The company assembles and eventually creates an agreement? Just because some people are not trained in business does not mean that they cannot be trained. :lol:how is the company going to decide the direction in which it goes? you need someone or even a minority of people to decide these things, people who are trained in business. Most people, arent.
H8sMikeMoore
The enemy of communism: Human nature.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="bradleybhoy"][QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"][QUOTE="bradleybhoy"][QUOTE="Nemesis4747"]most poeple do not want to be just cogs in the wheel, they want the freedom to express themselves, which a communist society doss not allow for.Frattracide
Who says so? Even in capitalism we are all "cogs in a machine". A far more corrupt and unjust machine. The only way to escape capitalism is to become completely self-sufficient.
THE WHOLE POINT OF CAPITALISM IS TO BE SELF SUFFICIENT.
do you even know what capitalism is? jeez
Do you even know what the term "self-sufficiency" means.
It means a progressively reduced reliance on society to fufill your needs until you can function without currency.
No, it just means you are able to provide for yourself.
What I meant by self-sufficiency was:
A progressively reduced reliance on society to fufill your needs until you can function without currency.
So wherever I said self-sufficiency you can read it as that.
[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]The company assembles and eventually creates an agreement? Just because some people are not trained in business does not mean that they cannot be trained. :lol:how is the company going to decide the direction in which it goes? you need someone or even a minority of people to decide these things, people who are trained in business. Most people, arent.
CptJSparrow
the more people you get, the more disagreements you get. You are obviously very young.
[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]The company assembles and eventually creates an agreement? Just because some people are not trained in business does not mean that they cannot be trained. :lol:how is the company going to decide the direction in which it goes? you need someone or even a minority of people to decide these things, people who are trained in business. Most people, arent.
H8sMikeMoore
the more people you get, the more disagreements you get. You are obviously very young.
The more disagreement you get, the more competition you get; competition is analogous to refining, which induces improvement.Communism would probably be a bit more appealing if the leaders of communistic nations didn't tend to be complete psychopaths.DracargenThe Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, North Korea, and Cuba are or were all state capitalist societies, not communist nations. Technically, there is no such thing as a "communist state," considering that communism is a theory of socioeconomics, though you did say 'nation,' which is more equivocal. Anyway, because the government owned most of the wealth, they are or were essentially oligarchies. It is not communism when the state owns the wealth. In contrast, the United States of America is a private capitalist society -- the private sector owns the wealth. And the revolution in China was fundamentally different from a communistic revolution, as it was in favor of peasants and not the proletariat.
[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]let me break this down for you real easy.
lets say you became a doctor in this system and you're getting paid the same as the janitor...
are you gonna really care if you cant be a doctor one day? I mean you can make the same money anyway.
This is where capitalism works best. the harder you work, the more you get.
how is the company going to decide the direction in which it goes? you need someone or even a minority of people to decide these things, people who are trained in business. Most people, arent.
pianist
Sparrow's right. If everyone in a group believes in communism, then it can certainly work. But believing in communism means that you are willing to accept that certain people will do more work to acquire necessary expertise and will not expect greater compensation as a result. Most of the people in our society don't believe that. But stick all of those that do together and you'll have a small, successful communist community.
Capitalism doesn't work on the principle of the 'the harder you work, the more you get.' Many of the wealthiest people in capitalist societies work very little, mostly because they have hired other people to hire thousands of other people to work for them. It's like a giant, legal pyramid scheme, though unlike most pyramid schemes, something is produced. But the concept is the same. You don't get rich working hard. You get rich by getting other people to work hard for you. The more people you can convince to work for you, the better off you'll be. It's built entirely around the idea of exploiting people, and is fundamentally not so different from a feudal system, except that the peasants can choose which lord they slave for and don't live quite so poorly (in most cases).
An artist may devote as much time to his or her work as any doctor, but you think they'll be paid the same? And that doctor may devote much more time to his or her work than the owner of a large mega-corporation, but you think they'll be paid the same? So not only is capitalism about how hard you work, it's also about what sort of work you do. If your skills are deemed unvaluable to society, then you're unvaluable... even if you're extremely commited to what you do.
Capitalism is as flawed a system as communism, and the end result is the same. A small group of people holds most of the wealth of a nation and manipulates the system to maintain that status quo. But the tiny chance that they may themselves rise to the wealthy elite placates the population in a capitalism and encourages entrepreneurs. Communism would be the better system for most people, but capitalism is the only system that can be successful, unless the majority is able to overcome one of humanity's most significant vices - greed.
1. with capitalism, you dont have to believe in it for it to work. Obviously its clear which one is more efficient.
2. The backbone of capitalism is, the harder you work the more you get. It depends on what you do. Pushing boxes in a warehouse harder than the next guy probably isnt gonna do much in the short term. But if youre smart, and work hard you can learn how to invest properly. Harder you work = the more you get. You just gotta know how to do it.
in order to get rich in the first place, to have people to work for you you have to work hard to make sure you know exactly where every dime of your income goes. You arent rich, dont act as if you work harder because you got nothing to show for it.
you're a real jerk if you call people slaves for working. Not only do you get to choose where you work, you get to choose how you spend your money, you also get to choose if you work for yourself or not. If you think of people as slaves, its because you think of yourself as a slave and that does not mean everyone else is a slave.
in capitalism, you always have the opprotunity to live for yourself. Those who dont, dont. those who do, do. period.
No artists dont always get paid the same. But why should they? It depends on how much people DEMAND your labor. The hard work you give and the profit from it depends on the field. artists can make more than doctors, by the way.
Capitalism is as flawed as communism? Well, in soviet russia people used to scramble just to get a slice of bread. They would wait in line on average 2 hours a day for all sorts of things. Capitalism has proven its self time and time again to be the superior economic system in comparison to socialism (since you all say communism never existed).
The most wealthy people in this country hold most of the wealth, but theres so much wealth because were capitalist that it dosent make life bad for other people.
Maintaining the status quo is the biggest criticism of socialism, because theres no reason to innovate. as long as people keep getting what they need, why should they up the ante?
greed is good. I love greed.
[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"][QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]The company assembles and eventually creates an agreement? Just because some people are not trained in business does not mean that they cannot be trained. :lol:how is the company going to decide the direction in which it goes? you need someone or even a minority of people to decide these things, people who are trained in business. Most people, arent.
CptJSparrow
the more people you get, the more disagreements you get. You are obviously very young.
The more disagreement you get, the more competition you get; competition is analogous to refining, which induces improvement.right competition! the essense of capitalism.
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a state capitalism, an oligarchy in which the government owned the greatest percentage of the wealth.Capitalism is as flawed as communism? Well, in soviet russia people used to scramble just to get a slice of bread. They would wait in line on average 2 hours a day for all sorts of things. Capitalism has proven its self time and time again to be the superior economic system in comparison to socialism (since you all say communism never existed).
[QUOTE="bradleybhoy"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]I would have to agree with Deathxcore. I would also agree that a real communist state will never exist because of human nature. People are greedy and that is never going to change.H8sMikeMoore
Never say never.
To the TC I hope that one day there would be a global commuinst society and I also embrace a lot of Christian ideals. It is quite irnoic that alot religions actually contain the values which are crucial for communism to function. Temeperance, selflessness etc.
Who is to say what human nature is? An individual' environment, upbringing and education no doubt shape their character. And you will notice that Capitalism promotes NONE of the values which are fundamental to the functioning of a commnist society.
"Human Nature" can be re-defined. Currently we are stuck in a hegemonic capitalist society. And so human nature is defined by that system. Human nature in a capitalist context is survival of the fittest, dog eat dog, kill or be killed. But if people began to embrace the essence of communist ideals, that we all have a responsibility to each other, that we are not enemies or competitors but brothers and sisters, then socialism and eventually communism would be willingly embraced democratically. However that shift in "human nature" is currently near-impossible because of the grip of international-capitalism which reinforces "dog eat dog" ideals as human nature and therefore asserts the impossibility of the implementation of genuine communism."
survival of the fittest isnt human nature? wow dude.To determine what "human nature" is you have to look at what distinguishes it from non-human nature.
Perhpas it is our evolved capacities for reasoning and understanding? Also our increased sensitivity to the welfare of others, who we recognise can feel pain and pleasure like us, and function as we do. We are not slave to animal-instincts, we have the ability to transcend greed and violence, and it is this ability which distinguishes "human nature" from baser animalistic urges.
in order to get rich in the first place, to have people to work for you you have to work hard to make sure you know exactly where every dime of your income goes. You arent rich, dont act as if you work harder because you got nothing to show for it.
H8sMikeMoore
that only applies if people start out the same, which may occur in the beginning but after a few generations it's possible for the descendants of the "smarter" people (or those that invested better) to exploit the system so that it's not possible for new people to be wealthy.
Yes, and my point was that a system could be devised in which communism functions within each business, but competition/capitalism rules nationally.right competition! the essense of capitalism.
H8sMikeMoore
[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]in order to get rich in the first place, to have people to work for you you have to work hard to make sure you know exactly where every dime of your income goes. You arent rich, dont act as if you work harder because you got nothing to show for it.
Hewkii
that only applies if people start out the same, which may occur in the beginning but after a few generations it's possible for the descendants of the "smarter" people (or those that invested better) to exploit the system so that it's not possible for new people to be wealthy.
actually its really possible, the stock market builds wealth for many people in there own life time. wealth is possible, just be smart.
actually its really possible, the stock market builds wealth for many people in there own life time. wealth is possible, just be smart.
H8sMikeMoore
of course it is, it's just possible for some industries, at the very least, to be impossible to get into unless you get there first.
[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]actually its really possible, the stock market builds wealth for many people in there own life time. wealth is possible, just be smart.
Hewkii
of course it is, it's just possible for some industries, at the very least, to be impossible to get into unless you get there first.
sorry i may be having a brain fart but im really confused by what you said.
The idea of communism is dangerous because it appeals to a lot of young idealists.
Capitalism is the best economic system developed so far, and instead of breaking it down and/or reforming it to the point of unrecognizability, I believe we should move forward with great caution and experience.
it's just that in some industries, at the very least, it's impossible to get into unless you get there first.Hewkii
do you know what the stock market is?
As far as i'm concerned, communism is the step-brother of dictatorship. All of our freedom's and rights are taken away so that all are equal and "on par" with eachother. I am not allowed to grow and become powerful or rich, and i am never at risk of falling and becoming poor or useless. But the risks are always worth it, because you have the freedom to carve your own destiny in capitalism, where in communism you are *forced* to be a small part of a large whole. You have no identity, no freedom. You are one of many. The drive to advance and grow dies a slow death, advancement continues for the sake of advancement, but it is a far shadow of it's former self when those who desired power and wealth pushed forth advancement in technology to crush their enemies, in both economics and war.
And you can't be allowed freedom of thought either. You can't be allowed to think "well this system sucks" or it'd all fall apart. To prevent rebellions, riots, or civil wars the freedom of thought and expression would need to be severely limited. I dont think it's just greed and "evil" that prevents communism, i think it is the old American want, drive, and need for freedom, that will never allow communism to reign supreme. The will to define one's own destiny, to become great, will always dominate over the will of others to suppress that urge, that destiny, and that greatness, so those who choose not to work for greatness, or who can not, can benefit.
The real enemy of communism... AMERICA!!!!!111
no but you are absolutely right. Communism is an idea that will forever be beautiful in thought but horrible in practice
The reason communism has failed and will never properly work is because of one thing: Human nature.
I'm speaking of actual communism. A classless society where everything is fair and everyone owns everything. However, the supposedly good intentions for the ideals of communism is unrealistic and illogical. Human nature cannot be suppressed for the benefit of the "collective." A lot of people simply are just too greedy, selfish, and fearful. This is why utopian philosophies are implausible. People desiring equality and fairness turn to the government; the body that seemingly has the resources and man power to regulate and push toward a utopian society. This leads to totalitarianism and dictatorships. Why? Power hungry people exploit the good intentions of the people, and impose a false sense of "equality" by dictating society. Much of it starts with "sticking up for the little guy" rhetoric. Populist speech and appealing to the bitter emotions of people can gain support and sympathy.
So, communism will never succeed like some of you think it could because of immorality. It's funny that many communist or socialiast supporters tend to be non-religious or atheist and seem to shun Christianity. The only way your ideals could work is with distinct moral values. Morality such as in Biblical principles. Heh, and Christians will never embrace communism because of its many flaws and tragic history.
Much of this is based around common sense. I've analyzed this a lot, and it makes sense. No?
Capitalism is the way of logic.
MayorJohnny
I've always said that communism is a wonderful idea in theory, but in practice it always fails, because with communism, it's so easy for a leader to get power-hungry and evil, because it's so easy for the leader to take total power in a communist government.
1. with capitalism, you dont have to believe in it for it to work. Obviously its clear which one is more efficient.
I already said it works. The reasons it works and the vices it promotes are the problem. For some, economic efficiency is less important than people's lives. I'm sure you'll immediately bring up, once again, the notion that capitalism must be better for the majority because people in North Korea and the Soviet Union were fighting over loaves of bread. And once again, you'll be reminded that nations like the Soviet Union and North Korea were never communisms. They were dictatorships masquerading as communism. It's like claiming that fascism is capitalism because both are right wing ideologies. Things may have panned out better for nations like the Soviet Union and North Korea if they spent their money on something like, I don't know, food... instead of dumping it all into the military.
2. The backbone of capitalism is, the harder you work the more you get. It depends on what you do. Pushing boxes in a warehouse harder than the next guy probably isnt gonna do much in the short term. But if youre smart, and work hard you can learn how to invest properly. Harder you work = the more you get. You just gotta know how to do it.
in order to get rich in the first place, to have people to work for you you have to work hard to make sure you know exactly where every dime of your income goes. You arent rich, dont act as if you work harder because you got nothing to show for it.
You're nothing if not persistent. I've already demonstrated that the backbone of capitalism is not hard work, but opportunism. You can work as hard as you like. If what you do is unvaluable, or if people can't afford to pay you millions for it and you can't mass distribute it (say you're individually offering a service for instance), then you won't get rich. Because they are responsible for maintaining the health of the citizens, doctors are every bit as valuable to society as industrial tycoons. You can't appreciate your wealth if you're dead. But no doctor will make as much as an industrial tycoon, because we don't need nearly as many industrial tycoons as doctors. If this nation had only as many doctors as industrial tycoons, it would fall apart. Same goes for educators. If you only had as many teachers as you had professional athletes, the cost of education would be astronomically high, and only the wealthy elite could receive an education. So unless you're going to try to argue that an industrial tycoon worked harder than teachers, doctors, or the countless other vital contributors to our society do, you'd be best to stop arguing that hard work is the backbone of wealth in capitalism.
And the funny thing is that capitalism tends to provide the greatest rewards to people who are totally dependent on the society that is built on the backs of these vital positions that could never receive the same wages for the reason I discussed above. Industrial entrepreneurs need a healthy, educated population to work for them. The enormously wealthy entertainment industry needs the same. And a healthy, educated population can not exist without doctors and educators... to say nothing of the fact that they probably wouldn't be too concerned with buying things or being entertained if they're forced to worry about more practical things, like food or protection. Police officers and farmers don't make much by comparison to wealthy industrialists either, do they?
Oh, but I forgot. They don't work as hard as the wealthy industrialists.
You hit the nail on the head when you talked about investing. If you work hard to become a good investor, you can become wealthy. But once again, becoming wealthy as an investor is dependent on society continuing to function, which is dependent on lots of people doing hard work for less pay than their contribution is worth. If everyone was an investor, there'd be nothing to invest in. And thus, what's investing based on? That's right... opportunism. Using other peoples' work to get yourself rich.
you're a real jerk if you call people slaves for working. Not only do you get to choose where you work, you get to choose how you spend your money, you also get to choose if you work for yourself or not. If you think of people as slaves, its because you think of yourself as a slave and that does not mean everyone else is a slave.
No, you're a real jerk if you feel it's fine to pay people beans to work hard so you can be wealthy at the expense of their effort. I obviously don't think of myself as a slave, because as a person with little material desire and who is working for a cause in which he believes, I am perfectly content earning my meagre salary. If I lived in a functioning communism, nothing would change for me. But the vast majority of people in society are not satisfied with their work or their pay. And if you think they have realistic options for changing that, you're naive. They can work to make one exploiter rich, or they can work to make a different exploiter rich. Or they can enter into their own business, get driven out of business by a mega-corporation, and end up right back at square one. Or they can try to invest their money in stocks and have it taken away from them by those with inside information or a trading 'edge,' which is what happens to most people who invest their own money.
I don't doubt you'll immediately point to those few examples of rags to riches stories, assured that this tiny percentage of success stories legitimizes your argument. But it doesn't. In a feudal society, or in a militaristic 'communism,' you also stand a tiny percentage chance of becoming a person of great wealth and importance. But it is tiny.
Capitalism looks real good on paper. It makes everyone feel that with some dedication and ability they can rise to the top and enter into the wealthy circles they envy. But just like communism, it's a good idea on paper that won't work out for the vast majority. If it did, the system would flop. Capitalism depends on most people serving those who rise to the top. And those servants don't have a significant REALISTIC chance of escaping their role.
in capitalism, you always have the opprotunity to live for yourself. Those who dont, dont. those who do, do. period.
Sure you do. Until you need money to buy food or pay for a place to live. Then you are no longer free to live for yourself. You are obligated to support yourself, and for most people, that will be by doing something you don't want to do. Why do you think there's a huge industry built around anti-depressants?
No artists dont always get paid the same. But why should they? It depends on how much people DEMAND your labor. The hard work you give and the profit from it depends on the field. artists can make more than doctors, by the way.
Of course they can. In fact, they can end up making a hell of a lot more than doctors or educators by rapping about being sexually aroused in a club. Not because society really needs people to rap about being sexually aroused in a club, mind you. Just more fuel for the fire, really.... something isn't right when you can make far more rapping about being sexually aroused in a club than most people who spend their days saving the lives of people who like to listen to rappers rapping about being sexually aroused in a club would make.
Capitalism is as flawed as communism? Well, in soviet russia people used to scramble just to get a slice of bread. They would wait in line on average 2 hours a day for all sorts of things. Capitalism has proven its self time and time again to be the superior economic system in comparison to socialism (since you all say communism never existed).
There you go again. Maybe if Soviet Russia didn't spend billions of dollars on a useless arms race, people wouldn't be scrambling to get a slice of bread. And I don't argue that capitalism is far superior to a dictatorship. I think a healthy society needs elements of both socialism and capitalism. Socialism combats greed and capitalism combats laziness. They complement each other. Ideally, you'd have a society where people can become wealthier than their peers through initiative, but where they can not become exorbitantly wealthy at the expense of the majority. The profit motive would continue to exist; you just wouldn't get such an enormous distinction between haves and have nots.
The most wealthy people in this country hold most of the wealth, but theres so much wealth because were capitalist that it dosent make life bad for other people.
It makes life really bad for the people upon whom the system is built. Where do you think all that crap we buy comes from? Thin air? Why do we get it for reasonable prices?
Maintaining the status quo is the biggest criticism of socialism, because theres no reason to innovate. as long as people keep getting what they need, why should they up the ante?
Because there are better ways of getting what you need. And frankly, if everyone in the world WAS getting what they needed, it would be far better than millions not getting what they need so a few can own multiple estates and dine on jewel-encrusted cookware.
greed is good. I love greed.
Yeah, we get it. And we get it. ;)
H8sMikeMoore
To build upon my previous point:
"To determine what "human nature" is you have to look at what distinguishes it from non-human nature.
Perhpas it is our evolved capacities for reasoning and understanding? Also our increased sensitivity to the welfare of others, who we recognise can feel pain and pleasure like us, and function as we do. We are not slave to animal-instincts, we have the ability to transcend greed and violence, and it is this ability which distinguishes "human nature" from baser animalistic urges."
Thus communism is perhaps an economic system which best represents our unique human nature for it is our human reason and our human logic which leads us to realise that in an ideal system of world communism there would be no war, no poverty and no exploitation of the many by the few. And this system would be achieved by rejecting baser animal instincts, like greed and violence, and valuing the characteristics that make us uniquely human: selflessness, temperance and compassion.
The ancient proponents of logic and reason, Greek philosophers, realised this over 2000 years ago.
To build upon my previous point:
"To determine what "human nature" is you have to look at what distinguishes it from non-human nature.
Perhpas it is our evolved capacities for reasoning and understanding? Also our increased sensitivity to the welfare of others, who we recognise can feel pain and pleasure like us, and function as we do. We are not slave to animal-instincts, we have the ability to transcend greed and violence, and it is this ability which distinguishes "human nature" from baser animalistic urges."
Thus communism is perhaps an economic system which best represents our unique human nature for it is our human reason and our human logic which leads us to realise that in an ideal system of world communism there would be no war, no poverty and no exploitation of the many by the few. And this system would be achieved by rejecting baser animal instincts, like greed and violence, and valuing the characteristics that make us uniquely human: selflessness, temperance and compassion.
The ancient proponents of logic and reason, Greek philosophers, realised this over 2000 years ago.
bradleybhoy
Real Christians try to do this. To follow by the example of Jesus Christ.
However, it seems that a lot of the communist supporters are atheist or are just very secular. There is no set truth, and it's all relative. Speaking the truth about morality is "teh intolerant."
It's like this desire for a "Utopia" is like wanting a Heaven without God. You can't have it both ways.
Christians will never embrace communism. It's way too flawed and implausible. God gave everyone a free will, and people that do not know God certainly shouldn't try to tell us about an "ideal" way of life.
I like how a lot of the people on here, are trashing capitalism, while they probably sit on a computer that has a high speed internet connection, it a brand name computer or custom built computer with brand name parts, live in a nice suburban household, have their nice game consoles that cost upwards of 200 bucks, parents probably pay for most, if not all of their living expenses, don't pay taxes, etc, etc.
A lot of us in the West (especially America) have benefitted a ton from Capitalism, and continue to.
Not every person who supports Capitalism is some money hungry fat cat. Yes, I WANT to make more money, I want to live a nicer life style than my parents provided me as a child, I want to drive a nice car, I want to live in a nice home in a nice neighborhood. I still give my money to charity, I give my old clothes to churches and other organizations that distribute them to the poor.
Am i greedy for wanting a nice lifestyle? And on top of that, I work hard, and have worked hard to get where I'm at today and have no problem doing it.
I like how a lot of the people on here, are trashing capitalism, while they probably sit on a computer that has a high speed internet connection, it a brand name computer or custom built computer with brand name parts, live in a nice suburban household, have their nice game consoles that cost upwards of 200 bucks, parents probably pay for most, if not all of their living expenses, don't pay taxes, etc, etc.
A lot of us in the West (especially America) have benefitted a ton from Capitalism, and continue to.
Not every person who supports Capitalism is some money hungry fat cat. Yes, I WANT to make more money, I want to live a nicer life ****than my parents provided me as a child, I want to drive a nice car, I want to live in a nice home in a nice neighborhood. I still give my money to charity, I give my old clothes to churches and other organizations that distribute them to the poor.
Am i greedy for wanting a nice life**** And on top of that, I work hard, and have worked hard to get where I'm at today and have no problem doing it.
InterpolWilco
Key concept there, because while many prosper in a capitalist economy others suffer, and without that suffering there could be no prosperity. Capitalism is built on polarity. You don't live in a universally prosperous society under capitalism. You live in one where the illusion of success is given by the triumphs of the few. It's unfair saying that people can't disagree with a system they live in. Disagreement is the first step to improvement.
[QUOTE="InterpolWilco"]I like how a lot of the people on here, are trashing capitalism, while they probably sit on a computer that has a high speed internet connection, it a brand name computer or custom built computer with brand name parts, live in a nice suburban household, have their nice game consoles that cost upwards of 200 bucks, parents probably pay for most, if not all of their living expenses, don't pay taxes, etc, etc.
A lot of us in the West (especially America) have benefitted a ton from Capitalism, and continue to.
Not every person who supports Capitalism is some money hungry fat cat. Yes, I WANT to make more money, I want to live a nicer life ****than my parents provided me as a child, I want to drive a nice car, I want to live in a nice home in a nice neighborhood. I still give my money to charity, I give my old clothes to churches and other organizations that distribute them to the poor.
Am i greedy for wanting a nice life**** And on top of that, I work hard, and have worked hard to get where I'm at today and have no problem doing it.
bman784
Key concept there, because while many prosper in a capitalist economy others suffer, and without that suffering there could be no prosperity. Capitalism is built on polarity. You don't live in a universally prosperous society under capitalism. You live in one where the illusion of success is given by the triumphs of the few. It's unfair saying that people can't disagree with a system they live in. Disagreement is the first step to improvement.
the general society in this country is proof that capitalism works. we could either live like people in socialistic countries, or like we do.
the people who havent benefited from capitalism (the few) should be helped... by you.
liberals are reaaaaal generous with other peoples money. Get out there and help instead of arguing on a gaming forum about how we should pay more taxes.
[QUOTE="InterpolWilco"]I like how a lot of the people on here, are trashing capitalism, while they probably sit on a computer that has a high speed internet connection, it a brand name computer or custom built computer with brand name parts, live in a nice suburban household, have their nice game consoles that cost upwards of 200 bucks, parents probably pay for most, if not all of their living expenses, don't pay taxes, etc, etc.
A lot of us in the West (especially America) have benefitted a ton from Capitalism, and continue to.
Not every person who supports Capitalism is some money hungry fat cat. Yes, I WANT to make more money, I want to live a nicer life ****than my parents provided me as a child, I want to drive a nice car, I want to live in a nice home in a nice neighborhood. I still give my money to charity, I give my old clothes to churches and other organizations that distribute them to the poor.
Am i greedy for wanting a nice life**** And on top of that, I work hard, and have worked hard to get where I'm at today and have no problem doing it.
bman784
Key concept there, because while many prosper in a capitalist economy others suffer, and without that suffering there could be no prosperity. Capitalism is built on polarity. You don't live in a universally prosperous society under capitalism. You live in one where the illusion of success is given by the triumphs of the few. It's unfair saying that people can't disagree with a system they live in. Disagreement is the first step to improvement.
Capitalism is flawed, and yes, there are things that are questionable. Its sad that there are people that are poor, but unfortunately, thats the reality of the world.
Theres always been poverty, I wish it could be wiped away, but its not going to, nor will it ever be gone.
I think the general idea of what you believe is somewhat admirable, but its also not fair to take money from people who work hard and give it to people that don't contribute.As said, I want to move up in society, I want nice things, and I don't see anything wrong with that. Its not like I'm doing anything dishonorable for a career. I'm doing what I love and making money at it. And it was a HUGE struggle, and at times still is, but I'm starting to reap the rewards, and I love them, and am so happy.
While it maybe unfair that theres poverty in society, its equally unfair to take people's money who have worked hard for it.
[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]1. with capitalism, you dont have to believe in it for it to work. Obviously its clear which one is more efficient.
I already said it works. The reasons it works and the vices it promotes are the problem. For some, economic efficiency is less important than people's lives. I'm sure you'll immediately bring up, once again, the notion that capitalism must be better for the majority because people in North Korea and the Soviet Union were fighting over loaves of bread. And once again, you'll be reminded that nations like the Soviet Union and North Korea were never communisms. They were dictatorships masquerading as communism. It's like claiming that fascism is capitalism because both are right wing ideologies. Things may have panned out better for nations like the Soviet Union and North Korea if they spent their money on something like, I don't know, food... instead of dumping it all into the military.
2. The backbone of capitalism is, the harder you work the more you get. It depends on what you do. Pushing boxes in a warehouse harder than the next guy probably isnt gonna do much in the short term. But if youre smart, and work hard you can learn how to invest properly. Harder you work = the more you get. You just gotta know how to do it.
in order to get rich in the first place, to have people to work for you you have to work hard to make sure you know exactly where every dime of your income goes. You arent rich, dont act as if you work harder because you got nothing to show for it.
You're nothing if not persistent. I've already demonstrated that the backbone of capitalism is not hard work, but opportunism. You can work as hard as you like. If what you do is unvaluable, or if people can't afford to pay you millions for it and you can't mass distribute it (say you're individually offering a service for instance), then you won't get rich. Because they are responsible for maintaining the health of the citizens, doctors are every bit as valuable to society as industrial tycoons. You can't appreciate your wealth if you're dead. But no doctor will make as much as an industrial tycoon, because we don't need nearly as many industrial tycoons as doctors. If this nation had only as many doctors as industrial tycoons, it would fall apart. Same goes for educators. If you only had as many teachers as you had professional athletes, the cost of education would be astronomically high, and only the wealthy elite could receive an education. So unless you're going to try to argue that an industrial tycoon worked harder than teachers, doctors, or the countless other vital contributors to our society do, you'd be best to stop arguing that hard work is the backbone of wealth in capitalism.
And the funny thing is that capitalism tends to provide the greatest rewards to people who are totally dependent on the society that is built on the backs of these vital positions that could never receive the same wages for the reason I discussed above. Industrial entrepreneurs need a healthy, educated population to work for them. The enormously wealthy entertainment industry needs the same. And a healthy, educated population can not exist without doctors and educators... to say nothing of the fact that they probably wouldn't be too concerned with buying things or being entertained if they're forced to worry about more practical things, like food or protection. Police officers and farmers don't make much by comparison to wealthy industrialists either, do they?
Oh, but I forgot. They don't work as hard as the wealthy industrialists.
You hit the nail on the head when you talked about investing. If you work hard to become a good investor, you can become wealthy. But once again, becoming wealthy as an investor is dependent on society continuing to function, which is dependent on lots of people doing hard work for less pay than their contribution is worth. If everyone was an investor, there'd be nothing to invest in. And thus, what's investing based on? That's right... opportunism. Using other peoples' work to get yourself rich.
you're a real jerk if you call people slaves for working. Not only do you get to choose where you work, you get to choose how you spend your money, you also get to choose if you work for yourself or not. If you think of people as slaves, its because you think of yourself as a slave and that does not mean everyone else is a slave.
No, you're a real jerk if you feel it's fine to pay people beans to work hard so you can be wealthy at the expense of their effort. I obviously don't think of myself as a slave, because as a person with little material desire and who is working for a cause in which he believes, I am perfectly content earning my meagre salary. If I lived in a functioning communism, nothing would change for me. But the vast majority of people in society are not satisfied with their work or their pay. And if you think they have realistic options for changing that, you're naive. They can work to make one exploiter rich, or they can work to make a different exploiter rich. Or they can enter into their own business, get driven out of business by a mega-corporation, and end up right back at square one. Or they can try to invest their money in stocks and have it taken away from them by those with inside information or a trading 'edge,' which is what happens to most people who invest their own money.
I don't doubt you'll immediately point to those few examples of rags to riches stories, assured that this tiny percentage of success stories legitimizes your argument. But it doesn't. In a feudal society, or in a militaristic 'communism,' you also stand a tiny percentage chance of becoming a person of great wealth and importance. But it is tiny.
Capitalism looks real good on paper. It makes everyone feel that with some dedication and ability they can rise to the top and enter into the wealthy circles they envy. But just like communism, it's a good idea on paper that won't work out for the vast majority. If it did, the system would flop. Capitalism depends on most people serving those who rise to the top. And those servants don't have a significant REALISTIC chance of escaping their role.
in capitalism, you always have the opprotunity to live for yourself. Those who dont, dont. those who do, do. period.
Sure you do. Until you need money to buy food or pay for a place to live. Then you are no longer free to live for yourself. You are obligated to support yourself, and for most people, that will be by doing something you don't want to do. Why do you think there's a huge industry built around anti-depressants?
No artists dont always get paid the same. But why should they? It depends on how much people DEMAND your labor. The hard work you give and the profit from it depends on the field. artists can make more than doctors, by the way.
Of course they can. In fact, they can end up making a hell of a lot more than doctors or educators by rapping about being sexually aroused in a club. Not because society really needs people to rap about being sexually aroused in a club, mind you. Just more fuel for the fire, really.... something isn't right when you can make far more rapping about being sexually aroused in a club than most people who spend their days saving the lives of people who like to listen to rappers rapping about being sexually aroused in a club would make.
Capitalism is as flawed as communism? Well, in soviet russia people used to scramble just to get a slice of bread. They would wait in line on average 2 hours a day for all sorts of things. Capitalism has proven its self time and time again to be the superior economic system in comparison to socialism (since you all say communism never existed).
There you go again. Maybe if Soviet Russia didn't spend billions of dollars on a useless arms race, people wouldn't be scrambling to get a slice of bread. And I don't argue that capitalism is far superior to a dictatorship. I think a healthy society needs elements of both socialism and capitalism. Socialism combats greed and capitalism combats laziness. They complement each other. Ideally, you'd have a society where people can become wealthier than their peers through initiative, but where they can not become exorbitantly wealthy at the expense of the majority. The profit motive would continue to exist; you just wouldn't get such an enormous distinction between haves and have nots.
The most wealthy people in this country hold most of the wealth, but theres so much wealth because were capitalist that it dosent make life bad for other people.
It makes life really bad for the people upon whom the system is built. Where do you think all that crap we buy comes from? Thin air? Why do we get it for reasonable prices?
Maintaining the status quo is the biggest criticism of socialism, because theres no reason to innovate. as long as people keep getting what they need, why should they up the ante?
Because there are better ways of getting what you need. And frankly, if everyone in the world WAS getting what they needed, it would be far better than millions not getting what they need so a few can own multiple estates and dine on jewel-encrusted cookware.
greed is good. I love greed.
Yeah, we get it. And we get it. ;)
pianist
With all due respect, in all reality, Fascism is not a right wing ideology.
Don't let George Bush be your example of Conservatism, cause to me, he's the furthest thing from a true Conservative. You think George Bush infringed on Civil Liberties? Woodrow Wilson threw people against the war, or who spoke out against him in jail. He's a hero to a lot of modern day liberals.
Barry Goldwater on the other hand is where I fall in line. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Pro-Choice (though I think abortion is morally wrong, I don't think it should be illegal), limited government, less taxes, none-interventionist military. Thats actually true Conservatism.
[QUOTE="bradleybhoy"]To build upon my previous point:
"To determine what "human nature" is you have to look at what distinguishes it from non-human nature.
Perhpas it is our evolved capacities for reasoning and understanding? Also our increased sensitivity to the welfare of others, who we recognise can feel pain and pleasure like us, and function as we do. We are not slave to animal-instincts, we have the ability to transcend greed and violence, and it is this ability which distinguishes "human nature" from baser animalistic urges."
Thus communism is perhaps an economic system which best represents our unique human nature for it is our human reason and our human logic which leads us to realise that in an ideal system of world communism there would be no war, no poverty and no exploitation of the many by the few. And this system would be achieved by rejecting baser animal instincts, like greed and violence, and valuing the characteristics that make us uniquely human: selflessness, temperance and compassion.
The ancient proponents of logic and reason, Greek philosophers, realised this over 2000 years ago.
MayorJohnny
Real Christians try to do this. To follow by the example of Jesus Christ.
However, it seems that a lot of the communist supporters are atheist or are just very secular. There is no set truth, and it's all relative. Speaking the truth about morality is "teh intolerant."
It's like this desire for a "Utopia" is like wanting a Heaven without God. You can't have it both ways.
Christians will never embrace communism. It's way too flawed and implausible. God gave everyone a free will, and people that do not know God certainly shouldn't try to tell us about an "ideal" way of life.
Yes, I find it ironic how a lot of the ideas which are crucial for the functioning of communism can be found in religious texts. However you can maintain an athesist stance and still adopt these ideas. They aren't inherently religious.
[QUOTE="pianist"][QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]1. with capitalism, you dont have to believe in it for it to work. Obviously its clear which one is more efficient.
I already said it works. The reasons it works and the vices it promotes are the problem. For some, economic efficiency is less important than people's lives. I'm sure you'll immediately bring up, once again, the notion that capitalism must be better for the majority because people in North Korea and the Soviet Union were fighting over loaves of bread. And once again, you'll be reminded that nations like the Soviet Union and North Korea were never communisms. They were dictatorships masquerading as communism. It's like claiming that fascism is capitalism because both are right wing ideologies. Things may have panned out better for nations like the Soviet Union and North Korea if they spent their money on something like, I don't know, food... instead of dumping it all into the military.
2. The backbone of capitalism is, the harder you work the more you get. It depends on what you do. Pushing boxes in a warehouse harder than the next guy probably isnt gonna do much in the short term. But if youre smart, and work hard you can learn how to invest properly. Harder you work = the more you get. You just gotta know how to do it.
in order to get rich in the first place, to have people to work for you you have to work hard to make sure you know exactly where every dime of your income goes. You arent rich, dont act as if you work harder because you got nothing to show for it.
You're nothing if not persistent. I've already demonstrated that the backbone of capitalism is not hard work, but opportunism. You can work as hard as you like. If what you do is unvaluable, or if people can't afford to pay you millions for it and you can't mass distribute it (say you're individually offering a service for instance), then you won't get rich. Because they are responsible for maintaining the health of the citizens, doctors are every bit as valuable to society as industrial tycoons. You can't appreciate your wealth if you're dead. But no doctor will make as much as an industrial tycoon, because we don't need nearly as many industrial tycoons as doctors. If this nation had only as many doctors as industrial tycoons, it would fall apart. Same goes for educators. If you only had as many teachers as you had professional athletes, the cost of education would be astronomically high, and only the wealthy elite could receive an education. So unless you're going to try to argue that an industrial tycoon worked harder than teachers, doctors, or the countless other vital contributors to our society do, you'd be best to stop arguing that hard work is the backbone of wealth in capitalism.
And the funny thing is that capitalism tends to provide the greatest rewards to people who are totally dependent on the society that is built on the backs of these vital positions that could never receive the same wages for the reason I discussed above. Industrial entrepreneurs need a healthy, educated population to work for them. The enormously wealthy entertainment industry needs the same. And a healthy, educated population can not exist without doctors and educators... to say nothing of the fact that they probably wouldn't be too concerned with buying things or being entertained if they're forced to worry about more practical things, like food or protection. Police officers and farmers don't make much by comparison to wealthy industrialists either, do they?
Oh, but I forgot. They don't work as hard as the wealthy industrialists.
You hit the nail on the head when you talked about investing. If you work hard to become a good investor, you can become wealthy. But once again, becoming wealthy as an investor is dependent on society continuing to function, which is dependent on lots of people doing hard work for less pay than their contribution is worth. If everyone was an investor, there'd be nothing to invest in. And thus, what's investing based on? That's right... opportunism. Using other peoples' work to get yourself rich.
you're a real jerk if you call people slaves for working. Not only do you get to choose where you work, you get to choose how you spend your money, you also get to choose if you work for yourself or not. If you think of people as slaves, its because you think of yourself as a slave and that does not mean everyone else is a slave.
No, you're a real jerk if you feel it's fine to pay people beans to work hard so you can be wealthy at the expense of their effort. I obviously don't think of myself as a slave, because as a person with little material desire and who is working for a cause in which he believes, I am perfectly content earning my meagre salary. If I lived in a functioning communism, nothing would change for me. But the vast majority of people in society are not satisfied with their work or their pay. And if you think they have realistic options for changing that, you're naive. They can work to make one exploiter rich, or they can work to make a different exploiter rich. Or they can enter into their own business, get driven out of business by a mega-corporation, and end up right back at square one. Or they can try to invest their money in stocks and have it taken away from them by those with inside information or a trading 'edge,' which is what happens to most people who invest their own money.
I don't doubt you'll immediately point to those few examples of rags to riches stories, assured that this tiny percentage of success stories legitimizes your argument. But it doesn't. In a feudal society, or in a militaristic 'communism,' you also stand a tiny percentage chance of becoming a person of great wealth and importance. But it is tiny.
Capitalism looks real good on paper. It makes everyone feel that with some dedication and ability they can rise to the top and enter into the wealthy circles they envy. But just like communism, it's a good idea on paper that won't work out for the vast majority. If it did, the system would flop. Capitalism depends on most people serving those who rise to the top. And those servants don't have a significant REALISTIC chance of escaping their role.
in capitalism, you always have the opprotunity to live for yourself. Those who dont, dont. those who do, do. period.
Sure you do. Until you need money to buy food or pay for a place to live. Then you are no longer free to live for yourself. You are obligated to support yourself, and for most people, that will be by doing something you don't want to do. Why do you think there's a huge industry built around anti-depressants?
No artists dont always get paid the same. But why should they? It depends on how much people DEMAND your labor. The hard work you give and the profit from it depends on the field. artists can make more than doctors, by the way.
Of course they can. In fact, they can end up making a hell of a lot more than doctors or educators by rapping about being sexually aroused in a club. Not because society really needs people to rap about being sexually aroused in a club, mind you. Just more fuel for the fire, really.... something isn't right when you can make far more rapping about being sexually aroused in a club than most people who spend their days saving the lives of people who like to listen to rappers rapping about being sexually aroused in a club would make.
Capitalism is as flawed as communism? Well, in soviet russia people used to scramble just to get a slice of bread. They would wait in line on average 2 hours a day for all sorts of things. Capitalism has proven its self time and time again to be the superior economic system in comparison to socialism (since you all say communism never existed).
There you go again. Maybe if Soviet Russia didn't spend billions of dollars on a useless arms race, people wouldn't be scrambling to get a slice of bread. And I don't argue that capitalism is far superior to a dictatorship. I think a healthy society needs elements of both socialism and capitalism. Socialism combats greed and capitalism combats laziness. They complement each other. Ideally, you'd have a society where people can become wealthier than their peers through initiative, but where they can not become exorbitantly wealthy at the expense of the majority. The profit motive would continue to exist; you just wouldn't get such an enormous distinction between haves and have nots.
The most wealthy people in this country hold most of the wealth, but theres so much wealth because were capitalist that it dosent make life bad for other people.
It makes life really bad for the people upon whom the system is built. Where do you think all that crap we buy comes from? Thin air? Why do we get it for reasonable prices?
Maintaining the status quo is the biggest criticism of socialism, because theres no reason to innovate. as long as people keep getting what they need, why should they up the ante?
Because there are better ways of getting what you need. And frankly, if everyone in the world WAS getting what they needed, it would be far better than millions not getting what they need so a few can own multiple estates and dine on jewel-encrusted cookware.
greed is good. I love greed.
Yeah, we get it. And we get it. ;)
InterpolWilco
With all due respect, in all reality, Fascism is not a right wing ideology.
Don't let George Bush be your example of Conservatism, cause to me, he's the furthest thing from a true Conservative. You think George Bush infringed on Civil Liberties? Woodrow Wilson threw people against the war, or who spoke out against him in jail. He's a hero to a lot of modern day liberals.
Barry Goldwater on the other hand is where I fall in line. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Pro-Choice (though I think abortion is morally wrong, I don't think it should be illegal), limited government, less taxes, none-interventionist military. Thats actually true Conservatism.
Ehm...yes it is.
Communism works great in the heads of naive 15 year olds. Other than that, it doesn't hold up well. Failure after failure on the large scale. No government is perfect or ideal, but communism has yet to be implemented in a successful format on the large scale.sonicare
there's a simple reason for that, really. it's that humans don't want to work hard for peanuts or govern without corruption. the solution to this is to get something else to do both.
[QUOTE="sonicare"]Communism works great in the heads of naive 15 year olds. Other than that, it doesn't hold up well. Failure after failure on the large scale. No government is perfect or ideal, but communism has yet to be implemented in a successful format on the large scale.Hewkii
there's a simple reason for that, really. it's that humans don't want to work hard for peanuts or govern without corruption. the solution to this is to get something else to do both.
It's not even that. It's that humans are INDIVIDUALS.
The reason communism has failed and will never properly work is because of one thing: Human nature.
I'm speaking of actual communism. A classless society where everything is fair and everyone owns everything. However, the supposedly good intentions for the ideals of communism is unrealistic and illogical. Human nature cannot be suppressed for the benefit of the "collective." A lot of people simply are just too greedy, selfish, and fearful. This is why utopian philosophies are implausible. People desiring equality and fairness turn to the government; the body that seemingly has the resources and man power to regulate and push toward a utopian society. This leads to totalitarianism and dictatorships. Why? Power hungry people exploit the good intentions of the people, and impose a false sense of "equality" by dictating society. Much of it starts with "sticking up for the little guy" rhetoric. Populist speech and appealing to the bitter emotions of people can gain support and sympathy.
So, communism will never succeed like some of you think it could because of immorality. It's funny that many communist or socialiast supporters tend to be non-religious or atheist and seem to shun Christianity. The only way your ideals could work is with distinct moral values. Morality such as in Biblical principles. Heh, and Christians will never embrace communism because of its many flaws and tragic history.
Much of this is based around common sense. I've analyzed this a lot, and it makes sense. No?
Capitalism is the way of logic.
MayorJohnny
You are half right. It will never work due to human nature. However, that is not due to immorality. That is subjective, and Christian morals are not even close to being necessary in order to HAVE morals.
Capitalism is not just something that benefits the rich. Some of the best inventions were created for the benefit of greed, some of which, ironically enough, have benefited the poor.
Hell, for that matter, just look at the current issue of alternative fuels. The only reason some people on the right are FINALLY coming around on the issue sure in the hell is not because they have changed their minds about climate change not being real... it is because they are wanting to avoid high cost of gas.
Plus, wanting to save or gain some extra cash is reason why your average citizen is recycling.
Man, what am I stepping into??
Anyhoo.
"All creatures are created equal but some are more equal than other." I always thought that summed it up nicely.
Also, in a communists society the idea is that no one is better than anybody else. If everybody is equal who is going to want to ride on the back of a trash truck or dig ditches?
quote
''like how a lot of the people on here, are trashing capitalism, while they probably sit on a computer that has a high speed internet connection, it a brand name computer or custom built computer with brand name parts, live in a nice suburban household, have their nice game consoles that cost upwards of 200 bucks, parents probably pay for most, if not all of their living expenses, don't pay taxes, etc, etc.
A lot of us in the West (especially America) have benefitted a ton from Capitalism, and continue to.
Not every person who supports Capitalism is some money hungry fat cat. Yes, I WANT to make more money, I want to live a nicer life ****than my parents provided me as a child, I want to drive a nice car, I want to live in a nice home in a nice neighborhood. I still give my money to charity, I give my old clothes to churches and other organizations that distribute them to the poor.''
Am i greedy for wanting a nice life**** And on top of that, I work hard, and have worked hard to get where I'm at today and have no problem doing it.''
So normal working class people cant afford games consoles or the internet?
I live on a council estate, i am working class, i have the latest games console and high speed internet, its not just middle class.
Hurray for American greed and capitalism!
I still love communism, though.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment