His country has a lower HDI than Cuba

>His country has a lower HDI than Cuba...

Attached: le hdi face.jpg (83x125, 4K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/26/chinas-top-court-rejects-judicial-independence-as-erroneous-thought
heritage.org/index/ranking
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>40th in the world
>Above most of South America
THANK YOU BASED FIDEL

Attached: 5.jpg (600x450, 75K)

communism is the future

>His """""""""""""""""""""""country""""""""""""""""""""""""" doesn't have an HDI higher than 0.9

Attached: 1529418521952.png (551x713, 515K)

rank 1 btw

Cringe. Capitalism is the system that has lifted the most people out of poverty.
If you like communism so much, why don't you leave the comfort of your first world capitalist countries and enjoy the "wonders" of communism in Cuba? Yeah, thought so.

t.mad that cuba has a higher HDI than his country while not participating in economic imperialism

Attached: 7.png (1152x648, 163K)

>his "country" has an hdi less of that of norway

your country is tiny that's not fair

Not only Argentina does not engage in "economic imperialism" but it's around 20 spots above Cuba in terms of HDI, you bullshitting commie.

Attached: 1528840292660.jpg (434x345, 50K)

>mfw

Attached: f.jpg (1464x932, 301K)

whatever tiny irrelevant """"country""""

>hdi less than that of ecuador
*inhales*

The whitoid is right. There's a very strong correlation between a country's prosperity and how free its market is.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
Argentina is higher than Cuba. In fact, the only Latin American country with an even higher score is Chile. The only relationship between socialism and high living standards is that living standards tend to increase the more socialists you kick out of helicopters.

It's not that it's "tiny", it's that it has a tiny population and a lot of oil. That's the same reason why Gabon has the second highest HDI in sub-Saharan Africa. But Norway also has very high market freedom on top of that, so it's not just their oil shekels (or they'd be on the same unimpressive level as Gabon).

We're higher than France.

its nominal gdp per capita that matters

its easy for tiny population country to be rich, like singapore. so these people in tiny lands bragging is just dumb. So arrogant for no reason

>lower HDI than Cuba.
Is it accurate, though? You have internet, meanwhile, there are no Cuban flags on this board.

So called totally non skewed Cuban "statistics"

i dont know anything about cuba, but what matters is how much you contribute to the world, not hdi

Because France is a country that has grown to hate freedom. Prime Minister Philippe even stated that the French have grown "addicted to the state". I have full faith in the fact that Macron can reverse the flow, but I'm more skeptical about his successors being able to reverse the trend. By the end of the day Macron is but one man, EM is but one party and the French will remain lazy and entitled.

>its easy for tiny population country to be rich, like singapore
It's not "easy" nor "hard". The 4th highest HDI country is Germany, with the countries ranked 5th-10th all having a smaller population except the USA. Including your precious Singapore at place 5 (shared with Denmark).

Organizing a small country is the same as organizing a large country: it's a matter of organization.

JUST

Attached: das.jpg (1502x873, 136K)

wow that is sad ukraine. Get your shit together!!! Use ruski to help you!!! Use your beautiful women if you have to

China lifted 700 millions people out of poverty in 30 years.

With capitalism.

but it was under communist chinese government, the savior of china

Attached: 1457527249631.jpg (569x370, 209K)

China is not exactly redistributing all its production among its citizens. Rather they are selling it worldwide at market prices

Still they actually lifted from poverty 700 million people, more people than habitants of Latin America

>Capitalism is an economic system based upon private ownership of the means of production

You do know that all major chinese companies belong to the party, right? This is even the reason why ameriorcs are buttblasted about ZTE.

Not him.

But you're actually that retarded?

>china
>not a third world country

Mao Zedong socialism, Deng Xiaoping socialism and Xi Jinping socialism are different things. Under Mao Zedong, the public sector comprised 100% of the economy. Under Xi Jinping a "mere" 50%. That means half of the Chinese economy is now private. This is why China is diong well, but China could've done even better if it was based on the values of Sun Yatsen rather than Mao Zedong. This is why the Republic of China is more prosperous than the People's Republic of China.

but you forgot that chinese taipei was formed on a small island with a smaller population with few peasants, it cannot be compared to china. They cannot continue their corrupt way on a small island and had to change. Also with japan colonization and other history difference, it's completely different

>but you forgot that chinese taipei was formed on a small island with a smaller population with few peasants, it cannot be compared to china.
Once again, size matters very little compared to policy. The difference between Mao and Xi was already massive enough. The difference between Xi and a hypothetical Free Market "socialism" successor would be just as big. China's biggest strength in this regard is that it can do whatever the fuck it wants and brand it socialism.

size matters a lot,just look at in nominal gdp per capita:
china pop 1.4 billion = 8600
taiwan pop 20mil = 24000
hong kong pop 7mil = 43000
singapore pop 5mil = 57000
macau pop 650K = 77000

LOL

HDI is retarded. IHDI is what matters. (Inequality adjusted)

If that’s the case then we would have seen massive increases in prosperity and development starting in the 16th or 17th centuries when capitalism first started to supplant feudalism. Instead it happened in the 19th century because that was when industrialization took off. The ability to harness energy is more important than any system in determining development.

>There's a very strong correlation between a country's prosperity and how free its market is.

I guess that’s why Honduras is a paradise right? Or why China is responsible for almost all of the reduction in global poverty in the past 40 years despite having a public sector that takes up 30+% of their economy.

Please do tell me how a system where tribunals are not free and independant can be considered capitalism.
theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/26/chinas-top-court-rejects-judicial-independence-as-erroneous-thought
How is your private sector going to defend itself when it literally has no possibility?
Or do you just think commerce = capitalism?

>I guess that’s why Honduras is a paradise right?
heritage.org/index/ranking
Honduras is 94th in terms of market freedom, putting it below the world average. What is your point?

>Or why China is responsible for almost all of the reduction in global poverty in the past 40 years despite having a public sector that takes up 30+% of their economy.
And under Mao it was 100%. See where I'm getting here? By the way, 30% is barely higher than France's 28%.

through capitalism

It was never 100% under Mao, he never completely eliminated private enterprise like Stalin did. And again, you can hardly call China’s markets “free”, they are dominated by SOEs and state intervention is literally everywhere. Also I question what they use as a metric of “market freedom”. Especially since the Herritage Foundation is literally funded by billionaires with a vested interest in making free market policies look good.

HDI is retarded, but IHDI is even more retarded.

Capitalism created the poverty to begin with you dunce. In the 18th centuary when Africans had children they would just die but thanks to capitalism they now can live long enough to breed more mouths to feed

F*nnish subhumans created poverty and every other bad thing on earth

Also you have to consider that more than enough wealth exists in the world to end poverty forever. The income from billionaires in 2017 alone was enough to end it for seven years. So capitalism creates poverty by having a laughably inefficient distribution of resources, and then “lifts” people out of poverty in a tiny trickle, and then somehow this is a success. If I trapped a bunch of people in my basement, and let them out one at a time, nobody would praise me as a liberator.

Based capitalism

WE