I was just remembering about the time I saw the documentary "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman and how he went to an eastern european country still living under socialism, maybe Czechoslovakia I dont quite remember, and he showed how the people there was naturally organizing themselves and exchanging their property peacefully in small markets without state intervention.
Now, how did those people that lived so long under collectivism manage to understand the concept of property rights and for that matter how did they determine what things belonged to one person and not to another?
Not sure what you're asking, but in Russia what happened was that the state privatized the top state assets to the president's campaign contributors (who became instant billionaires), while top managers of state firms privatized whatever wasn't bolted down out the door and pocketed the money before they could be privatized.
So in other words, it went bad.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
Then how would it be an apropiate way to do it?
For example, pretend that Cuba goes 100% capitalistic tomorrow, how would a person know what belongs to him and what belongs to his neighbor?
Felipe: Then how would it be an apropiate way to do it? For example, pretend that Cuba goes 100% capitalistic tomorrow, how would a person know what belongs to him and what belongs to his neighbor?
This may be a shock but private property isn't 100% abolished in socialist countries. People still own their clothes, their food, their cars, their furniture, and so on. Sometimes housing is owned in private, sometimes people rent from state public housing companies (which happens in all western countries as well).
The issue is that the capital markets are socialized, hence the only way to engage in economic production is through the state.
Stranger: This may be a shock but private property isn't 100% abolished in socialist countries. People still own their clothes, their food, their cars, their furniture, and so on. Sometimes housing is owned in private, sometimes people rent from state public housing companies (which happens in all western countries as well). The issue is that the capital markets are socialized, hence the only way to engage in economic production is through the state.
Oh dont worry I know that socialists differentiate between private property and personal possessions.
The thing is people cant own anything that can be used to produce new capital, they are only allowed to own personal possesions granted to them by the state.
I know that In Cuba a large portion, if not all, of the land belongs to the state so you don't even own your house. Therefore If Cuba goes capitalistic how would you defend your property against the claims of other 4 or 5 people living under the same roof? and what would happen to agricultural land owned by the state?
Could I just claim private ownership of some of it?
Felipe: Now, how did those people that lived so long under collectivism manage to understand the concept of property rights and for that matter how did they determine what things belonged to one person and not to another?
By not being inbreds?
Felipe:Now, how did those people that lived so long under collectivism manage to understand the concept of property rights and for that matter how did they determine what things belonged to one person and not to another?
Well it depends. There are a lot of disputes over property amongst families, and even within families, and the state frequently takes over property by decree. I hear horror stories every day. The Balkan nations have extremely corrupt governments, especially at the local level. Every year the politicians promise to "clean up the government" and "end corruption" (Ivo Josipovic, newly elected president of Croatia, for example). The Montenegrin prime minister, Milo Djukanovic, has ties to organized crime.
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
Felipe: I know that In Cuba a large portion, if not all, of the land in Cuba belongs to the state so you don't even own your house. Therefore If Cuba goes capitalistic how would you defend your property against the claims of other 4 or 5 people living under the same roof? and would happen to agricultural land owned by the state? Could I just claim private ownership of some of it?
I know that In Cuba a large portion, if not all, of the land in Cuba belongs to the state so you don't even own your house. Therefore If Cuba goes capitalistic how would you defend your property against the claims of other 4 or 5 people living under the same roof? and would happen to agricultural land owned by the state?
More than likely the state won't collapse just because it adopts capitalism, hence your opinion on what it does with its assets will be of no importance whatsoever.
People will receive the private property that the state distributes to them. Of course, in a situation where socialism has reached the breaking point, what the state desperately needs is capital to keep going. Fortunately for places like Cuba and North Korea there are large expatriate populations with a lot of capital that will want to buy assets. This did not exist for Russia.
Stranger: More than likely the state won't collapse just because it adopts capitalism, hence your opinion on what it does with its assets will be of no importance whatsoever. People will receive the private property that the state distributes to them. Of course, in a situation where socialism has reached the breaking point, what the state desperately needs is capital to keep going. Fortunately for places like Cuba and North Korea there are large expatriate populations with a lot of capital that will want to buy assets. This did not exist for Russia.
I havent thought of that, you are probably right.
I was just trying to imagine a 100% socialist society going 100% capitalist.... maybe its not possible.
Felipe:I was just trying to imagine a 100% socialist society going 100% capitalist.... maybe its not possible.
A 100% socialist society is not possible in the first place.
Felipe:Then how would it be an apropiate way to do it?
How to and How Not to De-Socialize - MNR
On Socialism and Desocialization - Hoppe
I'd suggest that some people are naturally unfit to believe in freedom and property rights, especially those who are from a mystical and semi-barbaric culture like the Slavs. This was one of the reasons why they became communist and thus went back to serfdom from capitalism. Today, even with free market capitalism, those people are still under the sway of such dictators as Putin. As things change, more they stay the same, as the saying goes. If anything, the Russian Mafia of today represents a glimmer of hope for freedom and they must be thoroughly supported by those libertarians who believe that black markets are the quickest way to achieve a free market. Of course, I may be wrong and would welcome any thoughts on this matter.
Not offices and bureaucrats, but big business deserves credit for the fact that most of the families in the United States own a motorcar and a radio set. - Ludwig von Mises
Felipe:Therefore If Cuba goes capitalistic how would you defend your property against the claims of other 4 or 5 people living under the same roof?
It's a tough question. Half of the population of Saint Petersburg are still living in communalki.
MarketFundamentalist: I'd suggest that some people are naturally unfit to believe in freedom and property rights, especially those who are from a mystical and semi-barbaric culture like the Slavs. This was one of the reasons why they became communist and thus went back to serfdom from capitalism. Today, even with free market capitalism, those people are still under the sway of such dictators as Putin. As things change, more they stay the same, as the saying goes. If anything, the Russian Mafia of today represents a glimmer of hope for freedom and they must be thoroughly supported by those libertarians who believe that black markets are the quickest way to achieve a free market. Of course, I may be wrong and would welcome any thoughts on this matter.
I’d never thought the day would come when I’d be defending slavs, but the very fact of the existence of such a powerful Russian mafia indicates a strong demand for freedom. I’d even say that whatever country has no decent organized crime is dangerously sliding towards herd mentality.
I lived in some sort of socialism in former Yugoslavia. Concept of private property was allways here, it is not something we did not know about. You could own small bussiness up to 8 employees, no problem. You could farm land and sell your products on market and you could own land up to 100 dunums (1 dunum = 1.000 m²).
Apartments were property of community but you had some sort of contract that said this is your apartment to use it and pass it to your children. After the collapse of the state and rejection of socialism you could buy-out your apartment at some low price. Everything else, like cars, boats, tv-s, and other stuff was privately owned.
We still have some sort of quasi socialism where you can have everything owned privately but government takes away about 50% of your pay and plus 17% of tax on everything you buy, and plus other "special" taxes. State owned land and industry was robbed by a small number of oligarchs loyal to some new party.
So, in my opinion we did not have much progress, only now our economy is debt based, government takes away even bigger cut of your earnings than before and you have no social security that you had before (workers had comities in state owned company and sacking employee was nor that ease if you did not have a strong reason, unemployed paid only 20% of electric bill, etc.) .
The good thing is that now we have more democracy and multi-party system. Maybe this is good, because bureaucracy is still very big, maybe even larger that in socialism.