Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Government The Almighty Buck Politics Technology

Cuba Calculates Cost of 54yr US Embargo At $1.1 Trillion 540

First time accepted submitter ltorvalds11 writes Cuba says its economy is suffering a "systematic worsening" due to a US embargo, the consequences of which Havana places at $1.1 trillion since Washington imposed the sanctions in 1960, taking into account the depreciation of the dollar against gold. "There is not, and there has not been in the world, such a terrorizing and vile violation of human rights of an entire people than the blockade that the US government has been leading against Cuba for 55 years," Cuban Deputy Foreign Minister Abelardo Moreno told reporters. He also blamed the embargo for the difficulties in accessing internet on the island, saying that the United States creates an obstacle for companies providing broadband services in Cuba. Additionally, he said that the area is one of the "most sensitive" to the embargo, with economic losses estimated at $34.2 million. It is also the sector that has fallen "victim of all kinds of attacks" by the US, as violations of the Cuban radio or electronic space "promote destabilization" of Cuban society, the report notes. The damage to Cuban foreign trade between April 2013 and June 2014 amounted to $3.9 billion, the report said. Without the embargo, Cuba could have earned $205.8 million selling products such as rum and cigars to US consumers. Barack Obama last week signed the one-year extension of the embargo on Cuba, based on the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, created to restrict trade with countries hostile to the U.S..
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cuba Calculates Cost of 54yr US Embargo At $1.1 Trillion

Comments Filter:
  • RT.com? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 11, 2014 @04:41AM (#47878591)

    Russian propaganda. These are the same idiots who claimed Russia wasn't ever invading Ukraine.

    • Re:RT.com? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 11, 2014 @05:00AM (#47878639)

      Well, RT is about as reliable as Fox News. If you assume that everything said is complete lies and the few things that are true are extremely skewed then you are pretty close to the truth.
      With that said, the US embargo against Cuba has not exactly been beneficial to either of the nations. All this time since the cold war could have been spent bringing Cuba closer to the US. Just opening up a bit with regards to trading would have done a lot.
      A better Cuban economy would benefit the US (How about cheap manufacturing on Cuba instead of in China?) and having a trading partner that close instead of a potential enemy there is a pretty nice deal.
      In my opinion the stance US has towards Cuba is pretty retarded.

      • Re:RT.com? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 11, 2014 @05:06AM (#47878661)

        RT is directly controlled by the Russian govern.. well, Putin. I would say that makes Fox News slightly more trustworthy.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Fox News is controlled by Rupert Murdoch, I haven't decided who is worse yet.

          • Re:RT.com? (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 11, 2014 @05:56AM (#47878807)

            I think you will find that far fewer Ukrainians have died because of Rupert Murcoch.

            • by Nimey ( 114278 )

              Thankfully Murdoch would rather be the power behind the throne instead, because I'd rather not give him the chance to be in charge of a government.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward

              But far more Iraqi's did.

        • by NoKaOi ( 1415755 )

          RT is directly controlled by the Russian govern.. well, Putin. I would say that makes Fox News slightly more trustworthy.

          In US, Fox News controls the government.

    • Re:RT.com? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dave420 ( 699308 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @07:01AM (#47879087)

      Why is this +5? Yes, RT.com frequently publishes propaganda, but this story is available on any number of alternative news sites, and is based entirely on a report from the Cuban government itself. Unless you are suggesting RT.com has made the Cuban government write & publish this report, your comment is a fine example of an "ad hominem", and should be ignored as such.

    • Re:RT.com? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by NotDrWho ( 3543773 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @07:44AM (#47879311)

      The U.S. embargo against Cuba is Russian propaganda??

  • by src1138 ( 212903 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @04:51AM (#47878619)

    "There is not, and there has not been in the world, such a terrorizing and vile violation of human rights of an entire people than the blockade that the US government has been leading against Cuba for 55 years,"

    Ha ha ha ha! Funny guy. He needs to read a history book - or even a current weekly magazine.

    Abretardo Morono - pushing the limits of ignorant hyperbole!

    • $1.1 billion over 55 years is $20 billion/year, in a country with a GDP of ~$70 billion, so that arguably puts the embargo into the category of 'surprisingly effective; if not exactly at achieving any of the US' alleged objectives'.

      When it comes to 'terrorizing and vile violations of human rights', though, that barely registers. Did this guy sleep through the entire 20th century?
      • $20bn against $70bn does sound super effective. Now adjust for inflation over 55 years and I bet this past years "damages" were well over $20bn.

        • I am genuinely baffled at how the embargo is supposed to support US policy interests(either idealistic, cynical, or both); but alleged damages that high do seem to suggest that the "It's pointless, they'll just trade with the EU and BRIC and things" theory is limited at best. I honestly would have expected a smaller effect myself. I just can't fathom why anyone thinks it's a worthwhile plan.
          • I am genuinely baffled at how the embargo is supposed to support US policy interests(either idealistic, cynical, or both); but alleged damages that high do seem to suggest that the "It's pointless, they'll just trade with the EU and BRIC and things" theory is limited at best. I honestly would have expected a smaller effect myself. I just can't fathom why anyone thinks it's a worthwhile plan.

            At this point the embargo is there solely for the "I'm right as long as I don't admit I was wrong" effect. In that regard, it is highly effective. The other possible explanation is to serve as a warning to others (i.e. nations with resources we might actually want, such as Bolivia, Venezuela, etc) such that they know any further steps toward socialism would lead to economic disaster even worse that what they have already endured.

    • I think we have heard from a group of people more unaware than Fox News listeners.
  • I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Torp ( 199297 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @04:54AM (#47878629)

    The righteous communists have a need to trade with the capitalist imperialists? Won't the ghost of Stalin provide for all?

    • The righteous communists have a need to trade with the capitalist imperialists? Won't the ghost of Stalin provide for all?

      Only once the whole world is communist. In the mean time...

    • Re:I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PolygamousRanchKid ( 1290638 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @05:27AM (#47878725)

      If Cuba had oil . . . the embargo would be over really fast.

      Cuban cigar smokers in the US don't have a PAC to push through changes. They're just not a big enough special interest group.

      • Cuban cigar smokers in the US don't have a PAC to push through changes. They're just not a big enough special interest group.

        Rich people can get Cuban cigars without any problem whatsoever, embargo or not. Hell, JFK smoked Havanas during the Cuban missile crisis.

        Normal rules and laws don't apply to the one percentile...

      • No it wouldn't. The embargo is only about pacifying Cuban-American voters. If it was to battle communism then we wouldn't have normalized trade relations with Vietnam.

    • Re:I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) * on Thursday September 11, 2014 @06:37AM (#47878995) Homepage Journal

      I don't think you understand how communism is supposed to work. Trade is desirable as long as the benefits are shared with the workers not just the private owners.

      How can you hate something you know so little about?

    • What I don't get is how a refusal to trade is a "human rights" issue. Nobody has a "human right" to force someone else to sell things to them (or to force someone else to buy their stuff).

      There might be valid complaints about the embargo, but "human rights" isn't one of them.

  • by NicBenjamin ( 2124018 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @04:57AM (#47878633)

    Works to something like $20 Billion a year. That's a credible figure. We do $650 billion with Canada in a year, and Cuba ain't that much smaller.

    The problem with their argument is that whenever a US President tries to reduce tensions, they do something to ratchet them back up. For example, Obama was inaugurated in Jan of '09, announces easing the embargo by allowing families in the US to visit and send money more easily in April, and by December some poor schmuck (Alan Gross) is rotting in a Cuban jail for bringing computer equipment in for Jewish groups. It's true that if you're an evil dictatorship stopping your local people from doing that is not unreasonable, and it;s true our government paid for it, but it's also true that you could easily stop him seizing his computers and deporting his ass. Now if Obama ever does anything nice for Cuba (such as sticking his neck out on ending the embargo) people supporting the embargo strongly have a trump card: why would we trade with a country that is holding one of our guys in prison for the crime of helping people access the internet?

    It would cost them literally nothing to let this guy go, but they insist on keeping him in prison where he can only prevent them from accessing that $20 billion a year export market.

    Which means most independent observers have long concluded the Castros like the embargo, because it allows them to claim everything that is wrong with the country is Evil Foreign Gringo's fault. Which justifies things like arresting guys for bringing in computer equipment.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Which is all the more reason to lift the embargo, so that this lie can not be told any more. Without the embargo the current regime would probably have a lot more trouble staying in power.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by drfred79 ( 2936643 )
        Venezuela is an excellent counter argument. They are becoming just as dictatorial and scapegoating the United States. But the current administration turns a blind eye to ideological equals. The embargo is not a contributing factor. We need to stop ignoring and forgetting Cuba and blast their human rights violations.
        • by dave420 ( 699308 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @07:18AM (#47879159)
          Scapegoating? That would imply the US's hands are clean, which it seems they probably are not, as the US supported the military coup against a democratically-elected leader, something South & Central America does not take too lightly, given the US's track record of destroying democracy in those regions.
    • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @05:15AM (#47878691)

      Right, but it's still an utterly stupid policy.

      If America had just allowed free trade with Cuba the inflow of US culture into the country would've long turned it into a pro-US state - it's the policy of isolation that's keeping it hostile in the first place.

      There's no way a country that small, and that close to the US could hold out as a communist nation in the face of unrestricted trade with the US - it'd become so utterly dependent on the US that it'd simply have no choice but to bow down to US wishes and culture.

      There are times where I do support the US (strikes against IS, stance on Ukraine) and there are times where I'll happily call it out as stupid (Iraq), this is one of those times where it's stupid, where the policy is wholly self-defeating, and where the only people that suffer from the policy are the largely innocent general populace of Cuba.

      The fall of the USSR was a prime opportunity to turn Cuba around, Russia facing bankruptcy withdrew almost all funding for Cuba and left it in the shit. Had the US taken that opportunity to drop restrictions, and normalise relations then Cuba would be as ex-USSR and as pro-USA as Poland is nowadays. Instead, the US continued it's bone-headed embargos such that now that Russia is becoming a resurgent pain in the ass Cuba is more than happy to take money to facilitate the reopening of the USSR's largest external listening base right off the coast of the US on Cuban soil.

      As foreign policy goes, the US' policy on Cuba is probably one of the single most stupid and short-sighted foreign policies there is.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by Archtech ( 159117 )

        "...US culture..."

        What is that?

        • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @06:32AM (#47878967)

          I would presume that that question is an attempt to bait me into saying "freedom", "democracy" and so forth so that you can say hogwash and point to examples where American's freedoms have been curbed, or democracy has been a farce.

          But I'm more pragmatic than that, American culture is imperfect, it has flaws, many of them, but there's also one thing that's clear - it's responsible for better levels of wealth, education, and freedom than you find in communist dictatorships.

          So to answer your question, US culture is, simply put, not communist dictatorship culture, it's something that's objectively better for most people, it's not perfect, but it doesn't need to be - better is good enough.

      • it'd become so utterly dependent on the US that it'd simply have no choice but to bow down to US wishes and culture.

        So we should open trade with Cuba so they become a free and open vassal state to the US?

      • by Livius ( 318358 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @06:22AM (#47878919)

        The purpose of the policy is not economic or ideological, it is to punish a country that chose to stop being an US colony and actually exercise the independence that was only supposed to be on paper.

        Cuba is hardly a model of economic progress or human rights, but that's not the reason.

        Very much like Iran.

        • by bazorg ( 911295 )

          I thought the reason for punishment was that the cold war balance of power was disrupted by Cuba in a way that many millions of people USA could have lost a nuclear war before the USA could fire their own missiles at the USSR. Did I get that totally wrong from this side of the Atlantic?

          • by isilrion ( 814117 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @10:07AM (#47880537)

            Did I get that totally wrong from this side of the Atlantic?

            Kind of. The embargo started two years before the missile crisis [wikipedia.org], so unless there was some time travel involved, the missile crisis did not cause the embargo. (Of course, it also didn't make it better.) It started also before the failed Bay of Pigs invasion [wikipedia.org] that forced Cuba to fully ally with the Soviet Union, which paved the way to the missile crisis.

            The embargo was retaliation for the nationalization of american properties in 1960, which, to my recollection (but I hated history classes, so I'm probably wrong), occurred in response to the owners shutting down production to destabilize the newly formed government. During the missile crisis it briefly evolved into a full blown blockade. After the missile crisis, it has gotten worse ("due" to the continuing alliance with the soviets), until the fall of the Soviets... when it got even worse (Torricelli act, 1992).

            I.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

        Europe gets a lot of US culture and still dislikes it. House and Game of Thrones don't excuse all the other stuff I'm afraid. And anyway most of the actors are English.

        • by Xest ( 935314 )

          Right, but there's a massive gulf between European distaste for US culture, and say, Chinese or Russian distaste for US culture.

          On one hand you have Europe, that makes a few measly complaints but on the most part doesn't care. On the other you have countries that want to whipe it off the face of the earth altogether and replace it with some kind of authoritarianism.

          Having the latter a few miles off your coast is always going to be a much worse proposition than the former, yet it's one the US consistently an

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

            If you think China and Russia really want to wipe you off the face of the earth you have been brainwashed by the propaganda.

    • by iris-n ( 1276146 )

      As far as I know the Cuban government wanted to exchange this guy for Cuban prisioners kept by the US, the Cuban Five [wikipedia.org]. The US refused.

      These Cubans went to the US to disrupt the operations of anti-Castro terrorist organizations based on Miami, and for that they were sentenced to 15 years in jail, the same sentence that befell the American guy.

      So I do understand that Cuba wouldn't want to give up on their only bargaining chip to free its agents. It's a sad state of affairs, really. So much could be gained if

      • The "they were only trying to stop fanatical anti-Castro terrorism" story is their version. The US version is that Cuban Five were also trying to infiltrate Southern Command, which is the US Military command responsible for everything we do in Latin America. Moreover the Cubans used intelligence from one of the Five to destroy that Cessna they blew up back in '98. The Cuban story isn't particularly credible. If you're Cuba you don't send five spies to the US without a side mission of "infiltrate the Souther

    • by nbauman ( 624611 )

      whenever a US President tries to reduce tensions, they do something to ratchet them back up. For example, Obama was inaugurated in Jan of '09, announces easing the embargo by allowing families in the US to visit and send money more easily in April, and by December some poor schmuck (Alan Gross) is rotting in a Cuban jail for bringing computer equipment in for Jewish groups.

      why would we trade with a country that is holding one of our guys in prison for the crime of helping people access the internet?

      It would cost them literally nothing to let this guy go, but they insist on keeping him in prison

      The article on Gross in Wikipedia is pretty good http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org] and the linked article in The Forward is pretty good too. Gross worked for Development Alternatives, a contractor for the USAID and other government agencies, possibly including the CIA, which was involved in some development projects in places like Afghanistan and Iraq where they were an arm of the U.S. military. The Venezuelan government accused them of giving support to the rebels trying to overthrow the Chavez government.

  • We're sorry but Cuban political prisoners were not available for comment. Electrical engineers had attempted to increase internet access in Cuba but fled to the freedom of the United States when they were told censorship doesn't allow true internet with scary freedom of speech. http://youtu.be/v5zmNRGAUQY [youtu.be]
  • I was in Cuba earlier this year. They seem to be doing OK for themselves.

    Sure, there are towns outside of Havana and Trinidad where there isn't a lot to do, but I didn't see any real evidence of extreme poverty.

    As far as I could see, the only thing the embargo is doing is preventing (most) Americans from visiting the place.

    • And you can somehow tell how much better off they'd be with the embargo lifted by walking around and looking at things? How did you come by this superpower?
    • Michael Totten did [city-journal.org], and he found a police state overseeing wrenching poverty, complete with shortages for essentials and goods of retched quality.

      In short: Communism.

      • That's the most absurd article I've read on the subject in quite some time. Here's a few reasons why:

        “Contrary to the myth spread by the revolution,” wrote Alfred Cuzan, a professor of political science at the University of West Florida, “Cuba’s wealth before 1959 was not the purview of a privileged few. . . . Cuban society was as much of a middle-class society as Argentina and Chile.”

        Ha! Alfred Cuzan was born in Havana in 1948 and became a naturalized American citizen in 1969. It seems overwhelmingly likely that his family, much like virtually all Cuban expats of that era, were part of the oppressive capitalist caste of Cuban society that was specifically targeted by Castro's policies. His impartiality is questionable, to say the least. Additionally, he references Argentina and Chile as

  • Castro might not be able to repay Cuba for this economic loss. Maybe those missiles were a bad idea.
  • by swb ( 14022 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @06:04AM (#47878829)

    I wonder what the value of American-owned assets nationalized by Castro would be worth today had they never been nationalized. My guess is that it has to be at least Cuba's "cost" or worse.

    It'd also be interesting to know the value of the lost productivity imposed by Cuba's communist economics.

    • And I wonder what kind of counter-claim of damages the USA can pretend they too suffered in the loss of trade. Probably just about the same amount in total.

  • by Jim Sadler ( 3430529 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @06:18AM (#47878895)
    Cuba is a complex nation with both good and bad points and we should not adopt just the American view towards Cuba. First the revolution in Cuba went astray and many good people were killed or had their lives ruined. There is also no doubt that Cuba backed a hostile Soviet Union during the cold war. There is also no doubt that prior to Castro American organized crime ran rampant in Cuba and the public in Cuba was being raped by corruption. Some Cubans did better after the communist gained power just as some lost their lives, property or freedom. Meanwhile we all act like blissful idiots by avoiding the real issues. Island nations often lack enough natural resources to provide a decent life for their populations. The type of government does very little to change that. For example if Haiti were to go communist today they would still be a very poor nation. If Cuba adopted the government and laws of Sweden or Switzerland or the US Cuba would still be a suffering nation. Natural resources shrink when used. Every year Cuba has less natural resources. With strict birth control and population control such as allowing no immigration at all Cuba could shrink its population and there would be more natural resources per person which can cause more wealth per person. Civil unrest and revolution are all expressions of over population which we tend to see as poverty. Picture it this way. We give each form of government a resting place in its own paper bag. We place each paper bag in a coffin full of fish guts and seal the coffin. We come back after a month and each form of government will have the same wretched stink. The form of the government does not control the prosperity of a nation. If we try to judge nations by their ability to survive we would be talking about strong monarchies in Egypt or China where concepts of fairness simply were not in play and a monarch with crushing powers determined every little thing.
  • by Murdoch5 ( 1563847 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @06:43AM (#47879019) Homepage
    Well the US acted in 1960 to place the embargo, we're still waiting for them to actually think it through. It's funny that Cuba actually has a better medical system then the US, and it's state funded, probably what the embargo was about in the first place.
  • The US has tried to lift the embargo several times. Every time Cuba does something to get it maintained. There was famiously a plane hijacking one of the times we talked about lifting it.

    Beyond that, the embargo does not stretch to the whole planet. They can trade with Mexico, Brazil, Russia, China, etc. Just not the US. I think they can trade with any country and europe and probably canada. So... whatever Cuba.

    Like most failed states, they're just blaming their incompetence on someone else.

  • by GLMDesigns ( 2044134 ) on Thursday September 11, 2014 @08:10AM (#47879511)
    And here we were taught by Under-development theorists (Marxists) that poverty was caused by exploitation by the capitalist countries (Core-Periphery) and that the solution was to have underdeveloped countries have less trade with capitalist countries. All sorts of regimes copied that (high import tarrifs, refusing outside companies from going in,etc...). Free market economists said that would create more poverty. Marxist economists and theorists said "bullsh1t." So. According to Marxist theorists and economists from the 1950s to the 1990s (out of grad school now - things may have changed) the Cuban embargo should have helped Cuba by saving them from capitalist exploitation.
  • Let's not forget that the best estimates for the death of communist regimes killing their own people is right around 100 million people [battleswarmblog.com]. Both The Black Book of Communism [amazon.com] and R.J. Rummel's Death by Government [amazon.com] come up with roughly the same number of people killed.

    Communism is incompatible with both human rights and a healthy economy, and never has, never can, and never will meet the needs of its own people or offer better lives than those under capitalism.

    Embargoes have nothing to do with it...

Truly simple systems... require infinite testing. -- Norman Augustine

Working...