Was communism really a failure? - Page 2

SpicyMcVoodoo · 04-25-2007, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

There's always going to be lazy people in the workforce regardless of whether or not its communism or capitalism. Let me be more specific...

I've got a good job, that job allows me to buy a house and earn a decent wage, it also allows me to save for my future and the future of our potential children.

If I'm busting butt at work and the guy next to me gets double the pay because he has three children then I have no incentive to work ahrder because no matter what I do he will always make more than me.

If each is really receiving a salary according to his need, then the guy with 3 kids really isn't ahead of you. He may be getting more money, but it's going to the necessities of his larger family. He's not buying Ferraris with it.

Naturally, people try to exploit the system, but you're talking in theory. And in theory, if someone receives more because he has more need, then he's not net ahead of someone with less needs. They're equal.

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

The very basis of communism is from each according to his ability and to each according to his need. This principle works great on paper but does not work in the real world because people have no incentive.

Okay, so maybe one of the things communism needed to tweak was incentive. One of the major things capitalism needed to tweak was unfair competition and monopoly. That doesn't mean capitalism didn't work in the real world just because in the real world those things happen. It means they needed to be tweaked.

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Not to mention as I said earlier the government can not effeciently manage the economy and the resources it takes to make it a growing economy.

If history has taught us anything, isn't it that we should never say something is impossible for humans to figure out? Why do you conclusively say it's beyond human ability to figure out how to plan/manage a growing economy?

7960 · 04-25-2007, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Greed destroys the very idea of communism. You can never get rid of greed.

Right.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"

So why am I going to work hard when it's going to be taken from me and redistributed? There is no way I'm going to work twice as hard as my neighbor if I'm only going to get half as much because someone else says I have less of a need.

kinggovernor · 04-25-2007, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

Okay, so maybe one of the things communism needed to tweak was incentive. One of the major things capitalism needed to tweak was unfair competition and monopoly. That doesn't mean capitalism didn't work in the real world just because in the real world those things happen. It means they needed to be tweaked.

What you described are market failures that capitalism needs to work. Capitalism is not anarchy, there also needs to be respect of IP and other laws. That does not make capitalism and communism on the same level.

How does the "central planner" prevent a communism failure?

6SpeedTA95 · 04-25-2007, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

If each is really receiving a salary according to his need, then the guy with 3 kids really isn't ahead of you. He may be getting more money, but it's going to the necessities of his larger family. He's not buying Ferraris with it.

Naturally, people try to exploit the system, but you're talking in theory. And in theory, if someone receives more because he has more need, then he's not net ahead of someone with less needs. They're equal.

Okay, so maybe one of the things communism needed to tweak was incentive. One of the major things capitalism needed to tweak was unfair competition and monopoly. That doesn't mean capitalism didn't work in the real world just because in the real world those things happen. It means they needed to be tweaked.

If history has taught us anything, isn't it that we should never say something is impossible for humans to figure out? Why do you conclusively say it's beyond human ability to figure out how to plan/manage a growing economy?

Ok now you're hitting on some pretty good points, but essentially communism tweaked is the socialism we see in Europe. This isn't a complete failure not even close and can work as it does in Europe. The problem however, and I think you'd agree, is that growth and progress lacks that of other industrialized countries that embrace more economic freedom.

6SpeedTA95 · 04-25-2007, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

What you described are market failures that capitalism needs to work. Capitalism is not anarchy, there also needs to be respect of IP and other laws. That does not make capitalism and communism on the same level.

How does the "central planner" prevent a communism failure?

A central planner doesn't the problem is you can have an army of planners as the USSR did and it still will fail..

7960 · 04-25-2007, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

Wasn't the basic problem with the Soviet Union's economy that the central planners couldn't get the supply/demand right?

If the answer to this is "no" then is the conversation done? Becuase the deeper problem is "why couldn't they get it right?"

kinggovernor · 04-25-2007, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

A central planner doesn't the problem is you can have an army of planners as the USSR did and it still will fail..

I know but I thought I would enter this thread because I was bored

thomez · 04-25-2007, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

yes

.

DosEquis · 04-25-2007, 03:47 PM

I am pretty sure the great depression was a result of many things all put together. I would not squarely blame the government. The idea of credit was basically just placed on a mass scale. Personal savings was nothing. The imbalance of wealth, lack of consumer spending, market way over inflated, etc.

Donkey® · 04-25-2007, 03:52 PM

How can there be NO examples of communism working and at the same time there be examples of democracy working? There have been failed democracies as well. Matter of fact, to flat out delcare our government "a success" is pretty retarded. Could one argue that it's MORE successful? Ok, i'll say "probably." But to just declare one form of government over another as "the best" and "perfect" or "a success" is not correct.

DosEquis · 04-25-2007, 04:14 PM

Isn't cuba rather communist? I mean sure they don't have it that well off, but at the same time there are countries with democracy that are doing worse.

Publius · 04-25-2007, 04:16 PM

i'll grant that you can't say Communism is a failure without caveat, because pure communism has never been attempted, only dictatorships with a communist front/slant to them. That said, logically speaking based on human nature, true and pure communism would be a very difficult, neigh impossible, system to impliment and maintain.

thomez · 04-25-2007, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Isn't cuba rather communist? I mean sure they don't have it that well off, but at the same time there are countries with democracy that are doing worse.

they have been privatizing more and more lately because the economy didn't fare so well after losing the cash cow that was the USSR.... but now they have money coming in from Venezuela which helps keep them afloat

they almost surely couldn't operate as well without the significant sums coming in from outside... then we would again see the failure of communism

Donkey® · 04-25-2007, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by Publius

i'll grant that you can't say Communism is a failure without caveat, because pure communism has never been attempted, only dictatorships with a communist front/slant to them. That said, logically speaking based on human nature, true and pure communism would be a very difficult, neigh impossible, system to impliment and maintain.

Human nature is even more unstable to base any reliable opinions on. It was "human nature" to enslave people. It was "human nature" to hunt people down that weren't of the same religion. I could go on and on but you know what I mean.

Publius · 04-25-2007, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Human nature is even more unstable to base any reliable opinions on. It was "human nature" to enslave people. It was "human nature" to hunt people down that weren't of the same religion. I could go on and on but you know what I mean.

Okay, fine, add the caveat that human beings, as now enlightened, could never impliment and maintain a true communist system. Human greed and lust for power is one aspect of human nature I don't see changing any time soon in our evolution though, so I feel comfortable saying communism will not be a workable system for at least several more centuries.

DosEquis · 04-25-2007, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

they have been privatizing more and more lately because the economy didn't fare so well after losing the cash cow that was the USSR.... but now they have money coming in from Venezuela which helps keep them afloat

they almost surely couldn't operate as well without the significant sums coming in from outside... then we would again see the failure of communism

So why don't we collapse china, our enemy, instead of sending them 200+ billion in a trade deficit to keep them floating.

Stylerod · 04-25-2007, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Human nature is even more unstable to base any reliable opinions on. It was "human nature" to enslave people. It was "human nature" to hunt people down that weren't of the same religion. I could go on and on but you know what I mean.

I don't know what you mean. What does slavery and religion have to do with the failures of communism?

7960 · 04-25-2007, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

How can there be NO examples of communism working ......?

I don't see you naming any.

There have been failed democracies as well.

But did they fail because of the democracy or for some other reason? The USSR failed because communism failed. China is becoming more and more capitalist because communism is failing. Cuba is communist because Castro jails or kills people who disagree with his style of government....not exactly a success, I'd say.

Matter of fact, to flat out delcare our government "a success" is pretty retarded. Could one argue that it's MORE successful? Ok, i'll say "probably." But to just declare one form of government over another as "the best" and "perfect" or "a success" is not correct.

Nobody has said our govt is perfect

Donkey® · 04-25-2007, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Publius

Okay, fine, add the caveat that human beings, as now enlightened, could never impliment and maintain a true communist system. Human greed and lust for power is one aspect of human nature I don't see changing any time soon in our evolution though, so I feel comfortable saying communism will not be a workable system for at least several more centuries.

And my question to you would be: How "successful" has our type of government been? How "successful" is it? (Keep in mind I am not of the opinion that THIS is what the founding fathers had pre-determined for us.)

thomez · 04-25-2007, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

So why don't we collapse china, our enemy, instead of sending them 200+ billion in a trade deficit to keep them floating.

China probably has a freer market than we do.