The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Communism is the way forward!

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Avatar for CVman
CVman
Original post by Connor27
You keep believing that buddy...


I sure will. Remember this thread in 20 to 30 years when unemployment hits all time highs!
Original post by Connor27
You keep believing that buddy...


Stop feeding the troll, ffs
Ha.
Reply 23
Avatar for jape
jape
16
Original post by jape
There's not an army of capitalist daft enough to fall for this bait.


I've been wrong before, and I'll be wrong again in the future.
Original post by CVman
Communism will work in the 21st century capitalism won't.

Robots are taking many jobs already! Unemployment will go sky high with capitalism....

Communism can keep robots away and offer pay to the people who want it.


Seriously? Capitalism is a theory based on peoples wants and needs it is inevitable. Communism is anti-ambition, no one wants to strive for success. Communism stops personal freedom it muzzles the voice of people. Businesses are limited to what they earn.
The idea that everyone earns the same amount is idealistic and unrealistic. Communism will lead to widespread corruption among elected officials.
Poverty is also prevelant in communist countries,
But other than that communism is great...
Communism will never work.

-proud right wing conservative
Original post by Jay Jetplane
"Too stupid." = Come on I got a BTEC in Workskills, I know what employers want and how to deliver in an interview and my CV.

"lazy" = Because 100+ applications over 3 months is really lazy.....


That... Is lazy. Let's break it down.

100 applications over 3 months.
33 applications a month.
Or about 1 application a day.

You -should- be treating finding work as a full-time job. Assume 8 hours a day, 5 days a week - That's 40 hours a week doing applications. Let's be generous and say you are doing research and doing follow-ups with the companies once a week, with each application taking about an hour. If you assume all afternoon is spent on research and all day Friday is spent doing follow-ups with companies, that's 4 a day or 16 a week.

There are 4.33 weeks in a month on average, so about 65(Well round down) applications every month.

You're doing less than half of the required applications, even assuming a -very- strong desire to chase up leads and study companies to tailor your application.
Reply 27
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by LisaNikita
Communism will never work.

-proud right wing conservative


Yes it will, because capitalism doesn't.

-Proud Marxist
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 28
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by helenhighwater99
Seriously? Capitalism is a theory based on peoples wants and needs it is inevitable. Communism is anti-ambition, no one wants to strive for success. Communism stops personal freedom it muzzles the voice of people. Businesses are limited to what they earn.
The idea that everyone earns the same amount is idealistic and unrealistic. Communism will lead to widespread corruption among elected officials.
Poverty is also prevelant in communist countries,
But other than that communism is great...


Capitalism is a theory based only on wants because no needs are provided by the government. The wealthy disparcy is too great and causes class antagonism. I would actually feel more ambitious during communism because I know that the government will show me the path according to my abilities, unike capitalism where your success is decided if your parents are rich or not and whether your connections are overwhelming. A capitalist would do everything if he gets 300% profit, that's how corruption starts. USSR was the world's 2nd largest GDP until it collapsed, tell me more how much poverty we had.
Original post by Fadel
USSR was the world's 2nd largest GDP until it collapsed, tell me more how much poverty we had.


Which is why it couldn't feed itself..
Reply 30
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by Drewski
Which is why it couldn't feed itself..


Who told you that? You seem to be a victim of western propaganda.
Original post by Fadel
Who told you that? You seem to be a victim of western propaganda.


So the fact they had to buy grain from US, Canada, Australia, etc is a lie?

https://chnm.gmu.edu/1989/items/show/182

And ultimately, no matter what you try to counter with, the country you're lauding suffered one of the biggest economic meltdowns of all time. The only kind of model it can be used for is what not to do. Any support of it is laughable at best.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 32
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by Drewski
So the fact they had to buy grain from US, Canada, Australia, etc is a lie?

https://chnm.gmu.edu/1989/items/show/182

And ultimately, no matter what you try to counter with, the country you're lauding suffered one of the biggest economic meltdowns of all time. The only kind of model it can be used for is what not to do. Any support of it is laughable at best.


Your report is based on 1988, where the soviet system was dying from the inside and heading towards its collapse. USSR should be envied by everyone. Building a country from rubble, to make it a superpower within 27 years is something that nobody has ever accomplished. "The only kind of model it can be used for is what not to do", now that's laughable. What meltdowns are you talking about when it was the world's 2nd GDP for all its existence? A good example woul be today's Russia, the capitalist one.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Fadel
Your report is based on 1988, where the soviet system was dying from the inside and heading towards its collapse. USSR should be envied by everyone. Building a country from rubble, to make it a superpower within 27 years is something that nobody has ever accomplished. "The only kind of model it can be used for is what not to do", now that's laughable.


********. It was mis-managed before, sure, but was always a major country, had been for centuries. It maintaining that status is hardly something that can be labeled as only due to their political system.

Yeah, a country that "was dying from the inside and heading towards its collapse should be envied by everyone"... :rolleyes: Grow up. That's an idiotic comment and you know it.

If a country collapses it's because it deserves it and it's ****. End of discussion.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 34
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by Drewski
********. It was mis-managed before, sure, but was always a major country, had been for centuries. It maintaining that status is hardly something that can be labeled as only due to their political system.

Yeah, a country that "was dying from the inside and heading towards its collapse should be envied by everyone"... :rolleyes: Grow up. That's an idiotic comment and you know it.

If a country collapses it's because it deserves it and it's ****. End of discussion.


It was a major country in geographical terms. Internally, it was a big village with mud roads and wooden houses, with no industry and complete plutonomy. It was mis-managed, yes, because there was nothing to manage. A country collapses if it has a lot of enemies, by being a bone in the throat to them. Which means that its success had to be stopped. No other countries would want its collapse if it was so ****, because it would be meaningless, common sense really.
Original post by Fadel
It was a major country in geographical terms. Internally, it was a big village with mud roads and wooden houses, with no industry and complete plutonomy. It was mis-managed, yes, because there was nothing to manage. A country collapses if it has a lot of enemies, by being a bone in the throat to them. Which means that its success had to be stopped. No other countries would want its collapse if it was so ****, because it would be meaningless, common sense really.


It was 1919, every country - outside the major cities - was a big village with dirt roads. Hell, I'm from Yorkshire - bits of that still are.

The UK has had far more enemies over the years. We're still here. Which system is the best one? I'll leave you to ponder that, since you're the only one living a delusion.
Reply 36
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by Drewski
It was 1919, every country - outside the major cities - was a big village with dirt roads. Hell, I'm from Yorkshire - bits of that still are.

The UK has had far more enemies over the years. We're still here. Which system is the best one? I'll leave you to ponder that, since you're the only one living a delusion.


1) London underground was built in 1863, at that time, Russia still didn't know what a train was. In Russia, it was built in 1930s, by Stalin. So England wasn't as mucky as Russia was.
2) UK was never enemies with USA or other european countries, nor did it suffer as much as USSR from the war.
3) UK wasn't involved in technological races which induced a lot of hate from other countries.

Tl;dr, UK wasn't invovled in anything that would get it hated for. Doesn't have anything to do with the system. Yes, you do exist, but now good ol' USA runs the business. I'm even surprised you're comapring UK to USSR.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Fadel
1) London underground was built in 1863, at that time, Russia still didn't know what a train was. In Russia, it was built in 1930s, by Stalin. So England wasn't as mucky as Russia was.
2) UK was never enemies with USA or other european countries, nor did it suffer as much as USSR from the war.
3) UK wasn't involved in technological races which induced a lot of hate from other countries.

Tl;dr, UK wasn't invovled in anything that would get it hated for. Doesn't have anything to do with the system. Yes, you do exist, but now good ol' USA runs the business.


If you actually bothered to read my post, you'll know I said "outside of the major cities". Care to try again?

Er, was never enemies with the US? Have you ever heard of this thing called history? It's been around a while, look it up.

No, it just started everything. And the notion it wasn't hated is equally moronic.


Listen, kid, if you want to debate, then fine. But you actually have to know something.

Quite obviously, you don't.
Reply 38
Avatar for Fadel
Fadel
16
Original post by Drewski
If you actually bothered to read my post, you'll know I said "outside of the major cities". Care to try again?

Er, was never enemies with the US? Have you ever heard of this thing called history? It's been around a while, look it up.

No, it just started everything. And the notion it wasn't hated is equally moronic.


Listen, kid, if you want to debate, then fine. But you actually have to know something.

Quite obviously, you don't.


"outside majour cities" is a stupid way of comparing countries. If the metro in London was built 100 years earlier than it was in Moscow, what could you infer about the prosperity of the country in general?

UK wasn't enemies with USA after 1918, hence assuming previous historical conflicts is useless.

I don't remember UK participating in the space, nuclear or weapons race? You're comparing a doll to a tank, and claiming that the doll is better than the tank. Obviously, why would somebody shoot the doll? Now that's moronic. The better system is the one that achieved the most, not survived the longest with no achievements.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Fadel
The better system is the one that achieved the most, not survived the longest with no achievements.


Fundamentally, no. Longevity and security is a far greater measure of a country's prowess, without which it doesn't matter what it achieved, because it can no longer do so. The country's sole aim is to provide security and opportunity to it's people. If it collapses that's - beyond argument - impossible.

If you can't understand that basic fact, the entire debate is utterly lost on you.

But instead, you live in your idealist bubble, away from the pressures and realities of the real world. In many ways, then, you're perfectly suited to the USSR.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you