except to the extent that the ex-Soviet republics tended to be even more of an economic shambles.
Exactly. Thats it. The economic position of the state prior to their transition away from communism absolutely has an effect on how they managed after the transition.
I'd be willing to guess that while part of the Soviet Union and under a planned economy, whatever the Estonian state was responsible for was closer to being services-based and processing raw materials after they were obtained. Not a lot of agriculture or mining.
After 1990, everyone was in the same boat, and the countries that were able to push through "shock therapy" reforms prospered, while the rest did not.
But, why did shock therapy fail in the countries that it didn't work in? I highly doubt it was as simple as "Ukraine wanted it while Croatia didn't."
Why did Estonia (a former Soviet state) not end up with looting as well?
Shock therapy required a short but very sharp drop in GDP, and a large and long-lived jump in unemployment (as make-work public sector jobs were eliminated). It also required people on fixed incomes to endure severe poverty due to anti-inflationary measures.
The countries that had the political resources to stick with this harsh program, and ride out the first two years where none of the positive effects were felt, ended up much better off than the ones that didn't.
Everyone ended up with some degree of looting. It was a matter of which countries had political institutions strong enough to push through this transition, prevent the rise of an organized gangster economy like we saw in Russia, and face up to the magnitude of the challenge.
Exactly. Thats it. The economic position of the state prior to their transition away from communism absolutely has an effect on how they managed after the transition.
I'd be willing to guess that while part of the Soviet Union and under a planned economy, whatever the Estonian state was responsible for was closer to being services-based and processing raw materials after they were obtained. Not a lot of agriculture or mining.
After 1990, everyone was in the same boat, and the countries that were able to push through "shock therapy" reforms prospered, while the rest did not.
But, why did shock therapy fail in the countries that it didn't work in? I highly doubt it was as simple as "Ukraine wanted it while Croatia didn't."
Why did Estonia (a former Soviet state) not end up with looting as well?