Marxism is the government of the future. But it will take a few years, hell a few decades, for the memory of the old Soviet Union to fade. I say give it 20 years before Marxist countries start popping up again.
Marxism is all about gradual evolution. Just because capitalism is currently the system that “works,” doesn’t mean it’ll always be. I’m already predicting the failure of capitalism due to supply side economics. Sooner or later, existing markets will be over saturated and can bear no more, leading to worldwide depression (imagine the Great Depression x10). It’ll probably take around 50 years, but the revolution is definitely going to happen.
COme on, Market over saturation? Too many beanie babies so we have to experience the worst economic depression the modern workd has seen? :lol: :evil:
the currant economic situation is comparible to that of the late 1920’s.
Oh Yes, I’m sure 50 YEARS from now Beanie Babies will lead to the destruction of the world…
But lets, for your sake, (who seems to believe Beanie Babies is the ONLY product overproduced in large quantities).
Say for example you work in a Beanie factory and are paid $10 per hour. In a day’s work you produce $200 worth of Beanie Babies. However you are only paid $80 that day - where did the other $120 come from? Workers are paid for their ability to work and not the work that they do. We are given enough money to live (just) so we can maintain a steady pool of workers for exploitation by the capitalists. The extra $120 goes as profit to the capitalist. He gets this money purely because he previously had enough money (capital) to own factories, equipment, etc. but he has actually done nothing productive in this process. (In fact, if you remove the capitalist taking profit, production proceeds quite smoothly - the same is not true if you remove the workers). This extra profit on top of wages is called surplus value. After spending some of the surplus value on mansions and private jets, our capitalist is forced to re-invest the surplus back into production. Investment is the motor force of the capitalist economy and helps improve the productivity of labor. If our capitalist does not invest, then he will be out-competed by other more efficient capitalists who do. If investing in new machinery makes production of Beanie Babies 20% more efficient then the boss can fire 20% of the workers (or cut everybody’s hours 20%) and still make just as much stuff. Unfortunately for the capitalist his profits are based on how much labor is worked ($120 per worker); when he fires people the rate of surplus value to investment decreases. This is fine as long as the market is growing and the capitalist is selling more items in total (even though the profit per item is decreasing - the recent explosion of the computers market is an excellent example of this). Unfortunately this eventually reaches its limits; the tendency for the rate of profit to fall means that an initial relative reduction in profits turns into an absolute reduction in profits. Workers earning $80 a day can only buy so many Computers and the capitalist cannot sell his goods at a profit. Our poor boss is forced to close factories and lay off even more people (e.g. Nortel Networks). While we may gain intellectual satisfaction in the fall of a particularly exploitative employer, it is clear that the workers in this situation are far worse off than the boss. The crisis of capitalism is systemic.
First of all, I was being fecesious with the beanie babies.
Second, wouldn’t a government bureacracy be even worse managing a factory? Besides Henry Ford invented doing the oppossite of what your Evil Beanie Baby Capitalist did. At some point he raised his workers’ wages to $5 which was several times the average wage for uneducated work. Ford’s contemporaries thought that he was mad, that he would lose money, and the first year he made a lot less money but then not only did his workers start producing a lot more Model Ts but they began to buy them. Ford’s profits went through the roof and worker’s wages everywhere went up.
The moral is, not every capitalist is as stupid as the one you described.
No, not all capitalists are greedy pigs only looking out for themselves, just that most are. Also the reason Ford was able to increased wages was that he could afford to. He had virtual monopoly over the automotive industry (half of all cars sold) and was making a yearly salary of 300+ million (today’s standards) compared to less then 20,000 of the Average Joe. Combined with the fact his labor production increased 380%, it’s interesting how Henry didn’t raise salaries even higher. Also the dismal performance during the Great Depression showed massive layoffs in the automotive industry due to lack of demand and overproduction in the 1920s when other industries (ex. agriculture) were declining during the same period.
Moses, you seem to have omitted some important elements. For example, the greedy capitalist is ultimately responsible for providing jobs for the labour. His/her initial investment, the risk that was taken (80% of all small businesses fail), the dreams involved, the blood sweat and tears that goes into a business - building and running - all (in my mind) suggests that the person who dreams big, has the talent, education and expertise, and works hard deserves in some degree to make his/her dreams come true. The poor exploited workers have a choice over whether or not to work for Joe company (true, many of them are not intelligent enough to make good choices, and many times there is an “employer’s market” - but this can change to a worker’s market very quickly, especially as education increases, more people take risks and require more workers, thus dwindling the supply) and with current labour laws they have quite a bit of latitude in deciding to screw over the people who give them money in exchange for “work” (i’ve worked in a few unions now, and i have NEVER been encouraged to work by the union bosses - quite the opposite).
Call me naive, but there are other elements to this discussion then the screwing over of the masses (come Enron, Nortel, Crossroads, and other recent examples of corporations run amuk)
You brought up some very good points. You brought up the fact that 80% of all small businesses fail. Is the underlining reason that these people also don’t pour their blood, sweat, and tears into business? No. Simply he is out invested by more efficient businesses who do can do things at a lower cost. Unfortunately those businesses turn out to be monopolies.
During periods of slump, the bigger capitalists, with economies of scale, are better able to survive. Capitalism has an inherent tendency to concentrate into monopoly. They also try to get out of these crises by selling goods on foreign markets. However, all the other capitalists are trying to do the same and the world is only so big. Also in the very act of exporting to foreign markets the capitalists develop the productive forces in these countries (eg. Indonesia, China) which then start producing a surplus for export - exacerbating the problem. The only solution at this point is to take these foreign markets by force.
Of course there still exists a huge “demand” for workers - houses for the homeless, or food for the hungry, or medicine for the sick - but for a capitalist, demand only means anything if it is backed up with hard cash. Capitalism gets itself in this mess because it produces for profit and not for need.
Now let’s use money, the basis of capitalism. Let’s say you have a $10,000 bill (they exist). You could use it to go and buy a 48-inch HDTV, a small motorcycle, and 200 pounds of candy. That bill cost the US government less to print than a sheet of newspaper. So why does money work? You can’t take a newspaper and buy a motorcycle. But everyone in the world is in on a secret. Everyone is going along with a deal: they’ll pretend your scrap of paper is worth a motorcycle as long as you will. You can’t take this bill to a government bank and exchange it for gold. Money is nothing but a promise everyone’s made with everyone else.
i was reading the communist maniphesto last night and in part of it , not in so many words but Marx basicly said,
" the only diference between a slave and a worker is you buy the slave but rent the worker". when you go to work you are not being paid for the resorce or the value that you add to the product but for the resorce that you your self provide, Labour.
now theres somthing i have to get off my chest.
there is a G8 summit coming up in Alberta and one of the big topics is Africa. now here is a place that does not have the resorces, wealth, capital, or stable government to efectivly run it to what they need. so they look to the west for help. and what do we do, we give them money- oh wait no, we don’t give them money we loan them money and expect them to pay it back and pay interest on it. and we keep loaning them money becase they need it, and we keep expecting them to pay of there debts.
it’s gotten to the point that more money is payed out in interest payments in some African countrys then what they spend on healthcare. even some of the that forian aid money gets recyculed back into loan payments. it’s rediculus.
it’s things like this that make me think of how important it is to work toward that old marxist saying. “from every one to there abilitys to every one to there needs”.
we could just give the african nations what they need, medician, clean water, food and of all things at this point conrticeptives. and they could give us what they can give, dimonds and oil.
but there hapend to be more profit in what we are currently doing then in helping other human beings.
I think Africa would be far better off today than if it had remained isolated from the rest of the world without any imperialism and man drain from (both N & S) America and Europe. Even if they had to live in a “primitive culture” (or the “White Man’s Burden” as Europeans put it), at least they had a stable society, food, and shelter.
you gotta’ love Churchill. If you’re not a liberal when you’re 20, you have not heart, if you’re not a conservative when you’re 40, you have no brains.
MP - you make my heart happy. What a nice idea - giving the African nations what they need. This is one of the reasons i went into medicine - to work with medicines sans frontieres, and help those without the benifit of Canadian medicine. Sadly tho’, our governments (and those of the past) have been lending money to corrupt governments, the food has been going to maintain armies, and the Western world is being laughed at (when not being burned in effigy).
I think you (and Paul Martin, and Bono) are right in terms of the fact that it makes no sense to demand payment on interest on a debt generated by the a**holes running the place. It would be nice to not pee our money down the African toilet - not when there is still so much need in N.A. (see native issues, etc.).
hey look…commies on holiday!
not one of you ever take into account adapted human nature…your only argument is that “it isn’t inherent in birth and can be changed…”
it isn’t inherent but it is (what’s the word???) taken in through time and nature…our very survival is based on our ability to take…not give. thus, the birth of selfishness.
“it isn’t inherent but it is (what’s the word???) taken in through time and nature…our very survival is based on our ability to take…not give. thus, the birth of selfishness.”
Again, you have to support communist in this case. You said time and nature. Would a child born and raised in a communist society be more likely to support communist, rather than capitalistic ideas (take more than you need) ideals than one born in a capitalistic society? Why is there a need for survival – too take from others, when there is already enough for everybody?
As for the Churchil quote, I believe it was 30 not 40.
hey look…commies on holiday!
not one of you ever take into account adapted human nature…your only argument is that “it isn’t inherent in birth and can be changed…”
it isn’t inherent but it is (what’s the word???) taken in through time and nature…our very survival is based on our ability to take…not give. thus, the birth of selfishness.
Instinct
not one of you ever take into account adapted human nature…your only argument is that “it isn’t inherent in birth and can be changed…”
it isn’t inherent but it is (what’s the word???) taken in through time and nature…our very survival is based on our ability to take…not give. thus, the birth of selfishness.
this is exaclty the kind of thing i did no want. i asked that you ask questions, not make ignorant statments ( i wont work so there). ask how, why and what. the fact that you have allready made up you mind and do not wish to adopt a new way of thinking makes your responce counter productive.
your entitled to your opinion so saying that greed is instinct is your opinion. we can’t change your mind about that. but thats all it is an opinion.
look if you want to ask me why capatilism does not work or why greed can be changed go ahead, but be prepared to except the answer i give. other wise it will just be a conflict of opinions ( " no it wont" “yes it will”).
and nothing will be acomplised or learned.
the fact that you have allready made up you mind and do not wish to adopt a new way of thinking makes your responce counter productive.
.
I’m not asking for your biography freek. You have made up your mind, and if you remember a thread a while back i already debated this with you and Moses…or maybe we just have some major short term memory.
since when did you say anything intelligent?
"Again, you have to support communist in this case. You said time and nature. "
Yes, I totally agree. When a kid pick pockets when no one told him to…what do you think of that? Desire and selfishness is the reason…not born with us but acquired very quickly…it is essential to our competitive survival. Now if everyone was a perfect Buhddist then we would be fine…but that won’t happen.
“Would a child born and raised in a communist society be more likely to support communist, rather than capitalistic ideas (take more than you need) ideals than one born in a capitalistic society?”
I have a good friend who grew up in Hungary and went here with her family. She hates communism, and she believes capitalism is a better system (though she is liberal, besides her stance on the death pelenty.) Now if we grew up in a perfect communist society (not USSR), then there would eb no problem…but a perfect communist society would be heaven on earth, and man could never allow that to happen. You know that.
“take more than you need”
A communist society that was perfect would be far more efficient than a present capitalistic one (but not a perfect one.) When it comes down to it you want a perfecyt society…communism isn’t the answer.
"Why is there a need for survival – too take from others, when there is already enough for everybody? "
Because some want more and have the ability to take it!
For example, you live in a communist society and everyone shares everything. The guy next to you in the communal dining room happens to like soup, so eats yours too…People take not because of NEED, but because of WANT. Capisce?
Too many of you pro-commies want a perfect society because our present one sucks…communism isn’t the answer, because it won’t advance the people who are being repressed…it would only hurt their ability to be rewarded for their live’s work.
“Yes, I totally agree. When a kid pick pockets when no one told him to…what do you think of that? Desire and selfishness is the reason…not born with us but acquired very quickly…it is essential to our competitive survival.”
Why must there be competitive survival when there is naturally enough for everybody? Why is there Sooo much more crime in poverty-infested, inner city slums than in upscale, gated communities?
“I have a good friend who grew up in Hungary and went here with her family. She hates communism, and she believes capitalism is a better system (though she is liberal, besides her stance on the death pelenty.) Now if we grew up in a perfect communist society (not USSR), then there would eb no problem…but a perfect communist society would be heaven on earth, and man could never allow that to happen. You know that.”
You’re exactly right. If I was born in Hungary during the Soviet “Communist” occupation, I would probably grow up with a grudge toward communism too. However, in communism, there is freedom of speech. If you want to say “Communism Sucks,” you have the right too. However reverse the situation. Just because I grow up in a capitalist society and say “Communism Rules,” will not mean I will, by myself, undermine the system and lead to the total collapse of capitalism. Same with communism.
“A communist society that was perfect would be far more efficient than a present capitalistic one (but not a perfect one.) When it comes down to it you want a perfecyt society…communism isn’t the answer.”
A perfect society isn’t possible. Like I said, some people growing up in a communist society will go against the system. However, communism provides the next-best-thing compared with capitalism. Tell me, if communism isn’t the answer, than what in your opinion is?
”Because some want more and have the ability to take it!”
Ditto from the previous responses.
"Why must there be competitive survival when there is naturally enough for everybody? Why is there Sooo much more crime in poverty-infested, inner city slums than in upscale, gated communities? "
Why? Because people are greedy and you cannot eliminate Greed in any society on Earth! And there are crimes in upscale neighborhoods…instead of robbing someone for 20, they cheat their taxes for way more…
"You’re exactly right. If I was born in Hungary during the Soviet “Communist” occupation, I would probably grow up with a grudge toward communism too. However, in communism, there is freedom of speech. If you want to say “Communism Sucks,” you have the right too. However reverse the situation. Just because I grow up in a capitalist society and say “Communism Rules,” will not mean I will, by myself, undermine the system and lead to the total collapse of capitalism. Same with communism. "
All true…the USSR was an oppressive state, not a true communist one, but you fail to answer the truly important question: “but a perfect communist society would be heaven on earth, and man could never allow that to happen. You know that”
Communism and capitalism is not the problem, human greed is. Just in my opinion communism would hurt society more than capitalism.
"A perfect society isn’t possible. Like I said, some people growing up in a communist society will go against the system. However, communism provides the next-best-thing compared with capitalism. Tell me, if communism isn’t the answer, than what in your opinion is? "
The answer? What does i equal? what is 2 divided by 0…there is no real feasible answer. We cannot eliminate greed when it is required for sheer survival (like robbing milk out of your mothers breasts, to raiding the fridge.) People take what they want, and if you have the ability to take, selfishness will follow. A capitslistic society would at least allow me to work for what I earn and give incentive. A communist society on this planet would not furfill the needs of the people, and only serve the motives of others. At least capitalism gives someone a chance to work and get something out of it…with communism, you will have nothing to show for it.
When everyone works for the state, they become lazy.
One quick question Horten, how do you do quotes? You seem to have a problem with mine (lots of ’t )
“Communism and capitalism is not the problem, human greed is. Just in my opinion communism would hurt society more than capitalism.”
Tell me, what promotes the growth of human greed more, capitalism or communism?
"And there are crimes in upscale neighborhoods…instead of robbing someone for 20, they cheat their taxes for way more… "
True (though I’m not sure on the exact number and how many are due to human errors because of the VAST amount of money involved). But are these rates higher than poverty stricken areas? I don’t think so. And even then, this is an arguement against capitalism. Only those looking out for themselves and scewing the system for “what’s theirs” will succeed in life.
“but a perfect communist society would be heaven on earth, and man could never allow that to happen. You know that”
To a poor worker trying to edge out a livin on minimum wage, I would think communism would seem like heaven on earth to him.
“The answer? What does i equal? what is 2 divided by 0…there is no real feasible answer. We cannot eliminate greed when it is required for sheer survival (like robbing milk out of your mothers breasts, to raiding the fridge.) People take what they want, and if you have the ability to take, selfishness will follow…”
I merely asked you if there was a system better than communism. In our present capitalistic system, there is still poverty. In fact, most of the world lives in poverty, trying to survive on less than 1000
calories a day. I wanted to know how you would go about solving this. How about a American capitalistic system in every government? Would that solve the world’s problems? It would seem like your answer was, “Well…well… it’s greed! Hahaha, you suckers will never solve it! :P” Like mini said, you have to have an open mind on this subject.
“When everyone works for the state, they become lazy.”
It depends on what you mean by lazy. We certainly have the machines and technology to greatly speed up and cut the amount of work. Why not use these machines to shorten needed work hours and thereby allow people to persue intellectual, physical, and secular activities? Of course, seeing someone under a tree dozing off when he simply doesn’t need to work would be considered “lazy” by the capitalist consumed with producing goods for the mass market.
