NationStates Jolt Archive

In a perfect or near world, communism would rule. No money would be needed, because people would only take what they need and everything would work in prefiect harmony. In a near perfiect world, there would still be a need for money as an equalizer, but you would still have the choices like, how your company spends and since you would be a good worker, if you changed jobs etc. In essence, every body takes only what he/she needs, and the rest of scocity bends to that, and if scociety bends to everybody equaly, then you have communism at its best, unfortunatly, this goes against human nature witch is to become best and have the most power, thus, perfiect communism would not work, however, a different form of communism that takes less of scociety bending in could work.

Capitalism is the exact oppisit, in capitalism, scociety bends away from all others needs, and you are left to fend for your own. this is good in some ways, but bad in others. this gives you the chance to excell and to rise up to be powerfull, but there will always be the people left in the dust with nothing. I think a ix between capitalism and communism is the key. You need to have a thick scocial welfare so that if you are "left in the dust," you still survive, but, if yo excell beyond your wildest dreams, then you still rise to the top. Unfortunatly, this means having high taxes, and if you don't have a good gov. then you are screwed. So, you need a very good democratic system, in order to let a good portion of the decitions be able to be up held by the non-gov. population.

Ok, that is my little (poorly written) rap on Communism vs. Capitalism. hope you had fun! :wink:

Oh no, not again.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

hm, im feeling a strange sense of deja vu :?

Communist parties when in power often turn their countries into prisons. Otherwise the people vote with their feet and head towards capitalist countries.

I like a mixture of both, but like neither. I am a socialist. The people should not completely fend for themselves, but if they want to get anywhere they must. I believe that the basics in one's life should be taken care of to help create equal opportunity to succeed. But I do not believe in equal outcome (aka everyone is equal financially). So a mixture of both is what I believe in, getting rid of the really rich and the really poor but not getting rid of the monetary system.

'Communist' countries that we DO have in the world, are pretty crap examples actually, the main reason being that all the power in a country (in the case of the USSR and China, with very large populations) is held still be a small minority, which is what Communism is supposed to prevent. I think that it was research by Giddens that suggested that to acheive Communism, we first need radical democracy in order to give the people the power that they need for true communism.

'Communist' countries that we DO have in the world, are pretty crap examples actually, the main reason being that all the power in a country (in the case of the USSR and China, with very large populations) is held still be a small minority, which is what Communism is supposed to prevent. I think that it was research by Giddens that suggested that to acheive Communism, we first need radical democracy in order to give the people the power that they need for true communism.

Even in theory I do not like communism. Equal outcome is stupid and should not be the basis of any economic system. And plus, in order for true communism to work everyone would have to give their share and I can guarentee you that this will never happen. An example would be in a time of crisis where survival is not necessarily a given. People will fend for themselves and screw others over in order to preserve their own existence. I believe this would happen, this cut throat attitude, even in times where there is no crisis.

This argument is way too "deep" for me. There is no way to decide. They both have their falts. Lets stick with the humor topics peoples.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The problem with communism is that some people will simply sit back and take a "Free ride", and live off of the income that the rest of society earns them. That adds to the workload of those people, and eventually, they simply give up. That adds to the workload of everyone else, and after a while the whole thing goes to hell in a handbasket.

The problem with Capitalism is the rich just get richer, and the poor get poorer. Right now, we have a middle class, but it won't last long.

I'm a socialist, leaning slightly to the capitalist side.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The problem with communism is that some people will simply sit back and take a "Free ride", and live off of the income that the rest of society earns them. That adds to the workload of those people, and eventually, they simply give up. That adds to the workload of everyone else, and after a while the whole thing goes to hell in a handbasket.

The problem with Capitalism is the rich just get richer, and the poor get poorer. Right now, we have a middle class, but it won't last long.

I'm a socialist, leaning slightly to the capitalist side.

I think we would generally get along on this topic. I believe in small business, not big business. I believe that the basis elements to living should be provided by the government in order to get an equal opportunity society. I am firmly against both communism and capitalism.

It's a Cold War within NS General!


Comrade Yuri Alexi Gagarin! Are you ready to be a Soviet hero and be launched all the way to space?


OMG! The bomb is over us!!@!@@!@#11111!shift!!!11337!!!!

It's a Cold War within NS General!


Comrade Yuri Alexi Gagarin! Are you ready to be a Soviet hero and be launched all the way to space?


OMG! The bomb is over us!!@!@@!@#11111!shift!!!11337!!!!

OMG! | 4m g0|ng 2 g37 pwn3d!1!!!!1!1!1!111shift1shift1pwnag3|nd4@55!1!

They both have their falts.
Exactly, thats why everyone should help me overthrow a country and you can all worship me, and I'll be your dictator! Instead of communism and capitialism, we can have... Fanaticism!

I took one look at the title and wanted to run and hide...so I did. Under the couch. For fifteen minute. Then, I found the Most Awesome, Incredible, and Glorious FlameMaster3000 flame helmet. I am no longer afraid, for I am safe from Über-Flamage.

I think that Equal Outcome would be pretty cool, but acknowledge that it just isn't practical or possible. Hence, I lean towards Socialism (Libertarian Socialism, btw). No controls on society in general (i.e. drug laws, laws against gay marriage, etc.) but economy is strictly controlled and people's basic needs are met by the government. That's me.

*Hides in flame-bunker*

i dont care! i dont care! i dont care! i dont care! i dont care! i dont care! i dont care! i dont care!

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Translation: "From the slave to the begger."

There seems to be a mis-understanding of what a free market means. It means being free to decide how to apply your labour and to dispose of the product of your labour in any way you choose.

It is a common mis-conception of free markets that "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" and a cursory glance at a good economics textbook or historical facts will show that a better conception would be "the rich get richer and the poor get..... richer".

Lets take a 2 hypothetical democracys in one of which people generally want to help the poor and in the other they don't. It is clear that only the first could possibly have a welfare state as any welfarist politician in the second would not be voted in. We may therefore assume that in say America or Europe today there is a general desire to help the poor since welfare states are ubiquitous. This then begs the question is it necessary to enforce welfare or, putting it another way, do you believe kindness and compassion have to be legislated?

My point is that a free market allows you to do whatever you like with your money which includes giving it to charity. Bill Gates setting up his multi-million dollar trusts was as much a "capitalist" act as supplying software for profit. Historically speaking, those countries where govt welfare has been absent have enjoyed a vast amount of charitible action. 19th century America, which was close to free markets, was famous for the generosity of its citizenry who did a relatively good job of helping the poor (considering the general level of wealth in the society at the time). To this day 80% of the worlds voluntary charity is from the US. Free markets are not then "selfish" or "heartless" and encourage more generosity, not less. The market is nothing but the voluntary actions of individuals and if those individuals are compassionate (as most are) then the market will be compassionate.

Private charity is not only more moral than govt welfare (by virtue of being voluntary) but it is also more effective, the latter being accompanied by the usual bureaucratic bungling inefficiencies and mis-prioritising. At the moment we supply aid to the poor in the same way the USSR provided food and shoes and the results are comparible. Private charity tends to focus on giving you a leg up, helping the poor to help themselves which is more effective and more dignified than living as parasites on the production of their neighbours.

Also, an economy free of high welfare taxes would have plenty of jobs and rapidly rising wages so the need for charity would be much reduced. The rising wealth would also mean people could afford to give more charity if they choose.

Anyone who believes the welfare state is effective is invited to explain how come we still have so many poor? How did this new underclass, the un-working class, arise in our alleged "classless" society? What are the chances for a kid who's raised without a father in poor housing, whose mother gets by on welfare and who therefore never learns the value of work, and whose 11 years of compulsory schooling by the state (schooling as opposed to education) taught him nothing of value either for finding employment or developing his personality?

Another criticism of the welfare state is that by depriving communities and families of their inter-dependence it is directly responsible for the much commented upon decline of "community spirit" and "family values".

The choice "communism vs capitalism" is often interpreted to mean "how much should we help the poor?", but this is a false interpretation. A sytem of laissez faire free markets is not only the only system compatible with personal liberty but is also the best way to help the poor (and everyone else) by removing the shackles that bind them to poverty.

Apologies for the length.

I took one look at the title and wanted to run and hide...so I did. Under the couch. For fifteen minute. Then, I found the Most Awesome, Incredible, and Glorious FlameMaster3000 flame helmet. I am no longer afraid, for I am safe from Über-Flamage.
*Hides in flame-bunker*
Socialism is more to do with jealous people punishing the rich than helping the poor.

Can I hide in your bunker too?

I took one look at the title and wanted to run and hide...so I did. Under the couch. For fifteen minute. Then, I found the Most Awesome, Incredible, and Glorious FlameMaster3000 flame helmet. I am no longer afraid, for I am safe from Über-Flamage.

I think that Equal Outcome would be pretty cool, but acknowledge that it just isn't practical or possible. Hence, I lean towards Socialism (Libertarian Socialism, btw). No controls on society in general (i.e. drug laws, laws against gay marriage, etc.) but economy is strictly controlled and people's basic needs are met by the government. That's me.

*Hides in flame-bunker*
Horrible horrible horrible. "I can't do things for myself or take care of myself so I want some one else to do it for me. I can't make my own decisions I want someone to make them for me. Take away my freedoms and choices but let me kill myself by ODing on cocaine. I'm not smart enough to decide how I should spend my money so someone else can do it for me. I'm a socialist and I think that no one should ever have their feelings hurt or be different than enyone else. I'm a feelgooder!" Socialism/Communism are worthless experimental societies that exist only the mind of the lazy, unmotivated, and unintelligent.