> Russia fell down because they disrupted the ability of the market to send and receive accurate price signals and over time that led to catastrophically misallocated resources.
This is extremely ahistorical. The fall of the USSR was due to Gorbachev's decision to introduce "western" markets into Russia and Yeltsin's opportunism. Growth and stability weren't flagging in the Soviet Union until they attempted to privatize.
And if the US had been the one to capitulate to communism we'd be quoting stats about the lack of income growth of their workers in contrast to the wealthy.
Viewing the health of a nation on the growth of their income isn't necessarily telling the story. Soviet inflation was almost unheard of save for hyperinflation shortly after the revolution, and hyper inflation after the collapse. Also as investment wasn't as much of a driving force since the economy wasn't private, so infinite growth isn't necessarily a good indicator of the state of things.
Infinite growth isn't necessarily the best way to measure success unless you're an investor. When we frame the world in that way a lot of "good" economies are harsh to live under, and "decaying" economies aren't bad from a quality of life standpoint.
The Soviet-era economies were generally horrible to live under from everything I've read and heard, even from people who actually lived under them. Did you? There's a reason they wouldn't let people leave East Germany, and actually shot them if they tried, and why those people risked their lives regardless to get out, and also why almost no one from the West ever tried to "escape" to Soviet-bloc countries.
Decaying economies are bad if they don't maintain their equipment and live off what previous generations created. You could see that in East Germany. They created a lot of stuff in the 50s and 60s and then they kept using that equipment until it fell apart. Same for buildings.You can do that for a while but eventually things will fall apart. You could argue that public infrastructure in the US is following the same path to some degree.
This is extremely ahistorical. The fall of the USSR was due to Gorbachev's decision to introduce "western" markets into Russia and Yeltsin's opportunism. Growth and stability weren't flagging in the Soviet Union until they attempted to privatize.