Communism vs. Capitalism vs other forms of governments

Mr_Kingkillaha

well apparently you are in the wrong forum

__________________
*
**
***
******
************
***************************
NO! They're all gonna laugh at you!
***************************

Fixey

I have no idea what craptastic means, i am guessing "crappy as hell" mabey?
If it does, you would be damn right, and that is what most of us face right now. For the vast majority of us anyhow.

Ok, I hate doeing this because it is gross generalisation and I can only go buy what I have seen in media ect. So when I say "Americans think...." I mean "What is portrayed to me by the media."

To me communism is portrayed as a big machine with a few old cronnies at the top creaming the "peoples" wealth, dictating what they will do in life, ruling the media, "secret" death squads to frightin individuals into compliance, everyone gets paid the same (exept the old cronnies)....pretty much an exagerated USSR.

None of this is even close, not 1 point.

Firstly, lets look at the USSR, if Lennon had said "PEOPLE OF RUSSIA, let us rise up and tople the Romanov's so I can take power and live a life of luxury with my friends while you slave under oppression and starve" I think he may have struggled. So he used a Buzz word, communism, to trick the people of Russia into following him. That is pretty cynical and just my opinion, he may have honestly believed in communism, but when the time came, he could not hand back his hard won power.

Let us look at the other points....
Media, this one is funny, yes in communism the state owns the media, just like the good old USA! In the USA media is owned by Business, which "own" political candidates which govern, ipso facto those controling the state control the media, control what you are told and how you are told it. the theory of communism would have the state own media (own everything for that matter) but not interfare with its content (yes I agree, not very likely givin human nature).

The cronnies in power would not exist due to the fact there would be no central government as such. Think of the USA as a communist country for a moment, it would have 50 independant states, self governed, operating under a common treaty of co-operation. within these states there would be smaller territories. Basicaly they would be controled similar to Local body coucels.

Choise, there is no reason why capitalism and communism need differ on basic human life. If the afore mentioned things about communism, and the general american view of communism was correct, it would suck, and there would be great need for state control just to stop the impending revolution from within, but as I have stated, without the opresion, there is no need for control. Everyone makes the same choices they would make, carer, sport ect. Only differance is there is no welfare (sort of) so you choose to be a bum, you be a hungry bum.

Last and biggest, the "Everyone gets paid the same" thing. Again, a fantasy. The big differance here is what is valued. In capitalism economic viability is valued, in communism human effort is valued. To answer your question directly they guy who swept 2km of road would be greatly rewarded, the guy who swept 500m of road, all other things being equal, would get enough to live on but little else.

Think of it like this, If the USA got rid of washington and transfered all its economic assets into comunity ownership and abolished tax, you would have a rudimentry form of communism (political communism) Could even keep its market economy with districts competing (yes competition under communist rule, how funny) with each other.

Economic Communism is quite differant and even in its purist form I dont really like it. I dont like the self reliant parts of its make up and closed economy. Imo every area has its own make up and, much like individuals, can contribute differantly.

Lastly a real life example.
I look after children in what American's call a "group home". I have done this for five years and it requires a high skill level. My employer is the government. I do not produce revenue for my employer so he does not pay me a wage, he pays me an allowance which is tax free and makes me claim an "Unemployment" benifit (welfare) or take up other employment as well as the home. I believed that I could best serve the community by claiming welfare and devoting all my time into helping the children in my care, which I did to some degree with success gaining national recognition. However welfare got the idea that because I was "unemployed" they needed to find me a job, which they did. They took my tersiary qualifications, 5 years working in a high skilled job and found me a job pumping gas. Now I dont know if you guys have "Shell" in the USA but it is like McDonalds. Upsells and Promo's are the order of the day. At the counter we have a promotional product which you "WILL" be offered every time you come into our store. Although it is only pumping gas I take any job I do seriously so I give it my best effort, the average for Promo sales is 4% with 6 - 8 seen as good. I average 10 and regularly top 15. I get paid the same as the lazy prat I stand beside who barely bothers to offer the promo product let alone honestly make an effort. You can only geuss how much this piss's me off. No matter how hard I try there is no way up, it is a family franchise business so nepitism is the order of the day....this is one reason I hate capitalism.

Sorry for my long windedness, I am rather pasionate about this subject.

Mr_Kingkillaha

sounds right. crappy + fantastic, used sarcastically, i think i picked it up from "The Simpsons" tv show or adam sandler, not really sure.


so what country did you say you are from? your job sounds pretty bad, but im sure if you were to get a job at McD's you could at least get paid more than this moron guy after moving up to management. I know food work is not really a respectable job, but at least they are willing to promote hard workers.


back on subject, i think in theory this communism would work pretty well. if you consider that in our capitalist country, the average person has to bust thier ass every day just to get by, while paying 15-20% taxes so our leaders can drive thier Mercedes and live in a mansion. i dont see how anyone could think communism even has potential to be worse. and i say "communism" as you describe, without a central government. any sytem with government is going to be corrupt.

__________________
*
**
***
******
************
***************************
NO! They're all gonna laugh at you!
***************************

limerickman

Fixey,

I can identify with what you have posted here and I believe that the central point that you raise will be lost on a lot of the American members of the Forum, who espouse that one has to contribute a profit to an enterprise where one is employed.

A lot of good work is done by people in the public sector - they provide a service which would otherwise not be provided by the State or by private industry.

Take your work with kids - would a private enterprise do the work that you did ?
Not for one minute because there isn't a profit in that type of work (and by profit, I mean a monetary value).
Yet, this work is "profitable" - in that it provides a service which would not be there otherwise.

The notion about the USA having 50 independent states is interesting.
Look at California - it's the 6th biggest economy in the world and outperforms
the other 49 states.
If California did go independent - under the structure that you have proposed - the USA would disintegrate as an economic entity.

Carrera

You've either been reading the Republic, or you'd be interested in reading it.
The Labour MP Tony Benn had a good take on it: He said if you have a monopoly of bread supply, you can either have a society where people fight over the bread by competing for it. Or you can sell the bread to the richest folks and toss a few crumbs at the poor.
Or you cna divide the bread up in equal measure.

Darjevon

Personally, I would divide my country into 2 sections. I'd build a big long wall between them, then id call one the ghetto and the other the derelict. That way my wall will stand forever, 'cause the inhabitants of either section will have no interest in scoping out the horrors on the other side of the fence.

As for the inhabitants,

I would be supreme dictator and they would be my "sharecroppers". I'd pay them in fake cocaine and heroin, and say they own a square of concrete 1ft by 1ft in area. They would die young and serve me from the moment they were born till the death of them. I would use all the profits from this to build another wall around the perimeter, so the inhabitants couldn't get out. Finally, I would save up until I could build a full, airtight, and opaque dome of concrete over the entire place. When it is one brick away from completion, I will climb out of the dome, mortar the last brick, thus sealing my life-sized diorama of hell forever.

God bless Jojoville.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

__________________
My "hitlist" is as follows.

1. My mailman
2. George Bush
3. Mike Tyson
4. Condoleeza Rice
5. Zapper

MountainPro

I have always liked Tony Benn...last of a dying breed.

jhuskey

That sounds like a plan ,except I would make one side conpletely surrounded by concrete walls and put all the "a-holes" and people that piss me off there and then run the pipes from all urinals and toilets to that side and wait for the water to rise.
Two problems solved.
But seriously this is a world governed by the rules of nature. The strongest and the smartest excel and when government tries to changes these rules a catastrophe will ensue.
Nature and the rules of the universe will prevail.

__________________
Whenever I can't get excited about riding I just fantasize about someone else's bike.

limerickman

I am a Tony Benn fan too.

He always struck me as being a very very honest politician.

MountainPro

indeed, a politician for the people...

i shared a lot of his views on Iraq..

Carrera

His only error is he has a very old fashioned outlook and idea that Russia is still communist. Even when I was there in 1992 communism was very out of fashion and Dallas with JR Ewing very much in.
But I agreed with him also over Iraq even when I was one of the few people to object when Clinton bombed Iraq to distract attention from his problems with Monica Lewinsky. My line has always been that any decision to invade Iraq should have been taken jointly with the allies at the time of the first gulf war.

jaguar75

Come on Lim...even though I don't agree with most of your views, I do respect your posts...you can't obviously believe that Americans go around with the blind sense of give me profits or give me death? I think you are thinking of the Japanese.
We Americans are a very competative lot and yes on the level of world economics the US has to be competative, however, a lot of American companies go out of their way to "give back" look at Oprah and Gates, Their foundations donate millions out of their own pockets. There are many more and I use these 2 only because I have read about them.
Granted Cali is a very strong state but, don't ever think that that state separating from the Union would be possible for many reasons...don't liken the US to Canada and their provincial problems.
Cali separating from the Union would be the equivilent of your mouth wanting to leave your body because your hands don't feed it right....

__________________

"Perseverance is more prevailing than violence; and many things which cannot be overcome when they are together, yield themselves up when taken little by little" - Plutarch (46 AD - 120 AD)

limerickman

can't agree with you there mate.
I believe the corporate/entertainment industry in your country is the cause of a lot of problems, not least in your own country.

Oprah Winfrey ?
What is she ?
A talk show host - who's only interest is corporate profit.
I despise everything that she claims to represent.
Unfortunately, the TV stations in this part of the world buy her programs and so she gets air time here.
She and what she represents is materialism and an attack on the generic cultures outside of the USA.
Going to SA to hand out presents to kids is all very well.
To what end though ? To give free advertising to her corporate sponsors ?
To ensure future sales of her programs on SA television ?

Bill Gates ?
He tried to create a monopoly for PC systems back in the 1990's.
Monopoly is the ultimate form of capitalism.

I'd rather your country keep your "culture" to yourselves, thanks.

By the way I wasn't suggesting that california secede from the Union.
I was merely pointing out that Cal. in it's own right is the 6th largest economy in the USA.
Remove the Cal. from the USA and the measurements for the USA drop dramtically.

jaguar75

Actually Oprah has a lot of respect because she started off as a poor black girl from the ghetto and has achieved the fortune 500 list. A tremendous accomplishment and a true testament to what determination and persistance will get you in this country. Granted this whole discussion is probably stupid as neither of us know her personally but I think it is funny how "glass half empty people" always find the negatives and always try to discredit people.
Do you know what Bill Gates's wife sole responsibility is? It is to give his money away. She is chairman of his foundation and their yearly donations roputinely approach the 100 million dollar mark. I bet you did not know this but the Gates foundation also gives big grants to other countries. I am sure though that this extreme is merely for a tax right off


Your knowledge of Bill Gates might be just a tad off...Gate/Microsoft does not create hardware they are software company. And when gates separated from Apple he took Apples operating system with him because he was one of the architechs of it and it was not copywrighted at Apple. Steve Jobs dropped the ball on that not Gates and Ballmer.


So then shut down your MIE or Netscape browser and stop posting on this site, close out your Windows, box up your (Dell, Compaq, HP, or Gateway) and ship it to me.

__________________

"Perseverance is more prevailing than violence; and many things which cannot be overcome when they are together, yield themselves up when taken little by little" - Plutarch (46 AD - 120 AD)