Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

[Edgetho]

Karl Marx was the most psuedo of psuedo intellectuals that has disgraced the surface of the Earth with his presence.

He extols the virtues of socialism, he tells us that we should be more giving, more willing to share, he tells us we need to change our social, political and economic systems because -- Tehy're not fair.

But nowhere does he tell us how to run such a system once we kill everybody we don't like. Which seems to be about the only thing communists, socialists, fascists (whatever), et al are good at.

What gets me is how can the people of today, in an educated society, in an informed society, WILLINGLY wish for a dictatorship?!?!?!

That's what true socialism MUST be for it to work. An absolutist, statist, totalitarian dictatorship.

And OBTW, Hitler was a socialist, not a Fascist. Mussolini was a Fascist. As was Franco. And probably Pinochet.

But Hitler was a socialist. Period. End of debate.

 

[Mr.Nick]

After college I was all for communism. Call it indoctrination of the liberal teachers. However, I thought about it deeply and came to the conclusion it can never work. First, equal is a fantasy. Nothing can be equal because there is not an equal amount of resources. It is a fairy tale to believe everyone can have the same of everything because someone will always have something better. Whether it is lake front property, warmer climate, etc…. Everyone can not live on the beach in sunny south Florida or in Hawaii. Then we get to work. Everyone can not have the cushy chair job. Someone has to pick up the trash. Someone has to dive into the sewage tanks and risk hepatitis to clean it. Who is going to do those jobs freely if everything is equal? There is nothing more to gain from doing those jobs. Heck if everyone has the same thing then why work at all? Then the government will have to force people to work and then there goes human rights. The only way communism, socialism, liberalism, etc… can truly work is if we lived in the perfect world with the perfect resources and populated with the perfect people. We have none and that is why those forms of government will always fail in the end. Capitalism works because people in the end are greedy and always want more. No matter what form of government you have you will always have the haves and have nots. The only real question is does the individual decide through his own efforts and accomplishments or does the government get to pick the haves?

Lets not forget we're all not the same...

We all have different talents, we all have different intelligent levels, we all have different skills etc...

The truth is that we're all not the same.

Sure, treating the janitor the same as the doctor is good for the janitor but it's not good for the doctor....

Why even bother going the extra mile as an individual under the socialist model??? it won't get you anything.... And I think that extra effort is what built the US and what keeps the United States on top of the world - because individuals are rewarded for their effort and their extra work...

 

[Dick Tuck]

Can anyone point to a country that has truly free market capitalism?

How about one that actually practices the tenets of Communism?

No

But Capitalism left to run amok can fall into a system of kleptocrats

Communisim, strong armed idiots

Yes we need a government to regulate out the small businesses and help the big corporations run the nation. We need more regulations to protect us from fresh milk and lemonade on the streets. Those evil banks trying to rob us by forcing us to sign a contract to purchase a car or house we can not afford. Yes totally free capitalism is scary.

So we don't need laws that allows workers to strike, rather than corporations hiring personal armies to gun them down? We don't need regulations to make sure miners have proper ventilation and detection of poisonous gas? We don't need regulations that protect from child, near slave labor? We don't need regulations that requires proper asbestos abatement? We don't need regulations that require licencing of lawyers, dentists, and doctors? We don't need regulations to ensure proper food labeling? We don't need regulations that require meat be inspected?

Aren't the lack of regulation abuses like those what ushered in the Progressive Era?

 

[SniperFire]

I mean in its original form. Like i said, Picture it with democracy, Of course we all know modern communism is absolutely horrible and victimizing. I wouldnt dream of that any day.

You mean... in theory, before human nature gets added in?

That is right SF

Utopia is achievable--- If we don't include Humans!

Yes if only we get rid of all the crappy humans dirtying the earth. The earth would be a utopia for no one until it ends.[/QUOTE]



Our brilliant Founding Fathers more or less came up with a system that corralled the vagrancies of human nature into something productive for society. Not perfect, but it has checks and balances.

Of course, today's Libs say F that - want to try the old communism idea again.


FAIL

 

[miami_thomas]

Going into this i would like to say that i am more on the capitalist end of the spectrum. Though going into this i am generally capitalist knowing the pros and cons of them both may change your own mind. Even though communism was originally a social thing it has also found itself as a government with one man in control. So lets try and picture it with a U.S or near that style democracy.
In essence capitalism is smaller government and communism is huge government. Now before your western instincts tell you to instantly choose capitalism think of the benefits of huge government control in your life.
In communism ideal/original communism everyone is equal. Though it almost never happens that a nation goes completely on the guidelines of a known social policy. Everyone is equal and therefore have the same things to live on and lean on their whole lives. Everyone once again must be equal in society and as a result you lose the right to earn. So in exchange for a lifetime safety net given by the government you give up the ability to earn your way up the ladder. This is because only one social class exist and that is common working class. So you have nothing to look foward to besides that life forever.
It is up to you to decide whether that is a bad or a good thing for you. As a result of this innovation potential is silenced. So is a lifelong safety net really worth losing earning rights and silencing so much potential for innovation?
Now knowing the main gains and losses of communism lets talk about capitalism.
Essentially capitalism is the exact opposite of communism in its original and purest form. In ideal/original capitalism they're is pretty much no government interference in your life. Of course they still have laws as any other nation but if you follow them you are left alone for all of your life. Capitalism is that sweet freedom you taste, love and learn about. In ideal capitalism you can go out and earn it all. You can dream big and dream about the journey there. You can be a bigshot nobody will ever forget. But with that ability to dream big and earn it all you lose that security you had with communism. And if someone earns too much capital they can decide to make everyone else work for dirt cheap money if they choose. They can dominate or without a law from it a monopoly can occur. And if you fail you have nothing to fall back on unless a generous citizen with decent capital decides to help you up.
So is the freedom of capitalism worth the possibility of ending up with nothing?
In conclusion i would like to share my opinion. I belive the risk involved with capitalism is worth the big dreams and potential unlocked that comes with it. People have bigger things to live for and more fuel to live on. Because "the dream" actually exist. In addition to the fact that the world/nation could innovate so much faster.
I would like for you to build an opinion of your own and for you to give me your feedback and for you to discuss amongst youselves.

Ask the victims of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il, Pol Pot, Castro etc that question...

Yes, communism is really that horrible...

Whoops you forgot about Hitler, he was such a good Communist.

Actually Hitler was over the national socialist party. But I always said they were the same along with liberalism.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Ask the victims of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il, Pol Pot, Castro etc that question...

Yes, communism is really that horrible...

Whoops you forgot about Hitler, he was such a good Communist.

Actually Hitler was over the national socialist party. But I always said they were the same along with liberalism.

Once he used them to achieve power, he disbanded them and murdered SA leadership.

 

[miami_thomas]

No

But Capitalism left to run amok can fall into a system of kleptocrats

Communisim, strong armed idiots

Yes we need a government to regulate out the small businesses and help the big corporations run the nation. We need more regulations to protect us from fresh milk and lemonade on the streets. Those evil banks trying to rob us by forcing us to sign a contract to purchase a car or house we can not afford. Yes totally free capitalism is scary.

So we don't need laws that allows workers to strike, rather than corporations hiring personal armies to gun them down? We don't need regulations to make sure miners have proper ventilation and detection of poisonous gas? We don't need regulations that protect from child, near slave labor? We don't need regulations that requires proper asbestos abatement? We don't need regulations that require licencing of lawyers, dentists, and doctors? We don't need regulations to ensure proper food labeling? We don't need regulations that require meat be inspected?

Aren't the lack of regulation abuses like those what ushered in the Progressive Era?

Workers were on strike before unions were even around. That was in the days of true capitalism. Murder is against the law not a regulation needed. If people keep dying, surely people would find a new job. In order to get employees they would have to better working conditions. Again slavery is against the law no regulation needed for the financial market. Not really doctors, lawyers, and dentist work now. Just under the table. If you don’t trust a doctor, lawyer, dentist then find one you do. Do you really think licenses make them special? Other countries survive just fine with out labeling and food inspections. Do the inspections really stop e coli? I think I keep seeing it pop up even with the inspections. If people keep getting sick from your product, they will stop buying it.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Can anyone point to a country that has truly free market capitalism?

How about one that actually practices the tenets of Communism?

No

But Capitalism left to run amok can fall into a system of kleptocrats

Communisim, strong armed idiots

Dude, capitalism is a self-regulating economic model...

The value of money is not dictated by a government, our currency is dictated by labor - hence the spender..

The rich mans money is only worth something because of the laborer - because that laborer has money to spend, hence buy their product....

That's why we have boycotts against businesses.

As they say - money is only worth the paper it's printed on..

 

[Avatar4321]

Communism - 10 million dead and growing.

 

[miami_thomas]

Whoops you forgot about Hitler, he was such a good Communist.

Actually Hitler was over the national socialist party. But I always said they were the same along with liberalism.

Once he used them to achieve power, he disbanded them and murdered SA leadership.

Hitler hated communist and hunted them down first and foremost.

 

[Edgetho]

Whoops you forgot about Hitler, he was such a good Communist.

Actually Hitler was over the national socialist party. But I always said they were the same along with liberalism.

Once he used them to achieve power, he disbanded them and murdered SA leadership.

That's got nothing to do with the price of poontang in Peking.

Hitler was a socialist through and through. A 'National' socialist to be sure, but a socialist completely, totally and irrevocably.

Yes, his enemies were the communists (who were instructed to vote for him instead of the Weimar representatives) and the 'standard' socialists (called 'sozis' by the 'nazis') but Hitler was a socialist.

Totally and completely and absolutely.

libtards LOVE to argue that he wasn't. I guess because they don't want to give their belief system a bad name. Like, how could it get much worse?

But Hitler was a socialist. So was Stalin and so was Mao and so was Castro and so was Pol Pot and so is Kim Suk Dik (or whatever his name is) and so are all of the rest.

Semantics. That's all it is. They all drink from the same poisoned well.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Going into this i would like to say that i am more on the capitalist end of the spectrum. Though going into this i am generally capitalist knowing the pros and cons of them both may change your own mind. Even though communism was originally a social thing it has also found itself as a government with one man in control. So lets try and picture it with a U.S or near that style democracy.
In essence capitalism is smaller government and communism is huge government. Now before your western instincts tell you to instantly choose capitalism think of the benefits of huge government control in your life.
In communism ideal/original communism everyone is equal. Though it almost never happens that a nation goes completely on the guidelines of a known social policy. Everyone is equal and therefore have the same things to live on and lean on their whole lives. Everyone once again must be equal in society and as a result you lose the right to earn. So in exchange for a lifetime safety net given by the government you give up the ability to earn your way up the ladder. This is because only one social class exist and that is common working class. So you have nothing to look foward to besides that life forever.
It is up to you to decide whether that is a bad or a good thing for you. As a result of this innovation potential is silenced. So is a lifelong safety net really worth losing earning rights and silencing so much potential for innovation?
Now knowing the main gains and losses of communism lets talk about capitalism.
Essentially capitalism is the exact opposite of communism in its original and purest form. In ideal/original capitalism they're is pretty much no government interference in your life. Of course they still have laws as any other nation but if you follow them you are left alone for all of your life. Capitalism is that sweet freedom you taste, love and learn about. In ideal capitalism you can go out and earn it all. You can dream big and dream about the journey there. You can be a bigshot nobody will ever forget. But with that ability to dream big and earn it all you lose that security you had with communism. And if someone earns too much capital they can decide to make everyone else work for dirt cheap money if they choose. They can dominate or without a law from it a monopoly can occur. And if you fail you have nothing to fall back on unless a generous citizen with decent capital decides to help you up.
So is the freedom of capitalism worth the possibility of ending up with nothing?
In conclusion i would like to share my opinion. I belive the risk involved with capitalism is worth the big dreams and potential unlocked that comes with it. People have bigger things to live for and more fuel to live on. Because "the dream" actually exist. In addition to the fact that the world/nation could innovate so much faster.
I would like for you to build an opinion of your own and for you to give me your feedback and for you to discuss amongst youselves.

Communism, in theory, is great
Communism, in practice, is deadly. Chairman Mao, Stalin are just 2 examples of leaders who's people starved to death in the name of communism.

You didn't like the 5-year-plan???

A bad crop season could destroy a socialist nation...

Let's not forget Pol Pot....

 

[Clementine]

Ask Cubans.

They can't tell you anything because they don't have freedom of speech.

 

[Avatar4321]

Actually Hitler was over the national socialist party. But I always said they were the same along with liberalism.

Once he used them to achieve power, he disbanded them and murdered SA leadership.

Hitler hated communist and hunted them down first and foremost.

Of course he did, Marxists were a competing form of socialism to the Nazi's.

Of course, then he also allied with the biggest Communist nation to start WW2

 

[Mr.Nick]

Communism - 10 million dead and growing.

Try 250,000,000

Stalin and Mao combined is 100,000,000 alone...

 

[peach174]

Communism is a brutal system of government. It does not just fail to protect individual rights, it establishes a system of violence force. The results have been exactly what one would predict: starvation, poverty, and the slaughter of millions.

This is why our Constitution has 3 branches of Government.
But our Constitution has slowly been undermined by socialism (a form of Communism) for the last hundred years and now the 3 branches have merged into the Executive Branch (under Bush and Obama) so that the system does not work.
We have activist Judges who now make laws instead of ruling about the laws that have been passed by congress.
We have lobbyists who runs congress instead of we the people.
We the people need to get Government under control of the Constitution.
If our congressmen and women violates it, vote them out, and the same thing to our Presidents.

 

[Dragon]

Capitalism or communism? Are those our only choices?: God help us! Either a system of organized greed with a systematically-underperforming economy and widespread poverty, or one that aims for an anarchistic utopia where everyone shares, devoid of natural human motivation, putting lead weights on anything fun between here and there. The ruthlessly horrible or the reality-challenged.

What's behind Door No. 3?

 

[Dick Tuck]

Yes we need a government to regulate out the small businesses and help the big corporations run the nation. We need more regulations to protect us from fresh milk and lemonade on the streets. Those evil banks trying to rob us by forcing us to sign a contract to purchase a car or house we can not afford. Yes totally free capitalism is scary.

So we don't need laws that allows workers to strike, rather than corporations hiring personal armies to gun them down? We don't need regulations to make sure miners have proper ventilation and detection of poisonous gas? We don't need regulations that protect from child, near slave labor? We don't need regulations that requires proper asbestos abatement? We don't need regulations that require licencing of lawyers, dentists, and doctors? We don't need regulations to ensure proper food labeling? We don't need regulations that require meat be inspected?

Aren't the lack of regulation abuses like those what ushered in the Progressive Era?

Workers were on strike before unions were even around. That was in the days of true capitalism. Murder is against the law not a regulation needed. If people keep dying, surely people would find a new job. In order to get employees they would have to better working conditions. Again slavery is against the law no regulation needed for the financial market. Not really doctors, lawyers, and dentist work now. Just under the table. If you don’t trust a doctor, lawyer, dentist then find one you do. Do you really think licenses make them special? Other countries survive just fine with out labeling and food inspections. Do the inspections really stop e coli? I think I keep seeing it pop up even with the inspections. If people keep getting sick from your product, they will stop buying it.

Striking workers, prior to the Progressive Era, were subjected to violence from private armies, like Pinkertons. How many Pinkerton killers were tried and convicted? Finding a new job is a joke, if all the robber barons had complete monopoly control over the industries. The term I used was near slavery. That's what child labor was tantamount to. Yes, I do think licensing demonstrates that one, the person has meet some baseline criteria to ply their trade, and pulling the license of bad actors is reasonable. Why would it matter if one could stop infected foods, since it's clear that it dramatically reduces the incidence. I guess you also hate the fact that the Public Health Service does all it can to find the cause of outbreaks. Without privately and testing all your own food, I doubt that most people know what they suffer from is a food borne illness, from a specific product.

All that will happen when you reduce government to bare essentials, is to make the cost of corporations buying your government cheaper.

 

[Edgetho]

Actually Hitler was over the national socialist party. But I always said they were the same along with liberalism.

Once he used them to achieve power, he disbanded them and murdered SA leadership.

Hitler hated communist and hunted them down first and foremost.

Again, what's that got to do with the price of a steam bath in Tokyo?

Why do the 'Bloods' hate the 'Crips'?

Why do the Hells Angels hate the Outlaws?

Don't they have more in common than they do differences?

Why, yes Virginia. How about that?

Not picking on you, kid.

You just gotta stop drinking the Kool Aid

 

[Dick Tuck]

Capitalism or communism? Are those our only choices?: God help us! Either a system of organized greed with a systematically-underperforming economy and widespread poverty, or one that aims for an anarchistic utopia where everyone shares, devoid of natural human motivation, putting lead weights on anything fun between here and there. The ruthlessly horrible or the reality-challenged.

What's behind Door No. 3?

What virtually all first world economies have found to work, i.e. mixed economies. Most things are best done by the private sector, but others can only be seriously addressed by government. Most of Western Europe has found that 60-40 mix works for them, and (if you add up all local, state, and federal services and taxes), we're closer to a 67-33 mix.