Communism Is The Only Way Forward (Page 2 of 3)

Communism is not democratic... not even in theory.  It involves the communal ownership of all assets and the distribution of such assets duty of the state.  However, the state is, as others have put it, not very good at doing such things with any degree of success.
Here's a good economic term for you, Purchasing Power Parity (PPP).  Basically, PPP is an economic measure of what one currency will buy in another currency with respect to a basket of goods.  Another good term to know, if you are going to argue such things, is GDP/capita in PPP (GDPP).  This is the total amount earned in or by an economy divided by the number of people who participate in the economy, adjusted back into the currency in question via said basket of goods.
With PPP, we say, "I have $100 US, what can I buy with them in China, Belgium, Germany...?"  Then we say, "I have 100 Euros, what can I buy with them in China, the US...?"  And we keep doing this for all countries.  With GDPP, we say, "OK.  I am in the US and earn $X US each year.  In terms of US $$, what would my yearly earnings be if I were a citizen of China (or wherever) and went to the US (or wherever) to purchase goods?"  Now that we have our definitions out of the way, we can proceed with a very unhappy lesson.
According to the CIA World Fact Book:
The US GDPP was $47,500 (2008 est.) and inflation was 3.8% (2008 est.).  This means that on average, US residents contributed 47.5K in 2008 to the GDP and will require a 3.8% cost of living raise in order to keep from losing ground next year in terms of what goods they can purchase with a constant sized basket for a devaluing (inflating) dollar.
Let's look at another Democratic country, Belgium.  Their GDPP was $37,500 (2008 est.).  I'm in the US, so I use $US... use what you wish.  If we took the average contribution of one citizen of Belgium, and compared it to what their contribution would buy if they came to the US with it, they would be in pretty good shape.  $37K is nothing to sneeze at.
Now for the tragedy:
Russia - whether or not they were "Communists" by one definition or another or were not is immaterial.  They were attempting to implement a planned economy, and in economic terms, that is communism.  The GDPP is $16,100 (2008 est.) which sounds great, except that there is 14.1% (2008 est.) inflation.  This means that every year, your 100 Rubles buys you 14.1% less.  This is a symptom of an economy that is hurting, badly.  Put another way, more bluntly, is that the average amount added to the economy of Russia would be nearly at the poverty line in the US.  Russia has great (staggering, really) reserves of resources, it will recover with time and with market freedom... provided that the Chinese do not invade them first.
China - Currently practicing Communism with "Autonomous Economic Areas" (or something like that).  The Chinese GDPP was $6,000 (2008 est.) with inflation of 5.9% (2008 est.).  Acceptable inflation numbers for an emerging economy, but guys, that is abject poverty.
Laos - GDPP was $2,100 (2008 est.) with 8.6% (2008 est.). Tragic?  Yes.
Vietnam - GDPP was $2,800 (2008 est.) with 23.1% (2008 est.) inflation.  Pitiful?  Again, yes.
Cuba - GDPP was $9,500 (2008 est.) with 3.4% (2008 est.) inflation.  Don't get too excited yet.  It goes up each year that Castro is out of power and given that Venezuela keeps providing them with subsidies in terms of fuel and the Chinese keep providing them with subsidies of everything else (with free stuff, you can buy a lot).
The thing is that communes (of any type) seldom work and people keep trying communism despite the fact that it fails and does so in a way that is heart wrenching.  People have used communism because it sounds very seductive to some people, as a means to grab power and to hold that power... nothing more.
_____________________
Edit 1: Grammar
Edit 2: "capital" != "capita"

Last edited by Hellikin (2010-01-26 18:40:57)

duh, i am a clan leader, i can't just let them be on their own for more than a month xD some of them are noobs and come with questions every 2 days or so
and btw: i just can't resist to turn on the computer when it is in front of me

That is absolutely incredible.  Can you help me write one for economics?

1)  You just said it was Democratic.....  its hard to take someone seriously when they contradict themselves.

2)  Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto that such a state was impossible.  But if you would like to prove him wrong, you can debate it.  But I doubt an anonymous internet poster, who can't seem to get their story straight or refute counter claims is going to win too many people over.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/-cracy?jss=0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government

dude, i'm glad i didn't study economics or history, chemistry, biology and physics are so much easier

well, some things are just easier for some people then for others and you can believe me when i say that economics and history are absolutely not better for me than sience

Go read the National Geographic cited above.  They tried it.  It failed... and did so in a rather fun to read way.
_________________________
Edit 1:

Daed... this is the smartest bot that I've ever seen.  It argues back.

Edit 2:

Once you get to a Ph.D level micro economics or mathematical finance class, it is nothing but math... I remember spending 14 pages on a proof once... and it still wasn't complete (I just gave up at page 14).  Pick up any copy of Econometrica and if you don't see a triple integral or the integration of a nested utility function, demand your money back.  And then you have behavioral economists... those who study why people engage in certain behaviors, who try to find rational explanations of irrationality.  Put another way, "Why is the stock market the only store in the world, where when everything goes on sale, people run out the door screaming?"  I don't know.  In economics, you get an interesting combination of a lot of different subjects across several different research streams.

Last edited by Hellikin (2010-01-28 06:49:28)

Exactly so.  Well said.

In spite of what mainstream media would tell you, Communism actually offers an array of freedom and happiness, in fact, even more so than in capitalism. In capitalism, only the bourgeoisie can find happiness. In Communism, everyone can.

No.  The mainstream media are far more left (socialist) leaning than they are towards capitalism (see here, here, here, and here).
The bottom line is that capitalism rewards effort and patience.  You (unlike in a communist regime) have the opportunity to become as successful as you want to be.  Limits under capitalism are only as strict as a person wants them to be.  As Lakers pointed out, everyone gets the chance to succeed.
The thing is that communism rewards nothing.  There is no incentive of any type inherent in such a system.  In fact, people are actually discouraged from success.  In economics, this is called a Moral Hazard... it is where people are de-incentivized against doing what is right.  In communism, since everything is owned by all, excessive (or abnormal success) brought about by extraordinary effort will be confiscated by the "people."  Tragically, such excuses are used to bring people into step with the party line.
I would argue that there is not a single communist regime anywhere (see my post here) where the people are doing nearly as well as they would be if they were operating under a capitalist system.
You're a bit new here, so you've not heard my "Pro Wal-Mart Rants" in chat, but let me offer this: Wal-Mart as an entity has done more to increase the standard of living of the working and middle class than any government entity, party, or effort could have even theoretically accomplished.  Those here who have families will back me up on this... they can walk into a Wal-Mart and buy a whole lot of stuff to keep their family operating... soap, shampoo, school supplies, etc. ... and they will pay far, far less than they would have to going anywhere else.
Bottom line, everyone wants to do the right thing... but, there is absolutely nothing wrong with making a profit while you are doing what's right.
___________________________
Edit 1:  Lakers, you have my deepest sympathies.  It is always a bit shocking to be reminded just how much such evil can take from us.
Edit 2:  He's not a bot... he created an account on stable... Is this argument just one huge "rune begging" incident?  Communism is good... everyone should share... give me runes...

Last edited by Hellikin (2010-01-30 19:40:41)

exactly