I'd reaaaaaaaaally like there to be a "neither" option, as both systems are in some ways unfair and flawed. Alas, I will choose communism, as the idealist in me is still alive and well.
Poll: Capitalism or Communism?
- Thread starter Jak23
- Start date
Capitalism. The ideals of communism are better, but capitalism is more in tune with human nature.
Communism, if properly executed by the people in charge.
There is no shame in working for a set wage and getting paid equally no matter what kind of job you are doing. Every person is contributing to society as a whole and in an ideal world, people should practice their jobs to support the society they are a part of, for the 'love of man' and not just to fill their own pockets with money.
In the past, communism has been abused by corrupt leaders, but in principle, the idea of equality isn't that bad. Although a gross simplification of what communism is ( and a far-stretch ), look at, for example, the world portrayed as in StarTrek. No monetary system, everyone does their job and because of this everyone has access to the same level of health care, food, recreational facilities, schooling, everything.
Although this is an Utopian world, it is something that mankind will never achieve by pure Capitalism.
Although Capitalism is all fun and games for the while, in the long run, it won't hold water and we'd have to revert to a more socialistic system. Imagine this: what would happen if the poor countries that are being exploited in the world at the moment 'rank up' and get wealthier and won't work for the low wages they are getting now? Shit will be hitting the fan around the globe...
There is no shame in working for a set wage and getting paid equally no matter what kind of job you are doing. Every person is contributing to society as a whole and in an ideal world, people should practice their jobs to support the society they are a part of, for the 'love of man' and not just to fill their own pockets with money.
In the past, communism has been abused by corrupt leaders, but in principle, the idea of equality isn't that bad. Although a gross simplification of what communism is ( and a far-stretch ), look at, for example, the world portrayed as in StarTrek. No monetary system, everyone does their job and because of this everyone has access to the same level of health care, food, recreational facilities, schooling, everything.
Although this is an Utopian world, it is something that mankind will never achieve by pure Capitalism.
Although Capitalism is all fun and games for the while, in the long run, it won't hold water and we'd have to revert to a more socialistic system. Imagine this: what would happen if the poor countries that are being exploited in the world at the moment 'rank up' and get wealthier and won't work for the low wages they are getting now? Shit will be hitting the fan around the globe...
Communism works in theory but not in practice
capitalism works in practice, even though it theoretically shouldn't work.
capitalism works in practice, even though it theoretically shouldn't work.
Well thats the thing, capitalism IS great. It's an amazing system. Except, we don't have capitalism anymore, we have "corporatism".
"No... no no no no no no no no!" I thought to myself the second I saw the title of this post.
"If commy-wommy is the leading choice, that will drain the last drip of faith I had in The Escapist Community. I mean they already polled in favor of a 'parenting license'."
At least it's only about 45%. That is greatly facepalm-inducing still, but at least it's not the majority. Here's the bottom line...
In practice:
Capitalism generates wealth and prosperity
Communism generates poverty and the peasant-aristocrat statuses
In theory:
Capitalism will leave unlucky people with only a working car, an air-conditioned house, a cell phone, internet connection and access to police and hospital service
Communism will keep people from ever really having any money of their own and shredding their freedom
Oh what? You thought communism was at least better 'in theory'? You need to expand your theory.
Please, please, I beg of you all; spend a little bit of time learning how economics work! I don't blame most of you for believing in the shit that you do; the fault of that belongs to the people who lied to you. Just be honest, be critical, be tough; sneeze that shit out of your brain and enjoy no longer being a member of the force against prosperity.
Prosperity--by the way--includes but is not limited to advances in healthcare, less war and violence in the world, lengthened lifespans, and social equality.
"If commy-wommy is the leading choice, that will drain the last drip of faith I had in The Escapist Community. I mean they already polled in favor of a 'parenting license'."
At least it's only about 45%. That is greatly facepalm-inducing still, but at least it's not the majority. Here's the bottom line...
In practice:
Capitalism generates wealth and prosperity
Communism generates poverty and the peasant-aristocrat statuses
In theory:
Capitalism will leave unlucky people with only a working car, an air-conditioned house, a cell phone, internet connection and access to police and hospital service
Communism will keep people from ever really having any money of their own and shredding their freedom
Oh what? You thought communism was at least better 'in theory'? You need to expand your theory.
Please, please, I beg of you all; spend a little bit of time learning how economics work! I don't blame most of you for believing in the shit that you do; the fault of that belongs to the people who lied to you. Just be honest, be critical, be tough; sneeze that shit out of your brain and enjoy no longer being a member of the force against prosperity.
Prosperity--by the way--includes but is not limited to advances in healthcare, less war and violence in the world, lengthened lifespans, and social equality.
Communism doesn't work while capitalism does(sort of) but I believe a brutal authoritarian global dictatorship lead by me is the best possible form of government.
Set limits from what you can posses, and a fundamental ground for what you have to posses. Everyone will have equal stuff, but the ones working harder and doing loads of community service earn "credit". Credit is used for buying a greater maximum (still to a limit), and then you may fill that limit as you deem right. For example a bigger house, or a greater television set.
However if you don't do anything useful, your absolute low will decrease, and so will your ability to get access to luxury. For example the internet, or cable. You'll get the absolute minimum to live by, and will get shittier food, until nothing but poverty remains. You won't starve, but you'll be living in a tiny house, with shitty food, in neighborhoods populated with these people.
Every year you are evaluated, see. If you've done enough work/service, you get to stay in your house and keep our stuff. If you done less, but still quite something, you get warned, lose some privileges for a year. If you fail the next check, you will downgrade. That does not mean you have to move, but you'll get a mark and a penalty, like lesser quality food, and less allowance. If you fail 3 times , you will be forced to move.
If you done more than you have to, you get a plus, and one mark will be lost. You can even get a +1 maximum bonus. That ensures your privileges for one year, and a few perks. If you repeatedly get high marks you are given the opportunity to move to the next ranked neighborhood, but that is an option, not a forced decision. You can however get a neato telly, and a backyard pool or something.
I shall call it "communicaptilsm". This is of course a bad executed writing invented in 10 minutes, but if something like this is worked out, I think it could work. Some parts of crime would cease, because everyone owns the same things, and ONLY by working/service can you improve upon that. There won't be ÜBER rich people like Gates, but also no overly poor people. everyone who's good can live off somewhat above the average pay-scale, if you'd try hard in life. Doing good gets you goodies.
But OT: I'd say capitalism, but very well regulated. So that people actually buy stuff with real money, so no one gets screwed like today. Lending money must be possible, but too much debt never works.
However if you don't do anything useful, your absolute low will decrease, and so will your ability to get access to luxury. For example the internet, or cable. You'll get the absolute minimum to live by, and will get shittier food, until nothing but poverty remains. You won't starve, but you'll be living in a tiny house, with shitty food, in neighborhoods populated with these people.
Every year you are evaluated, see. If you've done enough work/service, you get to stay in your house and keep our stuff. If you done less, but still quite something, you get warned, lose some privileges for a year. If you fail the next check, you will downgrade. That does not mean you have to move, but you'll get a mark and a penalty, like lesser quality food, and less allowance. If you fail 3 times , you will be forced to move.
If you done more than you have to, you get a plus, and one mark will be lost. You can even get a +1 maximum bonus. That ensures your privileges for one year, and a few perks. If you repeatedly get high marks you are given the opportunity to move to the next ranked neighborhood, but that is an option, not a forced decision. You can however get a neato telly, and a backyard pool or something.
I shall call it "communicaptilsm". This is of course a bad executed writing invented in 10 minutes, but if something like this is worked out, I think it could work. Some parts of crime would cease, because everyone owns the same things, and ONLY by working/service can you improve upon that. There won't be ÜBER rich people like Gates, but also no overly poor people. everyone who's good can live off somewhat above the average pay-scale, if you'd try hard in life. Doing good gets you goodies.
But OT: I'd say capitalism, but very well regulated. So that people actually buy stuff with real money, so no one gets screwed like today. Lending money must be possible, but too much debt never works.
Communism has never worked. The end.
I think a lot of people here have confused communism with socialism, they are two different systems of political economy.
If you like having any sort of human rights, then communism is not for you, by its definition everything you do, say, (and eventually, think) is dictated by the society (i.e. the dictator at top).
Regulated capitalism is the only system which allows freedom with economic growth.
I think a lot of people here have confused communism with socialism, they are two different systems of political economy.
If you like having any sort of human rights, then communism is not for you, by its definition everything you do, say, (and eventually, think) is dictated by the society (i.e. the dictator at top).
Regulated capitalism is the only system which allows freedom with economic growth.
They both work on paper. The difference is that Capitalism has worked in some form or fashion for over 200 years, where as Communism failed within 50. Overall, I think Capitalism has its own benefits; it leads to a stronger economy, where more people can be successful. It falls apart when you start caring about the poor though, which is a big part of any society. You run in to issues with pure Communism because people always want to be successful, and those that work for it don't get any sort of reward in a Communist economy. In a Capitalist economy, hard, good work is rewarded and poor, shoddy work isn't, making it more sustainable in the long run because it promotes well-made products at reasonable prices. You run in to issues when companies begin to screw the consumers over without any way for the consumers to respond, which is what mild regulations should prevent.
The issues with the current American Capitalist economy is the regulations in place don't stop all the things they should, and stop many things they shouldn't. It worked for as long as it did because many corporations still had a sense of morality and, before the last thirty-forty years or so, the regulations were relatively simple and easy to understand (relatively being the key word there). Lately there has been so much added and the laws have become so complicated that there are loopholes for literally everything if you know how to find them.
I won't pretend to know everything about the economy, or how to fix things, but I'm pretty sure simplifying things, making regulations simpler and easier to understand for everyone, would increase the amount of small businesses popping up, decrease the amount of corruption, and generally be a step in the right direction. But that's neither here nor there; my final answer would have to be Capitalism.
The issues with the current American Capitalist economy is the regulations in place don't stop all the things they should, and stop many things they shouldn't. It worked for as long as it did because many corporations still had a sense of morality and, before the last thirty-forty years or so, the regulations were relatively simple and easy to understand (relatively being the key word there). Lately there has been so much added and the laws have become so complicated that there are loopholes for literally everything if you know how to find them.
I won't pretend to know everything about the economy, or how to fix things, but I'm pretty sure simplifying things, making regulations simpler and easier to understand for everyone, would increase the amount of small businesses popping up, decrease the amount of corruption, and generally be a step in the right direction. But that's neither here nor there; my final answer would have to be Capitalism.
I hope you mean it's an example of how communism doesn't work. If you don't, you might want to ask the child prostitutes how equal they are.BlakBladz said:
I voted Capitalism. I live in one and I'm very happy.
A misconception people have with economics is that in a transaction, one party becomes richer and the other party becomes poorer. Sort of like how sports work; if one team wins, that means the other team lost. But that's not at all what happens.kiwi_poo said:
Here's the basic rundown:
When person Y gives something to person Z, and person Z gives something to person Y, in an agreed upon manner; that works. That's the basic element that fuels a productive, free society.
However...
When person Y takes something from person X against person X's will, that fails. That's the basic element of poverty and misery.
Person B taking something from person C, D, E, F, G and H against their wills, that's what socialism and communism is. Person B is the government.
They both blow and end up leading to the same thing in reality: power and wealth being centered around a very select few while everyone lives in third-world conditions. That's why there isn't any nation that strictly practices either one and is significantly prosperous. So the issue is not, and never should be, Capitalism vs Communism. It should be, and is, which way to lean in a mixed economy.
Karl Marx was a great philosopher. He said that capitalism was the best way to go from an agrarian society to an industrial society. All civilizations must go through a capitalism phase, he said, to motivate entrepreneurs to make use of the land and harvest natural resources.
When eventually the supply of resources is fully utilized by the economy, that's when capitalism has served it's purpose. Once there is no more capital to be taken for free, the inequities between the people who own the capital, and the ordinary working people, will drive the working people to revolt. The people who own the capital can delay the revolt with systems like welfare, unemployment insurance, etc to quell the unrest in the working people.
These government provided welfare systems transition the country into what Marx called socialism, which is what people who haven't read Marx usually think of as communism. This socialism is defined by a centrally planned economy that takes the wealth away from the people who owned the capital and distributes it more evenly throughout the population. Eventually the socialist society transitions to communism, which in Marx's definition means they disolve the central government because they don't need it anymore.
As you can see, "communist" governments in history didn't understand Marx at all. The soviet revolution tried to transform agrarian Russia into a socialist planned economy. Marx would have explained they had to go through a capitalist expansion before doing that.
When eventually the supply of resources is fully utilized by the economy, that's when capitalism has served it's purpose. Once there is no more capital to be taken for free, the inequities between the people who own the capital, and the ordinary working people, will drive the working people to revolt. The people who own the capital can delay the revolt with systems like welfare, unemployment insurance, etc to quell the unrest in the working people.
These government provided welfare systems transition the country into what Marx called socialism, which is what people who haven't read Marx usually think of as communism. This socialism is defined by a centrally planned economy that takes the wealth away from the people who owned the capital and distributes it more evenly throughout the population. Eventually the socialist society transitions to communism, which in Marx's definition means they disolve the central government because they don't need it anymore.
As you can see, "communist" governments in history didn't understand Marx at all. The soviet revolution tried to transform agrarian Russia into a socialist planned economy. Marx would have explained they had to go through a capitalist expansion before doing that.
Both are stupid systems that do not work at all in their pure forms oh and you mean(I assume) Socialism/Centrally Planned Economies not Communism no one wants to live in a dictatorship.
There are more economic systems than just the Free Market and Centrally Planned Economies.
There are more economic systems than just the Free Market and Centrally Planned Economies.
I remember my Histort teacher telling me of a Cuban doctor she met (Cuba has a lot of doctors). She asked the doctor why he worked in Cuba as opposed to a richer country. And the doctor aid, "I don't do this for money, I do this to help society. If we all helped society there would be no money."AmrasCalmacil said:
Communism is the belief that people aren't more worthy of a comfy lifestyle than anyone else. The belief that we are all important to society and society owes us all equally.