Communism II

[Flatlander Fox]

I think that we've explored every facet of this argument...
(Some much better than others)

Communism is a dead horse so to speak, so why beat it?

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Originally posted by scorch
I just wanna chuck my cents in.


What you anti-communists have got to understand, is that when we say things will be evenly distributed, it means fairly.

My ideal communist system, would make it work that the more work you do, the more you get paid. But however, everyone would have the chance to work as others. Also, deserving work would get paid more, eg. Doctors, who stuck it in for the extra 7 years of education, would receive a bonus for doing those extra 7 years, eg, they would drive a better car or whatever. This would encourage everyone to stick it in at school and consequently the average intellegence would increase. Now as i said before, everyone would have an equal opportunity. Not everyone is smart, but beefheads could also get bonus's for extra hard work or whatever...
Now the hard part is, making sure a ranking system does not evolve from this sorta 'credit' system.

So what you're saying is, you want to call it communism, but leave it capitalism? Here's a thought: Why not just leave it the hell alone?

 

[Six]

I agree.....who would agree to not discuss Capitalism vs. Communism for at least one month?

I'll agree to that.

How about we also agree not to discuss theism vs. atheism for a month?

I don't know about you, but I need a break from all that.

 

[Vrylakas]

Six wrote: quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree.....who would agree to not discuss Capitalism vs. Communism for at least one month?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll agree to that.

How about we also agree not to discuss theism vs. atheism for a month?

I don't know about you, but I need a break from all that.

So...um, how's the weather by you folks...?

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by scorch
I just wanna chuck my cents in.
My ideal communist system, would make it work that the more work you do, the more you get paid. But however, everyone would have the chance to work as others. Also, deserving work would get paid more, eg. Doctors, who stuck it in for the extra 7 years of education, would receive a bonus for doing those extra 7 years, eg, they would drive a better car or whatever. This would encourage everyone to stick it in at school and consequently the average intellegence would increase. Now as i said before, everyone would have an equal opportunity. Not everyone is smart, but beefheads could also get bonus's for extra hard work or whatever...
Now the hard part is, making sure a ranking system does not evolve from this sorta 'credit' system.

Your system is flawed, and gives benefit to those who are "smarter" than others, or percieved that way.

Is a doctor smarter than a plumber? I don't think so.

Let's see a doctor try to fix his toilet. If a "dumb" plumber can do it, why can't a "smart" doctor? Because that isn't his expertise. Your system rewards fashionable jobs to white-collar workers, and leaves everyone else to strive to moderation.

If a doctor is so "smart", why he does he hire people to build his house and fix his car? Because he doesn't know how to do those things -- that's not his expertise, again leaving a disenfranchised worker.

 

[ComradeDavo]

It is my impression that the anti-communists here give out propaganda lines whilst we communists at least have some idealoligies of our own (well I have anyway........you might be surprised to know that I formed my communist views all by myself)

now will everyone please be quite about this doctor issue....doesn't anyone think that the years of training is a bigger detterent anyway?????
And once again: THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY WANT TO HELP PEOPLE!!!!!!

I shall now attempt to abide by the proposed truce.....

 

[sonorakitch]

One question I would love to see all the commies on here answer is this:

If communism is so much better for the working man, why do hordes of Chinese workers and peasants flock to Special Economic Zones in China to better their lives, such as Shenzen, Pudong, and even the SAR Hong Kong. After all, these all have capitalist tendencies in a sea of your communism.

Your input is appreciated.

~Chris

 

[Simon Darkshade]

"It is my impression that the anti-communists here give out propaganda lines whilst we communists at least have some idealoligies of our own (well I have anyway........you might be surprised to know that I formed my communist views all by myself)

now will everyone please be quite about this doctor issue....doesn't anyone think that the years of training is a bigger detterent anyway?????
And once again: THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY WANT TO HELP PEOPLE!!!!!!"

A lot of people have formed their views by themselves and as a result of their experiences, my boy, and what I say is not propaganda lines, but an expression of my own thought out beliefs.
On the matter of doctors, you cannot label the whole profession with a single reason, from either side of the argument. People do all sorts of things for all sorts of reasons, and will continue to do so.
I am yet to meet a med student who is in it to help people, though

But I will not get to involved in this debate; rather I would sit back and have a good old chuckle at some of the things said here. Just a hint for the commies et al: Nothing here is anything that has not been argued or said before, for many, many years.

 

[scorch]

i should summerise a bit.


Using my system, everyone would have equal opportunitys to get better stuff. But those who don't could just bum around. The point is, you wouldn't have Bill Gate types that have a billion times more than others.

 

[Knowltok 2]

Why should I support those who want to "bum around"? What level of support should these "bums" get? Do they get computers to surf the net with? Do they get a TV, VCR, DVD, or Sony Playstation? What about a car?

If I can get a decent computer, a used car, a small apartment, a TV with basic cable, some basic furniture, a food allowance, and a little beer money, and not have to work at all, sign me up! I can always mow your grass for a used copy of CIV3 once you are don with it. You're going to keep public libraries right? 'Cause I like to read too. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, I'll need a little money to buy christmas presents for my kids.

 

[Six]

Hmm, and another one falls victim to the members.php bug.

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Originally posted by scorch
i should summerise a bit.
Using my system, everyone would have equal opportunitys to get better stuff. But those who don't could just bum around. The point is, you wouldn't have Bill Gate types that have a billion times more than others.

Why shouldn't Bill Gates have billions? He earned them. People like you make me mad. You think that rich people got that way without any effort, or that those who inherit are somehow evil.

Allow me to inform you that those who inherit have every right to do so, because that money wasn't theirs to choose who it went to, it was their ancestors' (usually the parents). It is my firm belief that if a man has money, he should be allowed to decide whom it goes to when he dies. This is one of the most basic principles of the concept of ownership, that one is free to give the fruits of one's labors to one's children if that is one's desire.

Man is mortal. When he dies, all that he has accumulated in a lifetime of toil stays here, while he learns the answer to the mystery of what happens when you die (well, to some it's a mystery). If he cannot decide in advance who is to get his things, then why toil at all? If man were immortal, then his things would always be his, but since he must die, it is only fair to let him choose who gets the things he spent a lifetime building and earning.

Rich people are not evil. They just worked harder than you, or their parents worked harder than yours. Deal with it, and quit whining. Maybe if you weren't a whiny loser, one of them might take a fancy to you and give you a grant. Try to remember that these people, by hiring you to mow their lawn, or work in their factory, or even just by putting their money in a bank where you can borrow it, are forming the basis of the economy.

You are not the center of the universe, the universe does NOT owe you a living, and no one cares what you have to say about it. Suck it up and go feed yourself. It's not my job to make you happy, and it's not Bill Gates' job either.

 

[Sixchan]

Rich people are not evil. They just worked harder than you, or their parents worked harder than yours. Deal with it, and quit whining.

Everything else makes sense, not the second sentence.

A volunteer in a third world country helping those who have no clean water build wells vaccinating children, or Bill Gates.

Both may work as equally hard, and chose equally hard jobs, but the simple fact is that one pays more. That's it.

 

[sonorakitch]

Sixchan,

There is an intrinsic value difference between building wells and starting software companies. While each may take a great deal of hardwork, there is a major skill difference between volunteer work in Africa versus wrangling through the corporate hurdles to build an empire in the business world. That is one major difference.

~Chris

P.S.- I conclude that because no commie answered my previous question on here, then it is because they have no ability to make a rebuttal.

 

[Maj]

Another factor determining pay has to do with supply and demand. Doctors are in great demand but in relatively short supply because the knowledge and skill required to become a doctor are fairly extensive, plus expensive to obtain. Over a decade of post secondary education and field experience is needed to simply earn the title of general practitioner. An additional three or more years are tacked on if specialization is in mind.

The demand for doctors can be easily explained. Humans have a fear of death. Humans dislike pain and illness. Doctors can often alleviate or treat these problems. Humans are willing to exchange money for a doctors' services. Doctors earn a relatively high income.

A cashier at McDonalds may work just as many hours, may be even more stressed, and deal with far more disgusting things at work than an average doctor. However, since one hour of training and barely any education are required to work the register and take orders, the supply of potential McDonalds cashiers is far greater than the supply of potential doctors. There is virtually no investment of time or money involved in getting an entry level job. The demand for McDonalds to fill spots may be high, but so is the demand for employment by students and those with little education. This allows McDonalds to pay their employees close to minimum wage since they have such a large population pool to choose from. If one person quits, finding a replacement is no great task; they usually come to the company.

This is a generalization, of course, so I'm sure several of you will be able to find some exceptions. Or maybe you'll find this reasoning to be entirely flawed in some way. Either way, let me know

-Maj

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Thank you maj and sonkoritch.

I will expand only slightly on their comments.

sonkoritch mentioned intrinsic value of work. This is a key sticking point, in my mind, that would-be communists continually stumble over. For some reason, they wish to equate caloric expenditure or hours spent to value of work.

Working eight hours in a steel mill is undoubtedly one of the most physical labor-intensive jobs possible. Working eight hours in a law firm is probably one of the least physically labor-intensive jobs possible.

So why is the lawyer paid more? Some will argue that it is because of the longer training period, some will say because he is smarter. They are both a little right, and both a little wrong. Their arguments are merely supporting arguments to the main reason.

The main reason that the lawyer gets paid more is because his work has far greater impact upon the world. Let us say that a lawyer spends a day drafting, getting approved, and getting both parties to sign, a contract to build a new building on the site of the WTC.

Two months later, a steel worker works all day helping to fill an order for girders to be used on the new building. In the process, he is personally responsible for the extrusion, shaping, drilling, and shipping of twenty girders.

The steel worker's efforts have produced 20 girders. The lawyer's efforts have produced a need for thousands of girders. In terms of net effect upon the economy, the steel worker has done almost nothing. The lawyer, by brokering this deal, has assured that several steel mills, thousands of union laborers working for dozens or maybe hundreds of contractors, and the Teamsters, will have steady work for years to come.

So tell us all again how the steel worker deserves anywhere near what the lawyer should get...

 

[Blackadder]

So in short an ideal society of Communism can only be created by a huge ammegedden wiping out every single human and thus making them all equal? In death, how can one person be better than others? Alternatively turning humanity into stone or reducing humans to the intellegence of air?

An ideal communist society, with every single concievable idea which makes the government communist is inconcievable, just like a true democratic system.

Also it must not be ignored that society is based on a work pyramid (in theory). A farmer is neccessary to produce food, a builder to build etc. When society improves, more business is added. Miners, smelterers, and industry begin. Then jobs which help society, like lawyers, doctors, etc. Administrative work (although in some societies this can come first), etc, etc, etc.
What if instead of currency, we began to trade in finished products? A laywer would have to equate a bunch of papers with the promise of steel when a steel worker can make the trade with the finished product. Who is the wealthier now?

 

[CurtSibling]

"The steel worker's efforts have produced 20 girders. The lawyer's efforts have produced a need for thousands of girders. In terms of net effect upon the economy, the steel worker has done almost nothing. The lawyer, by brokering this deal, has assured that several steel mills, thousands of union laborers working for dozens or maybe hundreds of contractors, and the Teamsters, will have steady work for years to come. "

Good post FL2!

But don't forget we need those steel workers, because there's no
Way a lawyer would ever get his hands dirty. But as FL2 pointed out rather nicely,
The highly paid worker usually does a more important role than the labourer,
This should be obvious to even a 16 year-old communist wannabe.

In a working society everyone plays a part, from the mayor to a rubbish-collector.
Communism strangles important aspects of economy and business in needless red-tape (pun intended).

I remember reading about the soviets getting a client state to licence-build transport
Trucks for the army. The soviets paid for work, not per vehicle, but per ton!

Now this meant the wily Hungarians could make the trucks twice as heavy
By welding huge girders along the chassis of the truck, thus charging a fortune!
And the Russians Paid in full for the contract!

Ah, the wonders of Communist industry!
And people actually want this wasteful excuse for a governmental system?

Don’t make me laugh!

 

[scorch]

Bill gates EARNT his money? There have been plenty of smarter people than Bill, that didn't get nearly as much money, eg. Einstein. I guess just as much as Bill deserves his money, the Arabs deserve their money from the oil they sell? So whats America doing there then?

 

[Simon Darkshade]

"I guess just as much as Bill deserves his money, the Arabs deserve their money from the oil they sell? So whats America doing there then?"

What on earth do you mean by this? Please expand upon you dubious interpretation of the Middle Eastern situation, so that you can prove our point for us, and provide a bit of a laugh.