40 helpful tips for Anti-Communists.

Post Reply New Topic

I wouldn't give them diddly, either.

That depends on who's doing the planning and how fine-tuned that planning is. Surely there's a better way than money to figure out what people want.

Nothing obviously out of your pocket you mean. It still affects you. Income disparity affects EVERYONE negatively who isn't on the top. The more someone else has, the less you have. When someone makes money, they take it from someone else. That's how a capitalist economy works, and when it doesn't work like that, it falls to pieces.

*I* never agreed to living in capitalism. *I* disagree that the current distribution of goods is naturally fair. What if I told you that you would have more if the government capped the money that celebrities can have? Just because droves of people follow them, why *should* their popularity mean that it's OK for them to be rich? What is right about that? No one individual person gives famous people a lot of money. No one individual is choosing 'hey, I'm going to make this person rich'. If no one wants these people to be rich, why is it right that they are? Why do you support a world where they CAN be rich if it's something you don't want them to be?


Can't do anything about them. They are a symptom of the times and their brand of silliness is nothing new. [/quote]

Oh but we can do something about them. But to do so means going against your ideals of free commerce. Ideals which I, quite frankly, don't understand as ideals worth having.


Tuff titty for you.
You could always leave. :idea: [/quote]

That's the thing though, if you're not a capitalist you're SOL. You can literally not live anywhere without having capitalism follow you around. The best you can hope for is a high-tax rate socialist country if you like having things, or settle for some commune somewhere where, just because you want to be *fair*, you have to be poor.

A free market doesn't equalize itself, a free market supports income disparity, and ultimately it has nothing to do with how hard one works or their skills. It gives greedy people a free card to run the world and in more disturbing ways than corrupt politicians could ever dream of.

What would you *really* do though? Nothing?

My lack of job bothers my conscience far more than my lack of money bothers me.

Where communism states "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs," socialism states "From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution." To me, it's more of an economic platform rather than a political one. It's less rigid than communism, but is often a stepping stone to it.

I don't see how this is unique to communism.

As we've already covered, capitalism already rewards and sustains indolence.

Precisely, it isnt that people want money, they want the things that they can acquire with money.

I don't see disposing of capitalism necessarilly as a way of enabling laziness, but removing the punishment system of malnutrition , homelessness and curtailing of healthcare and education to those who by accident of birth would otherwise not have the essentials to life.

People will work and embetter themselves for the sake of doing so, not to acquire distractions such as money.

Not necessarily. Making it illegal for an individual to have more than X amount of money would change the nature of the U.S. economy and not necessarily in a good way.

What you are talking about is maximum wage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_wage

Some people think it would be a good thing.


Others argue that it would be a bad thing.




I think Friedman has a compelling argument. Although celebrities aren't driving innovation, they are advertiosements for the American Dream where anything can happen. They are parts of and advertisements for an economy that rewards innovation and risk taking. Valuable things happen when people are unfettered. A wealthy Kim Kardashian is a small price to pay for an economy where it is worth it to be daring and innovative.




What is right about that is they are acting as vessels for the dreams of other people. Lots of people want individuals who are elevated above the rest. They fill an emotional need that is filled in other times and places by royalty. Absolute egalitarianism where literally nobody is ever above anybody else seems anathema to most humans.



Sometimes individuals do do that, if there is something in it for them. But mostly it is the modest contributions of thousands upon thousands of individuals. And even though they can see that they are making that individual rich with their collective concert tickets or whatnot, it doesn't seem to bother them.

Your claim that no one wants them to be rich is unsupported. Apparently lots of people do want them to be rich. The wealth of celebrities seems to have an emotional value for lots of people. Bling culture didn't happen by accident.



I don't particularly care if they are rich. But even if I cared, I would have to do a cost/benefit allowance to weigh whether the measures needed to prevent them from being rich would be worth it. On balance, I don't think they are. I don't care if Kim Kardashian is wealthy or if she loses all her money tomorrow. But I am glad I don't live in a country where the government can swoop in and take away most of her money on the grounds that she's too rich. Although I don't care about her personally, I care about what chilling effect that would have on others who might otherwise throw themselves into making new technologies that we are going to need in the future.

But communism and socialism are much better ways of enabling lazy people to do the bare minimum. I can do just enough to keep people off my back and still have food & shelter.

"embetter myself" bahhhhh who needs that!
Skate through life doing as little as possible, now that's livin!
You have me sold bro! power to the people, workers unite!

Capitalism would have me living under a bridge, but the communist/socialist way is so much easier. Yeah, I may not get fancy cars & shiny stuff, but who needs that. I'll just goof off, do some token work and have the basics taken care of. Why was I so blind? I don't want to work, I love f'king off.

@pete

1- I'm not batting for communism but for an alternative to the price system based paradigm (which includes an alternative to communism).

2-I realise that the communist manifesto is full of holes but these have been bridged by theorists from likes the technical alliance and its successors (who were american btw) who have more than adequately answered "the human nature question" and issues on motivation and reward.

3-i'm not going to respond to you unless you drop the attitude because its clear from your condescending posting style you're less interested in debating and more interested in regurgitating tired assaults on strawmen.

Naw, dude I'm just lookin for a way to get away with as little as possible.

Not wanting to work and slack off is being 100% honest. A socialist system seems to be a much more fertile ground to "work".
I can get on some social program and sponge the system to my hearts content.

What is your little utopia gonna go with lazy a$$ es like me? I'm not the only one. There are millions and millions of us who would happily collect a check and sleep til noon. Right now my family is footin the bill, but I'm working on getting on some disability. Socialism seems the way to go. Do the dance, jump through the bureaucratic hoops, and presto... free ride!

I get wasted , while you work your a$$ off.