Almost as if some means of production and commodities don’t make sense on small scale and require trade, which requires creation of commodities for world trade. which in turn means small nation either have to freeze in time anprim style or have little a capitalism as a treat.
Edit: to slightly expand what I mean, investing in new means of productions however requires capitalism, unless investing entity is not capitalist by themselves. To trade they will either have to trade what they have, which is not a lot, or trade labor power.
I don’t think legalization of small businesses is a problem as such, however co-ops of externally tradeable goods (tobacco, rum, tourism) can create inequality between them and internal coops like farming and construction. However, I’m not super familiar with their planned liberalization, I.e. which sectors will be affected or taxes on them.
There's a couple problems with trying to integrate into the world trade at the moment, besides the lifeline sweetheart deals with Iran and Venezuela that Cuba has already long used.
One of them is the crushing and illegal blockade from the US, which contracts and expands periodically in order to not only prohibit some goods and deals from being made with Cuba, but introduce uncertainty in how long any deal will be legal, putting a chilling effect on any possible deal, even if it's legal.
The second is that world capital is ideological. What I mean is that labor and goods are literally valuated based on the political ideology of the nation they come from. Remember when Argentina elected a Perónist president recently? When Fernández even just won the primary, the entire economy of the country was immediately re-evaluated 30% down . No policy changed, no politician even changed, and it wasn't futures or stocks, but the currency itself that took a 33% nosedive on the prospects of a left populist getting elected there. This, IMO, is the more chilling problem for any use of world trade by a socialist project. Neo-liberalism means that, globally, your products will be struck with an "ideology tax" and it will be even more uphill the entire way.
Because unless you wait for continental size revolution containing simultaneously all resources and fully developed production in one place you’ll always be forced in unequal exchanges with capitalist states? Like there is no pretty solution here
Almost as if some means of production and commodities don’t make sense on small scale and require trade, which requires creation of commodities for world trade. which in turn means small nation either have to freeze in time anprim style or have little a capitalism as a treat.
markets ≠ capitalism
True, and I'd say this sounds like an example of market exchanges that don't rise to the level of capitalism.
So?
Edit: to slightly expand what I mean, investing in new means of productions however requires capitalism, unless investing entity is not capitalist by themselves. To trade they will either have to trade what they have, which is not a lot, or trade labor power.
deleted by creator
I don’t think legalization of small businesses is a problem as such, however co-ops of externally tradeable goods (tobacco, rum, tourism) can create inequality between them and internal coops like farming and construction. However, I’m not super familiar with their planned liberalization, I.e. which sectors will be affected or taxes on them.
deleted by creator
There's a couple problems with trying to integrate into the world trade at the moment, besides the lifeline sweetheart deals with Iran and Venezuela that Cuba has already long used.
One of them is the crushing and illegal blockade from the US, which contracts and expands periodically in order to not only prohibit some goods and deals from being made with Cuba, but introduce uncertainty in how long any deal will be legal, putting a chilling effect on any possible deal, even if it's legal.
The second is that world capital is ideological. What I mean is that labor and goods are literally valuated based on the political ideology of the nation they come from. Remember when Argentina elected a Perónist president recently? When Fernández even just won the primary, the entire economy of the country was immediately re-evaluated 30% down . No policy changed, no politician even changed, and it wasn't futures or stocks, but the currency itself that took a 33% nosedive on the prospects of a left populist getting elected there. This, IMO, is the more chilling problem for any use of world trade by a socialist project. Neo-liberalism means that, globally, your products will be struck with an "ideology tax" and it will be even more uphill the entire way.
It's almost like all "AESC" were always capitalist, and that state capitalism became conflated with socialism.
Because unless you wait for continental size revolution containing simultaneously all resources and fully developed production in one place you’ll always be forced in unequal exchanges with capitalist states? Like there is no pretty solution here