• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you miss the Cold War?

Do you miss the Cold War?

  • Yes, I miss the spirit

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • Yes (beacause there was no globalisation)

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • Yes (beacause I was young)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes (various reasons)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No because I don't have memories

    Votes: 4 44.4%
  • No although I have memories

    Votes: 3 33.3%
  • I like the Cold War better than today

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • I like today better than the Cold War

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • There was o suh thing as the Cold War

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    9
Not sure what you're trying to get at here. Could you elaborate?

I think the worst it got back then was when you were dealing with union workers. In general, people understood how democracy and capitalism went hand in hand because the alternative was a totalitarian means of production that was supposedly for all the people.

Now, people don't remember that anymore.

There's also a cultural aspect in how people seem much more addicted to consuming just to wear things out in order to achieve social status, and that goes along with the abundance of personal debt people accumulate like crazy.

It's no wonder then that people clamor for government regulation so much. They don't want to take care of themselves and really get to know the people around them. Everyone's all about being cool by living in the moment or doing what's popular.

When it came to "made in China/Japan" people understood the value of consumer sovereignty.
 
Last edited:
I think the worst it got back then was when you were dealing with union workers. In general, people understood how democracy and capitalism went hand in hand because the alternative was a totalitarian means of production that was supposedly for all the people.

Now, people don't remember that anymore.

There's also a cultural aspect in how people seem much more addicted to consuming just to wear things out in order to achieve social status, and that goes along with the abundance of personal debt people accumulate like crazy.

It's no wonder then that people clamor for government regulation so much. They don't want to take care of themselves and really get to know the people around them. Everyone's all about being cool by living in the moment or doing what's popular.

When it came to "made in China/Japan" people understood the value of consumer sovereignty.

So it'd probably be more accurate to say that you miss that time period, rather than missing the "Cold War" itself.
 
Well like I said, people had the Soviet Union to look upon as an anti-free market country.

Now, people don't have that immediate example. When you're dealing with dialectic/a posteriori/experimental/concrete feelers, you really need that example to explain "this or else"...

...but yea, gas prices were cheaper.
 
Wasn't really aware of it until it was over, but I doubt I would have missed it.
 
Cold war - a war bettween years 1946 or 1947 i guess till 1991. A war where were used no guns. A war characterized by propaganda, political conflicts, military tension due to espionage, economical hard competition.

In simple words: Both sides USA and USSR were spying each others and no one ever used guns since during their espionage they realised the strength of each others and they valuated that the best way on that time would be to out the guns down.

Imo both USA and USSR were so much strong and so much weak to each other eyes that they were both afraid to attack or not.


Anyway i don't get. What's so special that we or anyone else around here could miss from cold war??

I mean Cold War wasn't smth that most of society felt or was involved so in this way some of them may have nostalgy. Only secret agents may miss smth for cold war.
I mean, we other and simple people were at home trying to recover and re-construct our own homes which were destroyed during ww2.


Just that imo this subject could be made up in a better way. I see most of people here say: Ye, i miss cold war coz rock music was hot on that time and things like that. (while i'm sure they think only about years 80-90)
Some others of us (including me) when saw in title Cold War though about it's politic side.
 
Well like I said, people had the Soviet Union to look upon as an anti-free market country.

Now, people don't have that immediate example. When you're dealing with dialectic/a posteriori/experimental/concrete feelers, you really need that example to explain "this or else"...

...but yea, gas prices were cheaper.

Well, I grew up after the Cold War ended, but you don't really need to explain to the vast majority of people that a command economy simply doesn't work.
 
Well, I grew up after the Cold War ended, but you don't really need to explain to the vast majority of people that a command economy simply doesn't work.

You'd be surprised how many people I've encountered who earnestly think that a planned economy is inherently "better" than a market economy.
 
The Soviets aren't the bad guys in movies anymore. I suppose it gives more work to British actors...
 
Well, I grew up after the Cold War ended, but you don't really need to explain to the vast majority of people that a command economy simply doesn't work.

The Soviet economy didn't work for a variety of reasons, this is an unfounded generalization.
 
well, Marxist's theories were and are the best ones. Too bad it was implemented by communists in the worse way.
 
Where is the "No, because this is an idiotic question" option?
 
Doesn't exist for bra burning Dragon Age players. :p

Lum would be disappointed. :naughty
 
...none of them being that planned economies are inherently unsustainable.

Planned economies are unsustainable when they are directed by a bureaucracy detached from the population as a whole. They only work when there is a unity of supply and demand, i.e. socialism. The Soviet economy - and all derived from it - ultimately failed because of this and because they were directed for political goals by a bureaucracy resembling a headless chicken. One can't deny its success in developing the means of production in a quarter of the time of that of British capitalism, though.
 
Last edited:
Planned economies are unsustainable when they are directed by a bureaucracy detached from the population as a whole. They only work when there is a unity of supply and demand, i.e. socialism. The Soviet economy - and all derived from it - ultimately failed because of this and because they were directed for political goals by a bureaucracy resembling a headless chicken. One can't deny its success in developing the means of production in a quarter of the time of that of British capitalism, though.

"A centrally planned economy is one in which the total direction and development of a nation's economy is planned and administered by its government. The antithesis of central planning is capitalism which is characterized by private sector control of production, distribution, and consumption. Capitalism also functions by being responsive to marketplace demands. Central planning, on the other hand, functions through administrative directives. While capitalism is generally regarded as an economic rather than a political system, centrally planned economies have strong political overtones and are closely associated with socialistic and communistic governments. It is rare, however, for any economic system to exist in a pure state. For instance, the health-care system of the People's Republic of China, an avowed communist state, is in a state of transition. China's universal health-care system, which was based on central planning, has largely been dismantled and replaced with various health insurance schemes, many of which are funded by member contributions. Private sector employees and the self-employed are often without any coverage and must bear the entire cost of health care themselves.

Central planning evolved in the Soviet Union following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Vladimir Lenin established two economic plans known as War Communism and the New Economic Policy. War Communism, in effect from 1918 to 1920, attempted to abolish money, control production, and confiscate peasant crops for distribution. The collapse of War Communism was concurrent with the creation of a planning commission known as Gosplan. The role of Gosplan, although vague and undefined, was not harmonious with the New Economic Policy which was established in 1921. Beginning in 1925 Gosplan began publishing economic appraisals for each upcoming year. These soon turned into five-year forecasts which began as nonbinding estimates of future economic activity. This practice, however, soon evolved into the First Five-Year Plan of 1928 which marked the beginning of a formal centrally planned economy for the Soviet Union. The five-year plans attempted to engineer a balance between demand and output but were overly optimistic and based on unrealistic growth predictions. The primary purpose of central planning in the Soviet Union was the attainment of the five-year-plan goals, which state authorities formulated.

Central economic planning as practiced in the Soviet Union and other communist countries required subordination, obedience, and discipline on the part of the individual for the benefit of the state. Choice was limited to the existing supply of goods and services and private decision making in regards to employment, occupation, and selection of workplace was also severely restricted. In communist Poland, for instance, the primary role of labor unions was to expedite the production goals of the state planning commissions. Also in that country, wage levels were determined not through collective bargaining or marketplace demand but rather by central planning authorities without any union input.

Central planning failed for a number of reasons including: inefficient allocation of resources and labor; upward transmission of distorted and self-serving information from agencies low on the hierarchical ladder; set prices unrelated to cost, supply, and demand; and inefficient execution and administration of the various economic plans.

Central planning, however, can sometimes be brutally efficient on a microlevel for channeling scarce resources to economic imperatives. A good example of this is a nation with a war economy. Nylon, for example, was essential for the production of parachutes during World War II. Because supplies of this fabric were limited, government planners requisitioned all available nylon for the making of parachutes. This eliminated future supplies of nylon hosiery, a product whose only utility was cosmetic and thus completely lacking in military value. This example also illustrates a primary feature of central planning—subordination of the price mechanism. The fact that a given quantity of nylon could be used to make either thousands of pairs of nylon hosiery worth thousands of dollars in revenue or a single parachute worth $25 was irrelevant to the central planning authorities.

"Secondary economies" are also a feature of planned economies and are brought about in part by the production of consumer goods marked by poor quality and lack of choice. In such cases consumers often resort to moonlighting, corruption, and the black market to satisfy their demands. Secondary economies provide the necessary mechanism to satisfy excess demand while frustrating the goals of central planning by diverting needed assets to so called "nonproductive" uses. A black market for nylon hosiery, to use the previous example, will work to mollify consumer demand but shift scarce resources away from parachute production as demanded by the government. Secondary economies also come about because planning authorities determine supply on the basis of the government's own needs and imperatives, Demand, manifested in offering prices, has no bearing on the supply quotas established by the government."

Linkage.
 
I was born two years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but I feel like I was born in the wrong era: the birth of a massive military-industrial complex, millions of people dying in proxy wars, the threat of billions more dying in an all-out nuclear exchange, and having to contend with a corrupt, tyrannical form of government. Truly golden days :roll:
 
"Secondary economies" are also a feature of planned economies and are brought about in part by the production of consumer goods marked by poor quality and lack of choice. In such cases consumers often resort to moonlighting, corruption, and the black market to satisfy their demands. Secondary economies provide the necessary mechanism to satisfy excess demand while frustrating the goals of central planning by diverting needed assets to so called "nonproductive" uses. A black market for nylon hosiery, to use the previous example, will work to mollify consumer demand but shift scarce resources away from parachute production as demanded by the government. Secondary economies also come about because planning authorities determine supply on the basis of the government's own needs and imperatives, Demand, manifested in offering prices, has no bearing on the supply quotas established by the government."

Linkage.

This sounds like a description of any of America's ghettoes.
 
Furthermore...

"Command Economy
A market where the government or some central authority decides where to allocate resources
Advantages and Disadvantages of a Planned Economy
Advantages:
The government can influence the distribution of income.
The government can determine which goods are supplied.
Disadvantages:
In order to function well, requires an enormous amount of information which is difficult to obtain.
No real incentive for individuals to be innovative. Goods are of poor quality since there is a lack of profit motive.
May NOT lead to allocative efficiency or productive efficiency due to lack of competition and profit motives.
Corruption - the government has the ability to abuse its absolute power.
The economy does not respond as well to supply and demand, firms are simply told to produce a certain number of goods or services

Central planning:
Resources and production systems are owned by the central government which allows the government to determine what is produced, how and for whom.
Enormous information is required due to centralized planning and control. Government planners must:
Predict patterns of consumer demand
Estimate technological possibilities and production capabilities
Estimate the opportunity cost of resources in alternative uses.
Producers are motivated to underestimate their capability
Advantages of central planning:
The govt. can make the distribution of income more equal
The govt. determines what goods are produced and can prevent production of socially undesirable goods.
Initially higher growth rates for Russia and China would suggest that as a system of organizing economic activity, central planning is successful in the early stages of economic development
Disadvantages of central planning:
Requires large amounts of information: forecasting people’s desires is difficult and the lack of incentives have led to a number of problems:
Decision makers do not experience profits and losses and are not strongly motivated to make the right decisions
Incentives to falsify production information lead to poor production decisions and massive pollution,
A reluctance to change with the market in forecasting demand:
There are queues when there are shortages (quantity rationing), and stockpiles if there are surpluses.
State owned enterprises are managed inefficiently.
There is no incentive for individuals and firms to be innovative. With no profit motive goods are often of poor quality and choice is very limited."
 
No I don't.

And you know what? There isn't *that* much difference between the Cold War era and the War on Terror era. The only difference is that during the Cold War you knew who the enemy was and that they had nukes to annihilate you with, while during the War on Terror you don't know where the enemy is coming from and where in the country they'll hit.

Either way, during both eras the government sought to gain power over the citizenry by making them afraid.
We had more individual freedom with the Cold War.
 
This sounds like a description of any of America's ghettoes.

Black markets exist in ghettos and everywhere else because, by definition they aren't recognized by the government.
 
Back
Top Bottom