Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall 28 years ago

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by picanha View Post
    That it wasn't the reason for collapse?
    I mean you were quoting my Nixon Shock comment. I just wonder what GDR has to do with it? But it's OK, never mind...

    Anyway as I understand you mentioned higher living standards in West Germany in comparison with GDR to demonstrate the advantages of free market. Problem is the German Wirschaftswunder would never have been achieved without non-market measures. One example is Marshal Plan. In addition AFAIK West Germans were implementing protectionist tariff policies until their economy recovered from war.

    Another problem with free market apologists is you like to compare living standards in capitalist Western Europe with those in socialist Eastern Europe yet for some reason you never mention the living standards in Third World countries which were for the most part (surprise !!!) capitalist.

    Originally posted by picanha View Post
    Since when you have to export the premium products and can't satisfy the domestic need for them at the same time?
    Since your economy may be dependent on strategic resources imports which have higher priority for population than certain consumer goods. Like oil and gas for instance. Considering the price of hydrocarbons throughout most of the 70s and 80s no wonder GDR was forced to increase her consumer goods exports causing the deficit at home. Makes perfect sense.

    Originally posted by picanha View Post
    It is called Soziale Marktwirtschaft in German don't know if it exists an english term for that. Basically evening out the fallouts of an allout capitalism. I also think thi sis teh best way to go. All profit from it even hardcore capitalists. Just keeping the balance is hard.
    Or Developed Socialism. Don't need to think that fresh ideas come exclusively to minds of Western economists. Soviet economists had always offered to introduce market elements into command economy. In tertiary sector in the first place. Eventually kooperativy were introduced in mid 80s. This idea worked pretty well as far as I remember.

    Originally posted by picanha View Post
    It depends on the motivation. See military / space exploration developmenst of the SU. Motivation to make Ivans and Ronnys life better was low though...
    Disputable. I've noticed that American arsenal was always more diverse than Soviet one. The reason for this is there was competition between several defense contractors within US military industrial complex. Same goes for aerospace sector.

    Originally posted by picanha View Post
    See point above. Regulation needed. In teh end teh market economy has way more advantages than drawbacks. Complex issue. ​

    The problem with taking away self driven initative is that it leads to stagnation eventually.
    Who's initiative? Employer's or employee's?

    When it comes to ordinary workers - Socialist workers were as motivated as their Western counterparts. Maybe even more. I spoke to many older generation people including those from Baltic States and Central Europe who you can't suspect in pro-Russian sentiment. Many of them said they felt more secure in Socialist period.

    On the other hand the innovation was more complicated in command economies. You couldnt start your own business and introduce your new ideas. Everything was supposed to be coordinated with socialist buroucracy.

    In the same way deregulated market economies become increasingly monopolized that prevent small businesses from joining the sector and introducing news ideas. You can call it some form of stagnation as well.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by picanha View Post
      Italy is indebted since the Medici infact they invented debt
      Not sure if you are serious, but they didn't.

      Originally posted by picanha View Post
      Astonishingly life is still better in Italy..
      Well if you borrow a lot of money you will live better than your neighbour who doesn't. Until the moment when you have to pay off your debts...

      Originally posted by picanha View Post
      I have many Russisn friends they say life is not good outside of St. Petersburg and Moscow.

      Though I love the Datscha some friends have outsude of Moscow (I always feel like in the Dr. Schiwago movie) it is astonishing how rural it still is there since it is only a few 100 kms away. In the EU you have access to everything in the vicinity of metropol regions. Even outside of it you smsll supwrmarkets offering everything you need. Upcatching countries like Bulgaria and some parts of Romania (may have changed haven't been there for a few years) and unpopulated areas might be the exception.

      So I still see an advantage in “freedom“ and entrepreneurship.
      Ironically you just described the consequences of free market reforms in Russia. As soon as borders were opened the cheap imports (both consumer goods and foods) have flooded the country. In result Russian light industry and agriculture concentrated in small towns and rural areas were mainly wipped out. Export-oriented heavy industry centers like Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk doing a bit better. Financial and entertainment centers like Moscow and SPb flourish.
      Last edited by m0shiach; 17-11-2017, 05:20 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by m0shiach View Post
        I mean you were quoting my Nixon Shock comment. I just wonder what GDR has to do with it? But it's OK, never mind...

        Anyway as I understand you mentioned higher living standards in West Germany in comparison with GDR to demonstrate the advantages of free market. Problem is the German Wirschaftswunder would never have been achieved without non-market measures. One example is Marshal Plan. In addition AFAIK West Germans were implementing protectionist tariff policies until their economy recovered from war.

        I don't know what you mean by that and what it has to do with capitalism and communism. One point to think about - why was the capitalist west always the culprit for wrong doings and these wrongdoings had repercussions on the mighty correct and more advantageous east? How ca a superiour system be outplayed by the inferior? I don't get it....it was not like today teh systems were thoroughly separated. A nearly 100 % confirmation of the failings of a system. Does it get any better than that? That was total defeat.

        Another problem with free market apologists is you like to compare living standards in capitalist Western Europe with those in socialist Eastern Europe yet for some reason you never mention the living standards in Third World countries which were for the most part (surprise !!!) capitalist.

        Then turn them socialist and prospring. The demise of these countries has often little top do with capitalism. I was in very poor socailist communist 3 world countries there are many. Laos, Venezuela Mozambique come to mind ever been there?

        Some are a textbook example of a failed state.



        Since your economy may be dependent on strategic resources imports which have higher priority for population than certain consumer goods. Like oil and gas for instance. Considering the price of hydrocarbons throughout most of the 70s and 80s no wonder GDR was forced to increase her consumer goods exports causing the deficit at home. Makes perfect sense.

        No it makes not. Please explain why this hasn't happened to West-Germany? We had to import the same amountsand were a leading industrial nation and exporter.
        Comrade SU duidn't give enough oil to teh GDR so they had to engage in teh market where you have to earn money first before you can spend it. I know I know a freak concept
        It exposed all the weaknesses and shortcomings of the GDRs economy.



        Or Developed Socialism. Don't need to think that fresh ideas come exclusively to minds of Western economists. Soviet economists had always offered to introduce market elements into command economy. In tertiary sector in the first place. Eventually kooperativy were introduced in mid 80s. This idea worked pretty well as far as I remember.

        Cooperativas (Kooperativen) also exist in capitalism. One of the advantages of teh evil freedom you can create your miniture socialist/ communist business. Sometimes tehy are really good and valuable.

        We still have many Genossenschaften (Also Cooperatives), my bank is one for example. I am a proprietor of my own bank for example. But thsi has nothing to do with a command ecomomy. If all it shows the better ability of uncontrolled systems to deliver diverse appraoches to diverse demands.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_banking

        My Portuguese grandpa for example delivered his grapes many decades to this cooperative which is still in operation (a cousin of mine still works there):

        http://cooppegoes.pt/pt/


        Capitalism doesn't exclude things in contrary to the command economy.



        Disputable. I've noticed that American arsenal was always more diverse than Soviet one. The reason for this is there was competition between several defense contractors within US military industrial complex. Same goes for aerospace sector.

        I just meant from a capability point of view. The lacking diversity is another direct result of the command approach. Western companies could always look for other customers abroad or in other branches see Navy Air Force.

        Who's initiative? Employer's or employee's?

        When it comes to ordinary workers - Socialist workers were as motivated as their Western counterparts. Maybe even more. I spoke to many older generation people including those from Baltic States and Central Europe who you can't suspect in pro-Russian sentiment. Many of them said they felt more secure in Socialist period.

        On the other hand the innovation was more complicated in command economies. You couldnt start your own business and introduce your new ideas. Everything was supposed to be coordinated with socialist buroucracy.

        In the same way deregulated market economies become increasingly monopolized that prevent small businesses from joining the sector and introducing news ideas. You can call it some form of stagnation as well.

        Security sure was higher than in an all out capitalism, which I do not promote by the way, but not higher than in regulated European social market economies.

        In the GDR then 5 people sat on a position intended for 2. Money then was lacking in other aereas (because you have to pay 5 workers doing the job of 2).

        For example in environmental protection or work space security.

        Thinking you know better what others want or need is bound to fail. Inherently.



        .................................................. .............................................

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by m0shiach View Post
          Not sure if you are serious, but they didn't.

          Not serious


          Well if you borrow a lot of money you will live better than your neighbour who doesn't. Until the moment when you have to pay off your debts...

          If I can repay it and everybody continues to lend I am better off than teh one not even able to borrow. I haven't followed it more closely since years, but I thoughtthe micro credit to helkp more poor people than any reality ignoring socialist project eventually resulting in the above mentioned problems of stagnation and


          Ironically you just described the consequences of free market reforms in Russia. As soon as borders were opened the cheap imports (both consumer goods and foods) have flooded the country. In result Russian light industry and agriculture concentrated in small towns and rural areas were mainly wipped out. Export-oriented heavy industry centers like Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk doing a bit better. Financial and entertainment centers like Moscow and SPb flourish.

          This is again what I don't understand. How can a system be at fault for something not existing even under the presumably better old system? I give you the SU was better in this regards than the GDR. But both failed miserably in comparison with western Europe.

          .................................................. .

          Comment

          Working...
          X