Fidel Castro is Dead

I work with a Argie - he went several times in the 90s on a lads holiday. They would take cases loaded with stockings/underwear and make up and trade it with the local ladies for 'favors'. Amazing what they would do for a pair of tights...
No shit eh, Cigars and stocking clad latino birds......One first class ticket, please! :hump:
 
No shit eh, Cigars and stocking clad latino birds......One first class ticket, please! :hump:
He said they would meet them at the airport and basically be companions for the vacation. His wife is Cuban American actually - @KGB_resident You should hear what they say about Castro's death - They are having a party this weekend :)
 
I work with a Argie - he went several times in the 90s on a lads holiday. They would take cases loaded with stockings/underwear and make up and trade it with the local ladies for 'favors'. Amazing what they would do for a pair of tights...
Sounds like pop in Tidworth in Early 44 except hershey bars and nylons (and Soap)
 
@KGB_resident It is quite obvious that you have never been to Cuba by the drivel that you are spouting.
Sir, if you disagree with something that I have written then propose your learned opinion. It your obedient servant has made some factual mistake then just point to it.
 
I've asked people what was the best thing about visiting Cuba. Some of them replied "no Americans".

More seriously, Cuba is very popular for low cost vacations. If you have the money to spend however, there are better resorts on other islands in the region.
Yes, Cuba is a very big island with endless beeches, nice climate and it is very inexpensive resort with many attractions for tourists. Why Turkey and Egypt are so popular tourist destinations? They are inexpensive. Yes, there are alternatives in Cyprus, Greece, Croatia and so on but cost/quality ratio matters. Only 50-60 thousands Russians visit Cuba annually due to very expensive air-tickets.
The Globe and Mail is indeed a serious newspaper. However, you missed the most important part of the story, which is the line below the author's name which said "Special to The Globe and Mail". That indicates the author is not a staff reporter. He's someone from outside who was invited to submit an opinion column. What you see there is his own opinion which does not necessarily reflect that of the regular newspaper staff. The Globe and Mail does this from time to time in order to bring a wider selection of opinions to their readership and avoid being too closed to outside influences.
You have a point here, but note that G&M has special section - 'Opinion' and the article was published in another section 'Business'. And anyway G&M bears responsibility for fantasies presented as proven facts on its pages. Tomorrow somebody would write that there are 100 thousands victims of cannibalism in Russia due to Putin's policy and what? Maybe G&M would say that it is just 'an opinion'?
Yes, serious newspapers sometimes presents falsehoods namely in form of 'opinion'. Let's look at the article closely. We see
Reports on Business >> Commentary
So Business section editor of G&M no doubt had read the article before it was published. He(she) saw Cuban GDP estimate for 2008 and saw the claim that Cuban economy that year was 3d to the bottom in Latin America. It is not strictly speaking 'an opinion' it is data presented as established fact. Anybody who more or less aware about economy would be very surprised looking at such 'information'. So there are 3 altternatives
1) human mistake of the editor
2) low qualification of the editor
3) publication of the article in this form was intentional.
1) In this case G&M should make own commentary and bring appology to its readers for disinformation. We don't see it.
2) It tells a lot about G&M and reliability of information that the newspaper presents.
3) Personally I think that it was made intentionally.
Anybody including mr.Milke has right to express own opinion but G&M is anyway responsible for reliability of data presented as proven facts on its pages (if it is indeed a serious edition).

Btw, there is no any note that the article reflects point of view of the author only.
Phrase 'Special to The Globe and Mail' can be understood that the article was written exclusively for G&M.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like pop in Tidworth in Early 44 except hershey bars and nylons (and Soap)
Hmmm, I have seen the women in tidworth and I wouldnt compare them!
 
You have a point here, but note that G&M has special section - 'Opinion' and the article was published in another section 'Business'. And anyway G&M bears responsibility for fantasies presented as proven facts on its pages. Tomorrow somebody would write that there are 100 thousands victims of cannibalism in Russia due to Putin's policy and what? Maybe G&M would say that it is just 'an opinion'?
Yes, serious newspapers sometimes presents falsehoods namely in form of 'opinion'. Let's look at the article closely. We see

So Business section editor of G&M no doubt had read the article before it was published. He(she) saw Cuban GDP estimate for 2008 and saw the claim that Cuban economy that year was 3d to the bottom in Latin America. It is not strictly speaking 'an opinion' it is data presented as established fact. Anybody who more or less aware about economy would be very surprised looking at such 'information'. So there are 3 altternatives
1) human mistake of the editor
2) low qualification of the editor
3) publication of the article in this form was intentional.
1) In this case G&M should make own commentary and bring appology to its readers for disinformation. We don't see it.
2) It tells a lot about G&M and reliability of information that the newspaper presents.
3) Personally I think that it was made intentionally.
Anybody including mr.Milke has right to express own opinion but G&M is anyway responsible for reliability of data presented as proven facts on its pages (if it is indeed a serious edition).

Btw, there is no any note that the article reflects point of view of the author only.
Phrase 'Special to The Globe and Mail' can be understood that the article was written exclusively for G&M.
I'm sure the Globe and Mail would be fascinated to receive your advice on how they should run their newspaper. Perhaps you should contact them and offer your consulting services.

I was simply informing you that the writer in question is not a Globe and Mail staff writer and to not expect the same journalistic and editorial standards to be applied.

Here's another "Special to the Globe and Mail" article on the death of Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro was no friend of socialism

The writer is former director of the NDP (the left wing party in Canadian politics, although not all that left wing by European standards). He is a relatively well known figure in Canadian politics as a left wing political activist and campaign organiser. He's going to give his opinion from quite a different perspective.
Gerald Caplan is an Africa scholar, a former NDP national director and a regular panelist on CBC’s Power & Politics.
Here's part of what he had to say about it:
Fidel Castro stands in a long line of great socialist leaders who betrayed socialism. The list pretty well includes all of them, from Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, to Mao Zedong and Chou En-lai, to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, to Mengistu in Ethiopia. In the name of the beloved masses, these revolutionaries became the greatest mass murderers in history, responsible for genocide, famine, incalculable suffering, widespread torture and the deaths of tens of millions of workers for the crime of somehow displeasing their great leader.

Castro was not a mass murderer of the same order, though hundreds, maybe thousands, of opponents were executed in the early years. He also broke the hearts of the millions of Cubans who welcomed his revolution. In reality the dictator led a nation with an economy frozen in the 1950s, captive of the Soviet Union on which Castro foolishly made his tiny island dependent. Nor was it all the fault of the idiotic American boycott, as Castro apologists are quick to insist.
The rest of the article is well worth reading, and I suggest that you do read it.

You can see that the Globe and Mail had actually published different articles from two opposing political viewpoints. The one you linked was from the political "right" in Canada, as someone associated with The Fraser Institute. The one that I have linked above was from the political "left" in Canada, as a former director and major figure in the "left wing" NDP political party in Canada (by the way, they were expected to win the national election in Canada last year, the Liberal victory came as a huge surprise to most people). Read both stories to get an overall balanced picture of how the Globe and Mail handled reporting on the event.

When you've read both, perhaps you can come back and tell us which side in Canada, the "right" or the "left", was harsher in their criticism of Castro. Don't expect much in the way of political philosophy from the Liberals however, as they have none beyond being effective public administrators. That's probably why they usually win the elections.
 
Let's look at such an 'unbiases' source as CIA factbook. There is no reason for the CIA to overestimate the size of Cuban economy.
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
But there is a huge distance between $3764 and $10000.
According to the World bank
List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia
Cuban GDP (PPP) per capita in 2013 was $20,649
So Raul Castro should be a Nobel Laureate in economy because he managed to grow Cuban economy more than 5 fold during only 5 years.
The World Bank figure for 2008 is $5,430, closer to the figure used by the Canadian newspaper than Wikipedia/World Factbook.

GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$) | Data
 
I'm sure the Globe and Mail would be fascinated to receive your advice on how they should run their newspaper. Perhaps you should contact them and offer your consulting services.
I appreciate your ironical note. However, I commented the article (Sergey Poleshchuk is my real name)
No, Fidel Castro did not deliver a better Cuba
As comments in G&M are pre-moderated then my one has been read.
I was simply informing you that the writer in question is not a Globe and Mail staff writer and to not expect the same journalistic and editorial standards to be applied.
Thank you for information.
Here's another "Special to the Globe and Mail" article on the death of Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro was no friend of socialism

The writer is former director of the NDP (the left wing party in Canadian politics, although not all that left wing by European standards). He is a relatively well known figure in Canadian politics as a left wing political activist and campaign organiser. He's going to give his opinion from quite a different perspective.
Well, on many points I agree with mr.Caplan, on some points rather not. Anyway it is an interesting point of view and author doesn't try to fool the reader using doubtful, unsourced data.
And point of view of mr.Milke is interesting and on some points I agree with him.
But (as a mathematician) I don't accept usage of allegations presented as proven facts, usage of unsourced numerical data as a proof. It in fact devalues the whole article and undermines credibility of the newspaper as a source of reliable information.
 
The World Bank figure for 2008 is $5,430, closer to the figure used by the Canadian newspaper than Wikipedia/World Factbook.

GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$) | Data
You points to GNI while another economical indicator GDP was mentioned in the article.
And GDP is a common name for different indicators - GDP (PPP), Nominal GDP.
Most commonly used GDP indicator is GDP (PPP) PPP = purchasing power parity. CIA fact-book used namely it and estimated Cuban GDP (PPP) as $10,000 (in 2010 US dollars). Look at
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Also as you may see there are different GNI indicators. According to your source
GNI per capita, PPP (current international $) | Data
Cuban GNI per capita, PPP (current international $) in 2008 was $16,780

Inflation in the USA is very low but it exists. So real values of US$ in 2010 and in 2016 are different.
 

Similar threads


Top