In Cuba, peanut butter is a luxury reserved only for the rich.

[grundle]

I bet these people would love to have access to Wal Mart, both for the products that it sells, and for the jobs that it provides.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060204/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/castro_s_campaign

Gov't Drive Vs. 'Rich' Hits Average Cubans

By VANESSA ARRINGTON, Associated Press Writer Sat Feb 4, 12:30 PM ET

HAVANA - President Fidel Castro is pursuing a campaign against Cuba's "new rich," accusing them of corruption and moral decay in his quest to erase class differences threatening the utopian ideals of his communist regime.

Violators face possible jail time and loss of state jobs as the government tries to eliminate a thriving black market that supplies Cubans and tourists with everything from gasoline and cooking oil to illicit meals of lobster served in small, private restaurants.

Yet "rich" is a mushy term on an island where state pay averages just $12 a month — a wage virtually impossible to live on even with heavily subsidized government services and mostly free housing. Many of Castro's targets are simply poor Cubans who steal from the state to make ends meet.

The 79-year-old leader has railed in recent speeches against these thefts, portraying widespread corruption as one of the greatest threats yet to Cuba's socialist system.

"This country will have much more, but it will never be a society of consumption," Castro told students at the University of Havana in a speech that was televised across the island. "It will be a society of knowledge, of culture, of the most extraordinary human development one can imagine."

Forty-seven years after Castro's revolution, many Cubans still share an ethic of solidarity that stresses spiritual over material wealth. They may not have fancy stereos, but they crowd theaters for plays and concerts. Many express pride that their doctors are helping earthquake victims in Pakistan, even if it means their own medical service is affected.

Still, Cubans also are known for their ingenuity — and many manage to stretch their salaries in underhanded ways.

"If there were abundance, who would rob?" said Oscar Espinosa Chepe, a state-trained economist who became an anti-communist dissident. "Hardly anybody can survive by working honestly in Cuba."

Bakers sell customers a less than two ounce chunk of bread for the three-ounce price and pocket the change from selling the leftovers. Workers at state-run pizza stands sell "extra" cheese, tomatoes and cooking oil on the side. Bus drivers don't give tickets to all paying riders.

Off-shift state truck drivers help neighbors move construction materials — for a price. And employees at state stores take part of the inventory home to sell.

Other people offer services or handmade goods without the required self-employment licenses that the state tightly controls.

In communist Cuba, the black market has no physical location, but is everywhere. From clothes and toys to household supplies and even gasoline, the sale of stolen goods is part of daily life.

"People have always diverted state resources — it happens when there is necessity," said Jesus Blanco, a 51-year-old who works in a bar. "One of the problems is the scarcity of new products coming in."

Blanco said he manages to live honestly on his monthly salary, which is 235 Cuban pesos, about $10. But, he added, both the television and refrigerator in his house are broken, and he doesn't have enough money to fix holes in his roof caused during last year's hurricane season.

Castro has been remarkably frank about the pervasiveness of corruption. He has lashed out at state workers and the self-employed, and accuses private restaurant owners of encouraging illegal activity by buying lobster — which only the state can legally catch — from private fishermen.

Cuba's leader seems particularly angry about service station workers who pilfer gasoline, selling it on the side. "We have to vanquish these deviations, or we die," Castro said.

Cuban socialism offers a broad safety net, with free health care and education, heavily subsidized transportation and electricity, and a ration covering about a third of the average person's monthly diet.

But the quality of some services is low, and monthly pay is swallowed up by additional food costs. Little or no cash remains for necessities like cooking oil or soap. TV sets and new clothing are usually bought with money sent from overseas relatives, so many go without.

The state dramatically boosted electricity rates for those using large amounts in December. Making a phone call to neighboring countries costs from $2.45 to $4.45 a minute, and the cost of unrationed food is high.

Castro says eliminating stealing could help raise living standards for the island's 11.2 million people. He increased government salaries in November, and doubled the minimum wage last May to 225 Cuban pesos, less than $10 a month.

But at the heart of Castro's crusade is a belief in the collective good. Hunger for possessions or prestige based on wealth is seen as a capitalist ill. Altruism, cultural endeavors and universal health care are valued above personal luxuries.

With material resources limited, Cuba must set priorities "significantly different than those given primacy in capitalist countries," Central Bank President Francisco Soberon told economists last year.

"For example, the expense related to saving the life of a child is given priority over the purchase of the latest model of a car for an elite, or lavish architecture for headquarters of global corporations," he said.

But there also is a real "new rich" on the island, although it is tiny.

Cubans with money join diplomats shopping at an upscale grocery store offering luxuries such as microwave popcorn and peanut butter. A golf club counts about 20 Cubans among its 100 members, a privilege costing $70 up front plus $45 every month.

The few relatively wealthy Cubans include people who are married to foreigners or work for foreign companies as well as musicians and athletes with special privileges. Some may even be people who steal from the state on a grand scale.

But most Cubans must scramble for essentials.

Castro's solution to this moral dilemma depends in part on youthful innocence. His government has dispatched thousands of young social workers to replace employees suspected of stealing from state operations. Since the campaign began in October, Castro claims gasoline sales nationwide have increased by $100,000 daily.

Communist officials are holding island-wide meetings urging party members to fight corruption, and Castro prods Cubans to do their part.

But people say that until their economic situation improves, it will be hard to make Castro's ideal a reality.

"The economy is getting a bit better, but I don't think we can live without the black market yet," said Blanco. "Until prices go down, the salary increases won't be felt, and there'll be no room for luxuries."

[movielib]

"This country will have much more, but it will never be a society of consumption," Castro told students at the University of Havana in a speech that was televised across the island. "It will be a society of knowledge, of culture, of the most extraordinary human development one can imagine."
rotfl

Ya gotta love Utopia!

[nevermind]

In Cuba, peanut butter eats you!

[Forum Troll]

When Castro finally dies and the country is opened up, there will be such an influx of Western investment capital, the place will change overnight. Casinos and mega-resorts and hotels will be built. Billions of dollars will flow into the country annually. At only 90 miles from Florida, it will become the new Hawaii. Only tourists and their money can save Cuba from extinction. So if someone offers to sell you cheap land in Cuba, buy it!

[Tommy Ceez]

So if someone offers to sell you cheap land in Cuba, buy it!

Isnt there a map where all the US corporations have already divided Havanna up waiting for Castro's death?


I disagree that it will be Hawaii 90 miles from florida...It will be the combination of the East coast's Las Vegas, Tiajuana and Bangcock...gambeling, drinking and prostitution all at 18 years old.

South Beach will wither and die

[grundle]

I would like to hear the opinions of people who voted that Cubans would be worse off. Please offer your comments.

[RayChuang]

When Castro finally dies and the country is opened up, there will be such an influx of Western investment capital, the place will change overnight. Casinos and mega-resorts and hotels will be built. Billions of dollars will flow into the country annually. At only 90 miles from Florida, it will become the new Hawaii. Only tourists and their money can save Cuba from extinction. So if someone offers to sell you cheap land in Cuba, buy it!

Wrongo! :D

That maybe true along the coastline but I expect the biggest investment will be agriculture. Can you imagine growing a long, long list of tropical agricultural products in Cuba where its main market is only 90 miles away? Cuba could become an economic superpower just from the agricultural exports almost overnight.

[eXcentris]

When Castro finally dies and the country is opened up, there will be such an influx of Western investment capital, the place will change overnight. Casinos and mega-resorts and hotels will be built. Billions of dollars will flow into the country annually. At only 90 miles from Florida, it will become the new Hawaii. Only tourists and their money can save Cuba from extinction. So if someone offers to sell you cheap land in Cuba, buy it!

Except for the fact that tourism is already Cuba's largest industry. It employs over 100,000 Cubans and generates over 2 billion dollars a year in revenue or roughly 10% of GDP (40% of foreign revenue). It accomodates over 2 million tourists a year and is the leading Carribean destination for Canadians, Italians and Spaniards, and ranks number two for Germans. Because Americans don't go to Cuba doesn't mean that nobody else does. :)

[Myster X]

How much of that tourism money goes into the economy? How much is Castro pocketing for his military?

[sjrab16]

The people and the government will still be conservative folks, so something tells me it will not be the new South Beach, Bangkok, and other places like that. However I do see it becoming more like and Mexican Resort town in certain areas.

[grundle]

The people and the government will still be conservative folks, so something tells me it will not be the new South Beach, Bangkok, and other places like that. However I do see it becoming more like and Mexican Resort town in certain areas.

Greenland got its name because of all the plant life it had at the time.

Iceland got its name because of all the ice.

How did Bangkok get its name?

[Canadian Bacon]

How did Bangkok get its name?
some guy got kicked in the nuts

[mikehunt]

removing the embargos would probably help
I don't understand why the US embargos cuba but not china
china has a just as bad if not worse human rights abuse record as cuba

[sjrab16]

removing the embargos would probably help
I don't understand why the US embargos cuba but not china
china has a just as bad if not worse human rights abuse record as cuba

Never understood that either. We became friends with Russia, we are "friends" with China, and then we deal with so many other governments that are worse then Cuba...just does not make sense

[Shazam]

removing the embargos would probably help
I don't understand why the US embargos cuba but not china
china has a just as bad if not worse human rights abuse record as cubaHistorical inertia.

[kvrdave]

<img src=http://w3.gorge.net/kvrdave/masterblaster.gif>
LIFT EMBARGO

Actually, they have the ability to have a decent life right now because of the economy of the world minus the US. I don't think much would change until Castro is gone, and even then it is hard to say. They may have another Castro type that just steps in.

[mseang]

Originally Posted by mikehunt
"removing the embargos would probably help
I don't understand why the US embargos cuba but not china
china has a just as bad if not worse human rights abuse record as cuba"

That is because China basically owns our economy. They have a large enough investment that they could feasibly send our economy in to a tail spin just by dumping a few bonds or a few of their investments in the dollar. The only reason they do not do this in my opinions is because we are their best customer.

[wildcatlh]

Removing embargoes = Miami burns. And I'm serious bout that. The Cuban-American population would never allow it.

Plus whichever party is in power that allows it to happen loses Florida in the next election, which is one of the big reasons it never happens. There's alot of people who say that the Elian Gonzalez situation is what lost Florida for Gore in 2000. The Cuban-American population basically controls the vote in this state.

[Ranger]

Removing embargoes = Miami burns. And I'm serious bout that. The Cuban-American population would never allow it.
They might be upset for a while, but I think they'll get over it.

[eXcentris]

I must remember to bring peanut butter to Cuba next time I go there. Trade it for some cigars perhap. :)

[Vandelay_Inds]

I have a friend who lived in Cuba for a couple of years. For a can of tuna, you can get any kind of sex you might be into. ANY.

You can also buy incredibly rare and valuable books for pocket change.

Oh, the joys of socialism.

[mikehunt]

Originally Posted by mikehunt
"removing the embargos would probably help
I don't understand why the US embargos cuba but not china
china has a just as bad if not worse human rights abuse record as cuba"

That is because China basically owns our economy. They have a large enough investment that they could feasibly send our economy in to a tail spin just by dumping a few bonds or a few of their investments in the dollar. The only reason they do not do this in my opinions is because we are their best customer.

but why was china ever allowed to get to that point? It's not like china just recently became communist and started abusing its people

[Vandelay_Inds]

China is an example for the rest of the world. I have a lot of admiration for them.

To stop trading with them would be very stupid in every way.

[Gallant Pig]

China is an example for the rest of the world. I have a lot of admiration for them.

To stop trading with them would be very stupid in every way.

Maybe but it's very hypocritical to have an embargo in one country because of poor human rights and not another country with atrocious human rights.

BTW: does China have an open market for US companies?

[Vandelay_Inds]

Maybe but it's very hypocritical to have an embargo in one country because of poor human rights and not another country with atrocious human rights.

Yes, but China is lifting hundreds of millions of its citizens out of poverty, is very eager to learn from everyone else, and has a government for which the happiness of the population is a top priority. The progress they have achieved in just a couple of generations is breathtaking.

Cuba is a country frozen in time, poor in everything but left-wing rhetoric.

BTW: does China have an open market for US companies?

Well, many of the big companies in China are wholly or partially owned by foreigners. Besides, the US benefits greatly from trade with China as it is.

[Ranger]

Actually, I have heard that the rich/poor gap was growing rapidly in China. There's a lot of frustrated jobless Chinese workers and when they try to protest, the Chinese government immediately breaks it up and tries to cover it up as in the media isn't allowed to cover it.

[Vandelay_Inds]

Actually, I have heard that the rich/poor gap was growing rapidly in China.

That is an inevitable consequence of growth and technological change. Those left behind in the countryside will of course earn a lot less than industrial workers. But that is irrelevant. What matter is that people are escaping poverty at a rate unmatched anywhere else.

There's a lot of frustrated jobless Chinese workers and when they try to protest, the Chinese government immediately breaks it up and tries to cover it up as in the media isn't allowed to cover it.

This is what fascinates me about the Chinese. The government has discovered that the best way of combating discontent is by aggressively and effectively promoting growth, with incredible results in very difficult areas such as the western province of Xinjiang, where even the intractable Muslim minority is increasingly finding that life under Chinese rule is preferable to independence.

[Ranger]

I think the lesson here is that market reform isn't going to magically create democracies, especially if implemented by authoritarian governments.

[movielib]

Yes, but China is lifting hundreds of millions of its citizens out of poverty, is very eager to learn from everyone else, and has a government for which the happiness of the population is a top priority. The progress they have achieved in just a couple of generations is breathtaking.
While I somewhat agree with you I don't see China as exactly benevolent to its population. While it has vastly increased economic freedom in recent years it's still lagging way behind on personal freedom. Fortunately, the more economically free a people become, the more personal freedom they begin to demand. It is probably becoming harder for the Chinese government to deny some incrementally creeping freedoms without a big crackdown which would endanger the increasing prosperity. They are at least going in the right direction. And they are leaving the democracy of India in the dust.

As far as the "breathtaking" progress, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore have all moved faster (I do give credit to the Chinese for pretty much leaving Hong Kong alone since the 1997 handover). China's huge population and later start are certainly factors but a little more personal freedom would, I'm sure, help move things along at a faster clip.

Cuba is a country frozen in time, poor in everything but left-wing rhetoric.
Can't argue with that. Cuba is utterly pathetic, "free" education and health care notwithstanding.

Well, many of the big companies in China are wholly or partially owned by foreigners. Besides, the US benefits greatly from trade with China as it is.
I agree with you on this too.

[Vandelay_Inds]

While I somewhat agree with you I don't see China as exactly benevolent to its population. While it has vastly increased economic freedom in recent years it's still lagging way behind on personal freedom. Fortunately, the more economically free a people become, the more personal freedom they begin to demand. It is probably becoming harder for the Chinese government to deny some incrementally creeping freedoms without a big crackdown which would endanger the increasing prosperity. They are at least going in the right direction. And they are leaving the democracy of India in the dust.

As far as the "breathtaking" progress, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore have all moved faster (I do give credit to the Chinese for pretty much leaving Hong Kong alone since the 1997 handover). China's huge population and later start are certainly factors but a little more personal freedom would, I'm sure, help move things along at a faster clip.

China is a much more complex society than any of the other Asian tigers. Given the sheer challenge of keeping such a huge empire together, and the terrible legacy of Mao, their achievements are truly miraculous.

About personal freedom, I think their current approach of "slowly crossing the river by feeling the stones" is the wisest way to move forward. No need to rush blindly ahead. Remember, Chinese civilization is thousands of years old.

And your comparison with India is right on. Democracy appears to hinder rather than stimulate development there.

I really like the whole of east Asia though, and have great expectations for them. :)

Can't argue with that. Cuba is utterly pathetic, "free" education and health care notwithstanding.

Whatever "education" they do get doesn't go much further than outright indoctrination. And health care is not equal for everyone either. The wife of my friend's father is somewhat of a figure in the regime, and the medical attention received by those with connections and power is worlds apart from what the commoners get.

[Vandelay_Inds]

I think the lesson here is that market reform isn't going to magically create democracies, especially if implemented by authoritarian governments.

I don't think democracy should be the main priority. It grants freedom only to politicians. I respect though those civilizations that have the capacity for generating progress in the actual lives of its members.

[Ranger]

I don't think democracy should be the main priority. It grants freedom only to politicians. I respect though those civilizations that have the capacity for generating progress in the actual lives of its members.
I have to disagree because I strongly believe democracy (human rights, political freedom, free elections, etc) should be the main priority rather than blindly imposing market reforms. I think a reasonable argument could be made that free trade under undemocratic conditions typically grants freedom only to the elites and politicians.

[Vandelay_Inds]

I have to disagree because I strongly believe democracy (human rights, political freedom, free elections, etc) should be the main priority rather than blindly imposing market reforms. I think a reasonable argument could be made that free trade under undemocratic conditions typically grants freedom only to the elites and politicians.

What would you rather have, a satisfying job, decent income, and the ability to pursue your interests as long as they're not of a political nature, or the freedom to vote for some crook?

[Ranger]

What would you rather have, a satisfying job, decent income, and the ability to pursue your interests as long as they're not of a political nature, or the freedom to vote for some crook?
Do you believe that's all democracy is - "voting for some crook"?

[movielib]

And your comparison with India is right on. Democracy appears to hinder rather than stimulate development there.

India's democracy is riddled with corruption and overregulated far more than even the U.S. It can take years to open a business in India (if at all) and the same thing could be done in a day in Hong Kong.

To me, democracy is way overrated and is, essentially, three wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

It's far more important to guarantee that people have personal and economic freedom, regardless of their popularity (which was the original idea behind the Bill of Rights) than to subject issues to a popularity contest, special interests and lobbyists.

[movielib]

Do you believe that's all democracy is - "voting for some crook"?
No, usually you get to vote for a whole bunch of crooks. ;)

[Vandelay_Inds]

Do you believe that's all democracy is - "voting for some crook"?

Most of the times it is. Plus it can be highly irrational and subject to passions and whims. Of course I'm not suggesting the US abandons it, but in other parts of the world, especially those with the cultural characteristics of Asia, it should never come before real progress in the lives of people.

[Vandelay_Inds]

To me, democracy is way overrated and is, essentially, three wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

:lol::up:

It's far more important to guarantee that people have personal and economic freedom, regardless of their popularity (which was the original idea behind the Bill of Rights) than to subject issues to a popularity contest, special interests and lobbyists.

Again, 100% agreement :)

[Ranger]

Some of you seem to believe that capitalism should be FORCED (by dictators and/or western countries) on developing countries whether or not the people of those countries demand it.

That I cannot support.

If the people of a particular country do not want free trade, then i believe that is their right.

[Vandelay_Inds]

Some of you seem to believe that capitalism should be FORCED (by dictators and/or western countries) on developing countries whether or not the people of those countries demand it.

That I cannot support.

If the people of a particular country do not want free trade, then i believe that is their right.

Everyone wants trade and capitalism. It's either that or poverty, and I don't think many desire being poor and miserable, whether they understand economics or not.

And the point throughout the discussion has been that people are living much better in China as a result of capitalism.

[Ranger]

Everyone wants trade and capitalism.

That is not true.

[movielib]

Some of you seem to believe that capitalism should be FORCED (by dictators and/or western countries) on developing countries whether or not the people of those countries demand it.

That I cannot support.

If the people of a particular country do not want free trade, then i believe that is their right.
I do think it is a basic human right for people to be able to work, create wealth and trade the fruits of their labor freely with others. No one should be forced to do so but no one should be prevented from doing so either.

Weren't certain freedoms "forced" upon the American people by the Bill of Rights? They were not subjected to a vote of the people (fortunately).

[Ranger]

No one should be forced to do so but no one should be prevented from doing so either.
Yes, I agree with that, though I think that it is a mistake to assume that free trade will always make things better. It is usually much more complicated.

I don't believe much progress in promoting democracy has been made with China and I believe that the country is still very poor. While many countries benefited from forced free trade reforms, other countries didn't and consequently became anti-free trade.

Weren't certain freedoms "forced" upon the American people by the Bill of Rights? They were not subjected to a vote of the people (fortunately).
I think that was done by a representative democracy, not a dictatorship, so that wasn't really "forcing" it on the people. I agree that a true democracy such as a direct vote on things like the bill of rights may not have worked very well.

[movielib]

Yes, I agree with that, though I think that it is a mistake to assume that free trade will always make things better. It is usually much more complicated.
I know you won't accept this but free markets and free trade will always make things better if it is done right. History shows it. The differences between Honk Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan on the one hand and countries like India, most of the rest of Asia and Africa really cannot be denied. It has more to do with a relatively free economy than with the type of government (Singapore's, in particular, is quite repressive on personal freedom). I am totally for personal freedom as well as economic freedom but democracy does not necessarily have a lot to do with it.

I don't believe much progress in promoting democracy has been made with China and I believe that the country is still very poor. While many countries benefited from forced free trade reforms, other countries didn't and consequently became anti-free trade.
China is still very repressive as I said above. But again, democracy is not necessarily important. Look at The mess of India. And if any country did not benefit from free trade, I doubt they had it.

I think that was done by a representative democracy, not a dictatorship, so that wasn't really "forcing" it on the people. I agree that a true democracy such as a direct vote on things like the bill of rights may not have worked very well.
It probably would have passed in 1791. I'm not so sure about today.

[Vandelay_Inds]

Income is directly proportional to economic freedom. That is a fact.

[Ranger]

And if any country did not benefit from free trade, I doubt they had it.
A country will see benefits after it makes it through the transition process which can have some short run problems like a temporary financial crisis.

The time this process takes varies by country, and some countries have little patience for such things. If the market transition isn't coming through fast enough, the people will become frustrated and demand radical protectionism policies. Free trade was overall successful in South America, but some countries shifted further left due to transition problems.

The problem of transition sometimes can be the fault of the government for imposing market reforms without being prepared.

I do think free trade can work - but some countries may need to be more cautious and moderate than others to ensure long-term roots.