• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cuban State Media: ‘Negro’ Obama ‘Incited Rebellion and Disorder’

No, you implied that the wage plus subsidies from the government made it not so bad in Cuba.
"Not so bad"? Well that is incredibly vague and incredibly subjective. What I originally claimed from the get go, "Its most likely around actually 11 cents an hours. But its also leaving out many other extremely important variables like cost of living, government subsidies, little to no taxes, gov programs offered to all Cubans."

Simply pointed out that your claim that it was.05 cents an hour was wrong and that you are leaving out many other variables.



What blockade? The US embargo doesn't effect Cuban trade with the rest of the world.
Except it does, see the Helms Burton Act. Pointed this out in my earlier post.


I never argued otherwise. You are simply making an weak semantic argument that a state that confiscates 97% of production has low taxes....
Not at all. Its like saying when state employees get paid in the US by the federal government and the federal government does not pay them 100% of their labor value and keeps some of their labor value as profit for themselves is a tax. No-one calculates like that.

That is a silly comment. So we can't compare and contrast different economic systems because they are different?
In the manner you are doing it, yes. Comparing a Marxist-Leninist system with modern day left wing Americans calling for a welfare state? Completely an apples to oranges comparison.

But you are defending it, though.
Sure, I'm defending the information I am presenting because I think you are leaving it out of a subjective analysis.

I think it's a hell hole, you think it isn't so bad because the government doles out food to its starving populace.
I dont think its great and I dont think its a hell hole.

And what rights do the title impart on the title owner? The right to sell?
Again, the right to sell ones house on a open market is not then end all be all for owning a house.

The right to build or plant? Nope, the government controls that.
You can build in your house, you can plant a garden on your property... In fact

The right to keep the proceeds of a sale the government authorized? Nope.
Uhh yes you can.. Did we not discuss the private sector in Cuba?

It's not ownership. The Cuban people are essentially borrowing land from the Government who maintains ultimate ownership and control.
Except they are owning the home.

Ummmm, no.
So there we go, you are essentially admitting that the ultimate caveat in home ownership is if you can sell said home on a open market. :roll:
 
"Regional" is a poor excuse. There is no reason why Cuba should be impoverished.
This is like saying there is not reason why any country in the region should have poverty... :roll:

By the argument of the average socialist, Cuban having "free" healthcare, universal schooling, and all the trappings of a full fledged Communist state it should be doing great... but it isn't.
:lamo Thats not the argument

Many of the other impoverished states in Latin America can't boast the supposed achievements of Cuba, and yet Cuba is among the worst states in Latin America.
What? "Worst states in Latin America"?!? Its one if not the best in education standards, healthcare standards, literacy rates, high in HDI, life expectancy. I mean your view of this nation is completely unsubjective and just ignores simple realities. I mean sure, its not "great" or comparable to the US, but to say its "among the worst states in Latin America" is simply ignorant.


There is no "blockade", there is an embargo by America -
Also known as the blockade.

who still manages to be in the top of the list of importers to Cuba.
CubaVenezuela 38.7%, China 9.8%, Spain 8.4%, Brazil 4.7%, Algeria 4.4% (2014)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2061.html#cu

What the Cubans can't buy from the US they could buy from Canada, or most of Europe who don't have trade embargoes in place.
Addressed this point several times already.

The problem is that Cuban can't afford medical supplies because their economy sucks, and they have invested little capital in developing their own medical supply economy.
:lamo Stupid Commies suck!
Now lets come back to reality. Why does Cuba have to improvise in the field of medical supplies? Cuba's medical magicians - Al Jazeera English

Well as an Oxfam America report found: "In the context of the weakened Cuban economy, the U.S. embargo exacerbated the problems in thehealth care system.
faracn.png

"
http://web.archive.org/web/20030720011919/http://www.wola.org/publications/cuba_myths_facts.pdf

But hey I get it, its easier just to go with the "commies suck" argument.
 
No surprise that a Communist government would depend on hand outs for their "free" healthcare....
Yea. Like the rest of the world!

I was going on YOUR citation that put the total utilities for the average Cuban at $2. So feel free to write up that monthly budget when you get a chance...
You want me to write up a monthly budget for you!?

No, I am arguing that the home ownership statistics you provided are bogus because the Cuban people have none of the freedoms with the property that would come with actual ownership. The state owns the real estate, the Cuban people borrow it.
Hey, youve already admitted the ultimate caveat in home ownership is if you can sell said home on a open market... We are simply going to go nowhere with this point.


You keep arguing that Cuban's own there own home because they hold the title... I keep pointing out to you that there is no freedom imparted by that title that would indicate that they actually own the home.
From an earlier source:
"Homeowners could buy and sell dwellings and land, but only at low government-set prices, and the state had first option to buy. Although little legal buying and selling of land and dwellings occurred for the next two decades, informal sales of land for self-building were common. Housing exchanges were the way most households moved to another dwelling, but the values of the properties—as determined by very low official prices—had to be certified as equivalent. Homeowners’ heirs were entitled to receive their share of a dwelling’s official price, however, the right to remain in and acquire the property—by amortizing the share due other heirs—was restricted to people who lived in a unit at the time of the owner’s death. Similarly, when a leaseholder passed away, existing residents could remain.

The 1984 (and 1988) General Housing Laws converted most leaseholders into homeowners, legalized most illegal and ambiguous tenure situations of tens of thousands of self-builders and others, permitted free-market private rentals and sales of roof-rights, and fostered self-building by both individuals and newly permitted housing cooperatives (which never got off the ground). The only groups not converted into homeowners were residents of tenements and shantytowns, who remained rent-free leaseholders, and occupants of units directly “linked” to workplaces. These laws also updated existing legislation regulating housing management, succession, house swaps, maintenance, repairs, and evictions, and they established the National Housing Institute. The 1984 law also allowed free-market buying and selling of land and housing, but it was restricted within a few years. Few households saw the need to sell, but pent-up demand and low supply led to high prices and some speculation.

By the early 1990s, more than 85 percent of Cuban households were homeowners, paying little or nothing for their units except for maintenance, repair and utilities. There were no mortgages or land and property taxes. Financing for purchases of units or repair was considered a loan, not a mortgage, and therefore dwellings were not used as collateral. The island’s economic crisis of the 1990s led to substantial hardship for many families who used their homes to supplement meager earnings by renting (legally) or downsizing, moving to a less accessible neighborhood, or selling through under-the-table transactions. After a decade of stricter regulations, in 2010, restrictions on building permits and the purchase of building materials were substantially relaxed, resulting in more construction and repair." Cuba Opens to Private Housing but Preserves Housing Rights | Reimagine!


There are no property rights in Cuba.
Except there are.
The state can take all you think you own without compensation for any reason, and heavily regulates what you can do with their property while you pretend to own it.
 
State ration amounts cover a partial month. What is teh availability of food that you have to pay for?
Depends on the food. As pointed out earlier beef and milk are most hard to come by when/if you have used up the amount covered by the ration card.

And state rationing doesn't mean anything, and you know that.
It doesnt? Foods given to all by the state I think would matter in the context we are discussing them here....

That wasn't my argument. My argument was that a state that can't even manage to keep its citizens in hospital nourished are most assuredly failing with the general population as well.
Except data would beg to differ. But then again I forgot that data is false

Here in the US hospitals provide ample nourishment to patients. Those who can't eat get IV nourishment, those who can get three square meals. It is the most basic of care for those in hospital and Cuba can't even get that right.
Looks like the US is struggling with malnutrition in hospitals as well...
"While previous studies have suggested that malnutrition is present in between 21% and 54% of hospitalized patients, new research, published in the Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, finds that only 3.2% of U.S. hospital patients were given a diagnosis of malnutrition. This new study and prior studies do agree, however, that malnutrition is associated with unfavorable outcomes including higher infection rates, poor wound healing, longer length of stay, and higher frequency of readmission of patients." https://www.nutritioncare.org/Press...Markedly_Underreporting_Patient_Malnutrition/

Right, you defended the Cuban system and I have gone on to explain why even with government subsidies the life of the average Cuban is still terrible. But then that should be abundantly clear given the number of people who risk their lives to get out of there.
I defended the variables and information I presented because you left them out.

I asked for answers that would show that my assertion that CUban is a terrible place to live due to abject poverty and a brutal Communist dictatorship. You answers haven't proven otherwise.
:shrug: to each their own
 
Absurd? Absurd is just throwing numbers out there just cuz.. That is what many of these cases are. Anywhere from a couple thousands to hundreds of thousands... Now that is absurd.

I've provided more than that, you have provided articles buy Cuban


That interview was done by Jorge E. Ravelo, M.D. of Virginia Gardens, FL who was interview Jon Lee Anderson who is an investigative reporter and biographer and wrote the most in depth biography of Che Guevara..

I'm not sure why that link came out the way it did, but if you reference back to the originating post by you you had a lengthy quote taken from an article written by Raul Gomez Treto who is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Cuban dictatorship.

And there are other books that found a very different Che Guevara. Will you discount that book because it is written by a Cuban?

That book's research shows 14,000 executions credited to Che Guevara alone. I guess your guy just argues that political prisoners aren't "innocent" as a way of white washing Che's attrocities...

As Jon Lee Anderson points out, "I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed ‘an innocent’. Those persons executed by Guevara or on his orders were condemned for the usual crimes punishable by death at times of war or in its aftermath: desertion, treason or crimes such as rape, torture or murder. I should add that my research spanned five years, and included anti-Castro Cubans among the Cuban-American exile community in Miami and elsewhere."

And I don't have any indication how hard he actually looked. But again, his argument that a communist revolutionary army conducting mass executions was fine because he didn't find any sufficiently "innocent" is weak tea. How many of those executed did he bother researching to see if there was sufficient evidence to convict them? A kangaroo court is great at ramming people through the meat grinder on trumped up charges, simply claiming that the charges made them not "innocent" is absurd.



:lamoWhat evidence/basis do you have to place his reliability into question? (Other than the obvious "He worked for the Cuban government" which would not be sufficient)
.

Again, you want to take the word of a mouthpiece for a dictatorship over the victims of the dictatorship. All the evidence I need that he is a horrible source is the fact that he runs the arm of the Cuban government responsible for the atrocities.

Except they do see the Global Health Observatory

Hah! The GHO is the statistical web distribution division of the WHO and doesn't actually collect any of it's own data.

I'm literally quoting your source. "patients' nutritional status was statistically associated with the presence of cancer and infection."

You have mistaken correlation with causation. The cancer and infection isn't causing the malnutrition, the poor care is causing the malnutrition. THis is not something you see in competent hospital fascilities.


Yes
"The collapse of the Soviet Union, ending 1991, decimated the Cuban economy. The country lost approximately 80% of its imports, 80% of its exports and its Gross Domestic Product dropped by 34 percent. Food and medicine imports stopped or severely slowed. Perhaps most immediately impactful, however, was the loss of nearly all of the oil imports by the USSR; Cuba's oil imports dropped to 10% of pre-1990 amounts." http://www.cubahistory.org/en/special-period-a-recovery.html

And again, Cuba was able to broker deals with any of the other countries in the world other than the US who were not embargoing them. They just didn't because their communist economy minus free stuff from bigger failing communist economies was a heaping pile of dung. It's not really a great defense of Communist governments that they fail without trade with capitalist countries.

Not really because of the Helms Burton Act....

And yet they still managed to do business with countries all over the world. Imagine that.

You can be considered a second world country and still developing.

I think underdeveloped is a permanent state for second world economies.
 
So when is the next time is the black attorney general and the white FBI director are going to discuss the old white presidential candidate's emails? The brown Republican and his two white opponents would like to know.

By "brown Republican" do you mean the Canadian?
 
"Not so bad"? Well that is incredibly vague and incredibly subjective. What I originally claimed from the get go, "Its most likely around actually 11 cents an hours. But its also leaving out many other extremely important variables like cost of living, government subsidies, little to no taxes, gov programs offered to all Cubans."

And as I pointed out the subsidies you claim are mostly absurd. Gas subsidies for cars almost nobody can own, "low taxes" of the 3% of your labor that the state allows you to keep, and so on. Communist Cuba is a horror show of human rights abuses and abject poverty... but it's state caused so I guess you socialists have to stick together?

Simply pointed out that your claim that it was.05 cents an hour was wrong and that you are leaving out many other variables.

I have only accepted your claim of $0.11 for the sake of argument. My source says 5 cents, yours says 11. Mine is no more wrong than yours is. It's just that they are both atrocious so I see no point if arguing it.

Except it does, see the Helms Burton Act. Pointed this out in my earlier post.

Except it doesn't. Cuban imports barely changed with the fall of the Soviet Union, and Cuban exports increased after 1996 with 2011 being at near Soviet era peak. And yet they still suck...

Cuba-Exports-WTO1.jpg

Not at all. Its like saying when state employees get paid in the US by the federal government and the federal government does not pay them 100% of their labor value and keeps some of their labor value as profit for themselves is a tax. No-one calculates like that.

The US government DOES pay people 100% of their labor value. In fact, having worked in a lot of government offices over the years I would venture to say that the Federal government pays people in excess of 100% of their labor value.


In the manner you are doing it, yes. Comparing a Marxist-Leninist system with modern day left wing Americans calling for a welfare state? Completely an apples to oranges comparison.

When you get down to $0.05-0.11 an hour wage, you are living in a welfare sate in either country.


Sure, I'm defending the information I am presenting because I think you are leaving it out of a subjective analysis.

No, I'm not. I am actually evaluating the information you have given me and asking the important questions that you leave out and making objective comparisons where your data allows.

I dont think its great and I dont think its a hell hole.

Then you've been fooled.

Again, the right to sell ones house on a open market is not then end all be all for owning a house.

Incorrect. If you can't sell it you don't own it.

You can build in your house, you can plant a garden on your property... In fact

You miss the point. You can't do any of that without consent of the government.

Uhh yes you can.. Did we not discuss the private sector in Cuba?

We haven't, but I am aware of the meager system of the last few years allowing "private" business in Cuba. But it is tightly controlled and not what anyone would consider a free market. I do find it funny that the things you see as bright spots in the Communist Cuban government is their meager steps towards capitalism.

Except they are owning the home.

False. The state owns it. The state owns everything. It wasn't until the last year or so that Cuba has even hinted at being open to limited private ownership. If that happens then great for Cuba, but that would only further damn their failed communist state. If the fix for communism is capitalism then communism was never a solution.

So there we go, you are essentially admitting that the ultimate caveat in home ownership is if you can sell said home on a open market. :roll:

It's a pretty important right that comes with ownership. If you can't sell it then you don't own it.
 
Yea. Like the rest of the world!

Nope. Event the socialist healthcare systems of the west at least buy what they need.


You want me to write up a monthly budget for you!?

I'm asking you to show me based on the $0.11/hour and your list of food costs that it is feasible to be well fed in that economy. I say it isn't, and all evidence points to that being the case.

Hey, youve already admitted the ultimate caveat in home ownership is if you can sell said home on a open market... We are simply going to go nowhere with this point.

From an earlier source:
""Homeowners could buy and sell dwellings and land, but only at low government-set prices, and the state had first option to buy. Although little legal buying and selling of land and dwellings occurred for the next two decades, informal sales of land for self-building were common. Housing exchanges were the way most households moved to another dwelling, but the values of the properties—as determined by very low official prices—had to be certified as equivalent. Homeowners’ heirs were entitled to receive their share of a dwelling’s official price, however, the right to remain in and acquire the property—by amortizing the share due other heirs—was restricted to people who lived in a unit at the time of the owner’s death. Similarly, when a leaseholder passed away, existing residents could remain.......

And when I say you can't sell the home on the open market they proper counterpoint is not to show that Cuban homes sales don't occur on an open market.
 
Depends on the food. As pointed out earlier beef and milk are most hard to come by when/if you have used up the amount covered by the ration card.

That doesn't answer the question, really.

It doesnt? Foods given to all by the state I think would matter in the context we are discussing them here....

Food given by the state to people who can't afford to live without it would be pretty popular. :roll:

Except data would beg to differ. But then again I forgot that data is false

Don't trust government stats that say the government is doing great.

Looks like the US is struggling with malnutrition in hospitals as well...
"While previous studies have suggested that malnutrition is present in between 21% and 54% of hospitalized patients, new research, published in the Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, finds that only 3.2% of U.S. hospital patients were given a diagnosis of malnutrition. This new study and prior studies do agree, however, that malnutrition is associated with unfavorable outcomes including higher infection rates, poor wound healing, longer length of stay, and higher frequency of readmission of patients." https://www.nutritioncare.org/Press...Markedly_Underreporting_Patient_Malnutrition/

Sooooo... your article finds that a study that found 3.2% of hospital patients are malnourished is wrong because of assumed under reporting? And how did they determine this?

"The discrepancy between the new study and prior studies is likely due to inadequate diagnosis and coding of malnutrition in hospitalized patients. There is currently no national benchmarking of malnutrition in acute care hospitals in the U.S."


Sooooo... they really have no clue whether the new study is correct. They just think it's wrong and then guess at the cause.

Not thick enough.

I defended the variables and information I presented because you left them out.

Hah, no, you left out the data and only claimed the variables.
 
I've provided more than that, you have provided articles buy Cuban
You've provided a source that is essentially a collection of varying sources. One source cites "1,000"s, one source cites "35,000 to 141,000"....

I'm not sure why that link came out the way it did, but if you reference back to the originating post by you you had a lengthy quote taken from an article written by Raul Gomez Treto who is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Cuban dictatorship.
What evidence/basis do you have to place his reliability into question? (Other than the obvious "He worked for the Cuban government" which would not be sufficient)

And there are other books that found a very different Che Guevara. Will you discount that book because it is written by a Cuban?
No I wont. I would be happy to debate whatever you find in that book in the Che Guevara subthread http://www.debatepolitics.com/latin-america/72631-real-che-guevara.html

That book's research shows 14,000 executions credited to Che Guevara alone. I guess your guy just argues that political prisoners aren't "innocent" as a way of white washing Che's attrocities...
14,000!? :doh
This is outrageous! John Lee Anderson cites 55 executions in La Cabana Che oversaw and hundreds other throughout Cuba at the time which were not oversaw by Che (Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life p370-371). Even the CubanArchieve cites the max number at 144.... 14,000 is just plain ridiculous and has no basis in reality.



And I don't have any indication how hard he actually looked. But again, his argument that a communist revolutionary army conducting mass executions was fine because he didn't find any sufficiently "innocent" is weak tea. How many of those executed did he bother researching to see if there was sufficient evidence to convict them? A kangaroo court is great at ramming people through the meat grinder on trumped up charges, simply claiming that the charges made them not "innocent" is absurd.
"I should add that my research spanned five years, and included anti-Castro Cubans among the Cuban-American exile community in Miami and elsewhere."

Again, you want to take the word of a mouthpiece for a dictatorship over the victims of the dictatorship. All the evidence I need that he is a horrible source is the fact that he runs the arm of the Cuban government responsible for the atrocities.
What evidence/basis do you have to place his reliability into question? (Other than the obvious "He worked for the Cuban government" which would not be sufficient)




Hah! The GHO is the statistical web distribution division of the WHO and doesn't actually collect any of it's own data.


You have mistaken correlation with causation. The cancer and infection isn't causing the malnutrition, the poor care is causing the malnutrition. THis is not something you see in competent hospital fascilities.
These two variables are statistically dependent...

And again, Cuba was able to broker deals with any of the other countries in the world other than the US who were not embargoing them.
See Helms Burton Act

They just didn't because their communist economy minus free stuff from bigger failing communist economies was a heaping pile of dung. It's not really a great defense of Communist governments that they fail without trade with capitalist countries.
:dohCan we move beyond the "commies suck" argument?
1.)They actually did attempt to move with trade deals with other countries problem is those economies arent very large either
2.)See Helms Burton Act
3.)You try to make it sound so easy to overcome loosing 80% of your trading partners essentially overnight...
 
And yet they still managed to do business with countries all over the world. Imagine that.
extremely limited because of the fear of foreign companies who also do business in the US who fearful of running afoul of U.S. sanctions against Cuba thus leading to commercial losses for Cuba.
Example: "In the U.N. Secretary General’s report on the embargo, Cuba puts a price tag of $833.75 billion for accumulated damages caused by more than a half-century of the U.S. policy of economically isolating Cuba. Taking into account the declining value of gold against the dollar, the economic toll would still be $121.2 billion, according to the Cubans.
That figure not only includes the cost of Cuba not being able to sell its products in the largest market in the world, but also the additional cost of dealing with more distant markets, and commercial losses in trade with other nations fearful of running afoul of U.S. sanctions against Cuba.
Despite the new relationship with the United States, Cuba contends there has been an intensification of the financial and extraterritorial aspects of the embargo, including billions of dollars in fines against third-country banks and financial institutions for using the U.S. dollar in transactions with Cuba.
Rodríguez said that just last week France’s Credit Agricole agreed to pay a fine of $1.1 billion to settle allegations it handled billions of dollars in transactions with Cuba — and other sanctioned countries. He also said that Sprint’s first payment after launching direct service between the United States and Cuba was held up."

Why do you think when the Helms-Burton act was enacted the EU challenged it?
BBC News | EUROPE | EU suspends challenge against controversial US law

317eik9.png

http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/amr250072009eng.pdf



Read more here: United Nations votes 191-2 to condemn U.S. embargo against Cuba | Miami Herald
I think underdeveloped is a permanent state for second world economies.
Ehhh no
 
And as I pointed out the subsidies you claim are mostly absurd. Gas subsidies for cars almost nobody can own, "low taxes" of the 3% of your labor that the state allows you to keep, and so on.
Not really. You got caught up on the gas one which I admit not many people have cars so its not widely utilized. But then you just attached more preconditions to others such as housing which you got caught up on how they cant sell their homes in a open market..

Communist Cuba is a horror show of human rights abuses and abject poverty... but it's state caused so I guess you socialists have to stick together?
Human rights in Cuba are not great that is correct. But nah, im just pointing out I dont think its a "hell hole" nor a Communist paradise.

Except it doesn't. Cuban imports barely changed with the fall of the Soviet Union, and Cuban exports increased after 1996 with 2011 being at near Soviet era peak. And yet they still suck...

View attachment 67200383
Why are you showing a graph of Cuban exports for Cuban imports? Even so that shows that Cuban exports suffered tremendous loss going back to the levels of pre-revolutionary Cuba essentially in a year....

But none the less here is Cuban imports and the result of the collapse of the Socialist-Bloc.
2v92k8y.png

Cuba Imports | 1990-2016 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

Turns out loosing 80% of your imports and exports really hurts your economy...


When you get down to $0.05-0.11 an hour wage, you are living in a welfare sate in either country.
An important tenant of a Marxist-Leninist system is the state providing for the welfare of its citizenry. Soo okay?...

No, I'm not. I am actually evaluating the information you have given me and asking the important questions that you leave out and making objective comparisons where your data allows.
You are evaluating the information but then adding more preconditions and ultimate caveats.. And then much of your analysis is simply, "Commies suck".

Then you've been fooled.
:roll:


Incorrect. If you can't sell it you don't own it.
Not true.

You miss the point. You can't do any of that without consent of the government.
You can build in your house.. .You can have a backyard garden... Where have you found information where it states you cannot?

We haven't, but I am aware of the meager system of the last few years allowing "private" business in Cuba. But it is tightly controlled and not what anyone would consider a free market. I do find it funny that the things you see as bright spots in the Communist Cuban government is their meager steps towards capitalism.
Never said it was a "bright spot" or a "bad spot". Simply just pointing out that it exists...

False. The state owns it. The state owns everything.
The state distributes the titles. Once they give out the title the owners of said title own the home.

It wasn't until the last year or so that Cuba has even hinted at being open to limited private ownership.
A limited private market of real estate....

It's a pretty important right that comes with ownership. If you can't sell it then you don't own it.
The whole concept of "if you cant sell it you dont own it" is not the end all be all in home ownership...
 
Nope. Event the socialist healthcare systems of the west at least buy what they need.

I thought you were implying that "socialized medicine" is bad because its a "free hand out".

But what you ignored on this point:

Why does Cuba have to improvise in the field of medical supplies? Cuba's medical magicians - Al Jazeera English

Well as an Oxfam America report found: "In the context of the weakened Cuban economy, the U.S. embargo exacerbated the problems in thehealth care system.
faracn.png

"
http://web.archive.org/web/20030720011919/http://www.wola.org/publications/cuba_myths_facts.pdf


I'm asking you to show me based on the $0.11/hour and your list of food costs that it is feasible to be well fed in that economy. I say it isn't, and all evidence points to that being the case.
Didnt we already go over this posts ago. On average around 70% of someones income is spent on food.

And when I say you can't sell the home on the open market they proper counterpoint is not to show that Cuban homes sales don't occur on an open market.
Im not saying they are sold on an open market.
 
That doesn't answer the question, really.
Thats from what I found. Beef and milk are some of the hardest sources of food to come by. It was also pointed out in several sources earlier.

Food given by the state to people who can't afford to live without it would be pretty popular. :roll:
Hence it being provided to the people by the state...

Don't trust government stats that say the government is doing great.
WHO is a bag of lies! :roll:

Sooooo... your article finds that a study that found 3.2% of hospital patients are malnourished is wrong because of assumed under reporting? And how did they determine this?

"The discrepancy between the new study and prior studies is likely due to inadequate diagnosis and coding of malnutrition in hospitalized patients. There is currently no national benchmarking of malnutrition in acute care hospitals in the U.S."


Sooooo... they really have no clue whether the new study is correct. They just think it's wrong and then guess at the cause.

Not thick enough.

Yea underreporting malnutirtion.. Something tells me that the 21%-54% malnutiriotn rate of patients may be correct... Basing off your logic I guess US hospitals are hell holes and the US people are "starving"

Hah, no, you left out the data and only claimed the variables.
Good god, I defended the variables and information I presented because you left them out.. Presenting the data is defending the variables.
 
The writer was Black. Buy hey, for the east coast liberal elite it's all about race all the time.

East Coast liberal? I bet Cruz is regretting spouting off in a similar vein, New Yorkers gave him the middle finger yesterday lol
 
You've provided a source that is essentially a collection of varying sources. One source cites "1,000"s, one source cites "35,000 to 141,000"

And?

What evidence/basis do you have to place his reliability into question? (Other than the obvious "He worked for the Cuban government" which would not be sufficient)

Because he is a high ranking Cuban official. Do you trust Phillip Morris to tell you about cigarette safety?

The problem is you aren't doing anything any different than I am. You are dismissing the accounts by victims when you have no reason to doubt them.

No I wont. I would be happy to debate whatever you find in that book in the Che Guevara subthread http://www.debatepolitics.com/latin-america/72631-real-che-guevara.html

I think Che's history is integral to understanding the brutal history of the Cuban revolution.

14,000!? :doh
This is outrageous! John Lee Anderson cites 55 executions in La Cabana Che oversaw and hundreds other throughout Cuba at the time which were not oversaw by Che (Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life p370-371). Even the CubanArchieve cites the max number at 144.... 14,000 is just plain ridiculous and has no basis in reality.

You have given your source, I have given mine. It would appear that John Lee Anderson was not very thorough.

"I should add that my research spanned five years, and included anti-Castro Cubans among the Cuban-American exile community in Miami and elsewhere."

This isn't a compelling argument for thoroughness. Is he claiming he spoke with everyone? How many people did he actually interview in those 5 years? Again, you offer a useless claim that misses all the crucial numbers.

What evidence/basis do you have to place his reliability into question? (Other than the obvious "He worked for the Cuban government" which would not be sufficient)

Are you serious? I am sure you are smart enough to grasp this simple concept.

These two variables are statistically dependent...

Statistical dependence and causation are not the same thing.

Can we move beyond the "commies suck" argument?

If you agree they are waweful then we can move past it. But since you can't seem to grasp that communism has lead to mass slaughter and human suffering in all states where it was attempted (actual causation) then I'll need to keep telling you.


1.)They actually did attempt to move with trade deals with other countries problem is those economies arent very large either

*sigh* And why didn't they move with trade deals with larger economies? :roll: And please provide evidence.

2.)See Helms Burton Act

I've seen it. As I pointed out, imports and trade have INCREASED since the Helms Burton Act, and matched Soviet era levels... and still Cuba is awful and their people are dirt poor.

3.)You try to make it sound so easy to overcome loosing 80% of your trading partners essentially overnight...

Hah! Bull crap. that 80% doesn't seem to be represented in their IMEX charts. They only lost exports when the crappy Communist Soviets collapsed, their imports didn't dive. Also any lack of diversity in trade partners is their own damn fault.
 
Last edited:
Thats from what I found. Beef and milk are some of the hardest sources of food to come by. It was also pointed out in several sources earlier.

Which against doesn't say much of anything about the diet of the average Cuban. Who do you think eats better, the average Cuban ex-patriot in Miami or the average Cuban?

Hence it being provided to the people by the state...

You said that the food program is "popular", I am pointing out the absurdity of that claim since the imposed poverty of the citizens make the food program essential. If the Cuban people were allowed to keep most of their GDP then the food program wouldn't be necessary. It's like trying to claim benevolence if I took 97% of everything you had and then bought you a loaf of bread in return.

WHO is a bag of lies! :roll:

I never said that. I said that the WHO is largely dependent on the data presented by the member nations, and have insufficient manpower to do the requisite independent study needed to verify data from the Nation states. WHO data from credible countries is credible, data from non-credible sources isn't credible. It's not a hard concept.

Yea underreporting malnutirtion.. Something tells me that the 21%-54% malnutiriotn rate of patients may be correct... Basing off your logic I guess US hospitals are hell holes and the US people are "starving"

The latest study doesn't show that. But, of course, you will question US statistics and swallow Cuban propaganda whole. :roll:

Good god, I defended the variables and information I presented because you left them out.. Presenting the data is defending the variables.

You provided meaningless, non-quantified variables as if they had some meaning. I pointed out that they have no meaning without the actual numbers. WITH the actual numbers it doesn't look any better for the average Cuban.
 
Not really. You got caught up on the gas one which I admit not many people have cars so its not widely utilized. But then you just attached more preconditions to others such as housing which you got caught up on how they cant sell their homes in a open market..

I am arguing that the claim of "home ownership" is wrong because the Cubans don't really own their own home.

Human rights in Cuba are not great that is correct. But nah, im just pointing out I dont think its a "hell hole" nor a Communist paradise.

There is no "Communist paradise" except for the guys in charge. And living in a state that is "not so great" on Human Rights (political executions, no free speech, sparse state controlled resources) is a hell hole. It's why

Why are you showing a graph of Cuban exports for Cuban imports? Even so that shows that Cuban exports suffered tremendous loss going back to the levels of pre-revolutionary Cuba essentially in a year....

But none the less here is Cuban imports and the result of the collapse of the Socialist-Bloc.
2v92k8y.png

Cuba Imports | 1990-2016 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

Turns out loosing 80% of your imports and exports really hurts your economy...

You do realize that the chart shows Cuban imports increasing AFTER the passage of Helms Burton, right?

An important tenant of a Marxist-Leninist system is the state providing for the welfare of its citizenry. Soo okay?...

And they do an awful job of it. In practice Communism has always been ruining the private sector until the State is the primary source of everything. They don't provide for the welfare, they ensure shared misery.


You are evaluating the information but then adding more preconditions and ultimate caveats.. And then much of your analysis is simply, "Commies suck".

They do suck. The Soviet Union,China, Cambodia, Vietnam, CUba... all these communist states have done nothing but bring death and misery to their people. When and where hope entered any of these bleak countries were in promises of a more free, democrat, capitalistic system.

Not true.

True.

You can build in your house.. .You can have a backyard garden... Where have you found information where it states you cannot?

The state controls building materials and seeds. You can not choose to do any of these things. You need approval from the state.

Never said it was a "bright spot" or a "bad spot". Simply just pointing out that it exists...

You aren't fooling anyone.

The state distributes the titles. Once they give out the title the owners of said title own the home.

Again, false. The state still has total control over the home.

A limited private market of real estate....

It isn't private. It's state controlled.

The whole concept of "if you cant sell it you dont own it" is not the end all be all in home ownership...

Nope, but it is the first vital criteria.
 
Back
Top Bottom