Shortages in the Eastern Bloc

[Veovis]

A lot of right-wingers like to point to the fact that the Eastern Bloc countries experienced shortages of goods (think long lines for toilet paper) as proof that planned economies are inefficient and unworkable.

I'm trying to figure out what was the real reason for these shortages. Was it greed in the bureaucrat class, or maybe something else?

Would someone more well-versed in matters of history and Soviet-style economics give some insight?

[Ned Kelly]

They were blown out of proportion, for one. But they did exist. By this point, the Soviet Union and it's satellites were tied up with the international economic system, and thus affected by the 'boom and bust' nature of capitalism. The bureaucracies were too economically illiterate to be able to deal with this/such a system cannot work whilst tied up with international capital. Typically, the worst shortages were seen in Ceausescu's Romania, which had gone so far as to accept IMF imposed austerity measures, completely sealing their fate as far as this matter goes.

[scarletghoul]

Yeah, revisionism introduced capitalistic economics which corroded the socialised base and got the socialist territories caught up in the capitalist system, ultimately leading to full restoration

[Veovis]

They were blown out of proportion, for one. But they did exist. By this point, the Soviet Union and it's satellites were tied up with the international economic system, and thus affected by the 'boom and bust' nature of capitalism. The bureaucracies were too economically illiterate to be able to deal with this/such a system cannot work whilst tied up with international capital. Typically, the worst shortages were seen in Ceausescu's Romania, which had gone so far as to accept IMF imposed austerity measures, completely sealing their fate as far as this matter goes.

Reason #1 that socialism-in-one-country can't work.

[tir1944]

I heard that there were no significant shortages in the USSR until the 80s,especially Gorby's time...

[DarkPast]

Well there were definitely shortages before Gorby's time. While the USSR during Stalin's time was among the world's three top manufacturers of a large number of basic and heavy industrial products, the light industry products and consumer goods lagged far behind, and were often of poor quality. There was also a massive shortage of housing.

Furthermore it should be noted that the distribution of consumer goods was geographically uneven - northwest Russia (particularly Leningrad and Moscow) received better quality goods and there was no rationing until the late 80's.

There were ways around the shortages, both legal and black market. For example, one could buy produce on farmer's markets, but the prices were 2-3 times higher.

(note that all of the above applies to the USSR, the situation in the other countries was somewhat different - Bulgaria for example largely avoided such shortages, while bread lines were far more common in Poland)

[Psy]

Reason #1 that socialism-in-one-country can't work.
The Comecon was large enough for it to be possible to have an island of socialism if the Comecon turned all of the nations into one centrally planned economy that traded nothing with economies outside the Comecon

[tir1944]

Where would they get the Hard Currency then?

[Ned Kelly]

Where would they get the Hard Currency then?

Read his/her post again carefully, why would they need hard currency?

[tir1944]

Cause i dunno,Bulgaria or Hungary probly couldn't produce certain things the US (etc...) could...

[Ned Kelly]

Cause i dunno,Bulgaria or Hungary probly couldn't produce certain things the US (etc...) could...

The hypothetical proposed by Psy didn't involve that; it involved an island of socialism within the comecon, presumably totally self-reliant

[tir1944]

The hypothetical proposed by Psy didn't involve that; it involved an island of socialism within the comecon, presumably totally self-reliant Maybe i'm just stupid,but COMECON involved only certain countries,and it was far from being self-reliant.
If Psy was making some fictional scenario he should have noted us of that.COMECON was a real,existing organization.It didn't involve the whole Earth,it was made up of just the USSR and some other minor nations.

Psy said:
The Comecon was large enough for it to be possible to have an island of socialism if the Comecon turned all of the nations into one centrally planned economy that traded nothing with economies outside the Comecon

Ok,maybe by COMECON he meant something he himself made up,i dunno...

[Ned Kelly]

Maybe i'm just stupid,but COMECON involved only certain countries,and it was far from being self-reliant.
If Psy was making some fictional scenario he should have noted us of that.COMECON was a real,existing organization.It didn't involve the whole Earth,it was made up of just the USSR and some other minor nations.

Psy said:
The Comecon was large enough for it to be possible to have an island of socialism if the Comecon turned all of the nations into one centrally planned economy that traded nothing with economies outside the Comecon

Ok,maybe by COMECON he meant something he himself made up,i dunno...

Who knows what could have been done, if the sole purpose of the COMECON was something other than rendering the 'People's Democracies' as mere quarry-type appendages of the Soviet Union

[tir1944]

Yeah,Bulgaria might have become,i dunno,the world's biggest and technologically most advanced computer producer,or something...:rolleyes:
The People's Democracies got a huge amount of material (especially oil&gas) for cheap...

[Ned Kelly]

Yeah,Bulgaria might have become,i dunno,the world's biggest and technologically most advanced computer producer,or something...:rolleyes:
The People's Democracies got a huge amount of material (especially oil&gas) for cheap...

Yes, you're right, they did. In exchange for becoming one-trick-pony economies geared toward providing a certain product to the USSR.

[Ned Kelly]

Leading to a lack of ability to be competitive on the world market, once the Soviets decided to enter the global capitalist system, leading to problems such as bread lines

[tir1944]

Leading to a lack of ability to be competitive on the world market
DDR was,from what i know,quite competitive,while Poland for example wasn't,despite all the loans they took from the West (see:Zetor tractor company)...

[Ned Kelly]

You're right on the DDR being comparatively competitive, that wasn't due to any ingenious plan on behalf of the DDR leadership, the DDR was always intended by the Soviets to be the 'showcase' socialist state, as it was literally on the frontline and resources were managed accordingly.

[tir1944]

You're right on the DDR being comparatively competitive, that wasn't due to any ingenious plan on behalf of the DDR leadership, the DDR was always intended by the Soviets to be the 'showcase' socialist state, as it was literally on the frontline and resources were managed accordingly.
Dunno IMO it probly had more to do with the number of skilled technicians/scientists,the educated workforce already present there,developed means of production etc...i mean hell,Stalin at first rooted for a neutral,demilitarized Germany...
Actually,DDR exported a number of sophisticated machines to the USSR...most Soviet huge coal excavators were built in cooperation with the DDR,IIRC

[aristos]

Yeah,Bulgaria might have become,i dunno,the world's biggest and technologically most advanced computer producer,or something...:rolleyes:


Yeah, because it's so natural, almost devinely pre-ordained that the US has become the world's biggest and technologically most advanced computer producer, but little Bulgaria could never aspire to such things. The Bulgarians should know their place, right? Talk of internalising "manifest destiny":rolleyes:
I mean it's not like a small country by the name of Korea has within a short time become the world's biggest manufacturer of specific electronics parts, is it?

Seriously, let's face it - the "Socialist camp" spanned across a vast territory with all natural resources ever needed for an advanced high-tech economy. Even the USSR alone was constantly churning out unrivalled marvels of engineering in many scientific fields. All indigenously researched and developed. The idea that such a vast territory could not have been completely self-sufficient, if properly organized is naive dogma, more dictated by a fundamentalist hostility to the boogy-man of "Socialism in one country" than anything else.
Just as a thought experiment: imagine the planet earth had shrunk in size and consisted of nothing more than the "socialist block" countries. Do you seriously think humanity would not survive and prosper?
Or how about this: there was a time when the Eurasians had no idea about the Americas and vice versa. Nevertheless it didn't stop either from developing a sophisticated and vibrant economy and an equally sophisticated culture to go with it.

[tir1944]

Yeah, because it's so natural, almost devinely pre-ordained that the US has become the world's biggest and technologically most advanced computer producer, but little Bulgaria could never aspire to such things. The Bulgarians should know their place, right? Talk of internalising "manifest destiny"Lol what? WTF? Bulgarians barely had any educated cadre or industrial capacities for computers production,that's the reason...
Not many countries today produce CPUs etc,also for a reason.



I mean it's not like a small country by the name of Korea has within a short time become the world's biggest manufacturer of specific electronics parts, is it?Yeah,thanks to American aid and "outsorcing"? Your point?



Seriously, let's face it - the "Socialist camp" spanned across a vast territory with all natural resources ever needed for an advanced high-tech economy. Even the USSR alone was constantly churning out unrivalled marvels of engineering in many scientific fields. All indigenously researched and developed. The idea that such a vast territory could not have been completely self-sufficient, if properly organized is naive dogma, more dictated by a fundamentalist hostility to the boogy-man of "Socialism in one country" than anything else.But it wasn't completely self-sufficient,as history shows us.



Just as a thought experiment: imagine the planet earth had shrunk in size and consisted of nothing more than the "socialist block" countries. Do you seriously think humanity would not survive and prosper?Please stick with real history instead of such ahistoric fantasies.

[Gustav HK]

Yes, you're right, they did. In exchange for becoming one-trick-pony economies geared toward providing a certain product to the USSR.

Yes, that was because of the revisionist state-capitalist counterrevolution in USSR, which spread to the other Comecon countries (except Albania, which was de facto thrown out), and transformed Comecon into an organization for the Soviet social-imperialism.

[RED DAVE]

The Comecon was large enough for it to be possible to have an island of socialism if the Comecon turned all of the nations into one centrally planned economy that traded nothing with economies outside the ComeconSo why didn't it happen, pray tell?


Yes, that was because of the revisionist state-capitalist counterrevolution in USSR, which spread to the other Comecon countries (except Albania, which was de facto thrown out), and transformed Comecon into an organization for the Soviet social-imperialism.Yeah, those pesky revisionists. Ever notice how the revisionists always manage to take over Stalinist and Maoist parties and ruin the workers paradises. And the workers don't rise up and throw the bastards out.

Or could it be that these so-called socialist countries were really state capitalist :mad:, and the workers just exchanged one set of bosses for another?

RED DAVE

[Psy]

So why didn't it happen, pray tell?

The Comecom had no intention in creating capacity to satisfy workers demands for consumption of utility. The only way the Comecom could create an island of socialism is if there was a massive workers revolution in the Soviet block that overthrew the Stalinist regimes and created a united workers state engulfing the entire old soviet block.




Maybe i'm just stupid,but COMECON involved only certain countries,and it was far from being self-reliant.
If Psy was making some fictional scenario he should have noted us of that.COMECON was a real,existing organization.It didn't involve the whole Earth,it was made up of just the USSR and some other minor nations.

Psy said:
The Comecon was large enough for it to be possible to have an island of socialism if the Comecon turned all of the nations into one centrally planned economy that traded nothing with economies outside the Comecon

Ok,maybe by COMECON he meant something he himself made up,i dunno...
The Comecon had enough industrial capacity to be an island of socialism if it was actually properly utilized through workers power. The relative low living standards didn't come from a lack of resources it came from the planners not making high living standards a priority of production. Even when the world economy became sluggish in the 1980's Comecon didn't simply redirect exports to internal consumption because of capitalist tendencies within the Comecon.

[aristos]

@tir1944

It wasn't self-sufficient because it wasn't organized in such a way. But as far as population, educated population, and material resources go there was nothing that stood in the way of it becoming self-sufficient. Just saying it couldn't be doesn't cut it. You have not provided any possible material shortcoming that could have hindered a theoretical self-sufficiency.
This is not a barren rock in the middle of an ocean we are talking about, but a geographical entity spanning almost an entire continent!
You also have not provided any proof as to why Bulgarians could not have developed a high-tech industry (well unless we count a veiled xenophobic dismissal of Bulgarians as lesser, helpless beings). After all South Korea was not known for technical prowess, yet they managed to turn the situation around. The same "outsourcing" and aid they received from US in doing so, could have been given by the Soviets and East Germans to Bulgarians.



Please stick with real history instead of such ahistoric fantasies.

Hm, you seems to have accidentally missed this:



Or how about this: there was a time when the Eurasians had no idea about the Americas and vice versa. Nevertheless it didn't stop either from developing a sophisticated and vibrant economy and an equally sophisticated culture to go with it.

[tir1944]

It wasn't self-sufficient because it wasn't organized in such a way.
Yeah,interesting...You do know that all socialist countries always prefered other socialist countries when it came to external trade,right?



But as far as population, educated population, and material resources go there was nothing that stood in the way of it becoming self-sufficient.
Than why couldnt they produce indigenous CPUs for example,ones that wouldn't be 100 times more expensive than the Western ones that is?



You also have not provided any proof as to why Bulgarians could not have developed a high-tech industry (well unless we count a veiled xenophobic dismissal of Bulgarians as lesser, helpless beings).
Because they lacked lots of things.If the USSR wasn't able to develop a high-tech industry en pair with the US,how the hell could Bulgaria do it then?



After all South Korea was not known for technical prowess, yet they managed to turn the situation around. The same "outsourcing" and aid they received from US in doing so, could have been given by the Soviets and East Germans to Bulgarians.
Except that most Soviet PCs in the late 70s/80s were reverse engineered copies of Western ones...

[Psy]

Yeah,interesting...You do know that all socialist countries always prefered other socialist countries when it came to external trade,right?

Then what was with the Pepsi deal? Was it that Comecon couldn't produce soda or was it that Comecon wanted US dollars?



Than why couldnt they produce indigenous CPUs for example,ones that wouldn't be 100 times more expensive than the Western ones that is?

Because they lacked lots of things.If the USSR wasn't able to develop a high-tech industry en pair with the US,how the hell could Bulgaria do it then?

Zelenograd developed the first industrial computer way before the west, this is of course to be expected since the Comecon had more engineers then the west thus more skilled talent. The Comecon means of production was backwards not because of material conditions because the ruling class of the Comecon at worse blocked modernization and at best ignored modernization.

[tir1944]

Then what was with the Pepsi deal? Seriously? PEPSI? PEPSI is so "famous" because it was an EXCEPTION.It was one of the few Western COMMODITIES that the USSR imported (for mass-consumption).Actually,IIRC,PEPSI wasn't even imported but locally produded (under the license),somewhere on/near Crimea i think...
Most soc. countries did 70 or so % of their external trade with other socialist countries.


Zelenograd developed the first industrial computer way before the west, this is of course to be expected since the Comecon had more engineers then the west thus more skilled talent.The USSR was actually ahead of the West when it came to computers (in the 60s for example),but this changed in the 70s-80s...



Comecon means of production was backwards not because of material conditions because the ruling class of the Comecon at worse blocked modernization and at best ignored modernization.
Ok (BTW i'd apprecciate if you could elaborate on this),but the fact remains that in the 70s-80s the Soviets thought it would be wiser to reverse engineer Western computers instead of developing their own which would have been more expensive...

[Psy]

Seriously? PEPSI? PEPSI is so "famous" because it was an EXCEPTION.It was one of the few Western COMMODITIES that the USSR imported (for mass-consumption).Actually,IIRC,PEPSI wasn't even imported but locally produded (under the license),somewhere on/near Crimea i think...
Most soc. countries did 70 or so % of their external trade with other socialist countries.

The problem is if the Comecon was Marxist what was the point of getting the license to produce Pepsi and why would any capitalists even deal with the Comecom if they saw the Comecom as Marxist? The only reason Pepsi would even talk to to Comecom is if they didn't see Comecon as a threat to capitalism as a Marxist Comecom its only export would be worker militancy.



The USSR was actually ahead of the West when it came to computers (in the 60s for example),but this changed in the 70s-80s...


Ok (BTW i'd apprecciate if you could elaborate on this),but the fact remains that in the 70s-80s the Soviets thought it would be wiser to reverse engineer Western computers instead of developing their own which would have been more expensive...
The big question is why did the USSR lose its lead? It was not just computers in the 1960's the USSR was the world leader lets not forget space that included many advanced technologies, the USSR put men in space while the USA struggled to get rockets off the launch pad without blowing up. Sure USSR had major failures with the N-1 but documents and testimony point that the problem was not talent but massive cut-backs to the USSR's space program, basically the USSR imposed austerity on itself and that is the only cause for the USSR's stagnation.

[tir1944]

The problem is if the Comecon was Marxist what was the point of getting the license to produce Pepsi and why would any capitalists even deal with the Comecom if they saw the Comecom as Marxist?So,according to you,it's not "marxist" for comm. countries to trade with non-communist ones? Seriously?
The USSR started trading with the West already in 1922-23...



The big question is why did the USSR lose its lead?I don't know.



Sure USSR had major failures with the N-1 but documents and testimony point that the problem was not talent but massive cut-backs to the USSR's space program, basically the USSR imposed austerity on itselfOk,the USSR "imposed austerity on itself" by cutting down its Space Program in favor of what exactly? Consumer goods or what?

[Psy]

So,according to you,it's not "marxist" for comm. countries to trade with non-communist ones? Seriously?
The USSR started trading with the West already in 1922-23...

And at the time the logic was that Russia was in a holding pattern waiting for revolution in central Europe to modernize Russian industry. Yet by the time of Comecon there was no point in trading with capitalists as the means of production within the Comecon was large enough to be self-sufficient.

The only reason a Marxist state would trade would be to flood capitalist markets with cheap commodities to cause a crisis of overproduction in capitalist markets, meaning you would be just spitting out exports and not wanting much if anything in return, i.e the USSR opening car lots in the USA to sell its cars in the USA for way below the price of the US car makers as economic warfare on American capitalists.



Ok,the USSR "imposed austerity on itself" by cutting down its Space Program in favor of what exactly? Consumer goods or what?
In favor of surplus value, GOSPLAN wanted to get more back from production then it invested in it i.e GOSPLAN wanted profits and this by demanding more for less so it could keep the difference. In the mind of GOSPLAN if the USSR space program could go the moon for half the cost that saving would mean they (the ruling class) would have much higher standard of living as they could steal more of the budget for themselves.

[aristos]

Yeah,interesting...You do know that all socialist countries always prefered other socialist countries when it came to external trade,right?

Not true, the Comecon countries were really very poorly integrated with one another as trade goes (as anything goes, for that matter). All of them, for example, had completely independent foreign trade agreements with capitalist countries.
A good example of the bureaucratic inefficiency of a fruitful cooperation between socialist countries was the forced adaptation of an outdated underground train model for the Czech metro system. The train was more advanced than any in the west (talk about scientifically inferior socialist block), but it was more profitable (note profitable, not useful) for Soviet factories to export their own outdated trains.
I think I don't need even mention Romania.



Than why couldnt they produce indigenous CPUs for example,ones that wouldn't be 100 times more expensive than the Western ones that is?

For anyone equipped with even a cursory knowledge of the internal workings of the USSR, it should be well known that the civilian economy was just a tiny subset, almost a side-effect of the military economy. The military had not much use for digital processors and preferred analogue ones for their anti-emp robustness. Their analogue processors were of course top notch. So this is not a case of lack of knowledge but a case of the parasitic nature of the soviet economy. Their knowledge of information technology was good enough to make Americans tremble in their shoes when they started making plans for a Soviet internet, long before US scientists contemplated the idea.



Because they lacked lots of things.If the USSR wasn't able to develop a high-tech industry en pair with the US,how the hell could Bulgaria do it then?

I wonder what you mean here? LED, tokamak, hydrofoil, Laser, HUD guided missiles, electronic synthesizers, speech processors, listening bug, the entirety of aerospace technology, etc. Look high tech enough to me. And all for the first time Made in the USSR (or a Warsaw pact country). So no - "things" were not lacking.



Except that most Soviet PCs in the late 70s/80s were reverse engineered copies of Western ones...

Look, where do you think the Americans got their CPUs from - aliens?
No, computer technology was developed from scratch at some point, by people who had very little idea of what they were doing as is with all pioneering work. The concept of a programmable machine (and implementation as it were) dates all the way back to ancient Greece. People in the socialist countries were people as anywhere else - they could invent indigenous technologies as good anyone else.
So while you are focusing on this or that shortcoming of a specific gadget, the fact of the matter is anything that could be invented or created, could be created or invented within the socialist block. The resource base did not hinder it. Nor was there any shortage of remarkable talent.

I also see you ignored once more the little historical lesson I allowed myself to give you.

[Iron Felix]

So the famines under Stalin weren't "shortages" of food?

[ComradeOm]

I heard that there were no significant shortages in the USSR until the 80s,especially Gorby's time...You heard wrong. Shortages of consumer goods were a permanent part of the Soviet economy from the First Five Year Plan onwards. For this there were both political reasons (ie, simply not prioritising consumption) and deep structural weakness to blame

[aristos]

Of course they were shortages of food. The entire agriculture was being restructured.
The bigger issue here is that when industrialised the entire "socialist block" territory could have been able to create abundance.

If we take the idea of socialism/communism needing to be global to its logical extreme, it would mean that in a hypothetical scenario where the entire world goes socialist but the island of Madagascar remains staunchly capitalist - socialism will be doomed to fail.
Anyone can understand how absurd such a view is. So this begs the question how much territory is needed before socialism is accomplish-able and stable?
In my view the historical "socialist block" possessed enough such territory.

[tir1944]

The USSR started importing grain in the 50s...

[aristos]

You know what Lysenkoism was, don't you?

[tir1944]

Last time i checked Lysenkoism fell out of favor by 60s,and the USSR kept importing grain until it collapsed...
Stalin's USSR didn't,from what i know,import grain.

[aristos]

Timofeev-Ressovsky and Vavilov were the leading geneticists of their day (basically pioneering that entire discipline).
Your beloved Stalin of course put an end to this (as hid did to many other progressive developments).
The potential to create agricultural abundance was certainly there.

Needless to say after such persecution the USSR not only lost its lead in genetics but strongly fell behind and only slowly started to recover towards the end of its existance.

The main issue with the lopsided economy later on was a pandemic complacency.
Fish rots from the head. So the debauchery and laziness of the ruling bureaucracy found their way down to the masses. Ruling ideas being the ideas of the ruling class and whatnot.
For example there were constantly huge amounts of efficiency maximizing proposals submitted by factory engineers to their managers. Almost always they ended up being put away in the drawer gathering dust. Because it was so much more convenient for the managers to keep production going as before - their performance was not reviewed, they were unaccountable.
This "fuck all" attitude eventually got hold of almost the entire population (hence the crude job policing campaigns by Andropov later on that arrived too late and did not really address the root of the problem). You had people en masse coming to their jobs in the morning, putting their jacket on the chair to create a semblance of being at their workplace and then quietly slipping out to go about their personal business.
It of course didn't help either that ideology was prioritized over the actual technical processes, so that you had bizarre situations where electronics parts were manufactured by poorly trained workers in Uzbekistan (inflated employment) only to have 80% of them discarded, when shipped to Leningrad for quality control . And we are talking about negligence of this scale in the military electronics sector, imagine the rampant chaos in the civilian economy.

[ComradeOm]

The USSR started importing grain in the 50s...No, it was in the early 1970s that the USSR became a net importer of grain


Stalin's USSR didn't,from what i know,import grain.For the record, in 1931 the Soviet state imported some 47 million roubles (at current prices) worth of foodstuffs (see Davies Crisis and Progress in the Soviet Economy). 'Stalin's USSR' never had any qualms about trading with the West

That the USSR was not at this point a net importer of food can be ascribed to the fact that the percentage of Soviet citizens living in urban areas increased by over 50% between 1950 and 1980