4 ms·

> Rodriguez earlier told the assembly, “We do not blame the blockade for all the difficulties our country faces today.” “But those who deny its very serious imp

> Rodriguez earlier told the assembly, “We do not blame the blockade for all the difficulties our country faces today.” “But those who deny its very serious impacts or fail to recognize that it is the main cause of the deprivations, scarcities and hardships suffered by Cuban families would be failing to tell the truth,” he said. Pretty ironic how lack of access to capitalism can be such an important issue to a communist state. And I would say let them have it - Cuba of today is a far lower humanitarian concern than a lot of currently unsanctioned trading partners, and far less than the China that Nixon opened up to the West. But I think people need to be realistic that families of Cuban refugees form one of the largest block of swing voters in one of the largest US swing states. It's an unlikely thing to happen until Florida becomes a (fully) polarized state.

cassianoleal 4y ago
Capitalism is not the only economic system where countries can benefit from mutual trade.
orthecreedence 4y ago
> Pretty ironic how lack of access to capitalism can be such an important issue to a communist state. Lack of capitalism or lack of resources? One doesn't "import capitalism" after an embargo is lifted.
- tick_tock_tick 4y ago
  I mean doesn't "Lack of capitalism" basically guarantee you'll have a "lack of resources". History seems to think so.
  - orthecreedence 4y ago
    Speaking of history, humanity existed for tens of thousands of years without capitalism, so no, "lack of capitalism" does not guarantee "lack of resources."
    - tick_tock_tick 4y ago
      Most of human history is defined by frequent lacks of resource.....
    - legitster 4y ago
      Well, by that logic, people lived on Cuba for thousands of years without access to American goods and services.
      - orthecreedence 4y ago
        Fair enough. My point is that capitalism doesn't materialize resources, as some people believe it to. It might be better than many other methods of organization to distribute resources, but only resources that are already available.
- BobbyJo 4y ago
  No, but capitalism is the sole source of international trade. So those resources only come when they engage in voluntary exchange. International trade is the most libertarian of all markets, because there is no centralized oversight, so all parties basically bring their own gun. I don't agree with GPs framing though, as I think scale is important when comparing economic systems. You wouldn't want capitalism in your house, but it's the best thing at scale.
  - orthecreedence 4y ago
    > You wouldn't want capitalism in your house, but it's the best thing at scale. Interestingly, I think it's the best thing at low to mid-scale. Once it reaches our current scale, the externalities of profit-driven production cross various thresholds that plunge us into existential crises. At-scale, we need some form of production that much more closely measures potential for externalities and allows assigning direct costs to these. Prices are incapable of doing this directly, and the promise of the liberal state to reign in externalities is more and more clearly an empty promise.
    - BobbyJo 4y ago
      Externalities and profit pursuit are exactly why it functions at large scale. Those things exist in every economic system, capitalism streamlines how you direct them. > At-scale, we need some form of production that much more closely measures potential for externalities and allows assigning direct costs to these. Prices are incapable of doing this directly, and the promise of the liberal state to reign in externalities is more and more clearly an empty promise. That's the role of money and taxes. You price the externalities. The reality is, every capitalist country is perfectly capable of reigning in externalities, the just don't, because we're playing a huge game where we try to maximize our living standards without killing ourselves. If we priced CO2, living wages, and plastic cleanup into our lives, it would be a huge set back to our daily lives.
  - legitster 4y ago
    > You wouldn't want capitalism in your house, but it's the best thing at scale. Although, growing up my dad literally did a weekly auction for chores. Actually worked pretty well too, lol.
- legitster 4y ago
  I mean, if Cuba lacks resources, then trading isn't beneficial to them anyway. What they want is access to capital. Either to international credit pools (to bring in equipment), or straight up cash infusion via US Tourism. Neither requires them to actually liberalize their economy, but they would certainly benefit from capitalism.
UncleOxidant 4y ago
> But I think people need to be realistic that families of Cuban refugees form one of the largest block of swing voters in one of the largest US swing states. It's an unlikely thing to happen It seems ironic that Florida Cubans seem to want to continue the blockade. They must know that it's hurting their relatives back in Cuba. And if it's not effective, then why keep it in place? (effective in this case meaning something that leads to meaningful regime change in Cuba - The blockade has been in place for a long time and hasn't led to a change.) It seems like a much better plan for changing Cuba would be to fully engage. Allow trade. Obama began down that path, but Trump stopped it and went back to the status quo. Obama was playing the long game (like he was with Iran) by engaging with Cuba knowing that eventually it would lead to change.
- OkayPhysicist 4y ago
  The Cubans who ended up in Florida overwhelmingly were fleeing the Communists, because they were well off enough to paint a target on their backs. Most of them loathe the current regime.
  - UncleOxidant 4y ago
    Yes, clearly they do hate the communist regime. My point is that the blockade hurts their relatives back in Cuba. And it also hasn't been effective in eliminating the Castro regime. Time to try a different tack.

cassianoleal 4y ago

Capitalism is not the only economic system where countries can benefit from mutual trade.

orthecreedence 4y ago

> Pretty ironic how lack of access to capitalism can be such an important issue to a communist state. Lack of capitalism or lack of resources? One doesn't "import capitalism" after an embargo is lifted.

tick_tock_tick 4y ago
I mean doesn't "Lack of capitalism" basically guarantee you'll have a "lack of resources". History seems to think so.
- orthecreedence 4y ago
  Speaking of history, humanity existed for tens of thousands of years without capitalism, so no, "lack of capitalism" does not guarantee "lack of resources."
  - tick_tock_tick 4y ago
    Most of human history is defined by frequent lacks of resource.....
  - legitster 4y ago
    Well, by that logic, people lived on Cuba for thousands of years without access to American goods and services.
    - orthecreedence 4y ago
      Fair enough. My point is that capitalism doesn't materialize resources, as some people believe it to. It might be better than many other methods of organization to distribute resources, but only resources that are already available.
BobbyJo 4y ago
No, but capitalism is the sole source of international trade. So those resources only come when they engage in voluntary exchange. International trade is the most libertarian of all markets, because there is no centralized oversight, so all parties basically bring their own gun. I don't agree with GPs framing though, as I think scale is important when comparing economic systems. You wouldn't want capitalism in your house, but it's the best thing at scale.
- orthecreedence 4y ago
  > You wouldn't want capitalism in your house, but it's the best thing at scale. Interestingly, I think it's the best thing at low to mid-scale. Once it reaches our current scale, the externalities of profit-driven production cross various thresholds that plunge us into existential crises. At-scale, we need some form of production that much more closely measures potential for externalities and allows assigning direct costs to these. Prices are incapable of doing this directly, and the promise of the liberal state to reign in externalities is more and more clearly an empty promise.
  - BobbyJo 4y ago
    Externalities and profit pursuit are exactly why it functions at large scale. Those things exist in every economic system, capitalism streamlines how you direct them. > At-scale, we need some form of production that much more closely measures potential for externalities and allows assigning direct costs to these. Prices are incapable of doing this directly, and the promise of the liberal state to reign in externalities is more and more clearly an empty promise. That's the role of money and taxes. You price the externalities. The reality is, every capitalist country is perfectly capable of reigning in externalities, the just don't, because we're playing a huge game where we try to maximize our living standards without killing ourselves. If we priced CO2, living wages, and plastic cleanup into our lives, it would be a huge set back to our daily lives.
- legitster 4y ago
  > You wouldn't want capitalism in your house, but it's the best thing at scale. Although, growing up my dad literally did a weekly auction for chores. Actually worked pretty well too, lol.
legitster 4y ago
I mean, if Cuba lacks resources, then trading isn't beneficial to them anyway. What they want is access to capital. Either to international credit pools (to bring in equipment), or straight up cash infusion via US Tourism. Neither requires them to actually liberalize their economy, but they would certainly benefit from capitalism.

UncleOxidant 4y ago

> But I think people need to be realistic that families of Cuban refugees form one of the largest block of swing voters in one of the largest US swing states. It's an unlikely thing to happen It seems ironic that Florida Cubans seem to want to continue the blockade. They must know that it's hurting their relatives back in Cuba. And if it's not effective, then why keep it in place? (effective in this case meaning something that leads to meaningful regime change in Cuba - The blockade has been in place for a long time and hasn't led to a change.) It seems like a much better plan for changing Cuba would be to fully engage. Allow trade. Obama began down that path, but Trump stopped it and went back to the status quo. Obama was playing the long game (like he was with Iran) by engaging with Cuba knowing that eventually it would lead to change.

OkayPhysicist 4y ago
The Cubans who ended up in Florida overwhelmingly were fleeing the Communists, because they were well off enough to paint a target on their backs. Most of them loathe the current regime.
- UncleOxidant 4y ago
  Yes, clearly they do hate the communist regime. My point is that the blockade hurts their relatives back in Cuba. And it also hasn't been effective in eliminating the Castro regime. Time to try a different tack.