[allworknoplay]

Totally separately and having literally nothing to do with anything else here, but since you brought it up, the USSR lost an economic war to capitalism, it didn't collapse because communism doesn't work. They spent their money lifting people out of poverty while american empire was busy extracting resources from other countries and keeping them in poverty.

Note also that I'm not defending individual policies of the soviet union.

EDIT: wanted to tack on: if in 1989 the US and western europe had collapsed and become communist, I wouldn't take that as proof -- or a particular reason at all -- that capitalism didn't work. That would be idiotic -- we were engaged in a decades-long cold war with another giant power, and lost. I may have separate arguments about capitalism, as I do now, but the collapse has nothing to do with it.

Similarly, the collapse of the soviet union has everything to do with trying to eliminate poverty WHILE staring down the barrel of the largest and most powerful empire that's ever existed.

[google234123]

This is historical revisionism. The soviet leaders tried to copy the success story of Deng Xiaoping's transitions from socialism to capitalism in China. The planned economy system just didn't work. The "US Empire" can't explain why by the late 1980s, the Soviet Union had 4x tractors as the United States which was totally wasteful.

Here is a good article on why it's computationally challenging to completely plan an entire economy. https://chris-said.io/2016/05/11/optimizing-things-in-the-us...

[wussboy]

Prices are information. That information turns out to be very useful when planning an economy.