No corruption in communism don't let me laugh

[ancient]

mostr nations would require a 2/3 majority..

[Juggernaut]

still forcement of the 1/3. besides, it will be quite hard to make decisions with a 2/3 majority required.

under social liberalism, everyone gets richer. you don´t have to pay for what you don´t use, or need. lower taxes makes less unemployment, and no black market.

[ancient]

Thats why they would probably also have a prime minister who can make some decisions, more comonly about things no one cares about, or isnt a clear majority.

We now have the technology to make every one able to vote by phone/internet, so it wouldnt be a hassle to vote on issues you care about, also there would be a tv station with all the news about the current thing you can vote for and what numbers to call. The prime minister would be voted on once every 3 years, i think would suffice, and needs only a majority to win..
voting on policys and things such as laws would happen at the end of every quarter.

If a govternment as I described could take force it would be the will of the people who decides what happens not a few slobbs in washington .

[Juggernaut]

but that´s s t i l l fascism. majority decidement´s no good. beside´s, voting per phone and internet is really easy to manipulate.

i´m sure you don´t like socialism in some matters either. would you like you government to support movies who sucks with your tax money, just because the government, elected by the majority, think they´re good? that´s what´s happening here in sweden.

or do you want to support the church with your money, if you´re an atheist and the majority is religious? taxes endures slavery. maybe you think film schools should be free of charges, but there´s always someone who doesn´t like movies. who´s gonna decide? each one for themselves of course.

besides, you don´t have to work so much under social liberalism, you would make it anyway. freedom to choose...

[ancient]

you are saying that theyre cant be a democratic socialist country, which just isnt true.

we have the technology to make it impossible to manipulate phonelines it is just not in use yet. it is proven. and by the way it isnt fascism, and movies isnt under industry or agriculture or commercial. only industry aggriculture and commecial shall be controlled by the government. movies can be made independently without concerning the government. church shall not be illigal it wouldnt recieve funding in anyway from the government, however it will be discourage and illigal to spread. in other words if you want to get people to believe what you do, the only place they can here about it is in the church. no advertising the church or having missionarys/door to door people ect.
so movies/tv would be unregulated because they arent a valid part of our lifes.
cable prices, commercials and movie prices should be regulated as well as the price of any product, to ensure the price is affordable. food and clothing as well water would be cheap/free depending on how basic it is. so a loaf of bread would be free, a pan of lasagna might be a dollar. water would be free, abnd clothing would be cheap unless its like designer..
housing would be free, and be given out according to need. a women whos single would have a apartment with 1 bedroom a living room, kitchen/dining room and a bathroom a couple with no children could also have the same, but perhaps larger bedroom. this would continue through all different stages.
not everything is controlled by the government but the government would have to be rather extensive.
inorder for this to work the government would have to be thoughtfull, sympathetic and acxtually care about the needs of the people, becausen happy people are more productive people.

people need to not think about what they want, but what they need.

a good worker should get payed more than a bad worker. but a bad worker who needs more than a good worker, should always have enough to live on.

[ancient]

people cant have controll over everything, government would have to be as steel aboout certain things. mostly involving religion, and a manifesto, which should be written on, byut also using a amendment system to allow a change if both the people and the govternment agree on it.

[N35t0r]

unckle_funk:

by your definition, every country on Earth is facist.

[KrazyHorse]

I just wish they'd take it to the OT. I stopped taking part in this argument when I realized that some people around here just have to have the last word. As a warning to unclefunker and ancient: if you don't stop with the OT posting in this forum, then you're going to have to deal with somebody reporting you to the mods. It won't be me, but somebody will eventually. Then you'll both get either a warning or a banning.

[Juggernaut]

HFSB: yes they are, more or less.

ancient: some people will always want more than they need, good luck in changing the human nature. sadly, i don´t think i have the sufficent english skills to really explain this, but:

and women who is single shall absolutely not have free housing and living. nothing is free. if you give someone everything for free, you turn the producers into slaves. only people who absolutley not can work and take care of themselves shall get things for free.

and socialism is the opposite of true democracy. sad, but true.

by funding unemplyed people you make them passive.

and you can´t just say that "the government shall be sympathetic". it´s a sweet thought but naive. everyone has their own definition on what´s sympathetic.

majority can´t decide! if you have absolutley no interest in sports, would you like your tax money to fund a football stadion? just tell me...

if water is aboslutely free, the water producers are slaves.

[ancient]

ve sveak svedish.. um ok.. i dont care i just stopped posting in this topic and was having a conversation with uk from sweden, but you shouldnt stop our conversation.. but thats ok hes stubborn anyways, well so am i, and he is right at humananity's current stage of social evolution you cant..

[NeoBlade]

Soulassasin-Yes,even if my typeing skills arn't top notch,it still dosen't mean you should just ignore my post.What you said was extremely rude and,even though I may type like a kid,at least I don't act like one.Now quit with the nit-pickin and address the issues set forth if your smart enough to tell people where and how to post.

[KoalaBear33]

Here is my very first post on this board... Hope you guys like it

All you capitalists that think communsim is the only one with problems, let me bring you to reality. First of all, party names mean nothing. Most of the time the parties don't cater to 100% socialist or capitalist notions. Presently, there is NO country that is practicising socialism or communism. The Scandenavian countries are more socialist than others but are still far off from what I would call socialism. Similary, what USSR and China practiced is not communism. Communism requires optimal allocation of resources and that cannot be accomplished humans can predict things. What the so-called communist countries practice is a flawed communism almost similar to a dictatorship.

Those that think capitalism is great and think there is no corruption, let me point out something. The vast majority of capitalist countries have more corruption than other forms of government! Yes it's true! Look at countries like India, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Tanzania, Zimbabwe and so on. There is more corruption in these countries than in any so-called communist country. The capitalists conveniently ignore all these countries and pretend that capitalism only exists in the US and other Western countries. The truth of the matter is that Brazil, for example, is really a capitalist country (maybe not as capitalistic as the US but nevertheless it is using capitalism).

Lastly, even in countries with low corruption, it is questionable whether that is true. Corporations actually control the government indirectly so that is in some sense a form of corruption. For example, the US is not planning to drill for Oil in Alaska because it helps its citizens; instead its because companies supported the Bush campaign. Similarly, the US didn't veto the Kyto treaty because its people were worse off (the corporations that supported Bush didn't like it).

Communism can't exist right now (we can't predict resource allocations) but don't bash it because you have been brainwashed by the US...

KoalaBear33

[Juggernaut]

If Bush doesn´t like the Kyoto treaty you don´t vote for him. The people in America have made their choice. Says pretty much about America...