Log in

View Full Version : Cuba state owned companies to run like corporations????



bootleg42
5th July 2008, 22:49
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bd027fb8-414c-11dd-9661-0000779fd2ac.html


Cuba determined to perfect statist economy


By Marc Frank in Havana
Published: June 23 2008 19:04 | Last updated: June 23 2008 19:04



At the recent metal workers’ union congress in Havana little seemed to have changed since Fidel Castro, former Cuban president, became ill almost two years ago, temporarily handing power to his brother Raúl before resigning and leaving the country’s leadership to him last February.There was no jockeying among cadres for a piece of privatised industry pie. There was no talk of competition, markets, strikes or other action against management, or turning state-owned businesses into co-operatives. Speeches calling on members to work harder for Cuba, Fidel, Raúl and revolution resounded through the hall as they have for decades.


“The key is in perfeccionamiento empresarial” – perfecting the state company system – read the banner headline in Workers, the trade union federation’s weekly newspaper.
The union meeting was the latest evidence that a debate fostered by Raúl Castro has for now been settled in favour of those who want to improve one of the world’s most statist economies – not dismantle it – using a business model developed when the president was defence minister to improve the performance of armed forces suppliers.

Perfeccionamiento empresarial is based on adopting modern management and accounting practices, often gleaned from the study of private corporations, for state-run companies. It grants management more authority over day-to-day decisions and imposes more discipline on workers while also increasing their participation in decisions and incentives for labour.


“Perfeccionamiento empresarial has no exact analogy in capitalist economies and is not borrowed from other socialist countries’ models of reform,” Phil Peters, an expert on Cuba at the Lexington Institute in Virginia, wrote in a study of the military’s economic model.


Raúl Castro signed a 200-page law last August ordering all 3,000 state-run companies to adopt the model. He also promoted General Julio Casas Regueiro, who was in charge of the military’s businesses, to defence minister and top spots in the Communist party and government when he officially became president on February 24.


The policy does not contradict Raúl Castro’s recent moves to lift restrictions on the use of mobile phones, computers and other goods and services, nor partnerships with foreign companies and more private initiatives. The bulk of the economy and its core industries and finances will remain in state hands.


Raúl Castro is not waiting for all companies to adopt his model – a lengthy process of sorting out bad books, Soviet-style management and paternalism.


Cuba’s economy is on a better footing than in the 1990s. Foreign exchange earnings are relatively strong due to the export of medical and other professional services – mainly to Venezuela – as well as tourism, high nickel prices and soft Chinese loans.


But the state has had problems investing these revenues through its many companies, many of which suffer from poor accounting and management.
“Perfeccionamiento does not aim to turn Cuba into a China or Taiwan in terms of level of development and integration into globalisation. In the end, the objective is political,” said Frank Mora, Cuba expert at the War College in Washington.


“Raúl Castro needs to defuse the social, economic and political pressure of rising expectations and increasing food costs by implementing and broadening a set of very focused economic reforms.”


I got this from the london financial times. The business press is very honest in their reporting (not for altruistic reasons of course). This sounds worrying.......

Herman
6th July 2008, 00:02
There should be improvements in management when it comes to a state company. However, the best improvements are done by automatizing communications (e.g. computers, intranet, databases, etc), not using the same model that European and American companies have.

trivas7
6th July 2008, 01:42
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bd027fb8-414c-11dd-9661-0000779fd2ac.html

drosera99 assures us that Cuba is a capitalist country:


Cuba is a capitalist country.

Future socialism should not look to Cuba as a model IMO.

bayano
8th July 2008, 17:49
very distressing. this is exactly the conversation ive been having with people- is cuba moving toward chinese-style state capitalism. and i have comrades (who dont call chinese and vietnamese styles 'state capitalism' like i do) who argue yes. very distressing. look at the mondragon style of so many worker co-ops that function on a wide scale and have existed as long as cuban socialism has. why is there any need to increase the powers and size of a managerial class, rather than to do away with all such nonesense.

remember, socialism isnt about great public healthcare and education, everyone having housing, or everyone basically getting paid the same. it is about popular control, workers control, the control of the whole by all the population.

Joe Hill's Ghost
8th July 2008, 18:13
drosera99 assures us that Cuba is a capitalist country:

Future socialism should not look to Cuba as a model IMO.


You enjoy that quote don't you? Anyway, I would agree with drosera here. Though I'm sure Nothing Human is ready to jump on this thread denouncing us all, seeing as Cuba is the only true "worker's state" in the world now.

Wanted Man
8th July 2008, 18:47
*sigh*

Okay, so let's get the bold quote straight: managers get more authority over decisions, and yet the workers also get more participation in decisionmaking? What is it going to be? The business press may be honest, but it also manages to contradict itself within one sentence.

Joe Hill's Ghost, I'll do the honour instead of NHIA: you can't think of a proper argument against Cuba and you know it. So instead, you just wait for any opportunity to denounce Cuba, nevermind glaring contradictions and those pesky things called 'facts'. Any media report will do, just as long as it confirms your opinion. Any other voices (like NHIA, who, unlike you, has some knowledge on the subject) must be ridiculed, in order to mask your own complete ignorance.

Joe Hill's Ghost
8th July 2008, 19:07
Dumbass-

Lets do a little mental exercise here. If we have two propositions, called A and B, and the two are mutually exclusive, then A and B cannot existence simultaneously.


It grants management more authority over day-to-day decisions and imposes more discipline on workers

This is option A


while also increasing their participation in decisions

This is B

Managers who have more power, don't allow more worker "participation" in any meaningful way. This is akin to "cogestion" in Venezuela or "comanagement" in several european companies. They pretend to give workers horizontal structures, while the power of the bosses remains ever the stronger. Though in these cases, I don't think managers get extra power to discipline workers. But cuban managers do!

Yehuda Stern
8th July 2008, 20:29
Well, this should be useful on the other thread. Congratulations for Cuba, the only communist country in the world, whose economy is so backwards it has to rely on models developed for capitalist firms.

Wanted Man
8th July 2008, 22:06
Dumbass-

Lets do a little mental exercise here. If we have two propositions, called A and B, and the two are mutually exclusive, then A and B cannot existence simultaneously.



[/B]This is option A



This is B

Managers who have more power, don't allow more worker "participation" in any meaningful way. This is akin to "cogestion" in Venezuela or "comanagement" in several european companies. They pretend to give workers horizontal structures, while the power of the bosses remains ever the stronger. Though in these cases, I don't think managers get extra power to discipline workers. But cuban managers do!
Okay, there's option A and B. So how does it follow that option A is necessarily right, and that B only exists in name, if at all. And how do you know? Well, it's just a feeling you get from a news message. You want Cuba to be capitalist, so it must be A.

Joe Hill's Ghost
8th July 2008, 23:20
Okay, there's option A and B. So how does it follow that option A is necessarily right, and that B only exists in name, if at all. And how do you know? Well, it's just a feeling you get from a news message. You want Cuba to be capitalist, so it must be A.

The article says that Cuba is examining corporations, not Mondragon, or Zanon, but corporations. It follows then that greater manager control is the order of the day.

Saorsa
9th July 2008, 07:11
^ Um, and since when has the Financial Times been a reliable source for truthful articles when it comes to the question of socialism and socialist countries? I thought anarchists claimed to be opposed to capitalism... funny how this one appears to have a great deal of trust in capitalist sources!

All this article suggests to me is that Raul Castro is calling on the management of state run firms to be more efficient. Big fucking deal.

bootleg42
9th July 2008, 07:40
^ Um, and since when has the Financial Times been a reliable source for truthful articles when it comes to the question of socialism and socialist countries? I thought anarchists claimed to be opposed to capitalism... funny how this one appears to have a great deal of trust in capitalist sources!

The business press tends to be very honest in their reporting (even if they have different semantics than us). They don't report truthfully for altruistic reasons of course. They are honest because the business world are the ones that read these papers, NOT most working people or even most educated people (unless they are involved in business or economics). The business world needs to know the truth without most of the propaganda that "regular mainstream media" gives. It's a good strategy to read the business press about events. The semantics may differ but the main points are truthful MANY TIMES.


All this article suggests to me is that Raul Castro is calling on the management of state run firms to be more efficient. Big fucking deal.

Yes but for it to be ran like a corporation in terms of structure is the main point I wanted to push. It's not me shitting on Cuba dogmatically by any means. It's just me passing information.

cyu
9th July 2008, 19:20
The business press tends to be very honest in their reporting (even if they have different semantics than us). They don't report truthfully for altruistic reasons of course. They are honest because the business world are the ones that read these papers, NOT most working people or even most educated people (unless they are involved in business or economics). The business world needs to know the truth without most of the propaganda that "regular mainstream media" gives.


Business reporters give their customers what they want to see. If their customers want rationalizations that what they are doing is for the good of humanity, then that's what the reporters will give them. Its reporting is as religious as a Christian newspaper is - they've managed to convince themselves that everything from wide gaps between rich and poor, weak unions, and gold standards are good for the world. It's crap - I'm surprised you believe it's "truthful" at all.

Joe Hill's Ghost
9th July 2008, 19:30
^ Um, and since when has the Financial Times been a reliable source for truthful articles when it comes to the question of socialism and socialist countries? I thought anarchists claimed to be opposed to capitalism... funny how this one appears to have a great deal of trust in capitalist sources!

All this article suggests to me is that Raul Castro is calling on the management of state run firms to be more efficient. Big fucking deal.


I assume the business press to be truthful in minor details like this. They don't have any motive to present the situation in a hyper capitalist light. The business press has to provide reliable coverage to business leaders, otherwise they'd have a hard time raping and pillaging. The rest of the article is pretty balanced, I don't see why we shouldn't accept it as relatively truthful.