Re: Socialism or Capitalism: What is better?

David Friedman kirjoitti:
> In article <5fnlk.44302$_03.22569@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>  "J. Anderson" <andersons6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>> As far as values are concerned, Finland bought raw materials at lower
than 
>> world market prices and sold manufactured goods and construction
projects at 
>> higher prices than it could get on the western markets.

> 1. Can you provide any sup****t for that claim? So far all we have are 
> claims on both sides.

> 2. Why would the Soviets choose to trade on those terms, instead of 
> selling their raw materials on the world market and buying manufactured 
> goods on the world market? 

It was politically questionable for both the western and eastern bloc to 
become "good buddies" in trade. If trade had flourished between the USSR 
and NATO west neither side could any longer have been able to demonize 
one another, and their military machines in Europe could have been hard 
to justify. If they generally were very suspicious of each other it 
makes sense that they did not want to get too much involved in trade 
either. I also find it credible that ideology-driven communists weren't 
that skilled at economics and trade in a way that they could act at 
their own best interests, which makes the claim that Finns got the 
longer straw from it credible. That's my 2 cents.

> Are you arguing that the Soviets were bribing 
> the Finns in order to get the Finns to provide either sup****t for Soviet

> policy or an example of how safe it was to be outside the western 
> alliance or both?
> 

I can't speak of the behalf of Johnny, Eugene or anybody else. My guess 
is: a little of both, and that they could use us as a proxy for their 
political initiatives.

-- 
Anton