RP: Estimated Soviet GDP increases 5%

[Cyclone]

According to the recent study by University of Minnesota professor Charles Johnson, the GDP of the USSR increased in 2009 by an good 5% while the West's GDP growth was generally negative due to the recent recession.

Yes, yes, I know, "it's an autarky, of course it would be unaffected, a bloo bloo bloo!" Autarky is a bit of a silly term, though. What about Poland, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Albania, Angola, Cuba, Vietnam, Mongolia, etc? Does trade with them not count because "ooga booga socialism"?

With the Soviet economy gradually pulling itself up to the level of the United States (its economy is currently estimated as being ~70% the size of the US's in absolute terms) from its "baseline" in 1914 of being one of the worst developed economies, can people still say that "socialism doesn't work"? Especially with computerization, which has seriously improved some of the inefficiencies of a planned economy.

And with regards to authoritarianism (I know you're going to bring it up!), it's worth noting the endless, militant propaganda campaign of prominent capitalist Presidents like JFK (nearly started WW3 over a socialist revolution in a certain small Caribbean state), Reagan (called the Soviet Union an "Evil Empire"), etc. Soviet Premier Bindiukov is beginning to relax controls on small-scale private press, expression and association to almost nothing, in spite of the current administration's endless attacks. The last major incident of political violence was when Viktor Ilyin killed Brezhnev in 1969 (okay it was really when Khrushchev and the gang whacked Beria in 1953, lol).

So I guess my question is this: what do you think the significance of this statistic is? Is it a meaningful indictment of capitalism, or is it just a hiccup caused by the fact that socialist and capitalist countries largely operate in different markets? Does Soviet economic growth represent the advantages of a planned economy, or is it more that they're playing catch-up, which is easier than leading the pack?

 

[Dr. Luny]

Well of course it all depends on the particulars of the capitalist or centrally planned economy. If the capitalist economy isn't well regulated, certain monopolistic interests will rise and cause inefficiencies, if the centrally planned economy isn't well managed there's potential for all sorts of problems.

With the increasing use of information techonology in the Soviet Union they have been able to run their economy much more efficiently, and they are now pouring boatloads of money into supercomputing and artifical intelligence projects which will definitely pay off down the road. If the US had brought the internet to the public earlier, say in the early 90's, maybe we wouldn't be behind them in some of these fields. Of course they've copied many of the internet services we've developed privately and provided them as a free service for their citizens. They might never have thought of a search engine, e-mail, social networks, etc. on their own, so they're kind of leeching off of capitlaist inovation. On the other hand, I was in East Berlin this summer and their webpages load much faster without all the advertisements.

 

[Francisco Cojuanco]

Stimulus is one thing. But eventually it's likely the crisis of the 80's will come back. The Soviets are doing major infrastructure upgrades and catching up, which means that folks are more productive - but what happens when that's all done? You can't run an economy simply by building dams and highways when there's nothing to use the power and roads.

As for the Internet thing, yeah, there's less advertising, but where was the first online social network created? Where was the first online marketplace set up? Which country pioneered online stock trading? The United States, that's who. The Soviet Union copies American concepts, and to a degree, they have some advantages. But the real innovation is in the West. Besides, East Germany is a special case - they're essentially the crossroads between capitalism and communism. In fact, they're the number-one destination after the West for inhabitants of Communist countries to immigrate to precisely because they adopted some characteristics of a capitalist economy.

So I don't see the Soviet GDP increase as being sustained.

 

[Cyclone]

As for the Internet thing, yeah, there's less advertising, but where was the first online social network created? Where was the first online marketplace set up? Which country pioneered online stock trading? The United States, that's who.

Why in the world would you think that the Soviet Union would have, for any reason, "pioneered" online stock trading? To a lesser extent, the same goes for online marketplaces. Socialist country doesn't come up with inventions to aid bourgeoisie in speculation! News at eleven!

The Soviet Union copies American concepts, and to a degree, they have some advantages. But the real innovation is in the West.

Who won the space race? I'll give you a hint: the name starts with "U" and ends with "nion of Soviet Socialist Republics."

Besides, East Germany is a special case - they're essentially the crossroads between capitalism and communism. In fact, they're the number-one destination after the West for inhabitants of Communist countries to immigrate to precisely because they adopted some characteristics of a capitalist economy.

Yeah, fair enough, the DDR is a mixed economy nowadays with meaningful market mechanisms (IIRC, it has about 80-90% state owned industry). That model seems to be working at reducing the disparity between East and West Germany.

 

[Hades]

IC: IIRC, the USSR had failed to get on the Moon before the US did, and have only had probes so far on mars while the US did get a man there in the mid 90s. NASA is also amking plans for a Mars Base.

And im pretty sure the USSR is cooking the books to inflate its success. While it is successful in many regards, i find its success to be somewhat exaggerated.

OOC: This really happened OTL.

 

[Francisco Cojuanco]

IC: IIRC, the USSR had failed to get on the Moon before the US did, and have only had probes so far on mars while the US did get a man there in the mid 90s. NASA is also amking plans for a Mars Base.

And im pretty sure the USSR is cooking the books to inflate its success. While it is successful in many regards, i find its success to be somewhat exaggerated.

OOC: This really happened OTL.

Correct on the first paragraph. But I don't think the Soviets are cooking the books on this one. You can't build sustainable economies on make-work projects alone.

 

[Cyclone]

IC: IIRC, the USSR had failed to get on the Moon before the US did, and have only had probes so far on mars while the US did get a man there in the mid 90s. NASA is also amking plans for a Mars Base.

Americans.

The Soviets put the first artificial satellite in orbit (Sputnik 1), the first animal in orbit (Laika), the first man in space (Yuri Gagarin), the first woman in space (Valentina Tereshkova), first space flight with a multimember crew (Voskhod 1), and the first space station (Salyut 1).

Face it, the Soviets won the space race. Luna (like Mars) was a consolation prize chosen because the Soviets had no interest in it.

And im pretty sure the USSR is cooking the books to inflate its success. While it is successful in many regards, i find its success to be somewhat exaggerated.

The USSR doesn't track its own GDP. They use Net Material Product instead. Western economists estimate its GDP based on a lot of different things. It's possible that Johnson overestimated the numbers, though.

 

[Hades]

No, The Space Race wasnt to see who could get into space first, it was to see who could get the Furthest. Face it, the US left the USSR trailing after the first Luna landing. It doesnt matter who gets ahead, the fact of the matter is as of this moment, the US is still light seconds ahead in the Space Race. As well as that, The USSR admitted that there were many spectacular failures that were unreported at the time. As well as that, the USSR had invested a lot of money in their Lunar Programme, which was also suffering from various failures too.

FC, We dont know if the MNP or GDP figures are being exaggerated, especially as the USSR doesnt operate on the same standard of economics as other countries. It is possible.

 

[RGB]

NASA just keeps making noises about plans to go to Mars again, meanwhile every space agency in the world flies to the orbit - and the Moon, yes - from Baikonur, on Soviet rockets, while the American space vehicles are all grounded.

As you said yourself, it's the final result that matters. Just because the Americans pulled ahead a little bit 20 years ago, doesn't mean the future belongs to them!

 

[Cyclone]

No, The Space Race wasnt to see who could get into space first, it was to see who could get the Furthest. Face it, the US left the USSR trailing after the first Luna landing. It doesnt matter who gets ahead, the fact of the matter is as of this moment, the US is still light seconds ahead in the Space Race. As well as that, The USSR admitted that there were many spectacular failures that were unreported at the time. As well as that, the USSR had invested a lot of money in their Lunar Programme, which was also suffering from various failures too.

Nope. The space race was a test of the practical abilities of the USSR and the USA's scientific establishment to accomplish meaningful, worthwhile goals. The moon is worthless. Twelve people have walked on the moon, all Americans between 1969 to 1972. Sounds like a sound investment of time and money . Notice how there are still long-term space stations (which are mostly Soviet, btw) and satellites? Face it, the USA spent billions of dollars to make the country feel better about the fact that in every meaningful measurement, the Soviets had beat them in space.

As to your so-called "logic" of "who can go farthest" being the victor, the space probe Laika 1 means that the USSR won the space race because it has actually exited the Solar System!

I mean space is nice and pretty, but don't kid yourself: it only has value in what it can provide to humankind. The Lunar landings and Mars landing have provided us with approximately zilch new knowledge, except that they won't magically kill people who walk around on them.

 

[wolf_brother]

IIRC correctly NMP is calculated widely differently from GDP, and any attempt to compare the two always has GDP ratings listed 20-30% higher than the same country in NMP due to differences in calculations. This isn't to say that one is better than the other, merely that different calculations and priorities lead to different outcomes in the math.

 

[Sachyriel]

You know what is truly surprising is that while the Western Democracies are allowing Pay-for-Porn Sites on the web, Communist Countries have mostly free-porn websites. This allows for a more relaxed populace at a lower price (though state-run bukkake sites are weird) and more effort to be spent on obtaining useful things for the populace.

This maybe an odd suggestion, but considering the porn industry in the USA alone is billions of dollars, and the Soviets get theirs for free, maybe if we had "Free Love" in the West we would have more money to spend on things we could use as a society.

5% of the total economy is not porn, I'm just sayin', it might help.

 

[mowque]

OOC: Wow mmmeee0. really, just wow.

 

[Sachyriel]

OOC: Wow mmmeee0. really, just wow.

OOC: Seriously, porn in OTL is a big part of the economy, and with communism free porn allows a great amount of $ or labour to be spent on other things, which might be helping the Soviets and hindering Democracies.

You're welcome though, did you like that post?

 

[RGB]

though state-run bukkake sites are weird.

OOC: You win AH.com forever.

Apparently, there IS sex in the Soviet Union.

 

[Sachyriel]

OOC

OOC: You win AH.com forever.

Apparently, there IS sex in the Soviet Union.

Thanks for the new sig

 

[Cyclone]

You know what is truly surprising is that while the Western Democracies are allowing Pay-for-Porn Sites on the web, Communist Countries have mostly free-porn websites. This allows for a more relaxed populace at a lower price (though state-run bukkake sites are weird) and more effort to be spent on obtaining useful things for the populace.

This maybe an odd suggestion, but considering the porn industry in the USA alone is billions of dollars, and the Soviets get theirs for free, maybe if we had "Free Love" in the West we would have more money to spend on things we could use as a society.

OOC: Is it bad that my first thought when I read that post was "No way, the late USSR was way too socially conservative to have government-produced and distributed pornography?"

 

[Sachyriel]

OOC: Is it bad that my first thought when I read that post was "No way, the late USSR was way too socially conservative to have government-produced and distributed pornography?"

OOC: Government doesn't even acknowledge them as pornographic, it's just "Science -> Biology"... I'll get us back on track though, too much posts taken up by mental masturbation about imaginary soviet porn...

IC: I've heard that the newest RPG launcher costs only 70% to make than the last one, and though this maybe a small percentage of the actual military budget it's compatible with nearly all of the other launchers projectiles, saving even further money (or effort to the soviets) in making more new ones. It's less than the free porn, but also more of a force than you think...

OOC: Sex, Explosions, just gotta find a way to talk about eating meat...

IC: Also as the soviets continue to keep to their ideology of "Local Communities under the Soviet Umbrella" and small livestock are raised through out major population centres (chickens, rabbits, certain lizards, small fish farms) distributing foodstuffs easier than the traditional western method, large amounts of livestock that are closer to human than rat sized and need lots of space.

Surely the trend of Soviets eating Rabbits maeks a dent in their economy, allowing for more effiecient uses of land for more grain products?

OOC: Sex, Explosives and eating meat, I have made all three pillars of manyl amazingness more popular in the SU than the USA...

 

[Cyclone]

OOC: Government doesn't even acknowledge them as pornographic, it's just "Science -> Biology"... I'll get us back on track though, too much posts taken up by mental masturbation about imaginary soviet porn...

OOC: Nah, to be fair there's been about 30 years of alternate social development, without the stagnation and conservatism of the Brezhnev era. Andropov (who I figure would be Brezhnev's successor ITTL) was a very spartan man, but I don't know if that translates to a socially conservative political policy.

IC: Also as the soviets continue to keep to their ideology of "Local Communities under the Soviet Umbrella" and small livestock are raised through out major population centres (chickens, rabbits, certain lizards, small fish farms) distributing foodstuffs easier than the traditional western method, large amounts of livestock that are closer to human than rat sized and need lots of space.

Surely the trend of Soviets eating Rabbits maeks a dent in their economy, allowing for more effiecient uses of land for more grain products?

"Small game herding" is just the Virgin Lands Campaign all over again. Right idea, wrong scale. I mean, the people of the USSR need meat, and farmers killed a ton of livestock back during collectivization. But the whole enterprise is just a bit... inefficient, especially on such a large scale.

 

[Sachyriel]

"Small game herding" is just the Virgin Lands Campaign all over again. Right idea, wrong scale. I mean, the people of the USSR need meat, and farmers killed a ton of livestock back during collectivization. But the whole enterprise is just a bit... inefficient, especially on such a large scale.

Depends on who is being inefficient: the people who want to eat or the people who want to be paid while other people eat.

The wide-spread network of small game allows people who are going hungry to pick a good meat and butcher it themselves. The Farmer can't possible eat all the meat he raises, and this allows for an inefficiency in the process of raising the animal to it being eaten by adding in the middleman farmer, who, while important in the Soviet Economy for vegetables, is getting rarer when concerning livestock. This is because more and more Soviets like small game, and less prefer the large-animal taste.

More and more people in Democracies each year would say they liked big-animal meat more, despite never having tasted rabbit or crow.