How much longer must the United States, in its dealings with Cuba, will continue its futile and ossified policy of frustrating the very sort of trade that made the US the wonder and envy of the world. China turned the threat of a truculent Taiwan into a blessing and a source of its own strength through economic openness, to the benefit of the people of both places. The United States, champion of free markets to the end of the Twentieth Century, let China beat it at its own game. [Full Article]
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/3435/how-to-deal-with-a-threatening-island/
How To Deal With a Threatening Island
Previous post: The Stateless Internet
Next post: The Online German Job Auctioneer
{ 7 comments }
I’ve never understood why Cuba with the whole wide world to trade with, finds it vital to trade with the US? Are they looking for credit?
Ron,
As I understand it, as a result of U.S. policy Cuba is not exactly free to trade with everyone besides the U.S. I believe that as part of its embargo policy the government brings a fair amount of pressure to bear on even non-U.S. companies that want to both trade with Cuba and do business in the U.S. Using its ability to pressure companies who want access to U.S. markets, the American government can affect Cuba’s trade with other countries indirectly even if they do not participate in any kind of trade sanctions. Perhaps someone else has more knowledge of this situation than I do, however.
Cuba is free to trade with a variety of nations around the world, and not all companies are going to be subject to repercussions from the US government. China is the perfect example. It’s Castro that makes life miserable on the island, not necessarily the US embargo.
I agree that the embargo is a failure in the sense that it has helped to solidify Castro’s control over the island rather than remove him from power. However, if the embargo was removed, do not expect Cuba to become the next Dubai overnight. Castro, his brother Raoul, and other communist party officials have a strangle hold over the island. They ration what people eat, what they can read, write & learn, etc. They also control who works where, when and how. All of the casinos, “tourism”, etc. going on in Cuba right now fills Castro’s bank vaults, not anyone else’s. So embargo or not, things won’t get better until someone kills Castro and his friends (or they all die).
I also want to comment on Mr. Potts assertion that Cuban Americans aren’t entitled to get compensation back for their stolen property. If someone steals something from me, and I see, say 20 years later, someone selling that property in the form of money or the item itself, I damn well should have recourse to reclaim that item or at least its value, especially when there’s documented prove via old insurance forms or whatever. Since everything in Cuba is controlled by their government (there is no private property in Cuba, period), any seized properties from business dealings is essentially the stolen loot the Cuban government possessed. It’s just like a thief stealing my car radio, and then the police say I’m not able to get anything back after Joe Bob buys it from him.
One more thing. Any lift of the embargo from our government needs to be taken into light concerning what our government believes is “free trade”. “Free trade” is more like regulated trade, which means our government will provide import-export insurnace to bail out ADM and other corporations after Castro burns them big time, as he has with several multinational corporations OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Instead of the company and shareholders taking the lost though, they like taxpayers to do it. So at least keep that in mind before jumping on the “trade with Cuba” bandwagon.
So what should be done? The embargo should be lifted, but likewise, restrictions on attacks against the Cuban government, along with arms shipments, should be lifted as well. Our Coast Guard is bound to ensure that no exiles take it to Castro themselves. This is not going to happen any time soon unfortunately, and neither will true “free trade” occur. We’ll continue to see more political plays and state backed/subsidized deals with American corporations “trading” with the Cuban government at our expense.
Everyone should go out and read Humberto Fontova’s new book about Cuba, “Fidel: Hollywood’s Favorite Tyrant”.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895260433/qid=1112906739/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-0435493-8503151?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
I would have liked to have seen a more in depth narrative, but Humberto does a splendid job describing a lot of the dirt behind the whole Cuban disaster. Much of it was brought on by our own government and even some of Cuba’s richest citizens, whom all regret what they did to allow Castro to gain power after the fact.
Disclaimer: I’m friends with Humberto, so I will always advertise his books
Considering that I’m the descendant of United Empire Loyalists, when should I expect compensation for the private-owned land in & around Boston that rebels stole from my family back during the Revolutionary War?
That stolen land is probably worth tens-of-millions by now…
Vanmind:
There is no “right” to your ancestor’s property, but Cubans had their own property stolen from them.
I think I understand. All we have to do is wait for some old Cubans to die, and then no one can ever again say bad things about the revolution of Castro & Che.
Opening trade with Cuba ideally would force an educated population with a sure to be growing level of prosperity to counter the Castro regime. Cubans are itching to get their hands on private businesses, even if they are less reluctant to let go of entitlements in the process. Free trade would accomplish the goal of liberalizing Cuba to the point where Castro meets some civil force, triggering an initial backlash before a larger decline of the regime.
But as Mr Rapp pointed out, “free trade” in the American and European context doesn’t mean free trade. It’s just regulated trading pacts with other countries, creating a sort of protectionism that arches over entire regions. NAFTA, the WTO and others, however, all degenerated into bureaucratic back scratching with no real regard for liberalized trade. Thus, if Cuba were opened, the likelihood that trade will have the effect it should have is small. That is part of the larger problem with this mutated brand of “globalization.”
Comments on this entry are closed.