Groningen, Holland Is Automobile-Free

Olivers wrote:

In 1959, the standard of living in Cuba was comparable to the most affluent
of Latin American countries. 45 years of Castro saw it lag behind
Aregentina, Chile and a couple of others. Cuba lost ground.

Indeed, but in some respects (education, health) Cuba has managed to
stay ahead. It's undeniable that the economy hasn't been decimated, but
45 years later, with virtually no trade with its largest ecomonic
neighbour- it could be a lot worse. And, as I keep on saying, it
certainly _is_ a lot worse in much of latin america, where there is
often a massive difference between the rich and the poor.

At any moment in time, Castro could have changed the relationship for the
benefit of his countrymen. Even now, the only things which keeps the doors
open are dollar remittances from expatriates and limited tourist earnings.

I suspect that the US attitude would change the moemnt Castro providied any
indication of altering his policies. Afet all, we've started letting
Ghadafi off the hook.

You must be kidding. For a start, there is not an extremely vocal and
politically powerful expatriate Libyan-American community in the US. The
resentment of Castro is ingrained in many US politicians, and not
without reason given the 1960's missile crisis etc.- but after a while,
it would be a good idea to let these things go I think.

But none which had the standard of living enjoyed by Cuba in 1959, relative
or actual, has advanced at the slow rate of the Cuban economy. Even
countries far less afluent than Cuba have now passed it, while the poorest
of Latin American states remain basket cases, but have had "relative"
growth in many instances more raid than Cuba's.

The problem with many latin american countries is, that in spite of
economic growth, this has very rarely tricked down to poorest in the
society. The standard of living enjoyed by Cubans in 1959 was pretty
uneven. Revolutions don't usually start for nothing.

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

David Horne extrapolated from data available...
The standard of living enjoyed by Cubans in 1959 was pretty
uneven.

I'm sure that those in Cuba who would aspire to higher personal standards
of living are quite happy that aside from a handful of government
functionaries, the standard of living is pretty equally modest for
everybody (with the possible exception of a handful of folks with rich
and generous family in the US)


Revolutions don't usually start for nothing.


.....But are perverted or betrayed by ideologues.

Unless and until Cuba provides US politicians with a substantial incentive
for dropping the embargo, it will likely remain in place. Obviously, the
exile community represents a substantial basis for its support, but a far
wider cross section of American voters continue to see it as a significant
issue. Only a handful of the most liberal of serving Democrats would hang
their careers on supporting changes to the current policy Cuba. That's
a principal reason that any realistic motivation for change likely must
come from Cuba. There's nothing to be gained arguing sociopolitical rights
or wrongs, simply the reality of a half century's experience.

TMO

TMO

I have one major problem with the US economic embargo as driven by the
exile Cuban community. The concept is that most folks in the US are
forbidden to have any economic contact with Cuba but the exile community
can send money & travel freely. It should be everyone has no contact or
everyone can visit.

David Horne wrote:
Olivers wrote:


In 1959, the standard of living in Cuba was comparable to the most affluent
of Latin American countries. 45 years of Castro saw it lag behind
Aregentina, Chile and a couple of others. Cuba lost ground.


Indeed, but in some respects (education, health) Cuba has managed to
stay ahead. It's undeniable that the economy hasn't been decimated, but
45 years later, with virtually no trade with its largest ecomonic
neighbour- it could be a lot worse. And, as I keep on saying, it
certainly _is_ a lot worse in much of latin america, where there is
often a massive difference between the rich and the poor.


At any moment in time, Castro could have changed the relationship for the
benefit of his countrymen. Even now, the only things which keeps the doors
open are dollar remittances from expatriates and limited tourist earnings.

I suspect that the US attitude would change the moemnt Castro providied any
indication of altering his policies. Afet all, we've started letting
Ghadafi off the hook.


You must be kidding. For a start, there is not an extremely vocal and
politically powerful expatriate Libyan-American community in the US. The
resentment of Castro is ingrained in many US politicians, and not
without reason given the 1960's missile crisis etc.- but after a while,
it would be a good idea to let these things go I think.


But none which had the standard of living enjoyed by Cuba in 1959, relative
or actual, has advanced at the slow rate of the Cuban economy. Even
countries far less afluent than Cuba have now passed it, while the poorest
of Latin American states remain basket cases, but have had "relative"
growth in many instances more raid than Cuba's.


The problem with many latin american countries is, that in spite of
economic growth, this has very rarely tricked down to poorest in the
society. The standard of living enjoyed by Cubans in 1959 was pretty
uneven. Revolutions don't usually start for nothing.

David

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote:

Everyone SHHHHHHHHH...

The best reason to go to Cuba is because there aren't a lot of loud mouth
American tourists running around like there are in Mexico and most of the
other banana republics...

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote:

I have one major problem with the US economic embargo as driven by the
exile Cuban community. The concept is that most folks in the US are
forbidden to have any economic contact with Cuba but the exile community
can send money & travel freely. It should be everyone has no contact or
everyone can visit.

Just one complaint with it? I would have thought that the infringement upon the
freedom of all Americans would be a major concern. Then there is the issue of
trying to extend American law beyond its borders by preventing foreign companies
from dealing with Cuba. A local man just went through legal hell after being
charged with selling water purification equipment to Cuba through a Canadian
company.

Around a week ago the discussion of "Car Free Fantasy" drifted into a
discussion of the Cuban economy and then of the US economic boycott.
Complain to the folks who started the drift.

127.0.0.1 wrote:

On Wed, 19 May 2004 15:35:48 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:


I have one major problem with the US economic embargo as driven by the
exile Cuban community.

what does any of this drivel have to do with travel to europe?

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message ...
Around a week ago the discussion of "Car Free Fantasy" drifted into a
discussion of the Cuban economy and then of the US economic boycott.
Complain to the folks who started the drift.

127.0.0.1 wrote:

On Wed, 19 May 2004 15:35:48 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:


I have one major problem with the US economic embargo as driven by the
exile Cuban community.

what does any of this drivel have to do with travel to europe?


The freedom to travel issue is one which will develop more and more
strongly over the next few years. The ability of the US Bureaucrats to block
travel to anywhere they set their hearts on was supported by a 5-4 Supreme
Court decision in the 80s of a law which hardened the embargo on Cuba.

I see no legal barrier for the US, for example, imposing the same travel
restrictions on Americans visiting France. "Punishing" France was a policy
decision of Condi Rice, acting for the President. "Punishing" Cuba is
part of a larger picture and has continued since 1960.

One irony which adds to the trajedy of Nick Berg's death is that he, as private
individual, was allowed to roam the Iraqi landscape and do things he
would have feen fined doing if he had visited Cuba.

Earl


*******

Senseless crackdown on Cuba


By Douglas Starr *|* May 12, 2004

WHILE AMERICA was watching the images of abused Iraqi prisoners, I saw
the same images from my hotel room in another country slated for
regime change: Cuba. I'd gone there to do research on that nation's
biotech industry. During the week I spent there I learned more about
my own country than I'd expected -- much of it disappointing. I'd
always been an agnostic on Castro and Cuba, but it's hard to remain
that way after seeing the collateral effects of our four-decade
embargo. Whole sections of Havana seem to be decaying. Hospitals exist
day to day on medicines, researchers improvise scientific equipment,
and there are national shortages in just about everything. Even
accounting for Cuban mismanagement, world health authorities have
linked the embargo and its ripple effects to epidemics and food
shortages.

The embargo does more than cut off American trade. It seeks to prevent
all other commerce as well. Under the ever tightening restrictions, no
ship that loads or unloads anything in a Cuban port can dock in
America for six months. Food and medicine have been restricted.
Foreign companies that do business with Cuba are discouraged or even
prohibited from doing business in the United States. In other words,
even though no other nations agree with our Cuba policy, we bludgeon
them into acquiescing. Sound familiar?

Those measures are sinking to new levels of meanness under the Bush
administration. Eager to curry the Miami extremist vote, the
administration has eliminated all "people to people" cultural
exchanges and university-related educational travel. Customs agents
at airports in Canada, Mexico, and other third-country way stations
have been alerted to nab any American tourists who might try to
end-run the travel restrictions. The enforcement branch of the
Treasury Department has beefed up its anti-Cuba surveillance, devoting
21 full-time employees to enforcing the Cuban embargo and travel ban.
Only four track the finances of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

Explaining the policy in a February speech, Treasury Secretary John
Snow said, "We're cutting off American dollars headed for Fidel
Castro, period."

But is it really about dollars? Or is it about stopping all contact
between Cubans and Americans?

This spring the Treasury Department canceled permission for 75
American neurologists and bioethicists to travel to Havana just days
before they were scheduled to depart for an international conference
on coma and death. In February the State Department refused to allow
Ibrahim Ferrer, the 76-year-old singer with the Buena Vista Social
Club, to attend the Grammy Awards because his entry would be
"detrimental to the interests" of our country.

Just a few weeks ago, our government fined Barbara and Wally Smith, a
retired Vermont couple, $55,000 for violating the travel ban. Their
crime: bicycling around Cuba and creating a book and website about the
trip.

With the election approaching, Bush wants to tighten the screws even
further. Last week the government released its long-awaited 500-page
plan to help remove Castro's "decrepit regime," in the words of
Assistant Secretary of State Robert Noriega. We will be spending $59
million over the next two years to help bring about the regime change
in Cuba, up from the current level of $7 million per year.

Maybe there was once reason for the embargo. But the Cuban missile
crisis was more than 40 years ago. The island poses no threat to us
now, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union. (The Bush
administration's charges of bioweapons production have been shown to
be groundless by a team of distinguished American investigators.)

Nor does the embargo have anything to do with human rights. China had
a worse record when Nixon opened the door in 1972, and American trade
helped liberalize that nation. Americans can legally to travel to such
paragons of human rights as Libya, North Vietnam, and Algeria. Cuba is
the world's only country to which the United States forbids our own
ordinary citizens to travel.

The Cubans I met were well educated, resilient, and showed no trace of
self-pity despite facing daunting odds every day. They enjoy universal
literacy and health care. Despite Cuba's poverty, its life expectancy
and infant mortality rates equal those of the United States, according
to the World Health Organization. They seem to have creative energy to
burn.

They're also eager for American tourism and trade, which experience
shows would liberalize their politics. Meanwhile, as one Cuban asked
me: "Aren't we allowed to have our own form of government?"

Back in my hotel room, I flipped on CNN and watched the kaleidoscope
of images that constitute the news from America: Soldiers in body
armor, Michael Jackson waving to admirers, a commercial for a
lumbering SUV. And then came the photos of the abused Iraqi prisoners.
Does this reflect the values of the world's greatest democracy? Or
does it reinforce what the rest of the world thinks our nation has
become -- a spoiled, self-absorbed, adolescent bully?

Douglas Starr is co-director of the Knight Center for Science and
Medical Journalism at the Boston University College of Communication.
*

"Earl" wrote in message
om...
"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...
Around a week ago the discussion of "Car Free Fantasy" drifted into a
discussion of the Cuban economy and then of the US economic boycott.
Complain to the folks who started the drift.

127.0.0.1 wrote:

On Wed, 19 May 2004 15:35:48 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:


I have one major problem with the US economic embargo as driven by the
exile Cuban community.

what does any of this drivel have to do with travel to europe?


The freedom to travel issue is one which will develop more and more
strongly over the next few years. The ability of the US Bureaucrats to
block
travel to anywhere they set their hearts on was supported by a 5-4 Supreme
Court decision in the 80s of a law which hardened the embargo on Cuba.


It is not illegal for U.S. residents to travel to Cuba. An absolute ban was
declared unconstitutional in 1963.

U.S. legislation only addresses spending money in Cuba. Naturally, as a
traveler you require accommodations, food and other necessities - as such
the law equates to a ban on travel for U.S. residents.


I see no legal barrier for the US, for example, imposing the same travel
restrictions on Americans visiting France.

They would have ban trade with all countries in the Eurozone,
I seriously doubt that any US President or Congress
would choose to exclude itself from such a major market.

Keith

"Earl" wrote in message
om...
One irony which adds to the trajedy of Nick Berg's death is that he, as
private
individual, was allowed to roam the Iraqi landscape and do things he
would have feen fined doing if he had visited Cuba.

Earl




Add to that the federal resources devoted to the Cuba thing - for the sake
of a few hundred thousand potential votes in South Florida at the expense of
the rest of the nation, from News of the Weird:

And in April, the Treasury Department's agency that investigates allegedly
illegal financing across U.S. borders was revealed to have only four agents
working on money traceable to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, but 21
agents working full-time on violations of the U.S. embargo of Cuba. [Toledo
Blade-AP, 4-29-04]

Chris

Path:
stones.force9.net!landlord!nntp-peering.plus.net!ptn-nntp-feeder01.plus.
net!news.glorb.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkele y!feed.news.qwest.net!
news.uswest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Steve Austin"
Newsgroups: rec.travel.usa-canada,rec.travel.europe
Subject: Groningen, Holland Is Automobile-Free
Lines: 4
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 17:43:51 -0600
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.40.96.203
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1084232646 67.40.96.203 (Mon, 10 May 2004
18:44:06 CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 18:44:06 CDT
Xref: landlord rec.travel.usa-canada:150269 rec.travel.europe:417554

Groningen, Holland is automobile-free. It's a bicycle and
pedestrian-only city.