4 ms·

In all the negativity of the article, you could easily miss the fact that Cuba has higher life expectancy than all the countries you mention except Chile, and l

In all the negativity of the article, you could easily miss the fact that Cuba has higher life expectancy than all the countries you mention except Chile, and lower violent crime rates by far, universal health care, and universal education. They also have suffered 50 years of a trade embargo by their main natural customer (they were a huge Sugar exporter to the United States before we cut them off).

msandford 12y ago
I think a very interesting question is "why does Cuba have higher life expectancy?" It might be due to universal healthcare, or it might be that people simply can't afford "bad" food and mostly eat what they're given by the government. And the government doesn't give them fast food, it gives them traditional staples like rice, beans, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Health_indicators_and_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Health_indi... Just because the healthcare is universal doesn't mean that it's good. There are differing views of the efficacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Contrasting_views_on_Cuba.27s_health_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Contrasting... The main criticisms are that the government has the power to first game the statistics or outright manufacture them. And because journalists don't have the freedom to report honestly (repeat negative exposure means no more visas) we don't actually know if the stats are gamed a little or a lot.
- tptacek 12y ago
  The US and Cuba have roughly comparable rates of death due to coronary heart disease and stroke.
- kenrikm 12y ago
  Or it could be because it's propaganda [1]. Nah can't be that dictitorial communist states have always been known for being extremely honest. I hear they also have a low infant mortality rate.. [2] [1] great healthcare! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK3AnxSgdxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK3AnxSgdxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD7mLp9j-3k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD7mLp9j-3k [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_wKhXurFyI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_wKhXurFyI
  - papaf 12y ago
    Research suggests that Cuba has good healthcare and a low infant mortality rate: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/4/817.long http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/4/817.long There is propaganda on both sides, it is obvious by now that communism sucks. However, to say that everything about communism sucks and that nothing can be learned from it is intellectually lazy.
mc32 12y ago
Why does not trading with one country have such a negative effect on Cuba? I dont think if Japan were unable to trade with Russia if would find itself in the same predicament. They have Europe and all of their natural" trading partners in Latin America. The us is not the only place they can sell sugar tobacco and bananas. Also why not buy cars from europe or Japan etc? Why must it be american cars?
- danmaz74 12y ago
  I think the industry that would/will benefit massively from the end of the embargo would be tourism. The US is just so much closer than the other big rich economies.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Why does not trading with one country have such a negative effect on Cuba? Because like much of the Carribean, one of the prime industries in Cuba prior to the embargo was tourism, and distance is a factor in tourism, and the main source of tourists with money to spend that would travel to Cuba in the absence of the embargo is the United States. And, perhaps most importantly, because as big of a real effect that it has, those clear real effects that are hard to quantify exactly provide a convenient and plausible cover for any harms that are really due to the economic policies of the government. > The us is not the only place they can sell sugar tobacco and bananas. No, its just one of the places (and the most affluent one) that they have the best position compared to other sources for doing so (without the embargo) because of transport cost per unit of goods. > Also why not buy cars from europe or Japan etc? Why must it be american cars? As the article here notes, those with the money to afford it are buying cars from elsewhere (Korea and China are mentioned specifically.)
  - mc32 12y ago
    Tourism is a good point but tourism is unpredictable, seasonal, etc. So, even Greece tries to make an effort at diversification. Cuba had how many years to diversify and find another economic engine. They could have been the main manufacturers or skilled labor for the caribbean, if they had tried to. Unfortunately, collectivization doesn't seem to have been conductive producing any significant industry, other than healthcare and education as an export.
tptacek 12y ago
That's probably not due to their health care, since their outcomes for major health incidents are poor. A major contributor to life expectancy is infant mortality, and two major contributors to "poorer" infant mortality statistics are aggressive prenatal care (bringing more children to term) and rigorous reporting. Additionally, if you're trying to compare Cuba to the US, you need to keep in mind that the US has a abnormally high and statistically powerful incidence of car crash fatalities (we drive everywhere), and Cuba has an anomalously low level of accidental death.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > That's probably not due to their health care, since their outcomes for major health incidents are poor. The idea that the only important contribution of a health care system is through the outcomes it produces to major health incidents is bizarre; if that was the case, then preventive care would have no value.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Can you flesh that argument out more? Is there a statistic we can find to validate it? Nothing is jumping out at me to suggest that Cuban preventative care is the reason Cuba ranks as well as it does on life expectancy. The idea that life expectancy statistics do a poor job of capturing the quality of health care systems isn't mine; it's a pretty popular one among economists.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      > Can you flesh that argument out more? The argument is that the observation "worse outcomes to major health events" does not justify the conclusion "better life expectancy is not due to health care system", because a health care system can be better at reducing the probability of major health events, while having worse outcomes from the health events that still do occur, and still have the net effect of those differences bet better life expectancies when all other factors are equal. > Is there a statistic we can find to validate it? I'm not arguing that Cuba's health care system is the reason for the better life expectancy numbers, I'm pointing out that the premise from which you drew the conclusion that it was not does not lead to that conclusion. (It supports the conclusion that Cuba's health care system's ability to respond to major health events is not the reason, which is a much narrower conclusion.) I'd personally be surprised if the health care system alone was the explanation (whether through preventive care or otherwise.)

msandford 12y ago

I think a very interesting question is "why does Cuba have higher life expectancy?" It might be due to universal healthcare, or it might be that people simply can't afford "bad" food and mostly eat what they're given by the government. And the government doesn't give them fast food, it gives them traditional staples like rice, beans, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Health_indicators_and_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Health_indi... Just because the healthcare is universal doesn't mean that it's good. There are differing views of the efficacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Contrasting_views_on_Cuba.27s_health_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Cuba#Contrasting... The main criticisms are that the government has the power to first game the statistics or outright manufacture them. And because journalists don't have the freedom to report honestly (repeat negative exposure means no more visas) we don't actually know if the stats are gamed a little or a lot.

tptacek 12y ago
The US and Cuba have roughly comparable rates of death due to coronary heart disease and stroke.
kenrikm 12y ago
Or it could be because it's propaganda [1]. Nah can't be that dictitorial communist states have always been known for being extremely honest. I hear they also have a low infant mortality rate.. [2] [1] great healthcare! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK3AnxSgdxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK3AnxSgdxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD7mLp9j-3k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD7mLp9j-3k [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_wKhXurFyI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_wKhXurFyI
- papaf 12y ago
  Research suggests that Cuba has good healthcare and a low infant mortality rate: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/4/817.long http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/4/817.long There is propaganda on both sides, it is obvious by now that communism sucks. However, to say that everything about communism sucks and that nothing can be learned from it is intellectually lazy.

mc32 12y ago

Why does not trading with one country have such a negative effect on Cuba? I dont think if Japan were unable to trade with Russia if would find itself in the same predicament. They have Europe and all of their natural" trading partners in Latin America. The us is not the only place they can sell sugar tobacco and bananas. Also why not buy cars from europe or Japan etc? Why must it be american cars?

danmaz74 12y ago
I think the industry that would/will benefit massively from the end of the embargo would be tourism. The US is just so much closer than the other big rich economies.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> Why does not trading with one country have such a negative effect on Cuba? Because like much of the Carribean, one of the prime industries in Cuba prior to the embargo was tourism, and distance is a factor in tourism, and the main source of tourists with money to spend that would travel to Cuba in the absence of the embargo is the United States. And, perhaps most importantly, because as big of a real effect that it has, those clear real effects that are hard to quantify exactly provide a convenient and plausible cover for any harms that are really due to the economic policies of the government. > The us is not the only place they can sell sugar tobacco and bananas. No, its just one of the places (and the most affluent one) that they have the best position compared to other sources for doing so (without the embargo) because of transport cost per unit of goods. > Also why not buy cars from europe or Japan etc? Why must it be american cars? As the article here notes, those with the money to afford it are buying cars from elsewhere (Korea and China are mentioned specifically.)
- mc32 12y ago
  Tourism is a good point but tourism is unpredictable, seasonal, etc. So, even Greece tries to make an effort at diversification. Cuba had how many years to diversify and find another economic engine. They could have been the main manufacturers or skilled labor for the caribbean, if they had tried to. Unfortunately, collectivization doesn't seem to have been conductive producing any significant industry, other than healthcare and education as an export.

tptacek 12y ago

That's probably not due to their health care, since their outcomes for major health incidents are poor. A major contributor to life expectancy is infant mortality, and two major contributors to "poorer" infant mortality statistics are aggressive prenatal care (bringing more children to term) and rigorous reporting. Additionally, if you're trying to compare Cuba to the US, you need to keep in mind that the US has a abnormally high and statistically powerful incidence of car crash fatalities (we drive everywhere), and Cuba has an anomalously low level of accidental death.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> That's probably not due to their health care, since their outcomes for major health incidents are poor. The idea that the only important contribution of a health care system is through the outcomes it produces to major health incidents is bizarre; if that was the case, then preventive care would have no value.
- tptacek 12y ago
  Can you flesh that argument out more? Is there a statistic we can find to validate it? Nothing is jumping out at me to suggest that Cuban preventative care is the reason Cuba ranks as well as it does on life expectancy. The idea that life expectancy statistics do a poor job of capturing the quality of health care systems isn't mine; it's a pretty popular one among economists.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > Can you flesh that argument out more? The argument is that the observation "worse outcomes to major health events" does not justify the conclusion "better life expectancy is not due to health care system", because a health care system can be better at reducing the probability of major health events, while having worse outcomes from the health events that still do occur, and still have the net effect of those differences bet better life expectancies when all other factors are equal. > Is there a statistic we can find to validate it? I'm not arguing that Cuba's health care system is the reason for the better life expectancy numbers, I'm pointing out that the premise from which you drew the conclusion that it was not does not lead to that conclusion. (It supports the conclusion that Cuba's health care system's ability to respond to major health events is not the reason, which is a much narrower conclusion.) I'd personally be surprised if the health care system alone was the explanation (whether through preventive care or otherwise.)