably has something to do with the fact they have a one child policy and boys are much more favoured than girls, resulting in the killing of the females and a distortion of the sex ratio. This was brought about by the Communist Party. It’s not what you have to do when you become capitalist. And if it’s to do with them not finding/maintaining a decent job why is this behaviour increasing now when more and more decent jobs and opportunities are becoming available in China?

[ronimacarroni]

I live in miami and I've met cubans new and old
The old ones are die hard anti communists but the new ones don't seem to mind communism that much
I think Castro might have eased the whole authoritarian thing throughout the years
He just seems like a tired old dog
In Cuba people just work, smoke their cigars and play dominoes or baseball.
Its boring but stable.

[Social_Critic]

I'm rolling on the floor laughing out loud. Cuba has a Stalinist repression system augmented with computer controls, miniature eavesdropping devices, and a deployed informant network where children are taught to turn in their parents. The regime is an evil combination of the worst practices of all tyrannies humanity has seen. These guys have PhDs in repression, torture and propaganda. And unfortunately some of their agents crawl in here once in a while. I can smell their stench.

[omegaword]

I'm rolling on the floor laughing out loud. Cuba has a Stalinist repression system augmented with computer controls, miniature eavesdropping devices, and a deployed informant network where children are taught to turn in their parents. The regime is an evil combination of the worst practices of all tyrannies humanity has seen. These guys have PhDs in repression, torture and propaganda. And unfortunately some of their agents crawl in here once in a while. I can smell their stench.

You're right, it's bad, it's been bad, and it might continue to be so. But frankly my friend, Cubans not unique in those things, it's not even the worst. You seem to think you'll kill Castro, or someone's going to overthrow his regime, but what I've seen does not support that. I don't think of Castro as highly as I used to, but I think his regime will not go anywhere.

[oscar]

Methinks the Castro regime would not survive today if the US embargo had been lifted 50 years ago with "free trade" serving as a corrupting influence on the Communist regime. China used to be communist; when they were able to trade freely with the USA, they became a single party Capitalist system instead.

[Poelmo]

@Oakwood

I'm just reporting what has been observed in all similar cases. You can argue against that but then you're apparently arguing against human nature. Perhaps Cuba will be the exception, but it probably won't. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Cuba should remain communist, just that there will be some downsides to going capitalist.