COMMUNISUM!?!?!? FOR IT OR AGAINST IT AND WHY?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#21
communism is a world welfare system

you can redistribute the wealth evenly and in 10 years it will be back in the hands it was, because the same people that got rich before are gonna work hard and do it again. the people that smoked their money up and had to have the new jordans every time they came out will be right back with their hands out .

who does communism help besides the poor and lazy?
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
47
www.soundclick.com
#24
I always thought Communism wouldn't work because of the reason most of you have given.
How can people aim high with their careers if their rewards will be the same as a reward for a custodian?

But I'll ask this, what if there's different levels of wealth?
Lets say scientists, doctors, and engineers get top shelf wages and everyone else gets what ever's on their category?
Wouldn't Communism work with a system like this?
 
Apr 25, 2002
4,446
494
83
#29
for those in FAVOR of communism

China= dictatorship
Cuba=Dictatorship
Former USSR and E. Europe = Dictatorship
N Korea=Dictatorship

and it has nothing to do with the US. The US did the RIGHT thing and saved civilization as we know it. Russia brought the power of the United States upon itself by occupying all of East Europe instead of returning it to its owners. Russia continued to practice aggressive policies so we continued to defend the free world. ASK anyone in Europe if communism was a good thing, especially in nations OCCUPIED by communism, and see the response u get.

By the way, at communisms HEIGHT, its highest point in USSR, the USSR produced only 40% of what the US does.

I challenge anyone to describe a communist state that worked. And no Vietnam doesnt count. Its declaration of independence was about Nationalism, not communism. Although it is technically "communist" the people there have reformed it and made it a free market economy= not communism.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#30
MaddDogg said:

China= dictatorship
Cuba=Dictatorship
Former USSR and E. Europe = Dictatorship
N Korea=Dictatorship

None of which are or ever were communist countries.




:rolleyes:


ColdBlooded said:
  • look at the USSR
    that's like saying "look at how fukked up mexico's government is, democracy must be a bad idea" - it just makes you look stupid.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#31
proppa said:
im broke right now.

5 years from now ill be less broke.

10 years from now ill be living good.

20 years from now ill be living beyond comfertable.


why is this. because i will work hard, learn, move up. achive my goals. and intern make more money, and have more oppertunites at hand.

:rolleyes:


ColdBlooded said:
  • communism takes away incentives
    um.... false. Just because you're not getting stock options and a company car doesn't mean you're going to sit on your fukking ass all day and watch Jerry Springer. People need monetary incentives now because the alternative is being raped in the ass daily by a bunch of old white guys who control the majority of wealth in the world.
    .
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#32
miggidy said:

How can people aim high with their careers if their rewards will be the same as a reward for a custodian?
:rolleyes:

ColdBlooded said:
  • communism takes away incentives
    um.... false. Just because you're not getting stock options and a company car doesn't mean you're going to sit on your fukking ass all day and watch Jerry Springer. People need monetary incentives now because the alternative is being raped in the ass daily by a bunch of old white guys who control the majority of wealth in the world.
    .

miggidy said:

But I'll ask this, what if there's different levels of wealth?
Lets say scientists, doctors, and engineers get top shelf wages and everyone else gets what ever's on their category?
Wouldn't Communism work with a system like this?

:rolleyes:

That's called capitalism dude.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#34
already dead. said:
They're also sub-par doctors
False, they are some of the best in the world, people from all over the world go to Cuba or depend on Cuban doctors in their countries for the treatments they need to survive.

already dead. said:

The problem is, if we split it all up equally, guess who leaves America? The CEOs, the stock brokers, big business interests, etc.
It leaves them with the same jobs they have now if the workers deem them still capable of leadership and their representation. And it leaves them with no more than they diserve.

already dead. said:
You ever wonder why many people are bums? It's not just racism, classism, or poor opportunities. Many homeless people are mentally ill, lazy, etc. Not all of them, but many.
They are homeless because they have no home. They should and would if they worked, which they would do if given the opportunity. If they are ill in anyway they should be getting proper treatment for it, which includes a place to live while being treated.

already dead. said:
Hardly. Collapsing all corporate incentive and big business infrastructure will destroy the American economy. The top are not just the top because they are racist white men, or because they are an exclusive club. There is also such a thing as business savvy and education.
It leaves them with the same jobs they have now if the workers deem them still capable of leadership and their representation. If they don’t they would be out of a job. This would in fairy tale land happen in capitalism too, ideally, but there is nothing to ensure that happens. In a communist system that would be engrained in industry through communal leadership and production.

ColdBlooded said:
  • communism takes away incentives
    um.... false. Just because you're not getting stock options and a company car doesn't mean you're going to sit on your fukking ass all day and watch Jerry Springer. People need monetary incentives now because the alternative is being raped in the ass daily by a bunch of old white guys who control the majority of wealth in the world.
already dead. said:
Many unemployed do not want to work. Many unemployed are too stupid to work.
If you don’t work you don’t live off the system of communism. If you are unemployed because you are too stupid, you would have an opportunity to go to school and increase your education so that you would be able to have a job.


already dead. said:
Our wealth is largely held by a select few, but those select few have an interest in keeping the US Economy afloat; namely, so their own profits can increase. .[/list]
So if the wealth of this country was held by the people, not some fraction of a minority, then everyone would have an interest in keeping the US Economy afloat. They would have the incentive to work harder, produce more, etc. It doesn’t even have to be common good that you work hard for. If you want your family to do better, you work harder. Except in a communist economy working harder will actually do something to uplift people, under capitalism if you work harder you don’t get more, they pay you the same and fire the guy next to you and then tell you to work even harder. In communism common good is a by product of doing for self.
 
Mar 15, 2003
751
0
0
#35
ColdBlooded said:
False, they are some of the best in the world, people from all over the world go to Cuba or depend on Cuban doctors in their countries for the treatments they need to survive.
Yea if I was from a third world country I'd try my best to get to Cuba, it's probly light years ahead of the shit at home.


It leaves them with the same jobs they have now if the workers deem them still capable of leadership and their representation. And it leaves them with no more than they diserve.
See but why would they stay around? They wouldn't. Their whole title and post depends on excess power. Have you ever worked at Burger King or McDonalds? Have you ever seen 30, 40 year old people making 8 dollars an hour, and wondered why? Some have language barriers. Some have criminal records. This is not in doubt. But for the most part, they have achieved the height of their career. Why would you want these people to run McDonalds and make decisions at a corporate level? The average person in the US thinks Saddam caused 9/11. Why the fuck would you give ruling power to them?

The average American is a fuckin retard. Retards don't work as a president (Bush) or as governor (Schwarzenneger). Why the fuck should even less educated, less intelligent people hold the reins of power? CEOs would not stay around if Communism came about. Their posessions exist exactly because they have strived in a system that rewards economic pursuit. If we took that away from them, there is no incentive to stay.

They are homeless because they have no home.
No, they are homeless because they walk in circles, mumble, sing to lamp posts, and shit on themselves. A very high percentage of homeless people have mental issues that prevent a normal life. Add in drug addiction, and you have a good case for institutionalizing 80 to 90 percent of the homeless population.

Most homeless are not capable, functional people just down on their luck. Many have serious issues preventing them from not being homeless. There is federal aid, afdc, medicare, etc. Most do not take advantage of these resources. The YMCA in the city where I live lets homeless people eat, shower, and gives them work clothes to apply for jobs in. Many do not take this route at all, however. Many simply refuse, and many lack the capacity.

They should and would if they worked, which they would do if given the opportunity. If they are ill in anyway they should be getting proper treatment for it, which includes a place to live while being treated.
I agree with this. There are a large deal of homeless people who need to be institutionalized.

It leaves them with the same jobs they have now if the workers deem them still capable of leadership and their representation. If they don’t they would be out of a job. This would in fairy tale land happen in capitalism too, ideally, but there is nothing to ensure that happens. In a communist system that would be engrained in industry through communal leadership and production.
They would all be out of a job. No one who strived to the top of a major corporation is going to allow the fickle system of communism to delineate their position and pay. The common people are fools. The common people are like the villagers in the quest for the holy grail. That's about how much stock I put in the mental capacity of the average American.

If you don’t work you don’t live off the system of communism.
Funny, considering there are people who don't work and live off the system of capitalism. I thought Communism was supposed to be the most humane system?

If you are unemployed because you are too stupid, you would have an opportunity to go to school and increase your education so that you would be able to have a job.
The kind of stupidity that keeps someone at Wendy's for 20 years is not curable through school.

So if the wealth of this country was held by the people, not some fraction of a minority, then everyone would have an interest in keeping the US Economy afloat.
Tell this to Bling Bling, who spends his money on 20 inch rims and a new Explorer. Or Sam Everquest, who sits in his fuckin house all day and plays EverQuest. Of fuckin Jonnhy Columbine, who uses his newfound fortune to purchase enough arms to take out a small parochial school. Or Jerry and Vermuth Springer of Bender, KY, who use the money to print out white power pamphlets. There are people in our country who don't even work for the good of self. They spend their money, herad-earned or given, on absolutely useless, masturbatory items/causes. Given a larger piece, they can be expected to do just the same. Actually in all probability, given a larger piece, they will glutton out even more.

They would have the incentive to work harder, produce more, etc. It doesn’t even have to be common good that you work hard for. If you want your family to do better, you work harder. Except in a communist economy working harder will actually do something to uplift people, under capitalism if you work harder you don’t get more, they pay you the same and fire the guy next to you and then tell you to work even harder. In communism common good is a by product of doing for self.
In a nation of 250 million people, my individual effort matters? You're saying I will see tangible, quantifiable results for pushing my job to the max every day, working overtime, etc.? Hell no. How many people are going to offset you by not working hard at all? How many people do you know, right now, at your job, who you have to work harder than, because they don't give a shit, and know they probably won't get fired? If you can't count more than ten you're not being realistic.

And what would you do to those who don't work? Shoot them in the head? That seems to be the most widely accepted system. What, jail them? No, we wouldn't do that. Just let them starve? No, because we would be back at square 1. Homeless people are homeless because they lack a home, right? So we should put Marlon Rockhead in charge of the Fed Reserve rate, and fuckin Timothy Toothless in charge of tariffs and export oversight.

People would be asking for the return of Capitalism, welfare and AFDC, and your dumb ass would get overthrown, not me. Working as some turning gear in the giant machine of economy might be a great thing if you live in a box. Otherwise, people are gonna see the bullshit system they have to produce for, and you will see a real revolution back to Capitalism.
 
Jul 7, 2002
3,105
0
0
#36
already dead. said:
Funny, considering there are people who don't work and live off the system of capitalism. I thought Communism was supposed to be the most humane system?

lol, this is the last time i read your post about the subject..lol
 
Mar 15, 2003
751
0
0
#40
nefar559 said:
lol, this is the last time i read your post about the subject..lol
Nah. But it was said that if you don't work you don't get supported in Communism, which is untrue.I guess it was true in totalitarian environments, but in Marx's communism, how exactly does welfare fit?