Communism Is The Only Way Forward (Page 1 of 3)

Wow. I used to call myself a leftist commie pinko...until today. Thanks for squaring me away Reltih_Floda   And yes we get the anagram.

Last edited by Tyranicus (2010-01-25 04:03:08)

You'd better stop right there. I can tell you never lived in a comunist country, i have a long time ago, i'm from Romania. Comunism lives of tiranie and fear. In theory, maybe sounds better then capitalism, the "destribution of wealth" on paper sounds nice but it was never "distributed" between the people, the wealth was "distributed" to the dictator and his party, the people remained as poor as they were. And there was NO way to make a better life for yourself, you could not travel, there were spies all over the place, you're best friend could have been a spy, if you spoke against the system you ended up in jail where you endured beatings/torturings and sometimes even be killed. Police, called millitia, had all the power they wanted, there were countless ocasions wheen innocent people were found "guilty" of a crime cause they tortured the guy till he "confesed" to something he did not do. I could go on and on, but the basic ideea is that comunism is only nice-ish on paper but dont forget that the dictator is a human beeing, and ALL man can and WILL be corrupted by power and wealth. "Too much power goes to your head" it's a saying that best illustrates this. There is also a joke about comunism that allthough a joke, it illustrates how comunism works: At the end of the week the leaders of vilages has to make reports to theyr superiors, then they report to theyr superiors all the way up to the dictator. One day a pig gave birth to 3 little pigs in a small village, the leader ofcourse reports this to his superior but he reports that 4 pigs were given birth, not just 3, cause 3 its not enough, so he reports 4, then that superior reports to his superior that 5 pigs were given birth cause he fears for his job or even worst if his superior dosent like the results, so he reports 5, then his superior for the same reason reprts 6. At the end of the month on paper there was 6 little pigs, but in truth only 3. The decision is taken then to export 3 pigs and the rest was to be soled in the country to the people.
My english is not the best, its just a rough translation of the joke but you can still see how the comunist system worked out of 6 false pigs, the true 3 pigs were exported, and the remaining 0 pigs distributed to the people.
Yes, there is one comunist system that seams to work, that is China, but its a very twisted way of comunism.
Capitalism is not much better either. But out of two bad things you have to choose the one that is less bad and that is capitalism. At least in capitalism you have the posibility to achieve whatever you want, now if you succeed or not that is another thing, but the posibility is there none the less, in comunism this was not true.
Anyway, this is a games forum, and no place to discuss politics.

Last edited by Lakers4eva (2010-01-25 06:36:59)

I'm guessing this is a bot, guys No point in replying.

And yes, the problem in communism lies with the leaders. I believe that, with good leaders, communism could work. (Of course, you still have the problem that you don't really have to work...)

As for Lakers4Eva: your joke works for both communism and capitalism. When you put your money in the bank, the money is lended to other people. That lended money is then lended to other people. And that money is again lended to other people. A bank only has to keep 10%(-ish) of it's capital, so while the actual amount of money is 100 euro, the "virtual amount "of money is close to 190.

But, well, I support a blend of capitalism and communism. It's called socialism, and it has nothing to do with Adolf Hitler. It has to do with building a solid health care system that doesn't leave anyone out, it has to do with redistributing part of the wealth, it has to do with people caring for other people. Not some people, but all people.

So, communism? I don't think it works. But I do support Obama in his reformation of the health care system

well, here in europe we also pay for our health ensurances, and i don't know if you know this, but when you are diagnosed with a disease that can't be cured, you'll be very happy if there is something like health care that pays most of the costs you'll have for the rest of your life, it is a huge load of financial problems if you have to pay for that yourself. i know somebody who would pay €2500 a month without health insurances, now it is only 75...

One of the key assumptions that communism makes is that marginal productivity of labor is constant for each additional laborer assigned to a task.  In short, a doctor (MD) will receive the same compensation for one hour of labor as a factory worker as both are assumed to have made the same contribution to society for an hour's worth of work.  There is not any incentive to better yourself (i.e. go to med school) as such cannot be rewarded.  You then have to have mandates... you tell people, YOU will go to school and become X, regardless of whether or not such a person would be a good X.
Another assumption made is that in a planned economy, there is zero friction from control.  This means that the controlling body operates as if supply and demand can be instantly adjusted with zero penalty. 
One of the more sinister implications of communism is just what Lakers was saying... with such mandates and with such control, those who oppose (by whatever means) the actions of such a system are... well... inefficient.  Such people are typically dealt with be being imprisoned, executed, or having influence applied to family members in a very tragic way.
You only have to look at China to see the implications of communism vs. capitalism.  Over the past 15 years, the Chinese government has taken drastic measures (by their standards) to free up their economy.  Supply and demand are allowed to operate as they will (for the most part) and individuals have an increased economic freedom of choice (the citizens can buy, sell, hold almost whatever they want).  What the Chinese government has not appreciated fully was the inter-relationship between economic freedom and personal freedom.  When people are exposed to economic liberty, it becomes natural for them to say, "If I can buy what I want, it makes sense for me to be able to say what I want and worship how I please."
People argue for communism because of the "inefficient (unfair) distribution of resources."  However, there is only the inefficient (unfairly incomplete) distribution of capitalism.

I know, right?  Totally unfair.

Smart regulation is necessary.  One of the classic examples has to do with fireproofing tents.  All camping tents sold today are made with a flame retardant material/lining/coating or some combination of the three (typically the material used to waterproof them is flame resistant).  Of course, they will burn, but not nearly as fast as the ones made before the late 70's.  Prior to this regulation, no tents were flame retardant.  A group of kids were very badly hurt, one was killed, and the company that manufactured the tent was sued.  There had been no economic incentive to purchase the flame retardant tents.  People looked at the additional price, and said, "No.  I don't need that, I will just be careful."  Well... they were wrong.  A well aimed bit of legislation handled the problem that the market was not solving fast enough.
The thing about government involvement is kinda like Daed says up at the top... you have to have good leaders.  But more than that, you have to have a great representative for that leader (after all, the leader is a busy man) as he/she will speak with the leader's voice.  So this second in command has to be "good" too.  The same holds true for several tiers downward.  You must have great integrity and conscientiousness at all of these levels or else you have some very bad (i.e. what Lakers was talking about) problems. 
One of the great definitions of government is that they are a meta-entity that have a monopoly on force.  We surrender some (not all) of our individual rights to use force to the government.  When the government says, "You must do X or we shall do Y."  You know that you have to do it, else you face penalties (prison, fines, etc.).  A citizenry has to be able to trust the government to make such laws or regulations as to do the least amount of damage to the populace.  X cannot be unrealistic, and Y cannot be unconscionable.  For both of these to happen, the leader must be good, the second tier must be better, the third tier must be even better and so on.

If you think about it its kinda depressing cause none of the existing goverment types are perfect, each has its own flaws-human nature. Maybe anarchy is the answer hehe.

Kinda reminds me of the quote:
"In theory; theory and practice are the same, in practice they are not."
ex.
In theory an Anarcho-Syndicalist Commune is great, but in practice its just not as good as it sounds.

If I had time I would make a bot that would post arbitrary criticisms of random medium.  For example how awesome would it be to have some bot post a lengthy criticisms of.. say.. Debbie does Dallas and how it was a representation of the late 1970's economic climate coupled with a decaying moral standard in the US?  With full citations.

That would make may day...

Last edited by DoomPope (2010-01-25 20:37:04)

Probably

welcome to my world, and imagine that i haven't done anything but studying for my exams since 20th of december... oO