ElectricDesign

Certified Zigger

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@CosmicHighway75 @Nimdauax @mcsquared34 Like do you even read my posts?

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

Nationalization only hurts it due to them running them as non-profit bureaucratic entities.

Capitalist countries and socialist countries with centrally planned economies tend to treat state-owned enterprises as nothing more than non-profit bureaucratic entities.

State-owned enterprises which can fire and hire their own workers, have to pay for their own expenses or go bankrupt, can retain a portion of their profits to reinvest into production, have to negotiate with suppliers for contracts, have to compete with other state-owned enterprises for shelf space, and have to convince state-owned banks to lend to them are profitable.

They retain both the positives of free market capitalism (profitability and innovation) and centrally planned economies (state directed macroeconomic control).

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

And this proves my point. East Germany and the Soviet Union surpassed Greece’s GDP per capita while achieving much more equal living standards despite the lack of market reforms including profitability.

With market socialist reforms (self-financing, profit-retaining, etc) these economies would have been far larger.

Soviet economic growth during the 8th Five Year Plan when it implemented market socialist reforms was 50% which was literally double the economic growth they had in the 9th Five Year Plan after they dropped market socialist reforms DESPITE having a large influx of money from oil due to the 1973 oil crisis.

This was despite these economic reforms only being rolled back before they could be fully implemented.

This essentially means the Soviet Union’s GDP per capita of $9200 (small for such a large and industrialized country) would have been double that by 1989 if the reforms were fully implemented. And that is likely an understatement due to me extrapolating partial reforms not fully implemented ones. Economic growth would also be compounded by the entire CMEA implementing similar reforms if Kosygin won the power struggle.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

First and foremost, the GDP per capita here is severely distorted due to the inability to convert each other’s currency. Soviet GDP per capita was closer to $9,200 and East Germany had a GDP per capita of $9,679.

Secondly, you didn’t read my posts. Their economies stagnated due to them rolling back their market socialist reforms in the sixties.

Slovenia (part of Yugoslavia) had a GDP per capita of $12,383 with it being larger than Japan and the UK’s GDP per capita in 1979 due to market socialist reforms before stagnating due to the 1979 energy crisis (which also stagnated some capitalist economies as well).

The New Economic System, New Economic Mechanism, New System of Management, New Economic Model, and the Soviet Union’s 1965 economic reforms would have led to state-owned enterprises becoming self-financing and profit-retaining.

The economy would no longer be micromanaged. The state planning committee would only control macroeconomic targets and could only control state-owned enterprises indirectly via state orders and access to capital.

But these reforms were all rolled back in 1968.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@CosmicHighway75 @Nimdauax @mcsquared34 This literally adds profit incentive. You are literally not reading my posts.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

Profitability.

SOEs which are not profitable are bankrupt and are then liquidated, restructured, or merged just like private enterprises.

However, these reforms were rolled back in 1968 leading to economic stagnation.

And I can show other pictures of East Germany which was surprisingly successful despite rolling back its market socialist reforms.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

Nope. There have been no serious attempts made by capitalist countries where state-owned enterprises are made self-financing, profit-retaining, and autonomous economic entities with the exception of the Russian Federation and the modern People’s Republic of China.

The Russian Federation’s economy is dominated by state-owned enterprises in the form of joint-stock enterprises whose shares are entirely owned by the state either directly (via the Federal Agency for State Property Management) or indirectly via state-owned holding companies such as Rostec.

Nearly every Russian automotive maker is a state-owned enterprise. AvtoVAZ GaZ, KAMAZ are all state-owned.

Nearly every convenience store in Russia is owned by the state via a subsidiary of Gazprom.

Sberbank dominates the finance industry in Russia and is one of the most profitable companies in Russia.

China’s big four state-owned automotive companies literally are so profitable that Europe has to implement protectionist policies.

Outside of Russia, China, and the few existing market socialist states, these state-owned enterprises are treated as non-profit bureaucratic entities outside of a few half-assed attempts to make them “profitable” without giving them the actual autonomy to become profitable (control over prices, ability to retain profits, hire and fire their own employees, ability to negotiate with state-owned or even private commercial banks for lines of credit, etc).

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

You’re looking at one form of socialism. A fully centrally planned economy is not the only form of socialism.

There is also market socialism which the Eastern Bloc attempted to implement in the sixties which included profitability being one of the main indicators of success. But they were all rolled back in 1968 due to the backlash caused by Prague Spring and due to the party apparatus (Leonid Brezhnev) winning the power struggle against the state apparatus (Alexei Kosygin).

These reforms were very successful. The Yugoslav republic of Slovenia was wealthier than Japan and the UK in per capita terms. The United States itself stated that the New Economic System of East Germany

Cuba itself has implemented market socialist reforms including making state-owned enterprises self-financing (they have to make profit and have to pay for their own expenses) or they face restructuring into cooperatives or liquidation. However, these reforms don’t work due to the current economic embargo on Cuba which is a small island and doesn’t have the resources to become fully self sufficient.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@CosmicHighway75 @Nimdauax @mcsquared34 So basically it’s normal that Cuba’s economy stagnated especially after the collapse of the USSR due to the inability to trade.

Trade wasn’t anti-socialist. Ever heard of the CMEA and the Soviet Union’s trade bloc? Are you arguing that 1960s Hungary wasn’t socialist?

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@asachixv @Aleksandar88338 Tactical nukes are merely large bombs and using them would have destroyed the offensive the second it started.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@asachixv @Aleksandar88338 Troop movements. Ukrainian 2022 Kharkov offensive still used large number of forces. Many times larger than the 15K force Russia had.

Use tactical nukes just like how they were planned to be used in the Cold War.

Armored formations and logistics.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@MK_Foxbat This is an argument I see all of the time but it makes no sense. Killing off the leadership of Ukraine will both destroy morale and create large amounts of shock.

Plus Ukraine does have some extremely competent generals that should be killed.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@Aleksandar88338 Monke didn’t enforce his red line again. He probably got convinced by Europe not to strike decision-making centers.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@Namitapumori You monster

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@Zlatti_71 Russia said they were going to attack decision making centers. Don’t tell me monke back down again.

[ElectricDesign @ElectricD704591]

@lobberstorm141 Sounds like a bot purge. X is stupid and suspends regular people.