|
capitalism vs communism (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Q5echo |
"Man is inherently selfish and greedy"
the nut shell. |
|
|
| Dmatrox |
capitalism: free market economy which allows markets to naturally adjust to inflations and recessions given enough time.
communism: command market economy which government determined prices and output leading to surpluses or shortages. ex. Communist Russia
I prefer the middle with some key government controlled industries, such healthcare and education. But i think there should also be privatized hospitals and schools at the same time if people are willing to pay for above and beyond quality of care/education. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by FuzzyGreen
capitalism:
freedom
emphasis on personal acheivement
rewards innovation
Man was not created equal, but shall be given equal oppurtunity
survival of the fitest
Man is inherrently selfish and greedy, why deny it.
Communism:
conformity
one for the good of the community
weakest link is a broken leg for the whole community
desirable for countries ruined by war that need hope
why strive to be the best if there is no reward
Loss of individualism and self expression
Please add.. |
Seriously, is there any point trying to debate communism with Americans? |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Seriously, is there any point trying to debate communism with Americans? |
why is it different from other westerners:conf: :rolleyes: |
|
|
| mps242 |
communism = faulty economics
capitalism = sound economics
simple as that |
|
|
| biznology |
| quote: | Originally posted by mps242
communism = faulty economics
capitalism = sound economics
simple as that |
ummm...ok. whatever you say.
both forms of organization can and *ARE* perversed in their practiced forms. capitalism has its problems, just as Soviet Russia and CCCP China had\have.
does the US practice -pure- capitalism? not at all.
did the Soviets practice pure communism, hell no, as Lenin tried to induce the revolution to speed things up.
does that make one more sound, or one less sound? hardly.
i agree with dmatrox in saying that somewhere between is preferable. Canada follows that course, just as Sweden and increasingly China. Sweden and Canada consistently rank higher on quality of life than even the US - but that isnt only dependent on economics. China is looking to catch the US in many areas. that being said China is not, and was never a utopian socialist state. her success is creating a more and more unequal distribution as well. the US professes the ideals of capitalism, yet neo-classical liberalization is undermining the logic of pure free market economy. state run businesses are looked upon as 'Communist' in the US, yet there are strict capital and labor controls that undermine complete free trade.
how does that make either solution perfect? |
|
|
| Heinz |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Seriously, is there any point trying to debate communism with Americans? |
so u support communism and not the form of your own government? |
|
|
| Cal |
| quote: | Originally posted by biznology
ummm...ok. whatever you say.
both forms of organization can and *ARE* perversed in their practiced forms. capitalism has its problems, just as Soviet Russia and CCCP China had\have.
does the US practice -pure- capitalism? not at all.
did the Soviets practice pure communism, hell no, as Lenin tried to induce the revolution to speed things up.
does that make one more sound, or one less sound? hardly.
i agree with dmatrox in saying that somewhere between is preferable. Canada follows that course, just as Sweden and increasingly China. Sweden and Canada consistently rank higher on quality of life than even the US - but that isnt only dependent on economics. China is looking to catch the US in many areas. that being said China is not, and was never a utopian socialist state. her success is creating a more and more unequal distribution as well. the US professes the ideals of capitalism, yet neo-classical liberalization is undermining the logic of pure free market economy. state run businesses are looked upon as 'Communist' in the US, yet there are strict capital and labor controls that undermine complete free trade.
how does that make either solution perfect? |
Dude, you got to slow it down for fuzzy. Next time, use shorter words and don't spell right ok? :stongue: |
|
|
| 3xx3r7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by mps242
communism = faulty economics
capitalism = sound economics
simple as that |
From a capitalist's point of view.
Each one has its benefits and disadvantages. Every government is a combination of each. Just depends on proportions. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by biznology
ummm...ok. whatever you say.
both forms of organization can and *ARE* perversed in their practiced forms. capitalism has its problems, just as Soviet Russia and CCCP China had\have.
does the US practice -pure- capitalism? not at all.
did the Soviets practice pure communism, hell no, as Lenin tried to induce the revolution to speed things up.
does that make one more sound, or one less sound? hardly.
i agree with dmatrox in saying that somewhere between is preferable. Canada follows that course, just as Sweden and increasingly China. Sweden and Canada consistently rank higher on quality of life than even the US - but that isnt only dependent on economics. China is looking to catch the US in many areas. that being said China is not, and was never a utopian socialist state. her success is creating a more and more unequal distribution as well. the US professes the ideals of capitalism, yet neo-classical liberalization is undermining the logic of pure free market economy. state run businesses are looked upon as 'Communist' in the US, yet there are strict capital and labor controls that undermine complete free trade.
how does that make either solution perfect? |
The US actually surpassed canada this past year ;). Ultimately I refuese to get into capatlism vs. "communism" (nobody advocates "communism" anymore however) discussions. When it comes down to it, socialist states can be as equally well off as more capitalist states ... it simply comes down to the lifestyle one prefers. Some prefer greater economic freedoms and some prefer greater social benefits. They bear many equal tradeoffs that some value more and others value less but ultimately it's a matter of perspective. It's undeniable that the US is an economic powerhouse surpassed by none in the world ... the question is whether the sacrifices it makes to acheive that is worth it. My own opinion is yes ... but that's different for everyone. |
|
|
| rizen |
Even though Linus has said linux!=communism, people always throw it out.
linux > windows
communism > capitalism
hehe :p |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
"Man is inherently selfish and greedy"
the nut shell. |
I am personally a liberal - and hence, far removed from the ideals of communism - but do not think that this quote in any way can justify capitalism as it is being debated in this thread. Even if the individual is controlled by specific urges, that does not necessarily entails that the interacting lump called society as a whole demonstrates the same behaviour - nor that it would thrive under conditions which only suits the individuals.
On another level: In this thread capitalism is seemingly used as a monicker for economic liberalism. Shouldn't capitalism mean "power should be entrusted to those with big financial means"? Why is this? When someone like FuzzyGreen advocates capitalism - does he mean that he wants to be ruled by Murdoch and Gates - or does he mean that he wants to live in a system where he can decide for himself what to do with his own money? |
|
|
|
|
