Communism or capitalism?

[Deleted User]

Oh I 100% agree. In fact that is the problem, we have more single mothers, poor people because of that. Honestly we need to stop rewarding people for making bad decisions but to say that is be called heartless. (not that IGAF)

However there must also be systems in place so that people who aren't born in the bottom are stuck there forever. I personally don't have a solution to this.

Ima spit ball an idea and tell me what you think -

"I'm not a fan of people not being able to access education because of the price tag. Therefore I seems fine to be to pay for someone's education if they show potential. Good grades, no crime, works hard, give back to the community. The system we have in place now were any dumb fuck can get free money from the government even if it is clear as day they will never become anything is crazy to me."

Everything you just said is scripture to me.

My mother once worked for a welfare center (not sure of the exact name), but one day (the day she quit actually) a man walked in. He was in rags almost, drove a beater car and had his three kids with him and wife. He spoke about how he had gotten a paycheck earlier in the month (first three days) but they had no money left, since school time came and he needed to by school supplies. They were completely broke, but because of the rigged system, he couldn't get any welfare approval because he got income earlier in the month. It was the 29th, and they just wanted to eat. Then, not an hour later, a lady with her hair all done up and one kid playing on his smartphone and wearing really nice shoes walked in. Her nails were done also. She was approved for welfare because she hadn't received any income. She also drove a fucking sports car. My mother asked her about the car and she responded that it was her parents. If your parents can let you drive a 100k+ sports car, why do you need welfare?

People are milking the system, and it isn't fair to those that have to provide the system. If everybody were to stop working and milk the system, the milk would run dry and everybody would die.

 

[Kioku]

Capitalism. Earn your keep.

 

[CallmeBerto]

@blujay - Oh yeah dude I see this everyday. I have a cousin who is very pretty (sounds strange but shut up and roll with me for a second here) She has 4 children...from 4 different guys, never had a job in her life and gets full welfare benefits AND got over 10K in tax returns this year. I have reported this bitch twice and NOTHING!!!

 

[Kioku]

@blujay - Oh yeah dude I see this everyday. I have a cousin who is very pretty (sounds strange but shut up and roll with me for a second here) She has 4 children...from 4 different guys, never had a job in her life and gets full welfare benefits AND got over 10K in tax returns this year. I have reported this bitch twice and NOTHING!!!

She's not breaking any rules. Sadly enough.

 

[CallmeBerto]

She's not breaking any rules. Sadly enough.

*cries at the sound of personal responsibility going out the window*

 

[GhostLatte]

So should the homeless starve? The infirm die without medical treatment? The mentally retarded left to fend for themselves? The old left to freeze in the winter?

Are you really advocating this?

"Survival of the fittest." and "Give the poor jobs so they can function without our help" are two insanely different things.

Survival of the fittest is a reference to Darwin's theory of evolution. This means that if a kid is born with hole in his heart and parents don't have enough money to have insurance or pay for it, he is just going to die.

I never said I was for the system in place. I brought it up to remind people of the harsh reality.

 

[brickmii82]

The purest expression of capitalism is unregulated competition. Competing entities vie for marketplace/social standing and value through innovation and policy. This breeds results quickly as competition showcases strengths and uncovers weaknesses.

A major problem in the model is simply mankind’s predisposition towards greed. When an entity gets large enough, it can simply out-resource it’s competitors to dominate its area. This is known as monopolizing. Also, unfair practices can tilt the scales in its favor depending on the circumstances surrounding it. The best example of this I can think of is currency manipulation, where a currency is increased in value through various unfair activities like reducing the amount of currency in circulation at the expense of those who have earned it fairly.

Capitalism is very merit based though, so it’s a great economic engine.

Moving onto communism, it is equality based in theory, and no one deserves any less or any more than anyone else. You function in your capacity supporting the system doing your assigned task, and the government supplies your daily needs without direct cost to you through taxation. Sounds noble right?

A major problem in the model is the exact same as capitalism. Greed. It is inherently large so greed becomes it eventually. Communist governments often become tyrannical as the views and policies of the leadership often become mandatory. There is no I, only us.

I feel “what fits where” really determines what works here. In most marketplaces capitalism works best. In a few other areas, there needs to be govt involvement to avoid greedy practices.

 

[deinonychus71]

Socialism is just a renaming of communism to make it more palatable.

No. It makes all the difference between a society where individualism is king and a society that doesnt let its people die, and try to make chances of success fair for everyone.

Communism has other notions like everything belongs to the state, universal revenue etc.
Now yes in America there's a ridiculous propaganda against it. But it's not communism.

 

[Kioku]

The purest expression of capitalism is unregulated competition. Competing entities vie for marketplace/social standing and value through innovation and policy. This breeds results quickly as competition showcases strengths and uncovers weaknesses.

A major problem in the model is simply mankind’s predisposition towards greed. When an entity gets large enough, it can simply outspend it’s competitors to dominate its area. This is known as monopolizing. Also, unfair practices can tilt the scales in its favor depending on the circumstances surrounding it. The best example of this I can think of is currency manipulation, where a currency is increased in value through various unfair activities like reducing the amount of currency in circulation at the expense of those who have earned it fairly.

Capitalism is very merit based though, so it’s a great economic engine.

Moving onto communism, it is equality based in theory, and no one deserves any less or any more than anyone else. You function in your capacity supporting the system doing your assigned task, and the government supplies your daily needs without direct cost to you through taxation. Sounds noble right?

A major problem in the model is the exact same as capitalism. Greed. Communist governments often become tyrannical as the views and policies of the leadership often become mandatory. There is no I, only us.

I feel “what fits where” really determines what works here. In most marketplaces capitalism works best. In a few others, there needs to be govt involvement to avoid greedy practices.

Honestly? Whatever "-ism" you may choose. They all have vast shortcomings due to one shared point. Humans.

 

[brickmii82]

Honestly? Whatever "-ism" you may choose. They all have vast shortcomings due to one shared point. Humans.

Bingo. Very few would complain about a monarch if they’re benevolent and humble.

 

[x65943]

No. It makes all the difference between a society where individualism is king and a society that doesnt let its people die, and try to make chances of success fair for everyone.

Communism has other notions like everything belongs to the state, universal revenue etc.
Now yes in America there's a ridiculous propaganda against it. But it's not communism.

I get your point, but they are synonyms. One word is more demonized, but they refer to the same ideology.

 

[CallmeBerto]

I would call myself a classic libertarian agro small government, free market with a dash of communism. I think is the best system.

However most people wont' go for it because people love giving up their rights fo safety and free stuff is nice, which of course leads to bigger government and we get what we have now in the USA and the problem only gets worst until it goes to shit and the cycle starts over again.

 

[deinonychus71]

I get your point, but they are synonyms. One word is more demonized, but they refer to the same ideology.

I don't know how they can say its a synonym with such major differences.

I would call myself a classic libertarian agro small government, free market with a dash of communism. I think is the best system.

However most people wont' go for it because people love giving up their rights fo safety and free stuff is nice, which of course leads to bigger government and we get what we have now in the USA and the problem only gets worst until it goes to shit and the cycle starts over again.

Check european countries. They gave up more "rights" for safety and the criminal rate is lower than the US.
And safety nets are nice yes.

 

[dpad_5678]

I don't want Stalin but I also don't want private companies running my country.

You can't give everything away to people of the lower class. They should be functioning members of society rather than leeches.

My family is on food stamps (single mom with two kids and a father that pays $500/mo for child support). Guess we're leeches?

 

[CallmeBerto]

I don't know how they can say its a synonym with such major differences.



Check european countries. They gave up more "rights" for safety and the criminal rate is lower than the US.
And safety nets are nice yes.

Comping the USA to Europe is insane. Comparing any country to another is insane. Each country has their own culture, history, ideas all which play a HUGE role in how it affects every aspect of their country including crime rates. Copying their policies here without taking anything I said above into consideration would never work.

On safety nets...so I'm torn on this. It is true that good honest people do indeed fall on hard times (sometimes through no fault of their own) and helping one another would be the moral thing to do. However if you subsidized something you get more of it(agro more poor people) If you tax it you get less of it (people who are willing to put in extra hours of work) You need to find a balance and I think the USA has gone far to far into the subsidized part of it. Look at the single motherhood rate, look at all the poor people who are doing NOTHING to improve their lives and instead leeching off the government and demanding more and more.

 

[brickmii82]

My question would be, why pay any attention to the welfare leeches? There are those that use it and need it to get to a contributing position, and those that're just unmotivated leeches. But let's be real here, how far will they get? Will they ever see the world? Probably no. Will they ever learn outside culture? Probably no. Will they ever truly experience life's finer offerings at all? Probably no. So let them have the scraps you're willing to drop or forget about if not for any other reason but to remember why you're motivated yourself. Is it fair? Not really. But show me what document I signed that assured life would be fair.

 

[Deleted User]

Sort of an incoherent rant on the subject, but here goes:

I'm not a full supporter of capitalism; what Adam Smith said about an invisible hand guiding the economy and bringing society upwards is bullshit. To paraphrase one New York Times article from the 70s, corporations only have one social responsibility, and that's to make money. More often than not, they're far too concerned with their own profits to pay heed to how they're affecting the world around them. Look at Nestle, claiming that water isn't a basic human right. Look at how Facebook indirectly screwed with one of the most powerful political systems in the world. Corporations are downright irresponsible at times.

Like what X said, there needs to be a balanced mix of capitalism and socialism in any half-healthy society. People and organizations can, and will, do bad things, and it's the government's job to keep them in place while also respecting basic human rights, which can admittedly be a tough line to balance on. A good functioning government should allow for upward mobility, but restrain people if their ambitions lead them towards unsavory actions. Even "successful" communist countries like China have embraced capitalist elements. This whole notion of socialism as evil is a rather annoying holdover in the US from events such as the Red Scare, and should honestly be debunked.

That said, I agree with you on communism; it was a failed system written by a man with good intentions. Communism didn't work because it put too much stock in people; not everyone is going to work hard all day every day, especially if what they're working in isn't necessarily aligned with their interests (an all-too-common sight in communism). Some people are better-skilled at others; it's a tough pill to swallow, but it's true nonetheless, and governments need to give leeway for this.

 

[Axido]

Neither nor. Neither is executed well as of now. Capitalism benefits a few who just got lucky. Effort does not equal wealth. You could work off your arse all life long and some fat banker gets rich because of that work you put in. Capitalism the way it is right now is just modern slavery unless you happen to know the right people.

Socialism in its originally intended form would be pretty nice. I just can't think of any country that has a system like that. Even countries that identify as socialist or communist don't have much in common with the ideas of Marx, Engels or Lenin.

 

[CallmeBerto]

My question would be, why pay any attention to the welfare leeches? There are those that use it and need it to get to a contributing position, and those that're just unmotivated leeches. But let's be real here, how far will they get? Will they ever see the world? Probably no. Will they ever learn outside culture? Probably no. Will they ever truly experience life's finer offerings at all? Probably no. So let them have the scraps you're willing to drop or forget about if not for any other reason but to remember why you're motivated yourself. Is it fair? Not really. But show me what document I signed that assured life would be fair.

Multiple reasons.

A. They keep voting for bigger and bigger government which means either higher taxes, inflation (normally both)

B. They try to rig the game in their favor via gender quotas, affirmative action.

C. They keep breeding (you are basically paying people who should have never been allowed to have children in the first place; the reason the poor stay poor in the USA is because they decided the wanted to be poor or they are stupid) you don't want these kind of people breeding with other screw ups.

Which means the cycle starts over from A again again and again until the system shits the bed.

That is what is happening now. Look at any poor community holy cow it is a shit show. Even if you don't think that IQ or lack of work ethic is the problem then you have to agree that the culture that created these people is trash and it should be killed with a flamethrower.

 

[brickmii82]

Multiple reasons.

A. They keep voting for bigger and bigger government which means either higher taxes, inflation (normally both)

B. They try to rig the game in their favor via gender quotas, affirmative action.

C. They keep breeding (you are basically paying people who should have never been allowed to have children in the first place; the reason the poor stay poor in the USA is because they decided the wanted to be poor or they are stupid) you don't want these kind of people breeding with other screw ups.

Which means the cycle starts over from A again again and again until the system shits the bed.

That is what is happening now. Look at any poor community holy cow it is a shit show. Even if you don't think that IQ or lack of work ethic is the problem then you have to agree that the culture that created these people is trash and it should be killed with a flamethrower.

Then hit the polls at your opportunities. They mostly don't. I think you're taking a very vocal minority and lumping them in with a majority that do work and contribute, but need help here and there. I came from poor communities. It was rough and gritty, but it had its merits. I'm quite appreciative of what I've earned due to not having shit growing up, but I'm not gonna say "I got mine and fuck the rest of you" due to a few bad apples. Poverty is struggle, struggle breeds character growth. While they may be lazy, who are you to pre-judge their offspring? They may be the next Hawking, Plato, Beethoven, MLK, ...... You just dont know.