Communism vs. Capitalism vs other forms of governments

Fixey

Good questions....First, there is no government under Communism.
Secondly, a communist society would function alot like the USA believe it or not, the difference would be ownership of assets. All assetts (economic assets not accounting assets) are owned by the state (ie the people) all positions within the society would be competed for as they are now in most countries.
I quess the key points are a communist country would have states of manageable sizes which would be run by elected (yes elected) people. these states would own all revenue produceing assets on behalf of the people.

Communism as touted by the USA (ie USSR, China) talks about lack of freedom, choice, state owned media and total control by state. that sounds more like capitalism to me.

Thats how I understand communism anyhow.

Weisse Luft

Communism is a pipe dream, never to be implemented because it has no negative feedback mechanism and as such, must be strictly enforced by a set of rules, such rules mandatory for its success lead to a state of totaliarism.

I am surprised no one had mentioned Orwellian trueisms to date. All people are equal. Some are more equal than others.

There is a quasi implementation of privideleged communism practiced in the systems of common stocks and bonds. But like I stated, its prividleged communism in that capital (wealth, the ability to provide goods and/or services in valorem excess of the effort needed to provide such).

Its far easier to understand economic systems when one deals with vlaue as an abstraction of definite value, like in Dollars, Euros, Pesos or Rubles. But when the cloak of the abstraction is lifted, the real underpinnings of a cooperative, free exchange system and its drive to offset scarcity is much clearer.

Its evolutionary. If you cannot see the roots, its highly confusing.

Fixey

For once I think I disagree with you Lim. I do not believe Communism equates to equality, far from it. What it does do is reward effort rather than ability. Example... In communism all jobs within society are considered equally important, from the street sweeper to the brain surgeon. A guy who is not so bright but busts his balls all day sweeping streets is valued more, and paid more, than an academic with a degree in law who puts in little effort. People arnt equal, the jobs they do are.

Weisse Luft

Remember that next time you need any surgeon. There is a reason we value brain surgeons more than street sweepers. But when the government provides you a brain surgeon, you will take an average one.

If you only knew what kind of hell the average medical student goes through to become a doctor, you wouldn't even think of equating street sweepers with doctors, let alone brain surgeons.

Fixey

Ah the standard regergitative response from the right.
See how long your world would last without manual labour my friend! follow this logic, if an economy colapses the last man standing is a farmer. This is so under any sort of economy be it left wing or right. It happens this way because an economy is similiar in someways to a body, If in trouble start with the least important things and shut them down. In an economy the least important are academics, then industrials (secondary and tertiary producers) then primary producers last of all. Haveing said that, and I believe this theory is excepted in most economic teachings, it becomes obvious, to me at least, that high end academics have succesfully bolstered their own worth at the expense of those that are most important in life. To directly answer your question, given the choise of one or other I would have the street sweeper. I may never need a brain surgon but, as the Italian's found out when their garbage guy's went on strike, one week without cleaners in a city and you have serious problems.

Fixey

2 things, one is this statement is not correct. There is no reason why a state employee should be inherintly worse than a private one. And two, if you read my post you might actually see that I mentioned a distinct lack of government under a communist system.

I do know where you are coming from but I believe you, like most capitalists, make the false asumption that money is the greatest, if not sole, motivater in society.

Fixey

That is simply not true. Simple as that!!! The only place Communism rules in Totality, stricktly controling industry and media, is in American Movies. I assume when you say "no negative feedback mechanism" you mean accountability? If that is so your entire premise is based on a myth.

All mean are created equal but some are created more equal has got to be the statement that sums up the weakness of capitalism. All people are created with the ability to play an equally important role within a society.

Weisse Luft

Money is the abstraction of scarcity. Likewise, everyone could wield a broom and sweep the streets. Very few people have the ability to perform brain surgery.

The greatest motivator is not money, its discomfort. Money cannot by itself relieve discomforts. But the ability to offset scarcity better than others leads to less discomfort. The hunter that could bring home more game in less time had more time to spend with his family.

If all people are created equal, why do we have athletic competetion? Jimmy Casper should be just as good as Lance Armstrong.

Jakebrake

On the contrary, it is people who espouse the views that you articulate that make the false assumption that money is the greatest, if not sole motivator behind capitalism.

Where does this panacea of communism exist? Instead of basing your arguments on theory, perhaps you could offer some real life examples.

"Kid"

I think most of you dont really know what communism and capitalism are.

Capitalism is mostly a form of economy, not the way the government works. Countrys really have capitalistic ideas but not a capitalistic government.

When most people think of communism they think of the ideas of marx. This is not true, communism is more like a totalitarian state, where marxism outlines no government everyone owns everything together.

In theory marxism works, but it doesnt include human nature. For it to work everyone would have to give up the nice things in life to work for everyone else. So everyone in the perfect marxist society would basically have no ego or free will.

Communism really isnt for the people its for the select few that benefit from the countrys profit. Those crazy people will do anything to keep in power like the tianamen square incident and many other where communist dicatators have downplayed a rebellion for a democratically elected country.

Communism also downplays the bright people to stand out or for people to work harder because there is no raises etc...

Communism in china is a much different from marxism or communist russia. Communist china is a totalitarian state but they include many capitalistic ideas, like free trade... etc . So china is not really communist.

Capitalism is better because it promotes people to work harder for more rewards. So everyone tries to do their job better for money. Communism doesnt give any raises, promotions, etc... so no one feels any motivation to work harder or do anything inventive.

Fixey

I'm not trying to insult you or start a flame war, but you remind me of the know-all guy in the bar in "good Will Hunting" Full of theory but little thought to there meaning. Let me put it this way, I weigh 100kg cut to the bone, i am 178cm tall and built like a russian ditch digger...if I where to aspire to be a pro rode cyclist I would be pretty average to say the least, same as if LA decided to go pro track sprinter I geuss. We are all individuals with our own abilities that differ, While LA may spank Jimmy Casper in the TDF Mr Casper might have a 130iq where LA might have a 95iq (Just a Hypothetical eg). Potentially we can all excell within society, mabey not at the same things but at something. To see my point first you must except that effort is as valuable as results, if you disagree with that you will never agree with me on this issue, which is fine btw.

You come across as a person who is very articulate and well read which I admire but I challange you just to sit back and think again on what I have read, If you still disagree then thats cool, but I have converted many a would-be capitalist in the past

Fixey

I stated right at the start that communism cant work, human greed will always be its down fall. I quess my arguement for this thread is that I would lean more to the left than the right if I governed a Country!

Fixey

I was wondering if someone was going to bring up the differance between economic and political theory. A cood example of this is actually the USA, which has a right wing political system but some (SOME) left wing economic policies such as Protectionism and Taxation. Although Protectionism and Taxation are not hallmarks of communism they are still way left of center. In theory it is possible to have a communist country with a capitalist economy, would be fun to moniter that



Not true at all. Your assesment is based on what?



Again not true, you use the words "communist dictators" but if you understood communism you would know there is no central Government.



Why do you believe this to be true?



What communism in China? China is not now, nor has it ever been , to my knowledge, communist!!!



Again, this sums up most peoples notion of communism, but simply put it is completely inaccurate.

It is obvious to me that we read completely differant papers on communism, how interesting, and somewhat amusing, how a differant perspective on the same subject came offer totally opposing position on the meaning of a theory!!!