Why is Cuba poor?

...

DDR

Dprk

All of them. Oh wait. They don't exist

The last one at the end of this crazy ride.

No true scotsman

...

DDR or Tito's Yugoslavia.

But didn't they fall?

Rome fell. Must not have been a successful society.

Good job.

Burkina Faso

That's not the argument that was being made. I'm not defending those countries so much as pointing out what a stupid fucking argument this is.

Let's look at the achievements of socialist nations shall we?

Hmmm… Sure poverty, starvation, and police states weren't too good, and yeah all of them collapsed or are in the process of converting to capitalism but hey. They made rockets

Why is Haiti poor?

Mother fucking DDR my dudes.

But it still fell none the less. The point is that no political entity lasts forever and judging the success based on longevity fails to grasp the nuance of the conditions which that political entity existed in.

Also it's important to note when you consider said political bodies to have fallen, because often that can be more subjective than not. To go off the Rome example, there are many points in its history when it could be said that Rome "fell:" the end of the monarchy, the centralization and consolidation of power within the Republic, the fall of the Republic, just about all of the major Civil wars under the united Empire, the splitting of the empire, the de facto loss of power in the West, the final Fall of the West, any number of the reforms under the the Byzantine Empire, the Fourth Crusade, the loss of Constantinople to the Ottomans, the fall of Morea, and the fall of Trebizond among many possible points. At each juncture, the actual structure of Rome's political body was changed radically enough that it would not be out of place to say there was a distinct government existing before and after the events in question. These events happened relatively frequently on the historical scale, but their impacts on the actual operation and function of Roman society is often lost to time or overlooked for the sake of narrative simplicity. At the end of the day, the Roman Empire of Augustus was almost unrecognizable when compared to the Roman Empire of Constantine XI.

You left off the correct one though: November 1 1922 with the abolition of the sultanate and establishment of the republican of turkey.

get fucked with an icepick you faggot.

The TRUEST inheritors of Rum. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

...

Roman empire ended in 1453.

Because commies+entrenched catholocism+latin american culture+us embargo and a lack of coherent social identity conducive to innovation and creativity (how many cubans are doing anything besides pop music these days?)

...

The French Republic only stood for a few years before relapsing back into monarchy, I guess republics are impossible guys xD

Name one "socialist nation" that wasn't a impoverished, starving police state before the socialist revolution.

The People's Republic of America
oh wait

what?

Not enough master race Jews to manage the economy there

pretty slick there, mick

Communism.

But they don't.
Every 'communist' state is actuallly socialist or some other shit. Socialism was considered to be a link between capitalism and communism, but no one has actually got past it to communism.
Even USSR was socialist, and they used to tell kids from young age that 'we live in soicalism right now, but don't worry guoys, we'll build communism soon'.

Because the USSR fell, it's true for both Capitalist and Socialist countries, and it's only downwards from there.

Nicaragua tbh, must've been fun fighting Raegan's henchmen.

Cuba, Russia and the DPRK should just go Dengist by now though. (As should Brazil, Iran and Egypt)

cuba has a better gdp/capita than a lot of latin america, and that's despite an embargo with the world's #1 consumer economy

if i had to be a random prole anywhere in latin america, i'd pick cuba

nigga you stupid

also

You're admitting that communist countries require endless free money from some external source to thrive. Such power!

Are they? World Bank lists their GDP (PPP) per capita at 58th spot. That's slightly below Chile and Romania, but above Argentina, Turkey, Bulgaria, Mexico, etc.

Why don't you objectively look at what the people of Cuba have achieved for themselves from a human point of view, instead of looking at their ranking on a list?

He is talking about bigger economies being more beneficial - because global division of labour.

And who that human would be?

A cuba-sized country doesn't need to be poor without a perpetual influx of easy money. That's called incompetence.

Further confirmation the leftist is a ghoul who thinks in terms of official statistics and simply doesn't know any human metrics to begin with.

Yeah. Because having access only to 0.2% of world economy cannot be a problem. Such economic expertise. Much wow.

Got anything explain why US can't have a better medicine, even with access to remaining 99.8%?

f a g g o t

That's called every modern major economy you stupid asshole

HDI human enough?
It's funny how Holla Forums will praise Lybia because it's edgy and "anti-globalis"t but shitting on Cuba which is essentially the same thing (expect without oil) is mandatory.

I wonder what level Libya's at now. Would be great for a "pre-Freedom™/post-Freedom™" comparison.

Why not? The vast majority of the world is poor. Any reason Cuba should be rich?

Abolished illiteracy, free healthcare and education, better life expectancy and lower infant mortality rate than the largest economy in existence. Only sustainable country in existence even after years of embargos from not only what would be their largest trade partner + the largest economy in the world but also from Europe if they ever defied the embargos as well as was the case with France.

Clearly not a paradise but the Cuban people have defied the odds time and time again, stood up to the biggest Imperialist power in contemporary history and still manages to outperform majority of Latin America.

If you give health insurance to everyone it cost is high. Also, social security…this type of stuff.

If that money would go into private pocekts of few select individuals (porky) then they would have more money. But also, no universal health insurance and that type of stuff. Communism everyone gets paid the same weather they are a doctor or a ditch digger. The government pays them to go to college because they have the grades and intelligence to do something someone else could never do. But it causes people to lack incentive because why strive to be a doctor when being something easier pays the same.
But it was thought up because in most society's you have the super rich and the working class who barely get by. Then after a few years of this the working class rise up and kill the rich class and take over. So to prevent this from happening and everyone have a job and education everyone gets the same. Everyone gets a place to live and free health care and a small wage.

B-but don't you know Somalia and Guatemala are heaven you fucking COMMIEE!!!!

It literally is not? It is in the top 5 standards of living of all Latin American countries and has education ratings comparable to Finland.

haha what

Don't forget inventing a vaccine for cancer

Jesus christ lurk the fuck more

Yugoslavia
Cuba
Paris Commune
Catalonia
Rojava

Dude, it is literary best answer on yahoo answers archive.is/jah1w

If i would say you are shill who does not know difference between communism and socialism on /leftypol would i be wrong ?

8/10 I guess you got me

...

Sanctions.

If you are under sanctions from US the only countries that may trade with you are, China if you are a big country, Latin America, and some few others.

Cuba is neither so they have to rely on themselves.

Second thing is, if you are poor with no natural resources, it's hard to became rich. How you will fund your "industrial revolution"?

I'm not sure how you people living in the US see this but I would have no problem with nuclear war wiping out the American population centres

Posadism when

How would you became rich if everybody is paid the same (more or less) and state does not encourage private property ?

Cuba is not poor. They have tobacco…rum…

The Soviet Union became the father of space, the biggest arms seller in the world that way, and a nuclear power that way.

It's called working hard, it can be done in any system/

archive.is/I7Lqt

tl;dr in communism everybody is poor because everybody earns the same

And cuba has best cigars, good rum and universal healthcare which is pretty good. You are confusing state success (from all people living in state) with private wealth.

Still, the overall wealth should be competitive with capitalist, and it should be able to break the "dependency theory". If not it's a failed system in my book.

But again, the vast majority of capitalist countries in the world are as worst as Cuba when it comes to the overall wealth so no point is made by Cuba.

The idea of ​​communism is very pleasing to lazy people, those who dream of never having to work while the state sustains them. There is no communist or socialist economy, there is only capitalist economy. So, you fucking lazies shit-head, go to work and stop writing crap on social networks.

leave hun

tough crowd

define "overall wealth"

communism is so great, it did went all right everywhere it took place, right? You lazy fuck . You don't have argument agaisnt that, all you can do is cry.

...

Cuba has little export goods beyond Cigars and Rum, so in turn it doesn't have high material wealth.

Compared to other countries of similar GDP, the standard of living is MILES ahead. Higher living standards, lower crime, better health, lower disease.

They may not get fancy gadgets, but people have healthier and more prosperous lives than if they'd remained Capitalist.

Sure. Rojava and Cuba, assuming I learned their respective languages. I might even visit Rojava in a few years if it goes well for them, training to become a teacher so I'd at least have something to contribute.

Burkina Faso is another, though sadly that one got fucked over by imperialist baguette fuckers.

Seriously, if you wanna see what a Socialist republic can do when not immediately threatened by Capitalist invasion (compared to Cuba, USSR, PRC, DPRK which use(d) authoritarianism for security) look up Thomas Sankara and Burkina Faso.

They became self-sufficient with food, immunised hundreds of thousands of children from life-threatening diseases within weeks of seizing power. They distributed land to the workers, and gave women rights and banned FGM, polygamy and forced marriages. This was in a fucking African nation during the 80's mind you.

...

...

Thomas Sankara • The Upright Man Full Documentary
youtube.com/watch?v=kItKeYK9D3k
he got shot by security. All equal and that stuff is great (he used to ride in renault 5) but then arises a problem of security.

He also got shot and all that was overthrown in coup. Also, no free press and Sankara's régime was criticised by Amnesty International and other international humanitarian organisations for violations of human rights, including extrajudicial executions, arbitrary detentions and torture of political opponents. The British development organisation Oxfam recorded the arrest and torture of trade union leaders in 1987. In 1984, seven individuals associated with the previous régime were accused of treason and executed after a summary trial.

People's Revolutionary Tribunals Procedures in these trials, especially legal protections for the accused, did not conform to international standards. Defendants had to prove themselves innocent of the crimes they were charged with committing and were not allowed to be represented by counsel.[24] The courts were originally met with adoration from the Burkinabé people but over time became corrupt and oppressive. So called "lazy workers" were tried and sentenced to work for free or expelled from their jobs and discriminated against. Some even created their own courts to settle scores and humiliate their enemies.

Revolutionary Defense Committees Sankara's CDRs overstepped their power, and were accused by some of thuggery and gang-like behavior. CDR groups would meddle in the everyday life of the Burkinabé. Individuals would use their power to settle scores or punish enemies. Sankara himself noted the failure publicly. The public placed blame for actions of individual CDRs squarely on Sankara.[6] The failure of the CDRs, coupled with the failure of the Revolutionary Teachers program, mounting labour and middle class disdain, and Sankara's steadfastness lead to the regime partially weakening within Burkina Faso.

let us say they were people not very happy with him management policies ?

Distributing land is the same mistake that Lenin made which eventually created the kulaks.