AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Fidel Castro Resigns As Cuba's President
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
The illegal didn't make up for the lack of the legal and in any case the sanctions were cruel and inhuman and caused the deaths of over half a million children, which may or may not have been justified according to the troll Albright.

Palladin- I don't just accept propaganda and lies because you say so. I take each claim you make and rebut it if it needs a rebuttal. Your screams of protest do not make anything so and in fact your batting average is way down so far. As long as I am permitted to argue the point in a polite and respectful manner according to the rules of the forum, I will do so. I would suggest that you should take the same approach and refrain from calling me a liar or or of being ignorant.
Palladin Wrote:GG,

Are you a liar or really this ignorant?

Patrick, intellectual flatulance is a common entity with the left. It is usually accompanied by a shutting down of input, so as to allow for maximum verbal outlay, no matter how wittless or shallow. And I am talking about more than a single person in this instance.
Having recently been warned not to address certain people by name, I'll just say that the foregoing is not someting as ethereal as flatulence but is much more akin to it's closely related real substance spewing from both ears at the same time.
John,

I know.

GG,

The only lie so far in this thread is that 500K children starved/died in Iraq. This is why I asked,were you lying or are you just a childish internet provocateur? I assume you're a liar and a provocateur now based on your reply.

The locals ridiculed the pr of Saddam after we got there. We have embargoed Cuba since 1962,no one starves in Cuba or dies due to the sanctions,why would Iraqis when we barely traded with them?

Why would trade with the USA mean much to Iraq pre 2003 compared to Cuba who WAS a large trading partner pre Castro? There is no logic to such nonsense. It only reduced their capital inflows,it didn't keep them from planting their food and eating it or medicating the people not already murdered by your friend Saddam.

Don't believe anything because I tell you,just believe facts. There isn't any evidence 1 human perished in Iraq due to sanctions. You don't have the ability here to peddle your Islamic bullsh.it w.o. a handful of us calling you the liar you are.

Now,what was illegal about anything we did here?
Well let's start with the US not letting Chlorine into the country which led to outbreaks of vicious diseases which in turn killed a big part of the half million children.

Oh never mind. If you people are not even willing to acknowledge what the entire world knows to be true what's the point in me trying to help you understand.
Palladin Wrote:GG,

Are you a liar or really this ignorant?

Locke, have a look at that. Last time I used that line you almost collapsed.


Your case was different. In it you called the person a liar, when there was no lie involved. In this one, Palladin asked if he was one or the other. Big difference.-Locke
Doug Bandow, of the CATO Institute, had this to say, in 2002, about Cuba and the ill fated embargo, and how it has REALLY worked for the late 45 years. Wink1

Quote:Potomac Principles ~ Washington's Inadvertent Support for Cuban Communism
By Doug Bandow

HAVANA, Cuba—Roberto Alarcón, well-dressed but of unexceptional appearance, is thought to be the No. 3 man in Cuba, after only Fidel and Raúl Castro. He lazily sprawled in his chair before eight American journalists, fondling his cigar. Asked about Havana’s willingness to negotiate with the United States over its embargo against his country, Alarcón responded: there’s “no reason to consider negotiating a failing policy.”

And failing it is. For more than four decades the U.S. government has attempted to isolate Cuba’s communist regime. And for more than four decades that government has survived. Fidel Castro burst onto the international stage in 1959 by deposing the corrupt and unloved Fulgencio Batista. Cuba became the Soviet Union’s outpost in the Western hemisphere, in 1961 earning U.S. support for a botched invasion by Cuban émigrés and an economic embargo.

The latter undoubtedly bled the Cuban economy. But the Castro government survived, buoyed by abundant Soviet subsidies—evidenced today by ancient Lada automobiles on Cuban streets and generic Soviet refrigerators in Cuban homes.

A decade ago the USSR collapsed. American supporters of the embargo promised that Castro’s time had come.

For instance, in February 1992 Jorge Mas Canosa of the Cuban American National Foundation declared: “I strongly believe, given the information that is coming out of Cuba, that the economy is going to collapse by the summertime, and that Castro cannot do anything to stop this collapse.” Two years later Heritage Foundation analyst John P. Sweeney announced: “The 32-year-old trade embargo against Cuba may finally be producing its intended results of destabilizing the island’s communist government and weakening Fidel Castro’s control of the Cuban people. . . . [H]is final collapse may be closer than ever before.”

Alas, Castro is still in power. Indeed, officials in Havana believe that they have survived the worst. It is hard to credit the regime’s claim to have the highest growth rate in the region, but new hotels are being built, foreign cars are plying Havana’s streets, and dollar stores are hosting Cubans as they buy Western goods.

Support for the embargo persists, however. Its advocates now disclaim any expectation of bringing down the Castro government. Instead, they hope to limit Havana’s resources. Yet tens of thousands of Cuban-Americans visit Cuba annually and many more send an estimated $700 million in remittances to relatives in Cuba every year. In short, the Cuban-American community wants one rule for itself and a different rule for everyone else.

While the embargo may deny the Castro regime some dollars, it unfortunately provides Havana a convenient excuse. Elizardo Sanchez, head of the Cuban Commission on Human Rights and National Reconciliation, complains that the “sanctions policy gives the government a good alibi to justify the failure of the totalitarian model in Cuba.” Ambassador Vicki Huddleston, head of the U.S. Interests Section (America’s quasi-embassy) in Havana, agrees: “Castro has found the embargo to be convenient to him,” since he “uses it very effectively all the time, making us the Goliath and Cuba the David.”

This is largely cant, of course. Although the embargo hurts, it is socialism that has ruined Cuba.

Blame Collectivism

As Sanchez, who has spent more than eight years in Castro’s prisons, explains, the nation’s economic problems are due not to the embargo, but to “the impact of totalitarian measures” by a regime that is “repressive and inefficient.” Collectivism is why this entrepreneurial people is desperately poor, living in a world seemingly frozen in the 1950s—from which many cars date and since which many buildings have not been painted. The embargo is supported by no one else and has done less to isolate Cuba than, say, its welshing on its debts. What sanctions do, however, is limit the potentially destabilizing impact of American visitors and investors. Although American business is not in Cuba, American dollars are. In fact, the economy runs on dollars.

Around Havana’s tourist hotels, touts promote paladares, or private restaurants. Men and women sidle up to strolling foreigners offering purloined cigars. Pedicabs look for customers and beggars seek a soft touch.

Cubans can shop at stores where everything from food to stoves is priced in dollars. Cuba is socialist, with rationing of basic goods, but everything is available to those with enough dollars.

When asked about such blatant inequality, Alarcon responded that the situation is fairer than a decade ago, when it was illegal for anyone to hold dollars—though some did anyway. But the growing pervasiveness of the dollar, to which up to 60 percent of Cubans have some access, has created a widespread awareness that the Cuban economy combines poverty with inequality.

This might be helping to spark the spread of human-rights activists and independent journalists across the island. Argues a senior European diplomat based in Havana: we are “convinced that greater openness of trade and commerce with Cuba would enhance social and economic changes.”

American trade, investment, and travel might pose an even greater challenge to Castro’s government, perhaps the most significant yet. For this reason Sanchez advocates lifting sanctions.

Of course, he admits, in the short-term money brought to Cuba that ends up in Castro’s hands “will be used for repression.” Nevertheless, “it would be more fruitful over the long-term if people from democratic states came to Cuba.” The majority of dissidents share his opinion.

In fact, because of the destabilizing influence of outside influences, Sanchez suggests “that the Cuban government really doesn’t want the embargo to be lifted.” Alarcon dismisses the idea, joking about Castro and Senator Jesse Helms, sponsor of legislation tightening the embargo, conspiring together in a backroom. And Cuban economic officials speak positively of growing support from American farming and business interests for allowing more trade. Yet some U.S. officials privately share Sanchez’s view.

Communism has ended as a serious intellectual and geopolitical force. Even its practitioners seem dissatisfied. For instance, Alarcon, who could end up as Cuba’s future communist leader, terms unlikely “a return to the type of socialism represented by the Soviet Union.”

Still, he doesn’t offer the alternative of freedom, which is what the people of Cuba desperately need—and what America cannot impose.

Doug Bandow, a nationally syndicated columnist, is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author and editor of several books.
quadrat Wrote:
Palladin Wrote:GG,

Are you a liar or really this ignorant?

Locke, have a look at that. Last time I used that line you almost collapsed.

Your case was different. In it you called the person a liar, when there was no lie involved. In this one, Palladin asked if he was one or the other. Big difference.-Locke
Locke,
you decide what's true, I see. Actually, your prophet Palladin is ignorant and I second what gray ghost said. Cuba's got healthcare and education on first world standarts, superior even to yours. Features of extreme poverty, such as homelesness and hunger, do unlike in America not exist.
quadrat Wrote:
quadrat Wrote:
Palladin Wrote:GG,

Are you a liar or really this ignorant?

Locke, have a look at that. Last time I used that line you almost collapsed.

Your case was different. In it you called the person a liar, when there was no lie involved. In this one, Palladin asked if he was one or the other. Big difference.-Locke
Locke,
you decide what's true, I see. Actually, your prophet Palladin is ignorant and I second what gray ghost said. Cuba's got healthcare and education on first world standarts, superior even to yours. Features of extreme poverty, such as homelesness and hunger, do unlike in America not exist.

"Q" I thought you were dispensing propoganda, until I realized that you are from former DDR wonderland, and now living in third world whorehouse. Here is your idea of "first world standarts".

Here is photo of assistants helping keep the floors clear of harmful bacteria.

http://www.babalublog.com/archives/cucarachas.jpg

Note up to date waiting room, with the latest in telephone technology.

http://www.babalublog.com/archives/entry.jpg

And notice high standar(t)s of cleanliness around corners of patient and waiting rooms, which rival any first world country, including former DDR wonderland where supermen/women originate. Wink1

http://www.babalublog.com/archives/floor.jpg
None of the links work for me but I don't need to see them to know what they contain.

I've seen the reality of the hospitals myself and I can tell you one thing, the healthcare system rates one below the US healthcare system for a good reason. The hospitals are clean and efficient and everybody gets to go.

Pretending otherwise is just sour grapes.

Here's a link that works:

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=9176

Why keep things clean when it cuts into profit?
Healthcare worldwide is only as good as the infrastructure and medical supplies that support it. Doctors and nurses who are not paid sufficient salaries to support their investment in education and dedication do not exist. A well-intentioned doctor without the medicines and instruments he/she needs is frustrated and useless.

There is no healthcare system worldwide based on a socialistic model that is as effective as one based on Free Enterprise. Even in the U.S. - the major problems with healthcare is too much bureaucracy.
William- I disagree and I refence France's healthcare system which is rated #1 in the world. I also feel that for profit healthcare cuts into quality because the most important thing is making money. Doctors may make a little less in some state run systems, a lot less in Cuba, but doctor's ethics keep the quality high enough to surpass the US system. The US healthcare system cannot be compared with the best (or top 10 or 20) in the world and that is why all pres hopefuls are promising to fix it some way or another.

You wrote:
Quote:Healthcare worldwide is only as good as the infrastructure and medical supplies that support it.

No argument with that because it's certainly important. It's also important that 50 million people aren't left out.
gray ghost Wrote:William- I disagree and I refence France's healthcare system which is rated #1 in the world. I also feel that for profit healthcare cuts into quality because the most important thing is making money. Doctors may make a little less in some state run systems, a lot less in Cuba, but doctor's ethics keep the quality high enough to surpass the US system. The US healthcare system cannot be compared with the best (or top 10 or 20) in the world and that is why all pres hopefuls are promising to fix it some way or another.

You wrote:
Quote:Healthcare worldwide is only as good as the infrastructure and medical supplies that support it.

No argument with that because it's certainly important. It's also important that 50 million people aren't left out.

Tell me GG, do you love your Canadian system?
Gray Ghost, the statistics put out by France and other socialized healthcare systems have come under tighter scrutiny since Michael Moore's fantasy hit the theaters. Did you know that the U.S. stats are pulled down because we collect infant mortality information on all births, whether normal or not? Any child born in France or Germany weighing less than normal is not added to their numbers, while in the U.S. they are. Of course, that is the basis behind the two systems. The U.S. does not assume any case is impossible, where elsewhere Triage is the name of the game. Those numbers these countries are so proud do not begin at the same starting blocks as in the U.S. I wonder why?
permission to speak openly, SIR
gray ghost Wrote:permission to speak openly, SIR

Since you are now the Official Seer, help yourself from now on. Just attempt to keep your self-aggrandizement within bounds that the forum can safely stomach.
Thanks John. Yes, I do love the Canadian healthcare system. It looks after everyone and it's very affordable for the country compared to the US system. I don't recall the exact figures but I think it costs somewhere around half what the US system costs per capita. I also love the fact that Canada has affordable drugs due to it's insistence that the price be kept low. Yes, that is the reason and not that the drugs are subsidized by the government.

Even though costs are kept under control by maintaining a system which is not wasteful, the system is still highly rated and above the US system. An example of keeping costs down is in the resorting to x-rays instead of more costly MRI's, just as an example. The contrast is with the US system where it is money in a doctor's pocket if he goes to an MRI as opposed to a cheaper x-ray. Yet this thriftiness doesn't translate to a higher infant mortality rate or a lower life expectancy or a lower standard of overall health of the people. On the contrary, Canada excels nearly as highly as the leading socialist countries of Europe when it comes to those kind of comparisons.

Does this sound a little know-it-all to you John? I hope not because it's not meant to be, but it is meant to demonstrate pride in the system and part of the reason I'm now living in Canada. Would you like to know more aobut the Canadian healthcare system John?
What you are saying then is that you are in excellent health and have not yet needed the system you so love, correct?
WmLambert Wrote:Gray Ghost, the statistics put out by France and other socialized healthcare systems have come under tighter scrutiny since Michael Moore's fantasy hit the theaters. Did you know that the U.S. stats are pulled down because we collect infant mortality information on all births, whether normal or not? Any child born in France or Germany weighing less than normal is not added to their numbers, while in the U.S. they are. Of course, that is the basis behind the two systems. The U.S. does not assume any case is impossible, where elsewhere Triage is the name of the game. Those numbers these countries are so proud do not begin at the same starting blocks as in the U.S. I wonder why?

Yes William, I've heard various excuses, both here and on webboard. Who was the lady (called herself the little red hen) (you know, peddled real estate) who thought she killed it too with her explanation. That was long before Michael Moore ever got into it wasn't it.
I wonder why wealthy Canucks often come to the USA for major surgery? It must be because Canada's system is superior. Why else would a capable person do so?

This whole discussion is off base anyway,the USA has just as large a socialist medical system as Germany,France,Canada and Russia do. We just operate ours differently.

I guess I ought to stop with this board posting,stating the same things over and over and over are meaningless. No American is w/o medical care,period. I know.

I know a man who has nothing,never has had anything,never has paid 1 cent in taxes,a life of dissipation if you will. Now 56,both legs gone,eyes all but gone,3 dialysis weekly,lived on the taxpayor dime for ages,has been in hospitals I cannot afford(John will know this,ParkWest Hospital for the wealthy in Knoxville,Tennessee) ,permanent residence in taxpayor funded nursing home.

It's simply a lie to say any American(to include any human here illegally) cannot get medical care. Canada's can't be superior to ours unless they have better technology,they do NOT have better access. No one does.

Our poorest,homeless people can go to any hospital in America free of charge and get treated,it's the law. Yea,you can show a handful of violations of the law,but we could find Canadians making some errors as well.

Again,America has socialized medicine,we just pay for it w/o announcing it,we always have had it in the 20th century. Incidentally,these figues of un insured(which does not mean UNTREATED) can't be accurate. We would have had national health insurance a generation ago if they were anywhere near accurate.

I live in Tennesee,close to the bottom in wealth and education. Here,if you do not have insurance,we have "TennCare". That's who pays for every single dollar of my own cousin's care,the guy who never paid 1 cent in taxes to the government. I happen to have personal experience with it,these people who claim America has all these untreated poor folks are either ignorant or liars. We're as socialist as Canada is,we just don't make it a big announcement is all.
Pages: 1 2 3 4