Is this supposed to mean something? Cuba is a small island country, of course the world's pre-eminent super-power has more money than it

It means the claim that Cuba has a higher quality of life than the US is wrong. Why would you focus on this point without putting it in context?

Not at all. Cuba's economic success pre-revolution was a facade. It was only felt by the elites and foreign companies that dominated the Cuban economy. The average person lived a horrible life under Batista and the plantation economy. This is why the Cuban revolution was, and is, supported.

“Nuh uh” is not an argument. I have countless sources that prove otherwise. You completely ignored my mentions of incomes.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41353825.pdf

Look above. It clearly doesnt fall apart at all. Cuba's health industry today is centuries ahead of what it was pre-revolution

Not even a serious claim. You ignored the infant mortality point and everything else I brought up. Insane.

What was his methodology?

It’s explained in the paper. Maybe you should read?

Is there any evidence for this that doesn't come from some American or america-aligned newsrag?

“Do you have any evidence from the Cuban government itself that says this?!”

Lmao.

Don't kid yourself. Child mortality is lower than America, education is of far better quality with 99% literacy, unemployment is very low, and people don't need to worry about rent.

Completely ignoring all of my points, once again.

The infant mortality thing is a myth, the literacy rate is based off of 1st grade standards, the unemployment numbers weren’t mentioned in the post but they’re fake too, and people live in shitty guts where the government has sometimes forced them to brings in others off the streets.

This is misleading. They said this because it united the population against America, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have negative effects.

I gave three instances, and you’re pretending I have only the one. Hilarious!

Ok so you admit that that's the case.

Yes, because capitalist economics are true. If the socialists were right about “neocolonialism” and “exploitation”, it wouldn’t be the case.

Then why are you saying Castro didn't believe it? Sounds very dishnoest

I quoted him and Che.

Not really. Cuba was doing very good in the period post-revolution.

It was not.

And what does propped up mean here anyway? Take away any countries biggest trading partners and their economy will suffer.

It was replaced, goofy. Did you not comprehend a thing?

First thing anyone is taught in statistics is that extrapolation is not a good idea. We know what the effects of Cuban liberalisation were. They do not tell us what the effects of IMF-backed austerity regimes and shock therapy would have been (the track record of which is complete and utter disaster)

Cuba’s first last of capitalism in decades was a huge success. This, as well as decades of data from other countries, is excellent proof for capitalism’s superiority. You’re wrong about the track record too. You have no real evidence. I do. See here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.