echidna

Eek, one of my pet hobby horses, fucking protectionism. Everyone's talking about food shortages and world hunger while the French farmers are busily convincing the EU to pay them to restrict their production !!!

Autonemesis

They have to keep up with the American farmers, who have enjoyed a deal a lot like that for decades. Of course, there are few American farmers to talk to about it anymore. Giant agribusiness corporations are the recipient of the bulk of farm subsidies in the US. Just another example of more corporate welfare.

Happy Wonderer

The term "State capitalist" as applied to Russia is unfamiliar to me, however if you only accept the 1900's utopian communities and Kibbutzes as "True Communist (tm)" then I'd agree that such a small community is unlikely to be able to create a chip factory. Heck, probably more people work at one Intel fab plant than have ever been in a Kibbutz or commune.

Russia was an attempt at implementing state-wide communism. I'm pretty sure that the history of Russia interests you more than the history of Sointula (a socialist commune in B.C. that was founded by Finnish utopians.)

This goes against history and psychology. For example, the President of the United States earns less than many CEOs. It is unarguably a more difficult job than a CEO job (especially in the last couple of years...) yet former CEO's still aspire to the job. Why? (I think it has something to do with the quality of the interns in Washington... ) On a more mundane level, skilled craftsmen often earn less then they could earn in an easy factory job -- why are there any left?

I think that you have it backwards. Chip plants are cheap compared to the Interstate Highway System. Neither the US or Soviet space programs could have been funded by private industry (who would give you a loan?) Although the railroads to the West were largly privately built, the US gave the builders huge incentives to build -- ten miles of land on either side of the right-of-way IIRC. This was enough of an incentive that some groups took the land and didn't build the railroad, but that is another story...

Even the chip plants rely heavily on government funding for the research programs used to improve yield and size.

Russia is pretty resource-poor per capita and per size. The quantity of resources is large, but it is spread out over a gigantic area and lots of nasty terrian. The American West was practically manna from heaven once we got rid of those pesky people who seemed to think that they lived there.

Did you know that during World War II, Russia moved a large portion of their industrial base over the Urial mountains to preserve them from the Nazi invasion? Imagine moving Detroit's factories to Canada. Pretty large project...

I can't agree with you that a communist/socialist system can't build large projects. What I agree with is that Marxian analysis fails for large societies. There is no such thing as a purely communist or purely capitalist society and in reality such a thing probably cannot occur. The US is much more of a socialist and planned economy than most of us would admit (crop subsidies as mentioned by other posters are an excellent example.) The soviets (as also mentioned) had much more of a free (black) market then they would admit. The economies were obviously different, but not in the way that Marx would have predicted.

HW

Neilium

aah, beat me to it. I was going to say, communist nations build factories the same way allegedly capitalist nations do it: state subsidies.

-neil(ium)

Vorkosigan

Did you know that during World War II, Russia moved a large portion of their industrial base over the Urial mountains to preserve them from the Nazi invasion? Imagine moving Detroit's factories to Canada. Pretty large project...

When this came up last year on WWII-L, it was exposed as a piece of Soviet propaganda. Recent work in the post-Soviet archives has shown that it never happened. I'll what I can dig up on this.

Vorkosigan

Me and Me

Since I am a Marxist-Leninist, Socialism which comes before Communism, what Marx called the Transitionary stage. In the Transitionary stage, in which the Soviet Union and all other Socialist countries are in, they get the materials to open factories by trading through a centralized economy, in where the economy is planned out by a State membership basis. They decide on what to sell and what they need more of and all that. The reason for wanting to open a business in this situation would be to create enough resources to make sure that the society would be well off.

Loren Pechtel

Stocks were started in order to make money circulate at a faster rate. Example: If you own a company, and I buy stocks from you, that is cash going to you, this enables you to build your business up from selling stocks, this adds to the income that the business itself brings in. If you don't sell stocks than you will make money at a slower rate than your competitors.

Happy Wonderer

Er, an awful lot of people were taken in then. (IIRC including the Germans who cited it post-war as one of the effects of the delay of operation Barbaraossa.) I'd like to know any more that you can find out. I'd be willing to believe that after the war the Soviets exaggerated the amount of factories moved, and during the war they certainly didn't really publicize the help they were getting from their (new) allies. I'd also be willing to believe that they didn't keep meticulous records -- they were getting invaded after all...

However:
Blood, Tears and Folly: an objective look at World War II; Len Deighton; Castle Books 1998; pp 453.

Alas, Deighton doesn't do a great job of citing his sources, so I don't know what he is basing it on. (Happened to be the most recent and handy book and after typing all that in I'm damn well not going to hunt for another reference...)

HW

Loren Pechtel

Originally posted by Happy Wonderer
The term "State capitalist" as applied to Russia is unfamiliar to me,

Look at the Marxists on here--I got the term from them and I think it describes the reality of countries like the USSR better than their supposed communist.

however if you only accept the 1900's utopian communities and Kibbutzes as "True Communist (tm)" then I'd agree that such a small community is unlikely to be able to create a chip factory. Heck, probably more people work at one Intel fab plant than have ever been in a Kibbutz or commune.

I doubt your number of workers for the chip factory is right--they are so expensive because of the robotics (when you are cutting to micron-range scales contamination is a *BIG* issue--on that scale, humans are DIRTY.) not because of the number of people.
I do think that the groups you refer to are the largest examples of true communism the world has seen. There are plenty of smaller examples, though--a marriage of equals is communism.

This goes against history and psychology. For example, the President of the United States earns less than many CEOs. It is unarguably a more difficult job than a CEO job (especially in the last couple of years...) yet former CEO's still aspire to the job. Why?

Note that total benefits can be very different than pay. That's what's up with the presidency and even elected office in general. What you get from being the president isn't $, it's power and prestige.

I think that you have it backwards. Chip plants are cheap compared to the Interstate Highway System.

But the highway system can be built piecemeal by each group acting in it's own interest.

Neither the US or Soviet space programs could have been funded by private industry (who would give you a loan?)

Agreed--this is another example of a project which is simply too large for a true communist system to do.

I can't agree with you that a communist/socialist system can't build large projects.

I never said socialist systems can't.

The US is much more of a socialist and planned economy than most of us would admit (crop subsidies as mentioned by other posters are an excellent example.)

Agreed.

Loren Pechtel

You sell stock to raise money to open or expand a business. I don't see how what you are saying conflicts with this.

Vorkosigan

Er, an awful lot of people were taken in then. (IIRC including the Germans who cited it post-war as one of the effects of the delay of operation Barbaraossa.)

Yes, an awful lot were. Just as they were about Soviet claims about lend-lease prior to the fall of the USSR, and about Soviet loss claims as well (the last note I heard about was in the Journal of Slavic military studies and the Sov records show human losses in excess of 40 million. Don't know what the figures are now). The Sovs took a lot of people in.

Unfortunately the only data I can find on it is the highly unreliable stuff at the Holocaust revisionist IHR. <sigh> I don't have any of my WWII books anymore. I'll see if I can track down the original post at WWII-L.

Vorkosigan