ForumsWEPRCommunism and Capitalism

126 32774
Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

I wanted to open up this topic again...
Hopefully I will get some thoughtful responses :-$
______

I think most people have the wrong view of communism.


The "equal pay" and the "you cant achieve anything" are not much to say. One whole thing of communists want to change is taking away the attention of people away from money. People are not born greedy. It is rather that we try to achieve. Who is to say people are born wanting to get more and more money? We just try to achieve goals. Look at Armorgames. The community here does not get anything over another, yet we are working our asses off trying to get AP. What we call greed comes from the process of people getting money, which usually involves "bad" behavior (The business world is cruel). Bill Gates, however rich, is not greedy.

Capitalism is like taking all of a persons freedoms away at birth and selling it to them when they can afford it it. You cant live without money. You rely on others for earning this money, but those who give it to you dont care of you. Employees are just concerned with getting their profit off you. The problem is, the road to getting a good job, housing, medical care, insurances, etc, are very though and cricket. There is no system for it. This is the freedom you supposedly have in capitalism! You are free to build your own road to happiness. Its like letting a baby do whatever he wants when it cant support itself. The mother should take of it. There is no system to get you settled. What communism does is create this system. No its not taking your freedom away, it is helping you by providing free education, health care, housing...

Its sad to see people say communists are evil, lol. Don't worry, we touch the existing evil with gloves on, it does not contaminate us.

  • 126 Replies
Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

The leaders do not get more money, they just control the national bank and spending.

I think a republic works well here.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,060 posts
Farmer

Ok, if the leaders do not have the money, then who does? The people? The leaders must have more money than the people to remain in power. Money is power. If the people have all the money, then the money will circulate and thus it would be communism because the money would eventually split the people into classes (lower, middle, upper).

Communism is all about the leaders having all the money so the people can all stay poor.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,060 posts
Farmer

If the leaders control the bank/bank spendings... then basicly they control the money.

Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

Ok, if the leaders do not have the money, then who does? The people?


Like I said right up there, the national bank. The money goes into what you might call a bank. The leaders control the spending, but the money is not theirs directly.
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,156 posts
Shepherd

But like he said before, money is power.
How could the leader(s) control the spending if the money is not the gov'ts? If you just dump all of the money into a bank, I have no doubt that this would cause inflation on an epic scale, How would we circulate the money? how would the money go to gov't purchases? How would we fund charaties, business, etc? The way I see it, Democracy is the way to go, and just get used to it. Every politician is crooked. It is just a fact of human greed and power. Look at Kwame in detroit.

Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

Yes but it does not mean that the leaders themselves will be rich and the people poor. Like what we have...the government has billions, but George Bush nor any of the Congress is entitled to it.

Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

Well how are the EPA, and such organizations payed for?

how would the money go to gov't purchases? How would we fund charaties, business, etc?


Businesses?
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,060 posts
Farmer

Ok so if the bank has the money, where does the money go from there? That all depends on who controls the banks and if the leaders control the banks then they can either ive it to the people which will cause money to circulate (capitalism or some other -ism) or they can use the money to buy a bigger army and keep the money away from the public (communism).

Even if the leaders do not control the money directly, the people remain poor and the leaders remain richer (and with them controlign the money... brings me back to them controlign all the money meanign it is basicly theirs).

Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

or they can use the money to buy a bigger army and keep the money away from the public


What!?
Thats not even related to communism :-$

ive it to the people which will cause money to circulate (capitalism or some other -ism)


I'll argue the way you do. The government does not throw money on the people. The working class earns its money from capitals so what happens is that we have a majority whos poor and all the capitals (businesses) who are rich.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,060 posts
Farmer

So basicly you think it would be best if we have a bunch of poor people, and some rich people? You do understand that th rich will be INSANELY rich therefore they will have some form of control of the country.

Let me keep this simple, why would you want everyone to be poor but a few rich people who keep taking from the poor when they make money to keep them from getting richer? That is basicly communism. Communism is manipulation to a great extreme and you act like it isn't.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,060 posts
Farmer

That is what communism is, keepign everyone within the same level of income, the same class. Sadly the only way to do so is to keep them poor.

Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

Let me keep this simple, why would you want everyone to be poor but a few rich people who keep taking from the poor when they make money to keep them from getting richer?


Lol thats basically how it is now.
Thats not what I want and thats not what communism is, lol.
Drace
offline
Drace
3,900 posts
Peasant

There is enough production to keep everyone living happy. That is not true.

Ninjacube
offline
Ninjacube
589 posts
Peasant

Capitalism and free market gives people incentive to work hard and become successful by making more money. People become successful and make money by opening businesses. This creates jobs by which more people can make more money. Also, Drace, there are enough jobs and opportunities for people to become educated, become successful, and reap the rewards. Capitalist supporters don't want consumers to be lazy.

Ninjacube
offline
Ninjacube
589 posts
Peasant

USA, when it was just a colony, could of just stayed in British rule, but they made a nice democratic government, but problems have arisen today. Communism is the next step.


The USA isn't a democracy, it's a republic. The US has no intentions or even the power to go to communism. If anyone even suggested it, they would be shot, lol.
Showing 31-45 of 126