suprising map showing how rich eastern europe used to be in 1965

[Hochmeister]

Are you laughing at your ignorance?

[Styggnacke]

Madeleine Albright once said, that the Soviet economy had been the main threat for the USA, not Communism.

Yes, Soviet economy was superior and extremely innovative:

[Žołnir]

Are you laughing at your ignorance?

No but i don't need some wierd maps to know bout Yuga. It's quite sufficient to know bout it from my grandmas and grandpas who were born before SFRJ existed. Let alone from other relatives, etc. I dunno bout Hungary or any other east Euro state but as far as Yuga goes i know enough, so no from what i hear bout it i don't want another Yuga.

[Hochmeister]

No but i don't need some wierd maps to know bout Yuga. It's quite sufficient to know bout it from my grandmas and grandpas who were born before SFRJ existed. Let alone from other relatives, etc. I dunno bout Hungary or any other east Euro state but as far as Yuga goes i know enough, so no from what i hear bout it i don't want another Yuga.

I don't know about Yugoslavia (was it a part of Comecon? No, as I recollect it). But the East Bloc had more economical potential than Western Europe.

[Hochmeister]

Yes, Soviet economy was superior and extremely innovative:

The Soviet economy was the first in Europe in the days of Stalin (it was called "Russian economical miracle"). But it has flaws, especially after 1960's (Khrushchev). Nevertheless, Soviet Union was able to exist and develop in a total isolation.

[inactive_member]

gorbachov was right the soviet union needed reform but jelzins massive privatization advocated by the west was what destroyed the former eastern european economies.

Privatisation in Russia and Ukraine was a mess. I am recalling the infamous phrase of Victor Chernomyrdin - "хотели как лучше, а получилось, как всегда!"

I listened to story from a top Belarusian politician saying the government wanted to privatise one of Belarusian production factories. The factory is producing chemicals and fertilizers. Many believe the production of machinery bring the most revenues to Belarus, but afaik it's production of chemicals that brings the most revenues from exports. Anyway, the factory has been a profitable factory since Soviet times. The management ran evaluation accepting offers from various bidders. There was an interest from wealthy Russian businessmen offering Belarusian government half-price plus a kick-back (откат) to those who would sign the deal. The deal did not go ahead becoming known to the public. That’s the kind of activities crippled Russia in the 90s haunting the country to present day. It started during Yeltsin period when the wealth of the country was acquired for penny worth by criminal organisations. Similar problems existed in Ukraine. This has not happened in Belarus and Belarus has a chance to learn from the experience of its neighbour on how _not_ to privatise its factories.

[Hochmeister]

By the way

[Permafrost]

Dear Lord, not the soviet speech again.

The gallows would be a much kinder fate than watching my nation suffer again under communist tiranny.

And no, centrally planned economy was not viable nor it will ever be, since central planning involves ignoring the demand and then regulate supply through a state apparatus. Now, this might have been effective in certain segments right after the war, however as soon as you have a diversified economy it becomes utterly useless and detrimental. And then total chaos ensues, as we have witnessed in the Soviet Union, as we have witnessed in Shitoslavia.

And mind you this is the damage it causes solely on an economical level. You know, they say the land east of the deutsch–deutsche Grenze (which used to be a pearl of the German state) shall never again be the same...

[RussiaPrussia]

Dear Lord, not the soviet speech again.

The gallows would be a much kinder fate than watching my nation suffer again under communist tiranny.

And no, centrally planned economy was not viable nor it will ever be, since central planning involves ignoring the demand and then regulate supply through a state apparatus. Now, this might have been effective in certain segments right after the war, however as soon as you have a diversified economy it becomes utterly useless and detrimental. And then total chaos ensues, as we have witnessed in the Soviet Union, as we have witnessed in Shitoslavia.

And mind you this is the damage it causes solely on an economical level. You know, they say the land east of the deutsch–deutsche Grenze (which used to be a pearl of the German state) shall never again be the same...

the reason why communism failed so much is not so much because of government control but because the system had no inflation, interest rates and no debt. People wouldnt shop in empty stores if merchandiser could just increase the price for the products. Companies couldnt debt themselves to different institions which means they couldnt take a risk. No debt no internist rates, but companies need interest rates so they want to grow in order to pay them. Thats why we constantly hear about how we have grow and how it is important because we need to grow to pay interest. Communism everything belonged to the state they just get a budget without any liabilities.

And east germany is so poor not because of communism but because the politicians gave them the west mark instead an own currency. They also privatisated everything in the most stupid way worse what russia experienced.

[RussiaPrussia]

Yes, Soviet economy was superior and extremely innovative:

it was.

most highest structure in europe was build at that time as well as other buildings which were the highest skycrapers for a long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostankino_Tower

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Sisters_(Moscow)

if youre so much better build something higher


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_...usiness_Center

at least capitalist russia can