Do Cubans actually want capitalism?

According to research conducted by the International Republican Institute, a staggering 79% of the Cuban people believe their government is utterly incapable of addressing the deep-seated issues facing Cuba today.
The study engaged roughly 600 Cubans using a non-traditional approach, relying on organic conversation rather than rigid, structured questioning. This was essential because most Cubans have learned through bitter experience that providing honest answers during standard surveys is dangerous; they fear the authorities, knowing that those who criticize the regime often end up behind bars. In fact, the participants had no idea their casual conversations were being recorded or used for this specific research. Conducted across 14 of Cuba's 15 provinces, the study highlights a key finding from the International Republican Institute: as soon as someone identifies themselves as a pollster, locals typically shut down or provide dishonest responses to protect themselves.
To put this into perspective, consider how these results compare to the public surveys conducted by the Gallup Poll last year, where the methodology was much more overt and less conversational.
While the International Republican Institute found that 79% of Cubans disagree with the leadership in Cuba, the Gallup Poll reported only 39% expressing disagreement with the authorities. Based on the findings from the International Republican Institute:

1. 41% of the Cuban people feel the situation in Cuba is moving in a bad or very bad direction, whereas only 25% believe things are improving or are in a good state.
2. 77% of Cubans desire a new electoral system.
3. 83% of Cubans believe that transitioning to a market economy would significantly improve their daily lives.

The images from Cuba speak volumes about why the people feel this way.

http://i24.tinypic.com/2zr41gm.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/nywjdh.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/2afzyvt.jpg

http://i23.tinypic.com/21cvzis.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/dbgmlj.jpg

http://i23.tinypic.com/2qwzn1l.jpg

http://i23.tinypic.com/a9s7qp.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/2e2p35v.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/qsv0r5.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/9kaxjr.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/2j4d62w.jpg

These figures represent the true sentiment of the Cuban people; anyone who has actually set foot in Cuba understands the sheer misery and poverty present there. An honest, decent person who has been there can only offer such a verdict. If you sit down and talk to ordinary people on the street, in a café, or in their homes—especially the younger generation—they will tell you exactly what this survey reflects.
The only ones who still offer even a modicum of support for Castro are the elderly nearing the end of their lives, though even among them, there are many who curse Castro for what he is doing to their children and grandchildren: stripping them of any chance at a better life. Cuba is a nation of breathtaking beaches and stunning landscapes that possesses every potential to become a paradise on earth if it weren't for this socialistic, communist regime.
Some people in America tend to admire the "free" healthcare system in Cuba, so I am providing these images of that "free" medical system—something I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy.

http://i21.tinypic.com/1zeypnc.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/2zrgtqp.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/mlo6d1.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/289lwcl.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/14sidzd.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/ojp20w.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/vzg9wy.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/28hpwzb.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/2h6a9ls.jpg

http://i20.tinypic.com/jkk2dc.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/hsq9kx.jpg

[IMAGE DELETED]

Of course they’ve had enough. All he ever brought to the Cuban people was misery and nothing else. Honestly, maybe he should face justice like Pol Pot did for what he did to his own people. Just an old-school communist, I guess.

It’s honestly pathetic. I simply cannot wrap my head around people who idolize Castro—just because he stands up to the USA out of pure spite. 👎 He’s been leading his own people straight into ruin for what, 60 years now? But hey, since Cuba doesn't have any oil reserves, I guess the rest of the world couldn't care less about a few losers over there. 🙄 😢

Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

I honestly think most Cubans just want their freedom, though who knows what kind of economic model will actually take its place once they get there... right now, people of all ages—anywhere from their 20s to their 60s—are fleeing Cuba in tiny little boats cobbled together from scrap metal. I’m sure things are just wonderful over there!

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

Let’s say things are dire partly because of the communism that has been crushing the people there for ages, so we don't fall into the trap of thinking it's solely caused by sanctions. It's true that sanctions have certainly played a massive role in creating poverty in Cuba, but ultimately, the whole mess is a product of a broken communist system.
If we had a system like that here in the States, I wouldn't say a word; I wouldn't even care.

Fearing that America might shift leftward, which would mean greater benefits for workers and lower profits for capitalists.

Greater benefits for workers? That part is particularly amusing to me, especially since it has become such a predictable cliché used by people who are enamored with socialism.
If you truly believe that a worker in Sweden gets everything for free while a worker in the US has to pay for it all, then I can only say good morning to you.
The models in Sweden and France are undergoing massive revisions right now because, in this day and age, it is becoming nearly impossible to function effectively as a state using those methods.

Regarding these photos, at least half of them could have been taken in America, or even right here at home.

Come on now; I’d love for you to post at least ten photos from American and local hospitals, or maybe ten shots of our major cities, given that these images are from the Cuban capital. Go ahead, let us finally see how much America actually resembles Cuba.
It’s unfortunate if that’s your perspective, though you are certainly entitled to it. Comparing Cuba to the US is something that really belongs in science fiction movies, likely produced in Hollywood.

What do you all think: is our current way of life merely the result of our own labor, or is it also driven by debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it was $42 billion.

I suspect you meant to refer to earnings versus spending; first of all, that debt shouldn't be viewed strictly in dollar amounts since the US operates within a different monetary framework, and it makes little sense to list foreign debt in dollars when over 80% of it is held in euros.
Debt itself isn't inherently bad if it is utilized to drive economic development and jumpstart the economy as a whole. If used correctly, debt isn't the enemy. Based on the data I have access to, out of $215 billion in credit, over $85 billion goes to legal entities, which is about 40% of total credit. More than $45 billion, or 21%, is allocated to mortgages. The government takes about $20 billion, roughly 10%. Then there's about $60 billion consisting of consumer loans, credit card debt, and auto loans.
I'll leave it to you to evaluate the quality of how that credit is being distributed.
Our lifestyle is our own, and frankly, there is no point in trying to draw parallels with how things work in Cuba. I’m also quite puzzled as to why you brought up the history of the US; neither of those things is relevant to what we are discussing here.

A buddy of mine spent some time over in Cuba, and he swears he’s never seen anything quite like it—just this incredibly genuine warmth from people and a pace of life that's hard to find anywhere else. Despite the lack of money, there’s no frantic rushing or constant stress; he said it was exactly what he needed to recharge his batteries. On the flip side, I have another friend who’s been living in New York City for nine years now, and when he came to visit this past summer, he told me straight up: "Trust me, man, you guys have it better here." He said life in the States is just one non-stop grind—everyone is constantly in a hurry, always working, never truly relaxing. It sounds strange to hear two such polar opposite takes, but I figured I’d share them as an example of how differently people experience the world.🤷

It’s a given that you can’t be both a villain and a man of integrity. To be honest, I find these situational arguments used during debates to be quite overwhelming; they leave me a bit lost, so I usually just toss them straight into the trash bin.
Tell your friend that if life in New York City is such a struggle, he should probably just move to Cuba.
I mean, if you're perfectly content being crushed by a dictator because you don't require anything from life, then sure, Cuba is your place—but if you actually have the ambition to build something meaningful, Cuba isn't exactly going to be your best bet.

It seems to me that Cuba is simply suffering from a massive lack of effective marketing, which explains why they're seeing such a huge exodus of people leaving while nobody is actually looking to move there.
If they could just step up their marketing game even a little bit, I truly believe everyone would be lining up to make the trip to Cuba.

The embargo has cost the Cuban economy tens of billions over the last four decades—some estimates even push that figure toward the $80 billion mark. Yet, strangely enough, the USA continues to export food there, mostly through various aid programs. Look, the Castro-esque regime simply hasn't managed to build a functional, stable economy. It’s a missed opportunity, really. There is massive untapped potential in their biochemical and pharmaceutical sectors—their doctors are highly respected globally—not to mention the room for growth in tourism and agriculture.

Speculation is everywhere, and frankly, it's a bit of a guessing game, but one thing is certain: the Cuban regime will either liberalize or collapse once Fidel Castro passes away. To many Cubans, he still carries this almost mythical status, but let's be real—most people see how the current situation is strangling the economy and preventing any real prosperity for the citizens. Meanwhile, the US is quietly coordinating with certain prominent Cuban exiles. The plan? If the regime falls, these individuals are positioned to step into key roles, acting as the primary drivers for reform and sweeping changes.

Objectively speaking, the Cuban regime isn't a global threat on par with the regimes in Iran or North Korea. However, don't think for a second that Americans will just accept the status quo once Fidel Castro is gone. The radical pro-communist options lost their main foothold after the Soviet Union collapsed. Now, they're left leaning entirely on the unconditional support of Hugo Chávez and other South American politicians who couldn't care less about what actually happens on the ground.

Cuba is standing on the precipice of massive shifts and inevitable progress, and all of this could kick off much sooner than anyone expects.

Sorry, but I’ve gotta ask one quick thing to the OP,

I was wondering why you didn't just write a similar post about the economic situations in places like Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Guyana, Nicaragua, or Panama???

See, those countries don't deal with socialism (you know, communism as an economic system) because they either kicked out their governments in record time or went through a civil war... or maybe those socio-communist movements just never even took root there.

So, here's the kicker: if those countries are free from the kind of brutal leadership you're describing over in Cuba, why aren't they living better than the folks in Cuba??
Why don't they have wages that are at least three times higher than what people make in Cuba?

And do you even know the difference in infant mortality rates between those countries and Cuba?
It's 6 per 1,000 in Cuba
compared to 26 per 1,000 in Paraguay
and 28 per 1,000 in Uruguay

Did you know the GDP per capita is actually higher in Cuba than in Nicaragua?

Not to mention the doctors in Cuba, the mandatory education, and all that stuff.

So, let's look at it this way:
Why doesn't the USA just decide to announce tomorrow that they're lifting every single sanction against Cuba! And that they're dropping all the penalties against any other countries in Latin America that work with them?

Just let Cuba start living a normal life. Let them take out loans, let them export their coffee, sugar, rum, and tobacco normally...
Since it's such a gorgeous island, tourism and all that export business would give them a totally different lifestyle and outlook.

But, if you mess with a small country, bully them—because you're bigger—isolate them, threaten them, slap them with penalties, and throw embargoes at them (including things like vaccines and antibiotics)... well, obviously that country is going to be struggling just to stay afloat!

It seems like everyone has an opinion on Cubans and those poor folks struggling under communism, right? But nobody ever wants to talk about the people living in the countries right next door to Cuba. They’re dealing with the exact same misery, poverty, and zero social safety nets to protect them.

So, we get endless posts crying over Cuba, but total silence on everyone else in the region.

Edward Chase23 said:It seems like everyone has an opinion on Cubans and those poor folks struggling under communism, right? But nobody ever wants to talk about the people living in the countries right next door to Cuba. They’re dealing with the exact same misery, poverty, and zero social safety nets to protect them.

So, we get endless posts crying over Cuba, but total silence on everyone else in the region.

Look, the topic is specifically about what's happening in Cuba, so you'd actually expect some debate on the matter, wouldn't you?

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

And it doesn't stop with Cuba; wherever they can't seize wealth or exert control, they slap on sanctions.

goldenmason172 said:According to research conducted by the International Republican Institute, a staggering 79% of the Cuban people believe their government is utterly incapable of addressing the deep-seated issues facing Cuba today.
The study engaged roughly 600 Cubans using a non-traditional approach, relying on organic conversation rather than rigid, structured questioning. This was essential because most Cubans have learned through bitter experience that providing honest answers during standard surveys is dangerous; they fear the authorities, knowing that those who criticize the regime often end up behind bars. In fact, the participants had no idea their casual conversations were being recorded or used for this specific research. Conducted across 14 of Cuba's 15 provinces, the study highlights a key finding from the International Republican Institute: as soon as someone identifies themselves as a pollster, locals typically shut down or provide dishonest responses to protect themselves.
To put this into perspective, consider how these results compare to the public surveys conducted by the Gallup Poll last year, where the methodology was much more overt and less conversational.
While the International Republican Institute found that 79% of Cubans disagree with the leadership in Cuba, the Gallup Poll reported only 39% expressing disagreement with the authorities. Based on the findings from the International Republican Institute:

1. 41% of the Cuban people feel the situation in Cuba is moving in a bad or very bad direction, whereas only 25% believe things are improving or are in a good state.
2. 77% of Cubans desire a new electoral system.
3. 83% of Cubans believe that transitioning to a market economy would significantly improve their daily lives.

The images from Cuba speak volumes about why the people feel this way.

http://i24.tinypic.com/2zr41gm.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/nywjdh.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/2afzyvt.jpg

http://i23.tinypic.com/21cvzis.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/dbgmlj.jpg

http://i23.tinypic.com/2qwzn1l.jpg

http://i23.tinypic.com/a9s7qp.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/2e2p35v.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/qsv0r5.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/9kaxjr.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/2j4d62w.jpg

These figures represent the true sentiment of the Cuban people; anyone who has actually set foot in Cuba understands the sheer misery and poverty present there. An honest, decent person who has been there can only offer such a verdict. If you sit down and talk to ordinary people on the street, in a café, or in their homes—especially the younger generation—they will tell you exactly what this survey reflects.
The only ones who still offer even a modicum of support for Castro are the elderly nearing the end of their lives, though even among them, there are many who curse Castro for what he is doing to their children and grandchildren: stripping them of any chance at a better life. Cuba is a nation of breathtaking beaches and stunning landscapes that possesses every potential to become a paradise on earth if it weren't for this socialistic, communist regime.
Some people in America tend to admire the "free" healthcare system in Cuba, so I am providing these images of that "free" medical system—something I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy.

http://i21.tinypic.com/1zeypnc.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/2zrgtqp.jpg

http://i22.tinypic.com/mlo6d1.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/289lwcl.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/14sidzd.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/ojp20w.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/vzg9wy.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/28hpwzb.jpg

http://i21.tinypic.com/2h6a9ls.jpg

http://i20.tinypic.com/jkk2dc.jpg

http://i24.tinypic.com/hsq9kx.jpg

[IMAGE DELETED]

Did you take those pictures yourself?

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

It’s funny, really... if you trade, it's wrong because then the Americans dump worthless dollars on you or send over those predatory corporations that basically prey on the vulnerable. But if you don't trade, then that's wrong too. Isn't that just wonderful about being a leftist? No matter which way you turn, you're right. They push protectionist ideas when it suits them, and then suddenly they're cursing isolationism when it doesn't. I guess it works both ways.

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

Like what happened in Cuba, for instance.

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

Let’s not play dumb here. First off, nobody honestly thinks that a Castro-esque coup involving an economy based on primitive agriculture—which is being subtly framed here as some sort of tiny, benevolent little state, a romanticized vision for jazz musicians and extras—could have actually threatened the USA. Ignoring the Soviet Union given how strategically vital Cuba is... well, that's just a sneaky lie. And secondly, the Bay of Pigs happened in April 1961, but according to recently declassified NSA documents, the first Russian military shipments were recorded arriving in Cuba back in September 1960. That means Cuba was already actively working to threaten US territorial integrity well before the action took place; they were essentially an instrument in that threat during the height of the Cold War.

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

I mean, isn't life just fundamentally unfair sometimes? It’s almost absurd. You have these incredibly hardworking Cubans constantly trying to strike fair deals with the Great Satan, offering everything from high-end tech and hi-fi systems to cars, but the Great Satan is just... well, corrupt. It seems they're only interested in the vices—the gambling dens and the sleazy stuff.

analoggull52 said:Well, I suppose it isn't just the legacy of communism that complicates things over there; one must also consider that the United States has maintained an economic blockade for forty-five years now. It’s quite extensive, really, because they don't just restrict trade themselves—they actively pressure other nations by offering trade incentives to anyone who refuses to deal with Cubans. It seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that America might pivot toward policies that favor worker benefits over capitalist profits.
One can’t help but recall those failed American invasions at the Bay of Pigs; surely, nobody actually believes a small nation like Cuba could pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity of the Democratic Party. It was only after that invasion that they began positioning missiles aimed at the United States alongside the Russians.
Before everything fell apart, Cuba essentially functioned as an American coup outpost—a playground where mobsters laundered their prohibition-era loot by opening up casinos and luxury hotels. As for these images being shown, I suspect at least half of them could have been captured right here in the States, or even locally.
I find myself wondering, what do you all think? Is our current way of life truly the result of our own hard work, or is it merely fueled by mounting debt? We went from owing $4.5 billion back in 1991 to a staggering $42 billion by 2007.

But I guess the real question is, what is the point of even making that comparison? Are we really suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (like Cuba), one with $13,000 (like a mid-sized developing nation), and one with $45,000 (like the USA)? It doesn't quite track, does it?

VitaJela As goldenmason172 noted:
Why doesn't the USA simply consider this? Imagine if they decided to announce tomorrow that they are lifting all sanctions against Cuba entirely—not just the direct ones, but also tearing up every penalty imposed on any nation in that region that chooses to cooperate with Havana.

You can rest assured that one fine day, news like that will eventually reach Cuba.
Even today, with that dictatorial regime still firmly in power right next door, it doesn't even cross their minds to take action—and honestly, given the circumstances, there is a very good reason why they wouldn't.

So, I suppose that means I’d be able to secure loans without issue and maintain a steady export flow of their coffee, sugar, rum, and tobacco...
Since that island is such a stunning destination, the influx of tourism and all that export revenue would likely offer them an entirely different way of life and a much broader perspective on the world.

It feels as though some people have simply opted to ignore history altogether, seemingly unaware of the actual reasons why the USA decided to impose those sanctions on Cuba.
I couldn't agree more; it’s such a breathtaking island, and I can easily see it becoming the next Seychelles once the communist regime finally loses its grip on power.

Just so we are all on the same page, I don't actually believe people in Cuba are living the dream, nor am I suggesting that communism is some kind of panacea; I was simply pointing out that the situation was driven by, and perhaps exacerbated by, the US blockade.
The root cause of the revolution back in 1958, I would argue, was the sheer misery of the populace and the fact that the nation had essentially become a banana republic; secondly, they opted for communism, which, as history shows, didn't exactly turn out to be the promised land. As for the US, it wasn't so much a fear of a direct invasion from Cuba, but rather—if I may say so—a reaction to the installation of Soviet missiles, which only happened after the failed attempts at the Bay of Pigs; in my view, it was more about big American corporations fearing that if the US shifted its political stance, they might lose profits to increased labor benefits. If this is truly such a grand democracy, I find myself wondering why the US cared so much about whether communists were in power in Vietnam, 20,000 km away, or in places like Chile and Korea (during the Korean War). Would any of you honestly volunteer to go die somewhere just to make things better for someone else? It seems somewhat absurd to me.

Quote:>

Let’s not engage in any sort of pretension here. Firstly, nobody is under the illusion that Castro's economic mismanagement—based on a primitive agricultural system (which is being subtly presented here as some sort of quaint, benevolent little state, perhaps a romanticized vision held by certain jazz musicians or extras)—could actually pose a military threat to the USA. To ignore the Soviet Union when discussing the strategic importance of Cuba is, quite frankly, a deceptive falsehood. Secondly, while the Bay of Pigs occurred in April 1961, recent declassified NSA documents suggest that the first Soviet military shipments were actually recorded arriving in Cuba as early as September 1960; this implies that even before the main action, Cuba was already actively working to undermine US territorial integrity and acting as an instrument of threat during the height of the Cold War.

Did Vietnam or Chile ever point missiles toward America?

Quote:>>

analoggull52 says: Look at the post Regarding these images, I suspect at least half of them could have been shot right here in America or even back home. It makes me wonder, do you think our current lifestyle is purely the result of our own hard work, or is it also built on debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it had climbed to $42 billion.

What is the actual point of this comment? Are you suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (Cuba), one with $13,000 (an average US mid-sized city), and one with $45,000 (the USA)?

The point I am making is that there is far too much boasting about capitalism here, largely due to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by certain citizens, though, as I mentioned, that isn't necessarily a reflection of our collective labor.
That $13,000 GDP figure refers to a specific urban center, not the entire nation.

As for those photos, I assume you watch American films set in the Bronx or Brooklyn; you can find similar scenes right here, and I wasn't referring to hospitals.

Their primary export is sugar, and since that is under embargo, they've turned to tourism; however, an American tourist visiting Cuba often has to travel through a third country because if they get a stamp in their passport, they risk being penalized for visiting.

I struggle to understand the mindset on this forum; why does everyone insist on seeing everything in such black and white? I have no affinity for communists whatsoever, but I believe in recognizing things as they are—whether objective or subjective. Or perhaps, I wonder, is it all just a matter of material interest?

analoggull52 said:Just so we are all on the same page, I don't actually believe people in Cuba are living the dream, nor am I suggesting that communism is some kind of panacea; I was simply pointing out that the situation was driven by, and perhaps exacerbated by, the US blockade.
The root cause of the revolution back in 1958, I would argue, was the sheer misery of the populace and the fact that the nation had essentially become a banana republic; secondly, they opted for communism, which, as history shows, didn't exactly turn out to be the promised land. As for the US, it wasn't so much a fear of a direct invasion from Cuba, but rather—if I may say so—a reaction to the installation of Soviet missiles, which only happened after the failed attempts at the Bay of Pigs; in my view, it was more about big American corporations fearing that if the US shifted its political stance, they might lose profits to increased labor benefits. If this is truly such a grand democracy, I find myself wondering why the US cared so much about whether communists were in power in Vietnam, 20,000 km away, or in places like Chile and Korea (during the Korean War). Would any of you honestly volunteer to go die somewhere just to make things better for someone else? It seems somewhat absurd to me.

Quote:>

Let’s not engage in any sort of pretension here. Firstly, nobody is under the illusion that Castro's economic mismanagement—based on a primitive agricultural system (which is being subtly presented here as some sort of quaint, benevolent little state, perhaps a romanticized vision held by certain jazz musicians or extras)—could actually pose a military threat to the USA. To ignore the Soviet Union when discussing the strategic importance of Cuba is, quite frankly, a deceptive falsehood. Secondly, while the Bay of Pigs occurred in April 1961, recent declassified NSA documents suggest that the first Soviet military shipments were actually recorded arriving in Cuba as early as September 1960; this implies that even before the main action, Cuba was already actively working to undermine US territorial integrity and acting as an instrument of threat during the height of the Cold War.

Did Vietnam or Chile ever point missiles toward America?

Quote:>>

analoggull52 says: Look at the post Regarding these images, I suspect at least half of them could have been shot right here in America or even back home. It makes me wonder, do you think our current lifestyle is purely the result of our own hard work, or is it also built on debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it had climbed to $42 billion.

What is the actual point of this comment? Are you suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (Cuba), one with $13,000 (an average US mid-sized city), and one with $45,000 (the USA)?

The point I am making is that there is far too much boasting about capitalism here, largely due to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by certain citizens, though, as I mentioned, that isn't necessarily a reflection of our collective labor.
That $13,000 GDP figure refers to a specific urban center, not the entire nation.

As for those photos, I assume you watch American films set in the Bronx or Brooklyn; you can find similar scenes right here, and I wasn't referring to hospitals.

Their primary export is sugar, and since that is under embargo, they've turned to tourism; however, an American tourist visiting Cuba often has to travel through a third country because if they get a stamp in their passport, they risk being penalized for visiting.

I struggle to understand the mindset on this forum; why does everyone insist on seeing everything in such black and white? I have no affinity for communists whatsoever, but I believe in recognizing things as they are—whether objective or subjective. Or perhaps, I wonder, is it all just a matter of material interest?

If you’re looking for a deeper dive into American interventionism, maybe you should just start a new thread for that. I mean, honestly. If we look at Vietnam through a wider lens, it was clearly just one piece of the larger containment strategy meant to stop the communist bloc. In that specific context, the whole thing feels like a legitimate move to push back against the corrosive influence spreading from the Soviet Union and China. It makes sense, I guess. And then there's Chile—which, let's be clear, wasn't even a military intervention—but that too was part of the broader effort to prevent that same ideology from taking root in South America. There is plenty to debate there, I suppose. But as far as this specific topic and the situation in Cuba goes... well, I really hope we can finally put to rest the idea that Cuba wasn't a genuine threat to the USA. We've talked enough about it.

analoggull52 said:Just so we are all on the same page, I don't actually believe people in Cuba are living the dream, nor am I suggesting that communism is some kind of panacea; I was simply pointing out that the situation was driven by, and perhaps exacerbated by, the US blockade.
The root cause of the revolution back in 1958, I would argue, was the sheer misery of the populace and the fact that the nation had essentially become a banana republic; secondly, they opted for communism, which, as history shows, didn't exactly turn out to be the promised land. As for the US, it wasn't so much a fear of a direct invasion from Cuba, but rather—if I may say so—a reaction to the installation of Soviet missiles, which only happened after the failed attempts at the Bay of Pigs; in my view, it was more about big American corporations fearing that if the US shifted its political stance, they might lose profits to increased labor benefits. If this is truly such a grand democracy, I find myself wondering why the US cared so much about whether communists were in power in Vietnam, 20,000 km away, or in places like Chile and Korea (during the Korean War). Would any of you honestly volunteer to go die somewhere just to make things better for someone else? It seems somewhat absurd to me.

Quote:>

Let’s not engage in any sort of pretension here. Firstly, nobody is under the illusion that Castro's economic mismanagement—based on a primitive agricultural system (which is being subtly presented here as some sort of quaint, benevolent little state, perhaps a romanticized vision held by certain jazz musicians or extras)—could actually pose a military threat to the USA. To ignore the Soviet Union when discussing the strategic importance of Cuba is, quite frankly, a deceptive falsehood. Secondly, while the Bay of Pigs occurred in April 1961, recent declassified NSA documents suggest that the first Soviet military shipments were actually recorded arriving in Cuba as early as September 1960; this implies that even before the main action, Cuba was already actively working to undermine US territorial integrity and acting as an instrument of threat during the height of the Cold War.

Did Vietnam or Chile ever point missiles toward America?

Quote:>>

analoggull52 says: Look at the post Regarding these images, I suspect at least half of them could have been shot right here in America or even back home. It makes me wonder, do you think our current lifestyle is purely the result of our own hard work, or is it also built on debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it had climbed to $42 billion.

What is the actual point of this comment? Are you suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (Cuba), one with $13,000 (an average US mid-sized city), and one with $45,000 (the USA)?

The point I am making is that there is far too much boasting about capitalism here, largely due to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by certain citizens, though, as I mentioned, that isn't necessarily a reflection of our collective labor.
That $13,000 GDP figure refers to a specific urban center, not the entire nation.

As for those photos, I assume you watch American films set in the Bronx or Brooklyn; you can find similar scenes right here, and I wasn't referring to hospitals.

Their primary export is sugar, and since that is under embargo, they've turned to tourism; however, an American tourist visiting Cuba often has to travel through a third country because if they get a stamp in their passport, they risk being penalized for visiting.

I struggle to understand the mindset on this forum; why does everyone insist on seeing everything in such black and white? I have no affinity for communists whatsoever, but I believe in recognizing things as they are—whether objective or subjective. Or perhaps, I wonder, is it all just a matter of material interest?

Relatively? I mean, are we talking compared to what? Are you comparing this to those old socialist states or maybe some of those former communist regimes out there? I guess it depends on how you look at it, but maybe you're thinking about the standard set by places that used to run under that kind of system. I don't know. It's a bit of a loaded question, isn't it?

analoggull52 said:Just so we are all on the same page, I don't actually believe people in Cuba are living the dream, nor am I suggesting that communism is some kind of panacea; I was simply pointing out that the situation was driven by, and perhaps exacerbated by, the US blockade.
The root cause of the revolution back in 1958, I would argue, was the sheer misery of the populace and the fact that the nation had essentially become a banana republic; secondly, they opted for communism, which, as history shows, didn't exactly turn out to be the promised land. As for the US, it wasn't so much a fear of a direct invasion from Cuba, but rather—if I may say so—a reaction to the installation of Soviet missiles, which only happened after the failed attempts at the Bay of Pigs; in my view, it was more about big American corporations fearing that if the US shifted its political stance, they might lose profits to increased labor benefits. If this is truly such a grand democracy, I find myself wondering why the US cared so much about whether communists were in power in Vietnam, 20,000 km away, or in places like Chile and Korea (during the Korean War). Would any of you honestly volunteer to go die somewhere just to make things better for someone else? It seems somewhat absurd to me.

Quote:>

Let’s not engage in any sort of pretension here. Firstly, nobody is under the illusion that Castro's economic mismanagement—based on a primitive agricultural system (which is being subtly presented here as some sort of quaint, benevolent little state, perhaps a romanticized vision held by certain jazz musicians or extras)—could actually pose a military threat to the USA. To ignore the Soviet Union when discussing the strategic importance of Cuba is, quite frankly, a deceptive falsehood. Secondly, while the Bay of Pigs occurred in April 1961, recent declassified NSA documents suggest that the first Soviet military shipments were actually recorded arriving in Cuba as early as September 1960; this implies that even before the main action, Cuba was already actively working to undermine US territorial integrity and acting as an instrument of threat during the height of the Cold War.

Did Vietnam or Chile ever point missiles toward America?

Quote:>>

analoggull52 says: Look at the post Regarding these images, I suspect at least half of them could have been shot right here in America or even back home. It makes me wonder, do you think our current lifestyle is purely the result of our own hard work, or is it also built on debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it had climbed to $42 billion.

What is the actual point of this comment? Are you suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (Cuba), one with $13,000 (an average US mid-sized city), and one with $45,000 (the USA)?

The point I am making is that there is far too much boasting about capitalism here, largely due to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by certain citizens, though, as I mentioned, that isn't necessarily a reflection of our collective labor.
That $13,000 GDP figure refers to a specific urban center, not the entire nation.

As for those photos, I assume you watch American films set in the Bronx or Brooklyn; you can find similar scenes right here, and I wasn't referring to hospitals.

Their primary export is sugar, and since that is under embargo, they've turned to tourism; however, an American tourist visiting Cuba often has to travel through a third country because if they get a stamp in their passport, they risk being penalized for visiting.

I struggle to understand the mindset on this forum; why does everyone insist on seeing everything in such black and white? I have no affinity for communists whatsoever, but I believe in recognizing things as they are—whether objective or subjective. Or perhaps, I wonder, is it all just a matter of material interest?

I guess if you look at the national average, we’re talking around $13,000. But then you look at a major hub like New York City, where it jumps up to about $20,000... though obviously, it drops off once you leave those areas. It’s all over the map, really. I suppose it mostly comes down to how all those high-productivity, capital-intensive service industries just cluster together in the massive metropolitan centers. That's just how it works, I guess.

analoggull52 said:Just so we are all on the same page, I don't actually believe people in Cuba are living the dream, nor am I suggesting that communism is some kind of panacea; I was simply pointing out that the situation was driven by, and perhaps exacerbated by, the US blockade.
The root cause of the revolution back in 1958, I would argue, was the sheer misery of the populace and the fact that the nation had essentially become a banana republic; secondly, they opted for communism, which, as history shows, didn't exactly turn out to be the promised land. As for the US, it wasn't so much a fear of a direct invasion from Cuba, but rather—if I may say so—a reaction to the installation of Soviet missiles, which only happened after the failed attempts at the Bay of Pigs; in my view, it was more about big American corporations fearing that if the US shifted its political stance, they might lose profits to increased labor benefits. If this is truly such a grand democracy, I find myself wondering why the US cared so much about whether communists were in power in Vietnam, 20,000 km away, or in places like Chile and Korea (during the Korean War). Would any of you honestly volunteer to go die somewhere just to make things better for someone else? It seems somewhat absurd to me.

Quote:>

Let’s not engage in any sort of pretension here. Firstly, nobody is under the illusion that Castro's economic mismanagement—based on a primitive agricultural system (which is being subtly presented here as some sort of quaint, benevolent little state, perhaps a romanticized vision held by certain jazz musicians or extras)—could actually pose a military threat to the USA. To ignore the Soviet Union when discussing the strategic importance of Cuba is, quite frankly, a deceptive falsehood. Secondly, while the Bay of Pigs occurred in April 1961, recent declassified NSA documents suggest that the first Soviet military shipments were actually recorded arriving in Cuba as early as September 1960; this implies that even before the main action, Cuba was already actively working to undermine US territorial integrity and acting as an instrument of threat during the height of the Cold War.

Did Vietnam or Chile ever point missiles toward America?

Quote:>>

analoggull52 says: Look at the post Regarding these images, I suspect at least half of them could have been shot right here in America or even back home. It makes me wonder, do you think our current lifestyle is purely the result of our own hard work, or is it also built on debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it had climbed to $42 billion.

What is the actual point of this comment? Are you suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (Cuba), one with $13,000 (an average US mid-sized city), and one with $45,000 (the USA)?

The point I am making is that there is far too much boasting about capitalism here, largely due to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by certain citizens, though, as I mentioned, that isn't necessarily a reflection of our collective labor.
That $13,000 GDP figure refers to a specific urban center, not the entire nation.

As for those photos, I assume you watch American films set in the Bronx or Brooklyn; you can find similar scenes right here, and I wasn't referring to hospitals.

Their primary export is sugar, and since that is under embargo, they've turned to tourism; however, an American tourist visiting Cuba often has to travel through a third country because if they get a stamp in their passport, they risk being penalized for visiting.

I struggle to understand the mindset on this forum; why does everyone insist on seeing everything in such black and white? I have no affinity for communists whatsoever, but I believe in recognizing things as they are—whether objective or subjective. Or perhaps, I wonder, is it all just a matter of material interest?

And what exactly do you think you know about profit margins, worker benefits, and how they actually dance together within the broader laws of economics? I mean, really. It’s easy to throw those terms around, but understanding the actual correlation between them... well, that's a different story entirely. I guess some people just assume they exist in separate vacuums, which is a mistake. Maybe you think one doesn't impact the other? I don't know. But honestly, if you haven't looked at the structural mechanics behind it all, you're mostly just guessing.

analoggull52 said:Just so we are all on the same page, I don't actually believe people in Cuba are living the dream, nor am I suggesting that communism is some kind of panacea; I was simply pointing out that the situation was driven by, and perhaps exacerbated by, the US blockade.
The root cause of the revolution back in 1958, I would argue, was the sheer misery of the populace and the fact that the nation had essentially become a banana republic; secondly, they opted for communism, which, as history shows, didn't exactly turn out to be the promised land. As for the US, it wasn't so much a fear of a direct invasion from Cuba, but rather—if I may say so—a reaction to the installation of Soviet missiles, which only happened after the failed attempts at the Bay of Pigs; in my view, it was more about big American corporations fearing that if the US shifted its political stance, they might lose profits to increased labor benefits. If this is truly such a grand democracy, I find myself wondering why the US cared so much about whether communists were in power in Vietnam, 20,000 km away, or in places like Chile and Korea (during the Korean War). Would any of you honestly volunteer to go die somewhere just to make things better for someone else? It seems somewhat absurd to me.

Quote:>

Let’s not engage in any sort of pretension here. Firstly, nobody is under the illusion that Castro's economic mismanagement—based on a primitive agricultural system (which is being subtly presented here as some sort of quaint, benevolent little state, perhaps a romanticized vision held by certain jazz musicians or extras)—could actually pose a military threat to the USA. To ignore the Soviet Union when discussing the strategic importance of Cuba is, quite frankly, a deceptive falsehood. Secondly, while the Bay of Pigs occurred in April 1961, recent declassified NSA documents suggest that the first Soviet military shipments were actually recorded arriving in Cuba as early as September 1960; this implies that even before the main action, Cuba was already actively working to undermine US territorial integrity and acting as an instrument of threat during the height of the Cold War.

Did Vietnam or Chile ever point missiles toward America?

Quote:>>

analoggull52 says: Look at the post Regarding these images, I suspect at least half of them could have been shot right here in America or even back home. It makes me wonder, do you think our current lifestyle is purely the result of our own hard work, or is it also built on debt? In 1991, the debt was $4.5 billion; by 2007, it had climbed to $42 billion.

What is the actual point of this comment? Are you suggesting the standard of living is identical in a country with a $3,500 GDP per capita (Cuba), one with $13,000 (an average US mid-sized city), and one with $45,000 (the USA)?

The point I am making is that there is far too much boasting about capitalism here, largely due to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by certain citizens, though, as I mentioned, that isn't necessarily a reflection of our collective labor.
That $13,000 GDP figure refers to a specific urban center, not the entire nation.

As for those photos, I assume you watch American films set in the Bronx or Brooklyn; you can find similar scenes right here, and I wasn't referring to hospitals.

Their primary export is sugar, and since that is under embargo, they've turned to tourism; however, an American tourist visiting Cuba often has to travel through a third country because if they get a stamp in their passport, they risk being penalized for visiting.

I struggle to understand the mindset on this forum; why does everyone insist on seeing everything in such black and white? I have no affinity for communists whatsoever, but I believe in recognizing things as they are—whether objective or subjective. Or perhaps, I wonder, is it all just a matter of material interest?

Do you honestly believe the rest of the world was just sitting there in a state of blissful ignorance during that era? It’s a bit naive to assume other nations were completely oblivious to the shifting tides of the Cold War.
Whether he actually had the support of the people is something we will likely never truly know, given that he never rose to power through a democratic election. To put it simply, he was a dictator.

That was precisely the fear held by big American capital—that if the US were to pivot leftward, they would inevitably see their profit margins shrink as workers began demanding more substantial benefits.

Within just three years of the revolution gaining momentum, an estimated 250,000 Cubans fled the island, eventually settling in Florida where they formed the backbone of the opposition against the new regime in Havana.
Whether you believe it or not, many Cubans themselves were deeply involved in various affairs, actively lobbying within the USA to push for specific measures against that regime.

That $13,000 GDP figure actually refers specifically to the metro area in New York City, rather than being an average for the entire country.

I believe you might be working with some inaccurate data here; the GDP for a city like New York actually exceeds $20,000 per capita, whereas that $13,000 or $14,000 figure you mentioned is much closer to the national average for the United States.

Robin Ramos2 said:If you’re looking for a deeper dive into American interventionism, maybe you should just start a new thread for that. I mean, honestly. If we look at Vietnam through a wider lens, it was clearly just one piece of the larger containment strategy meant to stop the communist bloc. In that specific context, the whole thing feels like a legitimate move to push back against the corrosive influence spreading from the Soviet Union and China. It makes sense, I guess. And then there's Chile—which, let's be clear, wasn't even a military intervention—but that too was part of the broader effort to prevent that same ideology from taking root in South America. There is plenty to debate there, I suppose. But as far as this specific topic and the situation in Cuba goes... well, I really hope we can finally put to rest the idea that Cuba wasn't a genuine threat to the USA. We've talked enough about it.

Relatively? I mean, are we talking compared to what? Are you comparing this to those old socialist states or maybe some of those former communist regimes out there? I guess it depends on how you look at it, but maybe you're thinking about the standard set by places that used to run under that kind of system. I don't know. It's a bit of a loaded question, isn't it?

I guess if you look at the national average, we’re talking around $13,000. But then you look at a major hub like New York City, where it jumps up to about $20,000... though obviously, it drops off once you leave those areas. It’s all over the map, really. I suppose it mostly comes down to how all those high-productivity, capital-intensive service industries just cluster together in the massive metropolitan centers. That's just how it works, I guess.

And what exactly do you think you know about profit margins, worker benefits, and how they actually dance together within the broader laws of economics? I mean, really. It’s easy to throw those terms around, but understanding the actual correlation between them... well, that's a different story entirely. I guess some people just assume they exist in separate vacuums, which is a mistake. Maybe you think one doesn't impact the other? I don't know. But honestly, if you haven't looked at the structural mechanics behind it all, you're mostly just guessing.

Whatever happened to the days when we were all equal?! 😢