View Poll Results: Is Computed [Pure] Communism Possible???

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I think it's got a shot.

    3 15.79%
  • Yes, capitalism will still be here for at least the next 50 years.

    0 0%
  • No, capitalism's the only way people will work.

    9 47.37%
  • No, capitalism provides innovation.

    7 36.84%
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 149
  1. #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Secondly, I'd like to apologize to mediasi. What I said to you was wrong. I just noticed your signature (also apologize for that other comment in another thread about your sig, didn't notice your name was above the sig line;
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    ...why not put it below it so you don't have to type it every post?)
    Because I like mine above the Sig line.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    ...and felt I'd take a jab at you for owning a business. I just figured that I'd relate you to every other business owner just like you'd related me to every other college kid you knew.
    Ahh, but I didn't. I related to many colleges in general AND the teachings AND pointed out that, regardless of your educational background, there are things you have not yet discovered. Even little einsteins see this.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    And as far as I know, they could both be accurate descriptions. But anyway, that was wrong of me...I have no knowledge of your personal life, but I applaude you for doing your hardest at your job and providing your employees with health care, benefits, good pay, and what-have-you. I wish more owners could say that about themselves.
    Most business owners who do this don't talk about it. It's just standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Thirdly, I'd like to apologize to AlaskanDad and Insertion. I never meant for you to believe that our personal freedoms would be taken away by [partially] limiting our economic freedoms. I'm all about some personal freedom, guys, that's why I'm against capitalism!!
    Now I'm confused. First, how do you propose that your "proposal" would not affect our freedoms? And, secondly, we are a capitalist country BECAUSE of freedom. We have the right to work for what we want. Those who have the drive (not just skill or luck) will flourish with riches (not always financially, but they will have a rich life). This is what freedom is about, and it's what millions died for.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    I guess that's my main point; NOW: representative democracy paired with capitalism -versus- FUTURE: technocracy paired with communism (NOT...I REPEAT...NOT representative democracy paired with communism, as it seems most of you are understanding it). Never before was there an effective way to distribute power/money, yet slowly but surely technology is providing us that EFFICIENT & EFFECTIVE method of distribution. ...
    In your quest to convince us that technocracy and communism would be a good thing, have you figured out how to address the hike in crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Let me re-summarize. Every single person has a smartphone [not the same smartphone] that can connect to the WiMax infrastructure scattered all across the country.
    Who pays for this?

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Connected to this wireless system is a massive database that records everything related to the GOVERNMENT (not personal stuff, such as who you talk to or what you like to read, or anything like that). Since the government owns all businesses, they will have to see what you're buying...they can already see what you buy now if you use a credit card (you could pay with cash, but I don't see us having that option for too much longer into the future). They use this large database that can be seen by any other citizen...it's not closed so that only the government can see it. Well, I guess in a since it is because YOU are the government.
    So, in essence, I could see, for example, how much alcohol and condoms one neighbor is buying, or the "girlie" medication another is, or what mood-altering medication the guy down the street is on?

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Since you are the government, YOU replace the House of Representatives and get to vote on every issue (if you so chose to do so), while there is still a Senate, and a President (hopefully more than just one, but this is debatable). This seems to solve the problem to me of the totalitarian stuff - finally distributing power evenly with technology by our side.
    And what about those who don't vote? We have that problem now - how would it be any different?

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Things that could be debatable are if people should be able to see what you buy, or what you vote on. Is this necessarily a bad thing. I don't think it is. You should be proud of what you choose, should you not? And anybody who knows you would prolly know what you buy anyway; why would somebody who doesn't know you even give a rats a$$.
    Because some of us like our privacy. If I head a serious illness, I don't think I'd want everybody knowing what it was. As a woman, I can think of quite a few things I wouldn't want anyone to know about...

    By the way, in all this, since the Government would own all businesses, which ones would be eliminated? I mean, I don't think I could live without Victoria's Secret. I'm not willing to sacrifice comfort for a "Happy People" scenario.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    As to the private ownership of property. I don't see the government owning personal property; I just see them taking over the businesses.
    But... my BUSINESS **IS** my personal property. I built it with hard sweat and long hours. So, because I don't own a home, but rather a business, it's just taken away?

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    The problem that I mentioned in my initial post is what happens with inheritances/property/other possessions after you die. Well...the only solution I see is to turn it over to the state at that point. I see this as a good thing because most conservatives talk about saving up money for their family, and more specifically their children. I know several conservatives whose children don't even try in school because they know they're going to get a new BMW when they're 16, then they go to college and they flunk out in the first year. Is all that really necessary? Then there are those conservative parents who gave their children a good education and who kept a good eye on their kid's grades. I attribute that to the community of the family, and not what the kid knew he had coming -- a successful life.
    This is all starting to sound like, "Screw everyone because of the scumbags out there." So WHAT if they don't appreciate it - what about the ones who DO??? Kick them to the side? If that's not stereotyping via making policy, I don't know what is.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    If high school students choose to continue furthering their education, they will be rewarded by not having to do manual labor...and generally getting to experience fun and exciting times.
    Nice, so manual labor is the "bad" job. Hmm... y'know, some workers LIKE manual labor. I sure enjoyed throwing hay and building stone walls when I was in high school. I enjoy it now even.

    And who determines what are "fun and exciting times"? For some it's a movie or a walk on the beach. For others it's a bong and a fifth of JD.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    As for the doctors and lawyers who put in plenty of time in med and law school, I believe that they could have less work as more people could be pushed toward going into those fields. A lotta time is wasted in the court rooms nowadays....
    Apparently there wouldn't be any real courtrooms for civil cases because no one would be able to gain anything (if you allowed people to sue each other, you're right back to capitalism). Which means, no one can be punished for anything that's not tried (or secondarily tried after) criminal court.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    you give 'em an efficient and effective technological system of organization and BAM, it frees up a lotta time for lawyers.
    Quite a bit. Civil lawyers would have no work at all.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  2. #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    In America today...there's no denying either of those claims. In other countries where there is no money, they are neither evil nor selfish, but they are easily controlled because they have no education.
    I'll agree about the lack of education, but if you seriously believe that there's no greed or selfishness, then please read this...
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1288230.stm
    (note: They are a poor country)

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    There's no doubt in my mind that kids in America today are much smarter than our parents were at my age...I'd attribute that to the internet.
    I disagree. I have yet to see any evidence that supports that children today are more capable of maintaining information than their parents were (which is what "smarts" is). If anything, less children are capable of retaining info and we can attribute that to polluted environments, artificial flavoring and coloring, food additives, etc. Being smart doesn't mean you know a lot (and the bulk of what you learn under standard studies in elementary and high school is memorization - no different than remembering enough to win a round of Trivial Pursuit).

    Couple that with the Internet and TV distracting children more, and you'll see that as they get older there are less of them who can humor themselves with their own imagination in a quiet room.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    I think it teaches people...makes them smarter by providing them with whatever information they want to know instantly - like Neo sitting in his chair and learning Jujitsu, you can learn whatever you want.
    That's not learning. That's getting implanted. Most people can add 2 and 2, but how many know how the numbers system really works?

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    I appreciate your comment about me being intelligent. I don't know if I really want to convince the other 95 percent of the world what's right and wrong...they have to do that for themselves.
    But you should WANT to convince them. No one became a great leader or turned over new stones by just coming up with a few ideas, arguing with a dozen people then walking away.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  3. #103  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    I said it could possibly happen considering things such as the national ID we'll have in three years. Enough of the borg stuff though...it's irrelevant to the topic of debate.

    As for Japan, like I said...I understand their capitalists. But my questions for you are:
    (1) Why is it that in general they have as much income per capita, yet aren't as greedy?? (Seeing as how I've never been there, I can relate what I've heard to this conversation...people saying that they dropped their wallet with money inside and imagining never to find it again...only to find that it was in fact, returned with all money in tact as well.).
    Don't get insulted, but your naivete runneth over. The reason crime is low in Japan is Honor. There is a great stigma involved in crime. Not only are you the criminal looked down upon, but it stains the family as well. Japan is the opposite of what you think it is. This honor, and shame is what drives people to succeed over there. Failure is not an option for many. They work longer hours and spend more time in school than their greedy American counterparts.
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    (2) Why is it that Japan was and still is focused on quality control of their products?? Good examples are automobiles and electronics. Whereas here, Palm sends you a Y-cable that they know people are going to hate. I realize that they're fueling more jobs because somebody else (if not them) is making a profit off of your additional purchases...but those are profits and jobs that could be used elsewhere in the grand scope of the economy.
    Again, this can be viewed as greed. The desire to put out a better product. Why? So YOU will BUY it. They don't give these things away. You will also note that in the panacea of your Japanese model, often the same product costs a Japanese person twice as much as the same product costs us in the states...not very helpful to a Japanese person now is it?

    The rest of your assinine ramblings isn't even worth commenting on. It is nothing more than insults. If you can have a rational discussion without wetting yourself, please do so. But I have yet to see this from you.

    Is this what our University system is putting out these days? At least we still have Claire.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  4. #104  
    This is getting fun, I'm glad I came back...

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Your entire side is that all men are greedy and/or stupid to some degree.
    Most people ARE greedy about something. Me? I am saving up for a nice house. I want a house bigger than the one I'm in. I want a huge kitchen because I love to cook. I want a swimming pool and a back shed. My husband wants a place to work with power tools and his trampoline in the back yard.

    Could I buy a house for half what mine will cost? Yes. Do I NEED more than that basic house? No. Do I DESERVE it? I don't deserve anything but the air I breathe and the people who love me.

    Thus, I am greedy in this respect. I know the house will be nice. The additional things I want could be considered as materialistic (though I don't blow money on junk) and it will be wealth-building (I could sell it for more in 10 years).

    Only when you can find yourself and hundreds more like you who are not greedy by CHOICE (which means clearing out and never buying anything beyond what you really need) can you say that people are not greedy.



    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    The majority of people from Mississippi don't know a damn thing about capitalism or communism, they just know that capitalism works [for now] and that's that.
    You know this for a fact? You do know the makeup of Mississippi, right? Are you saying the majority of Mississippi is ignorant? There's a lot of history there.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    And for one last time, I'm not arguing that. And I don't know if people are necessarily st00pit as much as they are misinformed. If one person can tell me how Fox News is a fair & balanced network while all of the other news stations aren't, I'll agree that people aren't misinformed and they're just st00pit all on their own. It's those with the money spending more money to keep them happy.
    Misinformed, OR just not wanting to know. Quite a bit of information flows quite freely, it's up to the person to decide if he/she wants to learn about it.

    Fox News does something the others don't - they punch you right in the gut. You can disagree with Hannity or Colmes or even O'Reilly, but you certainly can't argue that these guys lay their opinion (with backup) right on the table with a no-holds-barred approach. Set aside whether or not you agree with them, but they sure can get you thinking. Heck, I'd watch a guy teach me how to disassemble a toaster over someone telling me a story about fuzzy bunnies in the forest any day.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    When placed in an environment of greed and selfishness, however, their morals and intelligence go down the drain.
    Who's fault is that? I was raised properly. I know plenty of moral and intelligent people living in the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    I believe that an individual man inherently knows the difference between right and wrong...
    Sorry, but that's not true. The values instilled in you since birth are what you know until you learn something different. Never be taught any different, and while the world may think you are wrong, you may be right in your own self. There are people in this country who live in the woods and they can't speak, read or write. If they've been taught nothing, then the only "good" they'll know is nature and the ability to survive.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will.
    This is like saying people can't change at all. We change by learning.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Even after we incessantly make the wrong choices in life, we recognize them as being wrong...it's just too tough for us to fight it.
    That statement, coming from anyone, is a cop out.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Quite frankly...I'm tired of going back and forth over minute crap like "money is merely a buncha coins" and people reading too much into stuff that I say like "other countries have no money". I mean, you guys talk about realism, but your not being realistic in this conversation. Of course money is just a buncha coins, but more importantly...it represents how much more power one person has than another. And of course other countries have SOME money, but in comparison to America, it ain't jack.
    Then why are we in more debt?

    As for not being realistic, realistic is ALL that *I* am.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    Soo...since I'm the only person taking on like a billion people with something to lose, I just want these three questions answered before I leave this thread to spend my time on more productive things. These questions may or may not have anything to do with what we've been talking about...I'm just curious, more or less.

    QUESTIONS:

    (1) Why do some people listen to Fox News as their only news source? Why do they even listen to them at all, really??
    Maybe because it's the only televised source that doesn't sugar coat. I get my news from a variety of sources. And I listen, watch, read news because I would like to be informed.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    (2) Who chose, or how were goods chosen to be made in former communist nations?? I've never seen much on this topic. Was there only one shirt for all people? Was there one type of house that was built?? Any insight as to how supply/demand worked (or didn't work, rather) could possibly help me understand a little bit more about those countries' past failings.
    I don't know. It's irrelevant to me. I would think that you would have researched this before bringing all this to the table.

    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    (3) What religions are most of you that are arguing against me? Honestly, I'm only asking conservatives. Since most of you are Americans I'm going to say you fall between Christian, Agnostic, or Athiest. I'm just curious as to how your morals relate to your religious/spiritual life.
    I look to myself for my own answers. I don't need to lean on someone else as a reason for my statements.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    No evidence exists on technocracy.

    Right back at cha!! What evidence have you shown me about the failings of technocra...OH WAIT...THAT'S 'CAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY!!!!
    Debate 101: You don't need technocracy examples - you need relative examples.

    When ideas like this are born they are based on past ideas and their implementations. Otherwise, there would never be anything new introduced at all.

    You don't need to wait for some country to give everyone a smartphone to make a valid argument about how and why it would work.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  6. #106  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    To those that said other countries have money: http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/engl.../economic/gnp/. Check out specifically the first "Did You Know" section.
    But they "do" have some amount of money circulating.

    And, guess what? They all have crime, too.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  7. #107  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Again, this can be viewed as greed. The desire to put out a better product. Why? So YOU will BUY it.
    Which leads me to a question for grndslm...

    Why do you own a Treo? I mean, do you really need it or is it something that just makes life easier?

    There's nothing you can do on a Treo really that you can't do with a computer. Wouldn't that make it a materialistic item?

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  8. #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    And, guess what? They all have crime, too.
    No doubt.....if you look at the crime during the Comm dictated USSR time frame.....you were Russian roulette (pun intended) walking down the street with an official pair of Levi brand jeans or Nike shoes. People literally killed to have something that someone didn't have, just that cling to some individuality.
  9. #109  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm
    To those that said other countries have money: http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/engl.../economic/gnp/. Check out specifically the first "Did You Know" section.
    Once again they all have money, but less than developped countries..
    The $1 is deceptive though since the cost of living is a lot lower there so that dollar would go a lot further...
    And even if they are poor they have greed, maybe even more so, since they need it to survive.
    Yes the wealth is unevenly spread.. that is old news, but has nothing to do with your theory IMHO..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  10. #110  
    Quote " ... The Creator made the earth and all that it contains for the common good of mankind, whatever livth on the land, whatever growth out of the earth, and all that is in the rivers and waters ... was givin jointly to all and everyone is entitled to his or her share"

    What seperates Capitalism, from Communism is a Rationing Device. A ration device is a way to determine who get what of the resource, and good produced by the earth. With the understanding that no one human has created the earth, and no human provide functionality for the resource of the earth to be produced: No one can legally own those things. Any attempt by a government, person or corparation to claim a land and it resource are man made Legal deeds. Most of those deed came after wars, conquest, or pure criminal act. But Capitalism Rationing device is base on the fact "so called fact" that human have a unlimited amout of wants, with a limited amount of resource to fill those wants. So Capitialism Rationing device, become a free market were people who find a way to get hold of some resouce "legally or illegal" can trade those resource with other who got hold of some resources "legally or illegal". So a person willingness to get hold of resource for trade make them worthy of gaining limited resource offered by others.

    Communism based it distribution of resource on the need of the people. Communism understand that no man can honestly stake a claim to a plot of Land and the future resource it will produce, so all land is for the benefit of everyone. and everyone is allowed to get thier fare share depending on thier need.

    People on the Forum answer this home made case study.

    There is a group of twenty homeless traveller "looking for a place to live", and They find a empty unclaimed plot of land that measure 20 acres square.

    1. What would be their first coures of action.
    Build Systems, Not Products
    <center>All Comments © Copyright Clarence C Middleton 2005-2006, All Rights Reserved<br /> <a href="mailto:ClarenceCM3@gmail.com">ClarenceCM3@gmail.com</a><br /><ahref ="http://www.middleton.ath.cx"><a href="http://www.middleton.ath.cx">http://www.middleton.ath.cx</a><br /><a href="http://www.middleton.ath.cx"><img style="width: 124px; height: 54px;"src="http://www.middleton.ath.cx/photos/middletonlogo.gif" /></a></ahref><center />
  11. #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    No doubt.....if you look at the crime during the Comm dictated USSR time frame.....you were Russian roulette (pun intended) walking down the street with an official pair of Levi brand jeans or Nike shoes. People literally killed to have something that someone didn't have, just that cling to some individuality.
    Naaaa, that's not true. I am not in favour of communism, but the crime rate in communist countries was actually quite low (maybe apart from corruption). Burglaries, robberies and the like were not really worth it because your neighbours had just as little as you. The crime rate e.g. in Eastern Germany went up considerably after the reunion with Western Germany, that's one reason why some in the Eastern part of Germany miss the "good old days".
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  12. #112  
    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    Communism based it distribution of resource on the need of the people. Communism understand that no man can honestly stake a claim to a plot of Land and the future resource it will produce, so all land is for the benefit of everyone. and everyone is allowed to get thier fare share depending on thier need.
    That is what the theory says. It never worked anywhere on this planet in practice during the past 100 years. What makes you think this could change in the future? Do you think the people in North Korea get "their fair share according to their needs", or are they just barely saved from starvation thanks to food supply from highly productive capitalistic countries?
    People on the Forum answer this home made case study.

    There is a group of twenty homeless traveller "looking for a place to live", and They find a empty unclaimed plot of land that measure 20 acres square.

    1. What would be their first coures of action.
    That's impossible to tell without knowing who the homeless are (a family, 20 men with families somewhere), what the land consists of (fertile, desert, with oil underneath/without oil), etc. Since the land is unclaimed, it's probably not very useful anyway...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  13. #113  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    That is what the theory says. It never worked anywhere on this planet in practice during the past 100 years. What makes you think this could change in the future? Do you think the people in North Korea get "their fair share according to their needs", or are they just barely saved from starvation thanks to food supply from highly productive capitalistic countries?
    Actully Communism "sometimes under different names" have work for small communities throught out the world, and even in America. Communist ideology has been around long before the Soviet Union, and even before Karl Marx himself. Communism as a country didn't work in those instances because of problems with those Countrys. Remember we are in America a Totally Anti-Communist Nation. Any good news about a communism is surpress, and all bad news is elevated. It's all Propaganda to keep Americans Against Communism.

    Have you noticed that every time a communist or former communist country committs some type of Wrong doing They clearly state the fact that The country was Communist. Ie Communist North Korea plan to make nuclear weapons, or Former Communist Russia has committed various human rights volation. While anytime someone speaks of a no Communist nation, thier econmic system is never mentioned. You never hear of American Democratic Capitalist Slavery, or Democratic Inda plan to make nuclear weapons. It's all Propgranda. the same way they are using to tie Terrorism with Islam, is the Way try tried to tie Communism with evil , Coruption, and spys.

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    That's impossible to tell without knowing who the homeless are (a family, 20 men with families somewhere), what the land consists of (fertile, desert, with oil underneath/without oil), etc. Since the land is unclaimed, it's probably not very useful anyway...
    The whole point of the Question was to determine human nature. Most would say split the land into 20 acre: one for each person. As apposed to one or two taking control of all the land, and selingl or renting 1/2 an acre to the rest and keeping 2 acre each for themselve.



    As for people in countrys straving, that becuase of the courntys bad prioties. A nation decides to sell it's food instead of keeping it for it's people. That same corruption could take place in a Capitalist, Communist, or Socialist Nation. Alot of the Problem people like to bring up about Communist nations are also problem face in Capitalist nations "Including American". PS People are Straving and going hungry in American Also and it is a "highly productive capitalistic countries"
    Last edited by ClarenceCM3; 07/20/2005 at 06:26 AM.
    Build Systems, Not Products
    <center>All Comments © Copyright Clarence C Middleton 2005-2006, All Rights Reserved<br /> <a href="mailto:ClarenceCM3@gmail.com">ClarenceCM3@gmail.com</a><br /><ahref ="http://www.middleton.ath.cx"><a href="http://www.middleton.ath.cx">http://www.middleton.ath.cx</a><br /><a href="http://www.middleton.ath.cx"><img style="width: 124px; height: 54px;"src="http://www.middleton.ath.cx/photos/middletonlogo.gif" /></a></ahref><center />
  14. #114  
    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    Actully Communism "sometimes under different names" have work for small communities throught out the world, and even in America.
    That's possible, though I don't know of any. Even the Kibbutz in Israel are moving towards privatisation.

    "Communist", small communities may work for a while, but only as long as the members all know each other well. It does not work for large groups such as whole countries, as you can see in each and every past and present communist country.

    OTOH, 100% pure capitalism without any social components is probably not much more clever than communism.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  15. slinky's Avatar
    Posts
    578 Posts
    Global Posts
    592 Global Posts
    #115  
    I think the problem lies more in the reality within which the dyanimic world operates and the nature of people. Many of these systems sound great on paper and intentions good at the start.

    You can put "controls" in place but there will always be people who will not adhere or respect the "rules of the game" for one reason or another. In college most were our buddies and pals, peace and goodwill to all mankind, rock and roll forever, etc. etc. etc. Many of us had only a small taste of the world to come, had much greater independence and no dependants and were subsidized in some fashion by our parents and/or government until our release from this educational sanctuary. It should not come as a surprise that many of these pacifists and friends acted very differently when the opportunity to get ahead presented itself and which is always at the expense of someone else. Nepotism begins to rear its ugly head, etc. Regardless of the system there will always be factors that will create problems until we find a way to control the Darwinian instinct in human behavior.

    I think Clulup makes a good point in that the larger populations bring about increasing difficulties of "staying the path." The problem seems to me to be more in the execution than in the plan.
    Last edited by slinky; 07/20/2005 at 08:38 AM.
  16. #116  
    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    Have you noticed that every time a communist or former communist country committs some type of Wrong doing They clearly state the fact that The country was Communist. Ie Communist North Korea plan to make nuclear weapons, or Former Communist Russia has committed various human rights volation. While anytime someone speaks of a no Communist nation, thier econmic system is never mentioned.
    That's because communism is about more than just economics (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=communism) AND that we have come to know that communism in the sense of a country's leadership means WAY more than it's core definition.


    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    The whole point of the Question was to determine human nature. Most would say split the land into 20 acre: one for each person. As apposed to one or two taking control of all the land, and selingl or renting 1/2 an acre to the rest and keeping 2 acre each for themselve.
    Yes, but there is a difference here. You can't look at say, Oklahoma from years ago and say that there's all this land no one has claimed so they'll divy it up (in fact, they ran for it). You're talking about taking things that already BELONG to someone else and divying it up. Let's compare apples and apples.

    Do you like the concept of eminent domain? Who says if the process actually helps the community (many times it does not), but it's no different:

    eminent domain
    n.
    The right of a government to appropriate private property for public use, usually with compensation to the owner.



    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    As for people in countrys straving, that becuase of the courntys bad prioties. A nation decides to sell it's food instead of keeping it for it's people. That same corruption could take place in a Capitalist, Communist, or Socialist Nation. Alot of the Problem people like to bring up about Communist nations are also problem face in Capitalist nations "Including American". PS People are Straving and going hungry in American Also and it is a "highly productive capitalistic countries"
    The thing is, in America, probably a third of people who don't have enough food have CHOSEN the path. For some, the process of welfare, and the likes is totally avoidable. If we had a system that better measured which of the needy really needed help, that would be a good thing.

    But if you knock on my door and take 90% of what I've worked for my entire life (and I started with next to nothing), then I'm going to have a problem with that.

    Now, one question for you - if we were to become a Communist nation, how does that affect the value of our dollars? Do we just keep printing as people are born and old enough to work "for the government owned businesses?" What happens to our dollar being valued at something somewhere else? Or is that America will become the export capital of the world?

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  17.    #117  
    Communism rules!! I'm just a little drunk right now, and wanted to get this thread started again as I've been mostly in the Treo-related threads recently.

    For mediasi...do you think you honestly earned that 90% that the government would end up taking?? I have met quite a few business owners, and none of them seemed like they EARNED that money. You might be different, and you awfully seem like you have sincerity in your words, but MOST business owners don't do a damn thing, they just get lucky. It's a gamble....and I admit, I have no clue as to what I'm proposing would give people enough motivation to work or not. I have no clue until it's played out like I've said....with everybody having equal power, equal voting rights....just plain equality. You say it's not possible...I say it will be someday.

    As for the American dollar....when everybody has a smartphone in their pocket that is faster than their desktop today, I don't believe that we will have the need for "printed" money. You'll just be given a number like 30,000, for example...and when you run out, you're done for the year.

    I honestly don't see how this thread can continue to go on with no proof on what the government of technocracy provides for us....and when mos people here are basing facts upon philisophical beliefs.

    Back to the Bud [Light]! (Maybe I should start a poll on what the best beer is....or has it been done, already?)
  18.    #118  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    The $1 is deceptive though since the cost of living is a lot lower there so that dollar would go a lot further...
    Why is it that I can work for an hour and go to another country and live like the rest of them for five whole days?? It's just not fair...working at McDonald's for an hour is not any greater than working in another country for five days.
  19. #119  
    Time to give it up
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20.    #120  
    OK, OK, OK....just after more people answer these three questions besides mediasi. I'm specifically interested in number 2 if anybody could help me....or point me in the direction of an answer perhaps. Just a few responses and then I'll let it go to rest for good. I prolly won't even respond to them to keep this thread going....just trying to figure out your side a little more.

    (1) Why do some people listen to Fox News as their only news source? Why do they even listen to them at all, really?? For example, if all televised news stations get their news from the Associated Press....how exactly could Fox News be any more fair and balanced than what the AP is tellin' everybody??

    (2) Who chose, or how were goods chosen to be made in former communist nations?? I've never seen much on this topic. Was there only one shirt for all people? Was there one type of house that was built?? Any insight as to how supply/demand worked (or didn't work, rather) could possibly help me understand a little bit more about those countries' past failings.

    (3) What religions are most of you that are arguing against me? Honestly, I'm only asking conservatives. Since most of you are Americans I'm going to say you fall between Christian, Agnostic, or Athiest. I'm just curious as to how your morals relate to your religious/spiritual life.

    Thanks guys, been fun chattin'!!
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions