new capitalism vs communism thread

[Az]

Wouldn't be a good idea unless you also changed the laws. Theft would be rampant, looting, etc. Youcouldn't do it within the context of an exisitng society wherein property is respected/upheld.

OR... it could be everyone's, and it would be shared. Looting is 'making your own'.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Azazel
Skywalker: Remember my question from the other thread? How would you prevent the public agenda from being taken over by the private media? how would you prevent poverty, And what are the long term goals of your society?

First, a "social safety net" to keep people from going into poverty would be in place, but it would a) be minimal and b) be dependent on the person doing some sort of work for the government. It would basically be employment by the government, but it would be primarily a "public works" thing (road maintenence, etc). Of course, those who are truly unable to work wouldn't have to do this.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by JohnT
Uh... sure, Che. Tell that little girl and her parents in Sarasota that the right to life is so sancrosact that people don't kill random strangers "willy-nilly."

And this happens how often? From what I've read, the number of real child abuductions each year is around 50. Out of twenty million children? That's what, one out of every four hundred thousand? Murder is an extremely uncommon crime. If you're unlucky you might know one person in your life who gets murdered (unless you live in a very poor community). How many people do you know who've been robbed? Include yourself.

[Az]

you didn't answer all of my question? How would you prevent that policy from being changed? the upper classes will want it changed, to get tax breaks, for example.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Respecting rights. It's interesting that one of the first rights that people will disrespect is property. We don't see people murdering each other willy-nilly, nor raping each other, nor trying to keep each other from thinking what they will, but the right to property seems one we're very willing to violate. Cant be all that ingrained then.

JohnT put it better, but the reason murder doesn't happen that often is because a) killing a person is far more extreme than stealing a piece of bubble gum and b) the punishments are far harsher. Plus, there usually isn't much of an advantage to killing someone, whereas there is a definite advantage to theft. Also, I don't see how you can argue that rape doesn't happen that often and maintain consistency with your posts in all of the various feminism threads. Finally, the world is replete with examples of people trying to keep others from thinking what they will

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Azazel
you didn't answer all of my question? How would you prevent that policy from being changed? the upper classes will want it changed, to get tax breaks, for example.

In your communism, if it's democratic, how will you prevent it from becoming capitalist or schmooist? My system is a democracy - it CAN change if the people want it to.

[Az]

In your communism, if it's democratic, how will you prevent it from becoming capitalist or schmooist?

A consititution.

My system is a democracy - it CAN change if the people want it to.

So let me get this straight, it will fight poverty, but only for a short while? And we all know that if corporate owned, the media will not have any problems making this story dissappear, while politicians will change it. This spin would be easy.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


And this happens how often? From what I've read, the number of real child abuductions each year is around 50. Out of twenty million children? That's what, one out of every four hundred thousand? Murder is an extremely uncommon crime. If you're unlucky you might know one person in your life who gets murdered (unless you live in a very poor community). How many people do you know who've been robbed? Include yourself.

Slippery slope. Using the old it happens all the time so we should legalize it logic.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Azazel
This has been a message from our resident spambot. We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.

I am constantly amuzed that the communists believe they are the only one's who have a right to define both capitalism and socialism. The arrogance of the left is something to behold.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Unfortunately we'ld like to think so.

But you underestmate the greed factor of the common stiff.

Interesting group exercise that has been done time and again and shown to be very repeatable.

Go to a class room, take someone's wallet or purse and place it in the front of the room. Announce to the class that this is property and we are going to decide on its disposition. Two options

a) we return it to the person or
b) we divide it equally amongst the class.

Which one do you think gets chosen?

Ogie, if you then extend the prinicple to everyone's wallet, every day, and the answer might be different.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Azazel

Quote:

In your communism, if it's democratic, how will you prevent it from becoming capitalist or schmooist?

A consititution.

But they can CHANGE the constitution - in my system, schmooism is also ingrained in the constitution, but it can be changed.

So let me get this straight, it will fight poverty, but only for a short while? And we all know that if corporate owned, the media will not have any problems making this story dissappear, while politicians will change it. This spin would be easy.

What is a "corporation"? They don't exist in schmooism - there is only a buyer and a seller (or more properly, just two parties to a contract).

[Ned]

Originally posted by Spiffor
How could you guys take Ned's troll seriously?

Spiffor, man of ideas, are you afraid of the truth?

[JohnT]

Well Che, in 2002 there were 95,136 forcible rapes, 16,204 murders, and you Communists have quite an exciting history of forcing people from "thinking what they will", so I'm not too sure what your point is.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_02/html/...freported.html

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ned


I am constantly amuzed that the communists believe they are the only one's who have a right to define both capitalism and socialism. The arrogance of the left is something to behold.

Ned, if you're going to quote something, please make the post that follows it have SOMETHING to do with the quote you're beginning to sound like CBH (though without the run-ons).

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by JohnT
Well Che, in 2002 there were 95,136 forcible rapes, 16,204 murders, and you Communists have quite an exciting history of forcing people from "thinking what they will", so I'm not too sure what your point is.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_02/html/...freported.html

And even more, you need to remember Che, that rape is the most unreported crime

[Az]

Well Che, in 2002 there were 95,136 forcible rapes, 16,204 murders, and you Communists have quite an exciting history of forcing people from "thinking what they will", so I'm not too sure what your point is.

JohnT is not playing by the rules.

[JohnT]

I'm not?

Please clue me in so I don't have to read the thread.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by skywalker
the reason murder doesn't happen that often is because a) killing a person is far more extreme than stealing a piece of bubble gum

Exactly, inflicting violence on other people is extreme. It is far easier psychologoically to steal than to physically hurt someone, regardless of risk.

and b) the punishments are far harsher.

Most studies have determined that fear of punishment is not a major factor in deterring crime.

There usually isn't much of an advantage to killing someone,

There are frequently advantages to murder. You can rob them more easily if theyr are dead, they can't squeal on you for another crime you may have committed, they pissed you off, etc.

I don't see how you can argue that rape doesn't happen that often and maintain consistency with your posts in all of the various feminism threads.

Rape is frequent enough, but it is still uncommon. Everyone's been robbed. Most people have stolen. Most men have not committed a rape. Most men would deal with a rapist very harshly, while most people would not resort to violence if they found out someone was a theif (unless caught in the act).

Finally, the world is replete with examples of people trying to keep others from thinking what they will

Religions and governments, yes. Individuals frequently do not engage in thought policing.

[Kuciwalker]

The rule is, no historical example of schmooism or communism exists, so you can't refer to the USSR or China (or the capitalist counterparts). This is a purely theoretical debate

[Az]

Originally posted by JohnT
I'm not?

Please clue me in so I don't have to read the thread.

Blaming the other side for crimes and wrongdoings is prohibited. The only reference to the past that you can make is the consequences of certain policies.

[Ned]

Originally posted by skywalker


Ned, if you're going to quote something, please make the post that follows it have SOMETHING to do with the quote you're beginning to sound like CBH (though without the run-ons).

Skywalker, why do even address posts to me?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by skywalker
The rule is, no historical example of schmooism or communism exists, so you can't refer to the USSR or China (or the capitalist counterparts). This is a purely theoretical debate

Ahhhh. Then I'll just bow out 'cause I hate wasting my time talking past people.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ned


Ogie, if you then extend the prinicple to everyone's wallet, every day, and the answer might be different.

Unfortunately I do and it explains much of the leftist movement world wide.

Small bastions of conservatism hold their ground but more often than not the prevaling thought is whats in it for me?

All about reallocation of wealth to what is 'fair". "Fair" being defined as how can I get more without concerning longer term implications.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
There are frequently advantages to murder. You can rob them more easily if theyr are dead, they can't squeal on you for another crime you may have committed, they pissed you off, etc.

Those are advantages to the fact that a lot of law enforcement people will be trying to find you?

Religions and governments, yes. Individuals frequently do not engage in thought policing.

DUH. Individuals frequently are INCAPABLE of engaging in thought policing.

That's like saying that humans must have some inherent aversion to war, because individuals frequently do not declare war

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by JohnT
Well Che, in 2002 there were 95,136 forcible rapes, 16,204 murders,

And over two million buglaries.

and you Communists have quite an exciting history of forcing people from "thinking what they will",

Actually, more punishing people from saying what they think publically. Bad mouthing the government in private was as common as it is here. Again, however, that is institutional, not individual, of I could go all Liberatarian and say government theft is universal, while ven the worst governments don't kill everybody.

so I'm not too sure what your point is.

That property rights are not "natural" in the same way as the right not to be subjected to violence is. People are far more willing to violate proeprty rights than any other right, so the right cannot be that ingrained in our nature.

[Az]

What is a "corporation"? They don't exist in schmooism - there is only a buyer and a seller (or more properly, just two parties to a contract).

Corporations arise from private property. But you don't want to have them? Ok. How will big bussiness develop then? And without big bussiness, how will sophisticated goods be manufactured?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by skywalker
Those are advantages to the fact that a lot of law enforcement people will be trying to find you?

As I mentioned, punishment doesn't have much o a deterent effect. Most people do not engage in violence not because they are afraid o being punished, but because violence is alien to them. It is a deeply wrong thing.

Quote:

Religions and governments, yes. Individuals frequently do not engage in thought policing.

DUH. Individuals frequently are INCAPABLE of engaging in thought policing.

You think so?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Unfortunately I do and it explains much of the leftist movement world wide.

Small bastions of conservatism hold their ground but more often than not the prevaling thought is whats in it for me?

All about reallocation of wealth to what is 'fair". "Fair" being defined as how can I get more without concerning longer term implications.

People are selfish, not stupid. This is my point. If everyone's money was redistributed every day, soon everyone would bring a little as he could to class. In the end, everyone would bring exactly the same small amount so that everyone would exist in the school environment just at the starvation level. (Which is what happens under socialism, btw.) Realizing this, they will eventually vote to repeal the paradigm, having learned their lesson in spades.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
Spiffor, man of ideas, are you afraid of the truth?

Well, let me re-read your troll:

The goal of capitalism is to make everyone rich which necessarily eliminates poverty. The goal of socialism to make everyone equally poor so by definition there is no poverty.

Sorry sir, but the goal of capitalism is to make capitalists rich, certainly not the common man. Don't forget, we educated people having enough free time to discuss on this Internet board based on a video game are near the very top of the global pyramid of capitalism.
Our computers have been disigned by scientists that are well paid, but the whole prodution process, from those who extraced the minerals with which the comp is built, to those who wrote your adress on the packaging, are not precisely well paid.
The cashiers that make it possible for you to enjoy your riches with consumer goods belong to a very difficult working class. Ask Speer or Nationalist, our two resident "paupers" (which is very relative, they are filthy rich in comparison with the average Indian), if they feel they have been enriched by capitalism. Ask the Haitians who are making the Disney toys you'll buy to your children or grandchildren at Christmas, if they feel enriched by capitalism. Ask the Kenyan miners who extract the sulfur used on your matches. Ask the janitor at your office if he feels capitalism has enriched him. Ask all those people if they don't feel victim of an injustice.

Socialism is not about making everybody poor. Socialism is about making an efficient economic system that benefits everybody, rather than a select few. If there are so many people mourning socialism in former socialist countries, despite the despotic political regime, that's because these people have been plunged in poverty since capitalism. That's because there wasn't even a hint anymore of resource sharing.

So, if the above post wasn't a troll, it is incredibly misinformed.

[chequita guevara]

Or they'd realize the only way they could get more was to bring more so there's be more to share, while ostracizing freeloaders. You aways seem to think people in communal situations are incapable of solving probems.