Just a reminder
Screenshot from 2024-07-04 21-54-30.png
Marxism
-
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.
-
“One quick question Horten, how do you do quotes? You seem to have a problem with mine (lots of ’t )”
It works with other people…you’re unlucky!
"“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? "
Both equally…Communism would hurt the situation more buy getting rid of the will to work and hurting society as a whole in the long run. That and plenty of other stuff…(concerning economic mobility, corruption of those who start up such a society…)
""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."
Its true, but greed in all societies make people look out for themselves. I was just saying that everyone commits crime, regardless of place in society…some people do it less violently and it is socially acceptable.
"“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. "
Minimum wage? I know people my age who make a couple of bucks more than that. Even illegal immigrants who work less than that (and live a floor above me!) work their asses hard and long enough until they make more than “minimum wage.” I know too many people who work as technicians work are taught under my father who are from foreign nations, and make a lot of money (and being an automotive technician is a huge investment, thousands upon thousands in tools, labscopes, computers, and certification.) You know what hell on Earth is? PEople who don’t work because they will be fed if they don’t anyway. People losing the will to work. A whole society that doesn’t strive. Then everyone starves.
"“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! " Like mini said, you have to have an open mind on this subject.”A system is better than earth communism…earth capitalism. Why is it that independent communes collapse after the first generation? In most cases, newer generations aren’t as idealistic. Communism cannot work longterm (because the development of greed.)
I have an open mind, it is you commies who don’t. You ignore the facts that humans are greedy, that greed cannot be eliminated and what not. An american capitalistic system cannot work in every country because America is stronger and can take advantage (and does) of others, and people in those antions take advantage of their own. Now a whole world of communism? Imagaine everyone slacking off! You would have 0 calories per day.
IMO, you and mini fail to keep that open mind. Communes and nations tried to have communism. In some cases corrupt individuals behind ti, advancing their own needs made things worse, and in other cases the fact that future generations did not idealistically comply are all reasons why communism doesn’t work.
Now I repeated myself a million times, but i’ll say it again. If everyone was a perfect individual, then communism and capitalism would work perfectly…but this is just not true. People need a reason to work and compete.
Now just to debate against the praticality of a world wide communistic system, how would you go about creating it? Would you make America communist first? America doing it alone would never work out, because its economy would suffer, and people would be like “I owned a lot more stuff when we weren’t commies…” And the people in power…who will they serve? The good of us? Ha! At least in a capitalists society you can work harder than others, do better than others.
"“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."
That would be nice…but come on! People would only want to work 6 hours a day, 4 days a week, have a month off for christmas, and 3 for summer. How long can a society last like that?
It would be nice to make comptuers smart enough to do our work. but who would fix them, smarter computers? Just because they aren’t made of flesh, what gives us the right to enslave a race of machines that are smart enough to do human work?
I bet when man invented the sewing machine and steam engine he said, “Boy, work can be cut drastically!”
I bet when Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin he said, “Boy, there will be no need for slaves because this can do the work of many men!”
Didn’t you notice that our quality of life is a lot better than 50 years ago? Machines do our math, machines wash our clothes, machines move us place to place…are we happier? Don’t we still work? We might have more things and more machines doing aspects of human work, but there is a man behind every machine, from the wind mill to the gasoline engine. Sure we might not have to move ourselves, but we have to drive the car.
So no, increases in technology will not eliminate all human work.
Now sitting under a tree being an intellectual…sounds good.
BTW, if a machine can be emotional, would you feel right enslaving it?
-
Now for the second time posting! My computer crashed on me! :evil: Grr…. Must be the work of some damned Capitalist sympathizers! :roll:
“Both equally…Communism would hurt the situation more buy getting rid of the will to work and hurting society as a whole in the long run. That and plenty of other stuff…(concerning economic mobility, corruption of those who start up such a society…)
First corruption plays a large part in starting a society. Imagine where America would be today if George Washington turned out to be a dictator (and he could’ve been)? The worst and easiest way to ruin any society is through corrupt and incompetent rulers when the new society is still in its infancy. Economic mobility? What need is there when you naturally start out at the top? I disagree communism gets rid of the will to work. Did Edgar Allen Poe stop producing literature when he was poor (some say his best works came when he hit rock bottom)? Did Pablo Picasso magically stop painting when his early paintings didn’t sell? Did William Shakespeare suddenly stop writing plays because he had frequent finical troubles?
”…Its true, but greed in all societies make people look out for themselves.”
Again, why must we look out for ourselves when everybody is provided for?
”Minimum wage? I know people my age who make a couple of bucks more than that. Even illegal immigrants who work less than that (and live a floor above me!) work their asses hard and long enough until they make more than “minimum wage.” I know too many people who work as technicians work are taught under my father who are from foreign nations, and make a lot of money (and being an automotive technician is a huge investment, thousands upon thousands in tools, labscopes, computers, and certification.) You know what hell on Earth is? PEople who don’t work because they will be fed if they don’t anyway. People losing the will to work. A whole society that doesn’t strive. Then everyone starves.”
First, I like to ask what work those illegal immigrants do. Second, why must they work their asses hard and long even to make a few bucks more than minimum wage? Should life revolve upon a constant influx of work (chances are those workers produce commodities not necessities)? Chances are they are been paid for their ability to work, not the work they do. People will still work even if they aren’t paid for their job.
Let’s take a look at cooperative working to describe the work methods that created a free operating system known as Linux. People from all over the world worked to create a powerful commercial quality product. People worked for nothing and the product is distributed free. Was money exchanged ? Well, one of the people involved most heavily was using very outdated equipment and a fund was set up so he could buy a less antiquated PC. So there you have it: from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. A successful implementation in miniature of the communist method of production. What made this possible ? A very powerful factor here was the internet itself. People coordinated the project by advertising their abilities and needs to one another on the net and spontaneously forming small temporary “production units”.
“A system is better than earth communism…earth capitalism. Why is it that independent communes collapse after the first generation? In most cases, newer generations aren’t as idealistic. Communism cannot work longterm (because the development of greed.)”
Actually communism is a very long-term goal and system if implemented correctly. Just as the world has evolved from feudalism to capitalism, so it will evolve from capitalism, first through socialism (in which the working class is dominant), then eventually to communism (in which there are no classes). My job is to hasten that evolution. Also you are assuming that communes will collapse after the first generation. Not so. North American Indian, the Maories, Australian aborigines, and other tribes have existed many generations using a crude form of communism.
“I have an open mind, it is you commies who don’t. You ignore the facts that humans are greedy, that greed cannot be eliminated and what not. An american capitalistic system cannot work in every country because America is stronger and can take advantage (and does) of others, and people in those antions take advantage of their own. Now a whole world of communism? Imagaine everyone slacking off! You would have 0 calories per day.”
You are realizing the own folly of capitalism. Capitalistic countries like USA try to get out of the crisis of overproduction 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). How much more can the world withstand before it becomes over saturated? This is a reason why most of the world must survive on less than 1000 calories per day, foreign countries being taken advantaged by countries such as the USA and having to exploit their own population in order to survive. However in the communist society you are assuming everybody slacking off. People can learn to be motivated by working for the common good. If we help each other, we both gain. Capitalism encourages us to fight against each other for crumbs, while the very few stuff themselves on the pie.
”IMO, you and mini fail to keep that open mind. Communes and nations tried to have communism. In some cases corrupt individuals behind ti, advancing their own needs made things worse, and in other cases the fact that future generations did not idealistically comply are all reasons why communism doesn’t work.”
Be careful not to mix communism with socialism. China, USSR, Vietnam, North Korea, Laos and Cuba were all socialist states. So far no communist nation has existed.
”Now just to debate against the praticality of a world wide communistic system, how would you go about creating it? Would you make America communist first? America doing it alone would never work out, because its economy would suffer, and people would be like “I owned a lot more stuff when we weren’t commies…” And the people in power…who will they serve? The good of us? Ha! At least in a capitalists society you can work harder than others, do better than others.”
Now this deserves a lot of explaining (many, many pages) before you can have an in depth look at a communist system. However, if you’re looking for the answer, ask Mini (he is better at theorizing than I am). I would give you the Marxist resolution, but for a better understanding, read the Manifesto Itself.
“It would be nice to make comptuers smart enough to do our work. but who would fix them, smarter computers? Just because they aren’t made of flesh, what gives us the right to enslave a race of machines that are smart enough to do human work?”
If by human work, you mean busy work, we have been doing that for generations and with animals made of flesh. Suddenly, we must ban the enslavement of animals for plowing simply because they do human work? Likewise, we are already enslaving computers. I leave my computer on for most of the day and use it to type documents, surf the web, listen to music, and other task. What would you like, off time and paid vacations for my computer to compensate for this unjust enslavement? Computers aren’t smart, they can’t think on their own. What they do, however, is reduce the amount of work through automated task. Granted we need technicians and there are those willing to fill the gap because they enjoy this job. Are saying that all computer technicians are only in it for the money?
“I bet when man invented the sewing machine and steam engine he said, “Boy, work can be cut drastically!”
I bet when Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin he said, "Boy, there will be no need for slaves because this can do the work of many men
Didn’t you notice that our quality of life is a lot better than 50 years ago? Machines do our math, machines wash our clothes, machines move us place to place…are we happier? Don’t we still work? We might have more things and more machines doing aspects of human work, but there is a man behind every machine, from the wind mill to the gasoline engine. Sure we might not have to move ourselves, but we have to drive the car.”Another problem with capitalism – increased expectations. After spending some of the surplus value from exported good, capitalist are forced to re-invest the surplus back into production (ie more factories and machines). If capitalist does not invest, then he will be out-competed by other more efficient capitalists who do. If a machine cuts work by 20%, chances are he will cut the number of workers (creating unemployment) or (and probably the higher chance when things are “going good”) he will capitalize on his investment by producing more goods (now 120% from original production standards) and in turn export them to more markets so he makes enough to buy even MORE machines. Eventually this leads to overproduction, a major problem with capitalism. Guess who losses their job when the resulting slump in productivity comes? The man or the machine?
But by mentioning sewing machine, steam engine, and cotton gin, those are mainly used in commercial and industrial industries. How about the dishwasher? The Refrigerator? The laundry machine and dryer? I would hope that would reduce the amount of work compared with more “primitive,” conventional methods.
”So no, increases in technology will not eliminate all human work. “
No, but it will help to reduce it.
”BTW, if a machine can be emotional, would you feel right enslaving it?”
Newsflash! Suddenly Communist controlled machines become emotional! Read all about it!
:wink: -
BTW, if a machine can be emotional, would you feel right enslaving it?
Interesting question… ethic for machine… Anyway, even if Penrose has concluded that it is impossible to build an intelligent computer, i am always sceptical… we use far too often the work “impossible”.
-
"I disagree communism gets rid of the will to work. Did Edgar Allen Poe stop producing literature when he was poor (some say his best works came when he hit rock bottom)? Did Pablo Picasso magically stop painting when his early paintings didn’t sell? Did William Shakespeare suddenly stop writing plays because he had frequent finical troubles? "
Yes, but don’t teachers not work very hard in many instances because they have a guarenteed paycheck from the state? Yes. Do public servants work very hard? They are among the laziest! I worked in a town library and saw how lazy they are. Since they are provided a guarenteed paycheck and amount, they don’t work very hard. Beaurcracies are already so inefficients, how could you trust one to provide everything for us?
“Again, why must we look out for ourselves when everybody is provided for?”
Because people want mroe than the essentials. People want more than others. You can’t make people fully provided for…like a spoiled child, the more a person has the more they want. That desire keeps greed and selfishness out there. People will always look out for themselves, becuase people care more about themself.
"First, I like to ask what work those illegal immigrants do. Second, why must they work their asses hard and long even to make a few bucks more than minimum wage? Should life revolve upon a constant influx of work (chances are those workers produce commodities not necessities)? Chances are they are been paid for their ability to work, not the work they do. People will still work even if they aren’t paid for their job. "
Mowing lawns, pumping gas, doing building at the town park…They work their asses off because they get rewarded after years of hard work, like the Turkish immigrants who worked for my dad, or the israeli immigrants who my dad knows, or the arab immigrants that he teaches today!
Now you start going off in a different tangent…and the answer is people will work less hard if they get paid equal to everyone else or if their is no chance to. Look at state jobs, it is that simple.
“Let’s take a look at cooperative working to describe the work methods that created a free operating system known as Linux. People from all over the world worked to create a powerful commercial quality product. People worked for nothing and the product is distributed free. Was money exchanged ? Well, one of the people involved most heavily was using very outdated equipment and a fund was set up so he could buy a less antiquated PC. So there you have it: from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. A successful implementation in miniature of the communist method of production. What made this possible ? A very powerful factor here was the internet itself. People coordinated the project by advertising their abilities and needs to one another on the net and spontaneously forming small temporary “production units”.”
The world isn’t linux. I could say “well a communes work, so communism must work.” that is a small example and red hat and other companies make money off linux. What is next, a group project in 5th grade is communism too?
“Actually communism is a very long-term goal and system if implemented correctly.”
I debate that is it next to impossible to do so…just as impossible than a perfect capitalist society.
"Just as the world has evolved from feudalism to capitalism, so it will evolve from capitalism, first through socialism (in which the working class is dominant), then eventually to communism (in which there are no classes). "
I’m afraid that it will because people are misguided…i need to live another 50 years to rate the success of modern social democracies to say for sure if “capitalism or communism will win…” I’m guessing capitalism.
"My job is to hasten that evolution. Also you are assuming that communes will collapse after the first generation. Not so. North American Indian, the Maories, Australian aborigines, and other tribes have existed many generations using a crude form of communism. "
Crude form of communism? Not exactly communism is it? If my dad share s tools in the shop, is that communism? No. Its sharing. I have read the book “We” and it says the same thing. that communism is part of evolution. Indeed it is, but man is not the being for it.
“You are realizing the own folly of capitalism. Capitalistic countries like USA try to get out of the crisis of overproduction by selling goods on foreign markets.”
Yet we have a trade deficit…makes you think eh?
“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).”
Communism failed in North Korea, China, Vietnam, and Cuba. Though they make considerbly less money than America, they make more with capitalism. Haven’t you noticed that they are only “communist” in name?
"How much more can the world withstand before it becomes over saturated? "
There are always new products and people keep eating. Demand never dissappears.
“This is a reason why most of the world must survive on less than 1000 calories per day, foreign countries being taken advantaged by countries such as the USA and having to exploit their own population in order to survive.”
This indeed happens, but in a world where only parts of it are communist, they fail. How realistically will the whole world become communist…and when it magically does, how long can it endure that way? Not very long at all.
"However in the communist society you are assuming everybody slacking off. "
You bet your ass :)
“People can learn to be motivated by working for the common good.”
No…people want some sort of promise of betterment. Most people won’t.
“If we help each other, we both gain. Capitalism encourages us to fight against each other for crumbs, while the very few stuff themselves on the pie.”
Yes and Earth Communism says “everyone share the crumbs, because we couldn’t make enough pie!” What if ?I am a communist farmer, and i keep some more of my crop and don’t share it? That can very easily happen…until you eliminate that greed, communism can only damn us.
"Be careful not to mix communism with socialism. China, USSR, Vietnam, North Korea, Laos and Cuba were all socialist states. So far no communist nation has existed. "
Very true, though “communist” repubic is always fit in there in name. But doesn’t that show you how unrealistic a true communistic society is? The best means of comparing are farm communes and of the sort…wow, they lasted real long…
“Now this deserves a lot of explaining (many, many pages) before you can have an in depth look at a communist system. However, if you’re looking for the answer, ask Mini (he is better at theorizing than I am). I would give you the Marxist resolution, but for a better understanding, read the Manifesto Itself.”
That answers a whole lot ;) I don’t think Marx came up with an idea of sectional communsit societies. I believe he wanted a world wide revolution (in industrial nations at the least.) If half of the worlds industrialized societies became communist, i bet the capitalist ones would over power them. So it would have to be world wde, and again, how would that last???
“If by human work, you mean busy work, we have been doing that for generations and with animals made of flesh.”
And was it right?
“Suddenly, we must ban the enslavement of animals for plowing simply because they do human work?”
They are not very smart…a computer that can take place of ALL human work would be. As long as computers exist not smart enough to do EVERYTHING, man must do work…and that would be a hell of a lot of computers to fix.
"Likewise, we are already enslaving computers. I leave my computer on for most of the day and use it to type documents, surf the web, listen to music, and other task. "
Your computer is not as advanced as the computer in your skull.
“What would you like, off time and paid vacations for my computer to compensate for this unjust enslavement?”
Maybe French computers…
“Computers aren’t smart, they can’t think on their own.”
For now. A computer that can fully replace a man would be. We already invented computers that run of protein strands…it is just a matter of time until we can emulate a brain.
“What they do, however, is reduce the amount of work through automated task. Granted we need technicians and there are those willing to fill the gap because they enjoy this job. Are saying that all computer technicians are only in it for the money?”
That and their love of their work…that’s why i would want to be a history teacher.
“Another problem with capitalism – increased expectations. After spending some of the surplus value from exported good, capitalist are forced to re-invest the surplus back into production (ie more factories and machines). If capitalist does not invest, then he will be out-competed by other more efficient capitalists who do. If a machine cuts work by 20%, chances are he will cut the number of workers (creating unemployment) or (and probably the higher chance when things are “going good”) he will capitalize on his investment by producing more goods (now 120% from original production standards) and in turn export them to more markets so he makes enough to buy even MORE machines. Eventually this leads to overproduction, a major problem with capitalism. Guess who losses their job when the resulting slump in productivity comes? The man or the machine?”
By that theory factories will be producing machines, selling them to more machines. The human market will continue to exist.
“But by mentioning sewing machine, steam engine, and cotton gin, those are mainly used in commercial and industrial industries. How about the dishwasher? The Refrigerator? The laundry machine and dryer? I would hope that would reduce the amount of work compared with more “primitive,” conventional methods.”
They do, yet we find ourselves having “busy”: days, correct? Yet a lot of people commit suicide because they are unhappy. Why couldn’t we be happier with t he simpler things in life?
"No, but it will help to reduce it. "
People still work 14 hours a day…what computer reduces their work? Now we can do a lot more work in our time, but in return, there is more work to be done…unless everybody decided “you know what? Who needs advances in technology and such, I am happy the way I am.” Thats isn’t going to happen.
"Newsflash! Suddenly Communist controlled machines become emotional! Read all about it! "
Well capitalist could control them too, but at that point they would probably become customers.
Suggested Topics
