In remembrance of 9/11

[MrFun]

[johncmcleod]

DO NOT EVEN TRY TO SPEAK FOR AN ENTIRE GROUP OF PEOPLE. DO NOT EVEN TRY THAT ****. The Chilean people? How about Chilean socialists and communists?

Every account I've read says that 9/11 1973 was a tragedy.

And I wouldn't be talking, you were a non-Chilean calling Allende a thug. Neither of us has more credibility than the other. We're both non-Chileans, and we both have different opinions on Allende and Pinochet.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by johncmcleod


Every account I've read says that 9/11 1973 was a tragedy.

And I wouldn't be talking, you were a non-Chilean calling Allende a thug. Neither of us has more credibility than the other. We're both non-Chileans, and we both have different opinions on Allende and Pinochet.

It was a tragedy. But so was the election of 1970, where Allende won with only 37% of the vote. Alessandri would of made the better president. Allende was a thug. So was Pinochet. They both were thugs, just that Pinochet got the country off the ground with free market reforms.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

The "Chicago Boys" experiment failed utterly (though the world economy wasn't so hot at the time due to the massive increase in the price of oil)

no it didnt, it got rid of the 30,000% inflation which is one of the most debilitating things in an economy. hyperinflation.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Heheh.. Cuba has 'made it'. Hehehe... China has made it but was FORCED by the US to become capitalist... Heheheh.

Do people actually believe this crap?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


no it didnt, it got rid of the 30,000% inflation which is one of the most debilitating things in an economy. hyperinflation.

omfg. Even Lawrence agrees with me. Has the world gone crazy?

Yeah, it crushes demand.

China wasn't forced by the US (it could of went with the USSR), economic woes forced China to open up.

[johncmcleod]

Heheh.. Cuba has 'made it'. Hehehe... China has made it but was FORCED by the US to become capitalist... Heheheh.

Do people actually believe this crap?

Though Cuba is controlled by a repressive regime, they've solved the inequalities and set up a health care education system much better than any other country and Latin America has (save Costa Rica). But most of all, from what I've read most of the Cubans are content. The former fascist upper class that now resides in Miami is very vocal against Castro, and they get the most press. And then the people that suffered from Castro's brutality obviously don't like Castro, but for good reason. Though I don't support Castro's authoritarian policies, he's better than a lot of the other dictators, especially the ones that the US supports. And this has been done despite years of economic terrorism that has been committed against them. The embargoes that were put in place on Cuba would have crushed the economies of most countries.

China is also controlled by a repressive regime. Mao's policies were disastrous and I've never thought of him as a good leader. The reason I say 'made it' is because they gained self-determination. They didn't turn into a country like any other in East Asia that has a free market economy, massive inequalities, widespread poverty, and is exploited by the first world. But of course the US threatened an embargo and sever economic punishments of China did not change. China did need to change anyway as its economy was a mess, (another example of unindustrialized countries trying to make the leap from feudalism to communism), but now Chinese workers are exploited by first world corporations. Let us marvel at the triumphs of the free market economy.

[Giancarlo]

You are so wrong, mr. commie mccleod. Cuba's regime may have ushered in "better" health care, but the Costa Rica is the best way to go. You trying to even claim he is better then other dictators is just false. I'm sorry, but that's just nonsense. Economic terrorism? What are you talking about? That's a delusional statement. Cuba imposed these things on itself, when Castro launched his waves of brutality. He ruined the Cuban economy in just a few years. And no, China changed because it wanted to open up (it could of easily turned to the USSR). So please don't tell me that Chinese workers are exploited by first world corporations. China has a ton of jobs because of corporations. Let us marvel at the idiocy of the communist state controlled system. Communism/Socialism is the most idiotic form of government.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Cuba is controlled by a repressive regime, they've solved the inequalities and set up a health care education system much better than any other country and Latin America has (save Costa Rica). But most of all, from what I've read most of the Cubans are content.

Really? I think you must stop believing your propaganda. After the Soviet's couldn't fund the dictatorship with aid, Cuba's economy plummetted. The Cubans have had to deal with crippling oil shortages, extended electric and water cuts, and dwindling food stocks.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2961320.stm

Hal Klepak, a military historian from Canada who visits Cuba regularly, says the government is well aware of the threat.

This discontent, he says, "is very serious, I think it's the Cuban Government's number one concern.

"The generations that saw the revolution, that saw the regimes that preceded this one, tend to be thankful, and are still mesmerised by the personality of Fidel.

"But young people, particularly in Havana, are deeply dissatisfied."

Political dissidents are making lots of noise on the streets as they are arrested for daring to question Castro.

They didn't turn into a country like any other in East Asia that has a free market economy, massive inequalities, widespread poverty, and is exploited by the first world.

You mean like Japan? South Korea? Taiwan? Oh wait .

But of course the US threatened an embargo and sever economic punishments of China did not change.

Bull****. Deng was is no way pressured to change by external forces. His Four Modernizations directly arose from the disasters of the Mao era.

[johncmcleod]

You are so wrong, mr. commie mccleod. Cuba's regime may have ushered in "better" health care, but the Costa Rica is the best way to go. You trying to even claim he is better then other dictators is just false. I'm sorry, but that's just nonsense. Economic terrorism? What are you talking about? That's a delusional statement. Cuba imposed these things on itself, when Castro launched his waves of brutality. He ruined the Cuban economy in just a few years. And no, China changed because it wanted to open up (it could of easily turned to the USSR). So please don't tell me that Chinese workers are exploited by first world corporations. China has a ton of jobs because of corporations. Let us marvel at the idiocy of the communist state controlled system. Communism/Socialism is the most idiotic form of government.

Exactly. That's why I said save for Costa Rica. Economic terrorism would be the embargoes the US put on Cuba (ie the US not selling any medicine to Cuba). The only thing they did was hurt the Cuban people. The US punished the Cuban people for Castro's actions, mainly his economic system of choice. Being brutal had nothing to do it. The US has supported some of the most brutal dictators in the 20th century. Castro didn't ruin the Cuban economy either. Cuba's economy isn't great, but it is a Latin American country that started out underdeveloped. And Cuba's economy is way better than most Latin American countries.'

What do you mean don't say Chinese workers are exploited? They are. Many American products are produced in Chinese sweatshops.

Communism/Socialism is not a form of government. It is an economic system. There is a huge difference. And I beg to differ. First off, humans have been living communally for 3 million years (or only a few hundred thousand if you only consider homo sapiens human). Second off, capitalism has made the few that are lucky enough to have a decent lifestyle disgustingly materialistic. Thanks to your favorite economic system, everything is about money. Everyone believes money buys happiness. We provide lip service to the idea that money doesn't matter, but really, the thought in the back of most people's minds is, well, it would be nice to have some money, too. The whole point of capitalism is profit. All businesses exist to make profit. Why don't drug companies sell large quantities of medicine for very cheap to third world countries on their own? Because it isn't profitable. Why does Gap have its clothes sewn in sweatshops by workers working for 15 cents in hour that aren't allowed to make unions? Because it is profitable. But then of course that is only a minor problem. You really have to look at the majority of the world's population

Half of the planet's population suffers from malnutrition. Yet one in three Americans are obese from stuffing their fat faces with food. Our planet's ecosystem is being destroyed. Hundreds of millions are starving. War is widespread, hundreds of millions of people have had experienced the horrors of the battlefield or have had their lives affected directly and severely by war. Most people on this planet live in poverty. Things such as having money in the bank, having more than the clothes on your back, or having food in the refridgerator are unknown concepts to most of the world's population. Yet we are sitting here right now on our computers. Some of these problems could be solved. If food was redsitributed throughout the world, everyone could get over 2000 calories a day. And that isn't even using the world's full agricultural potential.

Now which economic system is more idiotic?

You mean like Japan? South Korea? Taiwan? Oh wait.

You mean like India? Sri Lanka? Bangladesh? Myanmar? Indonesia? Malaysia? Cambodia? Thailand? The Philippines? Vietnam? Laos? China? Pakistan? Afghanistan? Oh wait.

"But young people, particularly in Havana, are deeply dissatisfied."

I stand corrected. I am not surprised, Castro's regime is brutal. I would be against Cuba's government too. But the young people aren't the whole population. They have only known Castro's policies. The majority of the population, who saw how Cuba was before Castro came, like him a lot more. They don't want Cuba to get screwed over like the rest of Latin America, an area full of poverty, all of the nations having dependent, often times single product economies.

It was a tragedy. But so was the election of 1970, where Allende won with only 37% of the vote. Alessandri would of made the better president. Allende was a thug. So was Pinochet. They both were thugs, just that Pinochet got the country off the ground with free market reforms.

Allende was the most popular candidate. He got more votes than any other. The reason he only had 37% is because there weren't just two candidates running. There were several, Allende being the most popular. Can you show some evidence of Allende being a 'thug?' He was democratically elected, tried to make Chile more than just an outsource for American corporations and supplier of raw materials, and was in power for three years. Pinochet was installed by the US, was in power for much longer, was a dictator, and killed and tortured tens of thousands of innocent people. It also resulted in the poor getting a lot poorer.

There is no comparison between Allende and Pinochet.

[DrGerry]

Giancarlo, do you really have an ass in place of a brain? or you are merely trolling?

@Imran Siddiqui: how many times has visited Cuba? I mean Cuba not Miami, I don't know if you know the difference.

[chequita guevara]

No insulting other posters. Discuss the issues, not the issuers.

[Giancarlo]

This requires a major debunking. And I will give it to you.

Originally posted by johncmcleod


Exactly. That's why I said save for Costa Rica. Economic terrorism would be the embargoes the US put on Cuba (ie the US not selling any medicine to Cuba). The only thing they did was hurt the Cuban people. The US punished the Cuban people for Castro's actions, mainly his economic system of choice. Being brutal had nothing to do it. The US has supported some of the most brutal dictators in the 20th century. Castro didn't ruin the Cuban economy either. Cuba's economy isn't great, but it is a Latin American country that started out underdeveloped. And Cuba's economy is way better than most Latin American countries.'

The only economic terrorism is instigated by the Cuban government on its own people. Certainly there has been some "minor openings" in its economy, but nothing substantial. If they were to open their private sector to investment the Cuban economy could get on track. And if your beloved Castro would hold elections and step down, then maybe things could go forward. The Cuban people are only punished by Castro and his stupidity. The US supported some of the most brutal dictators in the 20th century? Not quite. Cuba's economy wasn't great to begin with and your beloved communist state has destroyed it even further. Cuba's economy is way better than most Latin American countries? Think again. Argentina is better. Even Colombia. Both Argentina and Colombia have a large light manufacturing sector.. Argentina did suffer a major economic blow in 2001, but it has made some good strides since then. If you really want to make Cuba better, its political system has to change to be more democratic. The Cuban government is ruthless and idiotic.

What do you mean don't say Chinese workers are exploited? They are. Many American products are produced in Chinese sweatshops.

Many of these Chinese people do not have jobs to begin with and are being paid far more then what they would get paid by their previous agriculture jobs. Think about it. It may be bad for you, but it is not bad for them and how their prices are there, it is not bad at all what jobs they do.

Communism/Socialism is not a form of government. It is an economic system. There is a huge difference. And I beg to differ. First off, humans have been living communally for 3 million years (or only a few hundred thousand if you only consider homo sapiens human). Second off, capitalism has made the few that are lucky enough to have a decent lifestyle disgustingly materialistic.

Rhetoric, rhetoric, rhetoric. And you don't know what capitalism really is. I am not all about money and making money. There is much more to life then that. I'm not some zombie. However, I think communism is the most evil idea ever to exist, after Hitlerism. Capitalism has made many advancements for the world. It will continue to make advancements. It has made substantial medical strides (pfizer is one of the companies that has done this).

Thanks to your favorite economic system, everything is about money. Everyone believes money buys happiness. We provide lip service to the idea that money doesn't matter, but really, the thought in the back of most people's minds is, well, it would be nice to have some money, too. The whole point of capitalism is profit. All businesses exist to make profit. Why don't drug companies sell large quantities of medicine for very cheap to third world countries on their own? Because it isn't profitable. Why does Gap have its clothes sewn in sweatshops by workers working for 15 cents in hour that aren't allowed to make unions? Because it is profitable. But then of course that is only a minor problem. You really have to look at the majority of the world's population

Money doesn't matter. It is just an integral part of the economy. If you think an economy is evil and should be destroyed, then you are against civilization, free trade, the free exchange of ideas and you are for the most brutal form of government ever, a style like that of the Khmer Rogue. They are the shining example of a regime that got rid of currency and essentially wiped out their economy. The whole point of communism is murder and suffering. It kills. It kills in the millions. The whole point of capitalism may be profit, but that is not a bad aim. Drug companies already do sell large quantities of medcine for very cheap to third world countries. The governments of these countries get a lot of aid money they often misuse. And you are wrong again. Think about what kind of jobs those people working in "sweatshops" would get in the previous agricultural jobs they most likely held. You have to look at the facts and have to look at what these people were doing before. Even with these low paying factory jobs they are better off then they are before. I'm not going to get redundant.

Half of the planet's population suffers from malnutrition. Yet one in three Americans are obese from stuffing their fat faces with food.

That is pretty hateful but you do have a point... Americans should lighten their diets. I'm not american (and I'm 6'2" at 145 pounds).

Our planet's ecosystem is being destroyed. Hundreds of millions are starving. War is widespread, hundreds of millions of people have had experienced the horrors of the battlefield or have had their lives affected directly and severely by war.

I hate to break this to you, but ever since we have been on this planet there has been war. There is not a damn thing you can do about it. It has nothing to do with capitalism. It is political mistakes, political judgements and political moves made by leaders and rebel groups. War has always been widespread. Suffering has always been widespread. Only after the cold war have many civil wars end. There are still 20 some odd civil wars going on, but you have to accept a fact about this earth is that war is bound to happen. Communism won't solve anything. It will only create more war.

Most people on this planet live in poverty. Things such as having money in the bank, having more than the clothes on your back, or having food in the refridgerator are unknown concepts to most of the world's population. Yet we are sitting here right now on our computers. Some of these problems could be solved. If food was redsitributed throughout the world, everyone could get over 2000 calories a day. And that isn't even using the world's full agricultural potential.

Say, in the 19th and 18th century (and before) Europe and America were in poverty and pulled theirselves out of it slowly. Technological advancements would not of happened if it weren't for capitalism. If you are so concerned, why are you even on your computer and not over their helping people if you are so concerned? You know what, food cannot and should not be redistributed (that's communism and is illogical). There are too many people on this planet.

Now which economic system is more idiotic?

Communism. Considering I just about debunked your entire argument to begin with... OUCH!

You mean like India? Sri Lanka? Bangladesh? Myanmar? Indonesia? Malaysia? Cambodia? Thailand? The Philippines? Vietnam? Laos? China? Pakistan? Afghanistan? Oh wait.

India? Making tremendous strides. Rather impressive considering they are jumping from an agricultural state directly to a high tech state (Bangalore I believe is the center of technology manufacturing in India). There has been some form of a peace deal in Sri Lanka. Bangladesh has had successes with microlending (though it is still poor). Bangladesh has far too many people. Indonesia is starting to stabilize itself albeit slowly. Malaysia has the tallest buildings in the world and is becoming a shining example of a strong emerging market ready to grasp developed status. Cambodia got out of a communist dictatorship (the most glaring example of your system) and is on the long road of recovery. I could go through the rest if you want me to.

Allende was the most popular candidate. He got more votes than any other. The reason he only had 37% is because there weren't just two candidates running.

He was the most popular candidate by a one or two percent. And face the facts, he was going to run a minority government that made too many mistakes.

There were several, Allende being the most popular. Can you show some evidence of Allende being a 'thug?' He was democratically elected, tried to make Chile more than just an outsource for American corporations and supplier of raw materials, and was in power for three years. Pinochet was installed by the US, was in power for much longer, was a dictator, and killed and tortured tens of thousands of innocent people. It also resulted in the poor getting a lot poorer.

There is no comparison between Allende and Pinochet.

I'm just saying the country would of been better off under Alessandri. You really should study up on Chile because apparently you know little about how the Allende government screwed up (by not making their plans more moderate, and far to the left thus angering the 63% who voted against Allende). Chile is better off being an export based economy. It is far better off now then it ever was under the socialist dictatorship of Allende. And no Pinochet was installed by the Chilean Army. The CIA may have provided verbal support and some funding but that was as far as it went.

And the poor got a lot poorer? That's a ridiculous statement. So utterly ridiculous. If anything everybody in the country gained more wealth. Allende was a crooked criminal bastard.

[Nubclear]

ather impressive considering they are jumping from an agricultural state directly to a high tech state

Just skimming here..."India" caught my eye.
No, Fez, they aren't

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

ather impressive considering they are jumping from an agricultural state directly to a high tech state

Just skimming here..."India" caught my eye.
No, Fez, they aren't

Oh yes they are.