[infecto]

Unfortunately I do not think this is the full truth. I believe there should not be an embargo BUT the embargo is not the main cause of poverty in Cuba.

Cuba has a huge tourism industry. A lot of the business that serve tourists are state owned. Where does this money go? Everything from hotels to restaurants are state owned. Who is profiting here?

I think at this point its less personal and more choice. Cuba chooses to run its govern and keep their people in poverty, the US chooses to keep them on an embargo list. Comparing this to Mexico is a poor example. There is ample current trade with Mexico that if cut off, would hurt the country. The US has not traded with Cuba for a LONG time but has traded with most other world super powers. Nobody here to blame but the Cuban government.

[soperj]

Technically wouldn't it be everyone profiting since it's going to government? If it was an foriegn business owner like alot of resorts in the bahamas, who would be profiting there? Certainly not the people living on the island.

[adventured]

Your assumption rests on the notion that the government = everyone, and that the people in power aren't focusing that money toward their own pockets. I'm not aware of a Socialist government that has ever existed that did anything but line their own pockets while the people starved and went without.

Mao's China, Lenin & Stalin's USSR, old Vietnam, Cambodia under Pol Pot, Hugo's Venezuela, Fidel's Cuba, North Korea. It's the same story every time.

[lawnchair_larry]

Norway?

Socialism is a spectrum.

[cheez]

Even in a democracy you'd be lucky if that were even 10% true. In a socialist government, even more unlikely.

[soperj]

10% more than you get when it's just taken straight out of the country.