Granma editor Lazaro Barredo writes that the libreta de abastecimiento, Cuba’s household food rationing book, made sense in its time but can now give way to a system where only the needy receive food subsidies. He says it’s one aspect of a state paternalism, combined with an attitude on the part of many Cubans that the state will provide everything, that needs to be left behind. The rest of his message is that everyone need to join the debate about how to make the country more productive, and everyone needs to work harder.
It’s perfectly rational to subsidize the needy and not the entire population. But after 50 years of socialism where the state has dominated the economy and regulated Cubans’ efforts to provide for themselves, can you blame Cubans for expecting a lot from the state?
51 comments:
of course you have to expect the cubans to react to any lessening of state control when it comes to basic necessities; but this is an important step that has to be taken to advance. very good they are talking about it and shows they are working towards something more realistic. end the embargo and help speed up the process
The problem is not with the Cuban people but with the so-called social ownership of the means of production. It's easy to admonish someone to produce more but unless that person has access to the means of production that is not an achievable goal. Raul Castro, Ramiro Valdez, and now Barredo Medina say that they want Cuban workers to produce like entrepeneurs in capitalist countries while alienating them from both the means and the rewards of production. Can somebody contact Karl Marx for an explanation of how this is supposed to wrok? Talking about contradictions!
Vecino de NF
Vecino, why must you always pander? Such a system of government has never worked. You know that. And, no, the Cuban people are the problem. They have alternatives. One of those alternatives is social and political upheaval, because at the end of the day, in every damn society, it is the people, whether you believe it or not, who decide the fate of their state and their lives. Is that not how the current state came to be?
Anonymous October 14, 2009 10:40 AM,
"Vecino, why must you always pander?..."
How am I pandering?
pander [ˈpændə]
vb
1. (intr; foll by to) to give gratification (to weaknesses or desires)
2. (archaic when tr) to act as a go-between in a sexual intrigue (for)
n also 'panderer
1. a person who caters for vulgar desires, esp in order to make money
2. a person who procures a sexual partner for another; pimp
[C16 (n): from Pandare Pandarus]
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged 6th Edition 2003. © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003
It is rather tiring to keep seeing all these sexual allusions in blog commentary. Some people must not be getting any action.
Vecino de NF
Pander: "To cater to the lower tastes and desires of others". That is you, Vecino. You would resemble a puta far before you take on the image of a pimp. That much I know. Stop lying to yourself about the majority of the Cuban people. Take heed and cease attempting to alter the views of Leftside and AC: They are men who are resolute in their opinion, just as I am. You love to write them facts about the current condition of Cuba; debate with them about their flawed logic. They are communist sympathizers and commissaries. It is like talking to a heap of steaming shit.
Anonymous October 14, 2009 12:33 PM,
"... You love to write them facts about the current condition of Cuba; debate with them about their flawed logic. They are communist sympathizers and commissaries. It is like talking to a heap of steaming shit."
Now that we know what you think about my motivations, what are yours?
BTW there is an ugly rumour making the rounds in the different Cuban blogs that all these insulting language (on either side of the ideological divide) is really fake. It is the work product that is required from a few professional commentators in Cuba that are being financed (cheaply I may add) by Cuban intelligence. Just a rumour!
Vecino de NF
Anonymous October 14, 2009 12:33 PM,
BTW a committed communist can survive anything but a contradiction.
Vecino de NF
You are correct about the rumor. This is nothing novel. But I am very candid with my insolence. It is a faculty that you seem to lack, as if it were to denegrate your intellect and tolerance of other's opinions and perceptions, and, most significantly, their perceptions of you. We will have to see how this liberal viewpoint pans out for you. I find you to be a very "peacekeeping" man in a political arena where such a word has been nonexistent. Plain and simple: you are absolutely unaware or unfamiliar with the tactics of your enemies; so unfamiliar I believe you find yourself astonished whenever the evils of Cuban officials begin to surface. You seem to have become very complacent with your American identity. That is a privilege: Not truly knowing the reality of evil-doings abroad, rather only reading of them. Nevertheless, if you must know, I tolerate you far more than the others on this blog--so much more that I wish to exhange conversation.
Anonymous October 14, 2009 2:37 PM,
"...if you must know, I tolerate you far more than the others on this blog--so much more that I wish to exhange conversation."
Are you asking me out on a date? Thanks but no thanks! BTW after your comments I feel that after all my years of this Earth I finally understand myself ... NOT!
Stick to the facts, they are more faithful than opinions!
Vecino de NF
Is it possible that Vecino 'panders' because he has some knowledge of the Cuban system? Is it possible that many of us are involved and deeply interested in how the contradictions of the Cuban system will change as time marches on? Is it possible that the usual shouting voices will slowly start to realize that they don't have a very good understanding of the cuban contemporary situation?
Vecino, in Cuba the workers DO own and have access to the major means of production. In capitalism they do not - their boss does. In Cuba, the workers are holding meetings right now to identify problems and solutions to productivity and effeciency. In capitalism, the workers are shut out of most real substantive decision-making.
No one is saying the Cubans ought to "produce like people in capitalist countries." That would entail relying on exploitation and the profit motive. Cuba will continue to prioritize the social goals of production. All they are saying is that there must be greater incentives for hard work and innovation, ie. less paternalism. That is a further step away from Che's idealistic "new man" formulation, however this has been going on in one way or another (with fits and starts) for the last 30 years.
Leftside,
Agree that on "paper" and procedurally it appears that "in Cuba the workers DO own and have access to the major means of production." but the reality is quite different. Take as an example, cattle raising in Cuba. A farmer takes care of the cows but he can not determine how to dispose of them. He (most Cuban farmers are men) can not decide on his own whether the cow should be used for milk production or meat production. If he slaughters a cow without government permission, he will be fined or be sent to jail. That is not owning the means of production that is administering for an absentee owner.
In theory the "people" own the means of production, but in reality the party elites (and very limited in number) decide what to do with them.
Vecino de NF
Certainly there is an important distinction between individual (capitalistic) ownership and social ownership. In the former, (to stay with the cow example) the rancher will decide to dispose of the cow by whenever it will bring him the highest profit margin. After the hurricanes, for example, would have been an opportune time to slaughter thousands of cows because you could have made a killing on the black market. That would have increased the profit of the people fortunate enough to own cattle, but been a disaster for the rest of the country. (I'm sure there were such illegal killings, but not to the extent if there were no law protecting the beasts).
Under social ownership, the society studies and analyzes the optimal levels of beef and milk production and acts accordingly (in theory at least). This deprives some people of high profits but says nothing about optimal production and efficiency, which has far more to do with the availability of inputs like water, feed and other things.
I'll agree that, in a macro sense, individual ownership provides greater incentives for profit and growth. But there are more important things in running a society that intends to benefit everyone, with a preference for the poor.
As for Phil's question:
can you blame Cubans for expecting a lot from the state?
No, of course it is logical that Cubans expect a lot from the State. Free health, education, cheap housing, full employment and more are required by the Constitution (things called impossible in the US). About 3/4 of food used to be subsidized by the State. Now they are trying something new. Going down to something like 25%. This is something every good capitalist should be praising. Adding up all the reforms in agriculture/food it is a pretty significant series of market reforms. What remains to be seen is how they are going to determine who continues to get subsidizes (those w/o access to foreign currency would be my vote).
Medina is not criticizing those who "expect a lot of the State." He's criticizing a certain attitude that denies one's own responsibility towards society. When an individual checks out of their job or neighborhood and just gets by through loafing, it's a problem for democratic socialism.
Paternalism exists in Cuba, like in every country. The State deserves most of the blame. But paternalism in Cuba developed out of a noble desire to ensure there were no "means tests" or income cut-offs - for access to some basic goods and services. Everyone gets it. This costs money, but the people do not see the cost to the State (themselves) because of the subsidies.
The reforms in food/agriculture (like energy that preceeded it) are part experiment, part necessity (the price of food). They are to be watched closely for any negative effects on the food security of the population. It will not be worth it if food production goes up but the number of hungry does as well. It is quite a gamble actually. A bet that people are going to be able to afford enough food on their own.
anon who commented about the people and government; you are absolutely right. the people will decide their government, if they will revolt or not. cuba's history is full of that.
and so the cubans don't revolt against this government because the majority still see it as legitimate; warts and all.
it is the great truth that the anti side just can not accept. anyone who knows the true reality of cuba, (not just havana) knows that.
good for raul for moving towards that attitude, but is it the chicken or egg theory? hard to increase production if there's no material to produce more. cuba has to become more integrated into the world economic systems, and that means ending the embargo and american hostility. but the last thing the regime's opponents want is to succeed.
re agriculture example, many farmers can decide on things far more than it is perceived to those outside cuba; as usual truth is something hard to come by from those wanting to destroy, not reform.
Leftside,
"I'll agree that, in a macro sense, individual ownership provides greater incentives for profit and growth. But there are more important things in running a society that intends to benefit everyone, with a preference for the poor."
Shouldn't then one focus in increasing production through individual ownership, and then redistribute surplus to the needy through social consensus? The Cuban government has never tried that. It has tried to redistribute accumulated wealth (pre 1959 capital stock), and foreign wealth (remittances, aid, subsidies) before allowing national wealth creation. The reason is simple: if one allows people individual ownership of the means of production one looses absolute political control. Fidel Castro first, and now Raul Castro are just interested in absolute political control of Cuban society, and they would do everything necessary to preserve it.
Anonymous October 15, 2009 8:31 AM,
"...as usual truth is something hard to come by from those wanting to destroy, not reform."
As far as destroyers of Cuban economy and society, the nominations go to:
Ramon Castro Ruz, and Ulises Rosales del Toro for their dismantling of the sugar industry
Fidel Castro Ruz for the dismantling of the Cuban cattle industry
"Gallego" Fernandez for the dismantling of paternal responsibility by creating and enforcing the Escuelas en el Campo (Schools in the Countryside) system.
The late Rosa Simeon for dismantling Cuban scientific credibility by supporting allegations of biowarfare attacks against Cuba.
Raul Castro Ruz for dismantling the Ministy of Interior structure after the Gen.Ochoa's case.
Please note that no candidate for best destroyer of Cuban society and institutions resides in Miami. Please feel free to add your own nominations!
Vecino de NF
On Planet Vecino, the destroyers of Cuba are its regime officials, not the people.
On Planet Leftside, socialism breeds a society replete with incentives and motivations.
Anonymous October 15, 2009 12:41 PM,
Accountability must be attached to individuals otherwise is meaningless. Please give names of those who you consider the destroyers of Cuba!
Vecino de NF
The PEOPLE, Vecino. THE PEOPLE. Carajo, you're more intelligent than that.
Anonymous October 15, 2009 4:01 PM,
The main difference between those of us who believe in markets and individual freedoms and those that believe in collective political models is that we believe in INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY. We tried individuals in the courts. We do not issue blanket collective guilt judgments. That's what we fight for. By blaming the "PEOPLE" you are giving a free pass to the leaders, and alienate the "PEOPLE" from their responsibility to hold their leaders accountable.
Every guerrilla fighter knows that you shoot the leading officer first, then the communications guy, then the rest of the officers and non-coms, and finally you take care of the platoon. The same applies in politics. Hold the leaders accountable and the "PEOPLE" will follow! When either ideological argues their point in this and other forums, they are empowering the "PEOPLE" because we know that maybe not today, may not tomorrow, but maybe one day our arguments may tip the scales. So if you are interested in change work toward it. Otherwise rant, and you will be paid little heed.
As far as being intelligent, I know my limitations.
Vecino de NF
it is the people who empower the leaders, if the people are not happy they will change the leaders. so all you do is rant as well, and your perspective of destruction is just that -- opinion
it was the people who got rid of the disgusting american corruption in cuba; and if they want it back then it will be their decision. but you delude that the people don't still legitimize the regime; have you ever even been in cuba in the past 50 years?
of course the miami influence is absolutely irrelevant, they and american policy have done nothing. the innocents with blood on their hands.
there has been biowarefare against cuba; the loss of credibility is on anyone who tries to deny it.
someone call the men in white coats
no no, that's too extreme, the right wingers are loons, but lets keep giving them the meds and see what happens.
the facts just never seem to get in the way of a good right wingnut
even 50 years of reality just can't make a dent in their fantasy land.
yes that's right nitwit..."there has been biowarefare [sic] against cuba"
and let's not forget the CIA seeding clouds in Cuba to cause flooding, or was it droughts??
chingon
The Cuban People disgust me. I hold them accountable before I hold Fidel accountable. They could run him out of the country if they truly wished. That is the reality. The people are the truest of enemies against exiles like myself. I have come to that conclusion. I have 50 years of history and empirical evidence riding on my side. I do not agree with Vecino and his pandering of the left, and I sure as hell will never side with the communist sympathizers. Therefore, there are three ideological factions vying against one another on this blog. These are facts. I believe in a free market economy and basic human rights for all and sundry, but I do not believe such non-negotiable rights are acquired without fighting for them. Thus, I do not believe in the Cuban people, nor may I ever.
chingon mi hermano si tu no sabes que era bastante biowarfare contra cuba entonces buscate un libro brother!
"Hold the leaders accountable and the "PEOPLE" will follow! When either ideological argues their point in this and other forums, they are empowering the "PEOPLE" because we know that maybe not today, may not tomorrow, but maybe one day our arguments may tip the scales."
Vecino, we agree on something: The Cuban People are very much like cattle, so much that we must "empower" them to wage war against those who have inflicted such injury upon their lives. They have grown accostumed to such a life of affliction. Perhaps it is because I am accustomed to freedom, on a grand scale, that I cannot fathom such faculties of cowardice upheld by the Cuban masses. Conversely, when I infiltrated the island many many years ago I was shot upon by the citizens, armed by the government. They are very loyal to their comandante and patria. Essentialy, you are, as an outsider, imploring the people to foment change, via your blog posts on this forum. In the end, the people will hold their masters accountable, but only the people will honor such capacities. Trust when I say the leaders will not receive a free pass. Before I infiltrated the island, I had a score to settle with Batista's men in Miami. But that is neither here nor there. Until a foreign power usurps the Kingdom, one can only count on a disaffected people to incite change. But, as I have told you, do not count on the Cuban masses. Do not count on those negros. They are a herd of cattle. When I say Fidel will not die by the Cuban bullet, I mean it. It brings me great sadness. I have waited long enough to understand this.
There goes that gusano The Hate talking mierda again only now he won't sign with a name. Go back to your hole, viejo.
Anonymous October 16, 2009 12:42 PM,
We do not agree that "The Cuban People are very much like cattle,...". I do give their political choices the benefit of the doubt because they do not have access to complete information thus my efforts here. People always act on their own perceived self-interest. This self-interest can be clouded by lack of information or ability. Having said that it would be much more justifiable to say that the Cuban people support the Cuban government if there would be freedom of expression and association in Cuba. Alas that's not the case.
Anonymous October 16, 2009 12:15 PM
"... do not agree with Vecino and his pandering of the left"
First I have to attack the use of the ethnic-political slur gusano, and now I have to explain the meaning of pandering. One gets no rest in this blog! For the record I see myself as engaging the left, ... and all other ideological directions in respectful discussion "with malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right."
In the meantime I need to run, there are some people in white coats looking for me! Ha, ha, he, he, hee, hee, they are coming to take me away! Believe me, I feel much better now!
Vecino de NF
Vecino, I am sorry to say that you are, with your pacifistic and charitable qualities "for all", unfit to combat the evils of the world. The Pen only goes so far, nor is it the only instrument to destruct evil. Had you not emigrated from Cuba to the United States, I do not belive you would have survived in such an unpeaceful land; then again, I do not believe you would have been the same man and carried such a peace-making frame of thought.
Anonymous October 16, 2009 1:27 PM,
"...with malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right." was taken from Pres.Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural after his point of view prevailed. Not many at the time or now thought of him as a pacifist.
BTW why do you think I "emigrated from Cuba to the United States"?
Vecino de NF
There was no room for pacifism during the Civil War. I have never thought of Lincoln in that light, for he would have never won the war had he been a pacifist. I was simply regarding my perceptions of you. That if the occasion to sit and speak with Fidel or Raul, etc., you would do just that: sit and hold a civilized conversation.
Concerning your Cuban identity, I cannot say. What is known is that you are accustomed to receiving your rightful personal freedoms; therefore, you are an American interested in the Cuban politica. Perhaps you are Phil Peters.
Anonymous October 16, 2009 3:28 PM,
You are right. I would sit down and speak with Fidel, Raul, or Ramiro, ... and negotiate their resignations. "I don't like violence ... I'm a businessman. Blood is a big expense"
"Pour les vaincre, messieurs, il nous faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, et toujours de l'audace et la Patrie sera sauvée!"
And I am not Phil Peters. I am always grateful for his hospitality in this blog.
Vecino de NF
Leftside, you either have no clue about Cuba or you work for the Cuban Government.
Tell anything you write here to somebody in Cuba and they will laugh on your face.
You are so naive!! Are you writing from the 60s?
Vecino, tell me something I could not already discern about your character? With your answer I am almost 100% positive you are not Cuban, and if you are, now you know why it's been 50 years. And as for the Danton reference, what would audacious, like a true revolutionary, is to pop a round into the head of Fidel and Raul and Ramiro, etc., and then to do yourself the favor before they do it to you. But you do not like violence, as I do not. But when need be, I understand that violence is an inborn quality, just as self-interest is.
Talk with Fidel!! Ha. What a joke this Vecino guy is. That's like asking the devil to be saintly.
I would kill that despot with the first thing I could get my hand's on. And then they'd kill me. Still, I wouldn't think twice.
Juan Pan
Anonymous October 16, 2009 4:03 PM meet Juan Pan
Juan Pan meet October 16, 2009 4:03 PM
Obviously you two need to get together. I look forward to reading about your exploits in the news. Please limit collateral damage! I hate to spend my time explaining to Leftside et alles the moral ambiguity of uncoventional warfare.
BTW reading some of these commentaries remind me of Playboy letters to the editor. They are so obviously over the top that they must be written by gifted writers on Playboy payroll.
Vecino de NF
On Planet Vecino, negotiating the resignation of communist dictators is not an over-the-top undertaking.
On Planet Vecino, self-professed communists like Leftside will one day possess an adoration for capitalistic virtues.
Anonymous October 16, 2009 4:31 PM,
What do you suggest be done?
Vecino de NF
That's not up to you or me, Vecino. But you may still think so. It helps the time go by.
Anonymous October 16, 2009 4:54 PM,
Are you Anonymous October 16, 2009 4:31 PM? If you are, then why are you opining in this blog if you have nothing to suggest? Are you one of those that for CUC 20 and access to the Internet write up diatribes that will be used to paint the "outside" as the enemy of the Cuban people?
My only request is that you sign with a handle. It saves storage space in this blog.
Vecino de NF
Just the inverse of that: The Cuban People are the enemy of the outside. They are my enemies.
Pedro Pan
Pedro Pan,
Any relation to Juan Pan? So no plan, no what is to be done idea?
C'mon you can do it, Pedro! BTW the overwhelming majority of the Cuban population did not ask to be born under the current Cuban political system. Something to think about before you get into genocidal fantasies.
Vecino de NF
PS Thanks for the handle!
At least 73% of the Cuban population that was not born before 1/1/1959.
Source: Anuario Estadístico de Cuba 2007
Vecino de NF
I found it odd that nobody called out the ridiculous comment by anonymous at October 16, 2009 12:42PM (and some others). It should be clear to readers that there are some alarming trends from the anti-Cuba, pro-embagro crowd. It is very telling of the tendencies of this group that they truly are anti-Cuba. This truth comes up again and again on this blog. Also the racism is disgusting as well. The group of Cubans that believes that the "negros" in Cuba should be wiped out is dangerous, and I would argue that this group is used effectively by the Castro regime to stay in power. Que verguenza!
Anonymous October 19, 2009 2:57 PM,
"I found it odd that nobody called out the ridiculous comment ..."
I refer you to my comment on October 16, 2009 4:22 PM. Please remember that the US embargo was put in place because US interests were hurt by Cuban government action.
Vecino de NF
sure, fair enough vecino.
Clearly, the embargo was put in place because US interests were hurt. To me that is the most pathetic part, that these right wing Cubans were tricked by US propaganda and agreed to put their lives at risk to attack their homeland...for what?
Anonymous October 21, 2009 5:55 PM,
There was common interests between US interests and the anti-Castro Cubans. Nobody was tricked except maybe the non-participating Cuban masses on both sides of the Strait of Florida.
Vecino de NF
смотреть порно видео малолеток на природе http://free-3x.com/ ебут студентку онлайн free-3x.com/ порно видео он лайн молодые [url=http://free-3x.com/]free-3x.com[/url]
Post a Comment