Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Niassuh)
    Which country was it? Poland?

    yep
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mazzletazzle)
    not necessarily... people will be relatively poor but can live well (see the Nordic countries for this) ... narrowing the gap is a noble pursuit though
    Whaat? People in the Nordic countries are everything but not poor compared to the rest of the world... :P

    (Original post by _icecream)
    Place a huge tax on the rich problem solved
    Who will want to get rich then? Who will have the motivation to work hard and think of new ways of doing things etc?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _icecream)
    Place a huge tax on the rich problem solved

    Taxation is one thing, but taxing millionaires wouldn't fix much
    To reduce poverty you need to look at the distribution of wealth.
    Job security,job creation and wage influx is what helps.
    So wealth needs to be distributed equally in order to maintain a fairer society.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    In these hypothetical "fair" communist societies - what happens to the unemployed?
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Niassuh)
    Ok. Lot's to unpack here. First off, the rational incentives you speak of came with the creation of capitalism. Was every man in it for himself in tribal societies? Hell even in feudalism? Human nature is not an innate thing but rather something shaped by our society and environment, in the capitalist mode of production we are taught to worship competition from the earliest stage, even in school where we fight over grades, for uni seats and eventually for jobs. If this competitive culture was destroyed, do you think the next generation would enjoy fighting over resources?

    Your thinking is quite limited in saying workers will immigrate. Do you think I want socialism in one country? I am talking about world hunger and hence international socialism buddy.

    Workers paid more than they're actually worth...what...technological advancements mean that workers nowadays are producing far above their wages. That's why businesses are able to profit. Regardless of whether you agree that the USSR was socialist or not, the USSR boasted 100% unemployment. Not saying that's entirely true but wouldn't a mode of production that enshrines the "right to work" be less likely to have unemployment than capitalism which has at no point in history ever had 0 unemployment?

    As for bad management of the economy...this is laughable mate. Capitalism can produce 200 different brands of toothpaste but people ares still starving in Africa. There are certainly inefficiencies with central planning, as seen in the Soviet example, but planning in the 21st century will be remarkably different. You know why? We have the internet.

    As for bureaucrats having no consequences for failure, that's referring to the Soviet example in particular, I think. Socialism would strictly mean workers management through trade unions, we already have an example of what happens when the party and state are merged and when the party is allowed to rule without the workers themselves. 21st century Marxists won't make the same mistake.
    USSR boasted 100% unemployment. Typing mistake ?

    here's that youtube video wihout you needing to "fiire" up your VPN (there's no petrol what you gonna fire it up with anyways?):

    playit.pk/watch?v=ihhCoJ72fQE

    Capitalism can produce 200 brands of toothpaste compared to hunger in.......Africa ?

    how is that related ?

    Africa is over populated, they've pretty much done it to themselves. Whether you install communism, capitalism or any other ism, won't matter until either their soil becomes more fertile or they can lower their population. Other countries feeding africa is not sustainable.

    The main difference between the free market and communism is freedom. In a capitalist country much like the one you're living in, you can choose to do what you want to do with your money to a certain extent (because there's taxes). In a communist country, you don't get that. You get what the government wants you to get. And hence no freedom. If the government doesn't like a certain kind of toothpaste and you do, you're in trouble for even liking it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Viridiana)
    Whaat? People in the Nordic countries are everything but not poor compared to the rest of the world... :P



    Who will want to get rich then? Who will have the motivation to work hard and think of new ways of doing things etc?
    The poster's point was that people will always be rich and poor.

    You miss the point I am making. There will always be differences in wealth. However, the differences need not be as pronounced as in the UK or other countries. The gap between the wealthy and the poor in Nordic countries is significantly smaller than in the UK. They are 'relatively poor' not living in 'absolute poverty' as in LEDC countries. It was not a comparison between LEDC and MEDC countries.

    As for your point about motivation.... Norway's average GDP (per capita) is $65,460 compared with UK's at $38450... you don't have to have a communist system, just fairer taxation and redistribution of wealth. The Nordic countries earn more and live better than we do
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zedeneye1)
    USSR boasted 100% unemployment. Typing mistake ?

    here's that youtube video wihout you needing to "fiire" up your VPN (there's no petrol what you gonna fire it up with anyways?):

    playit.pk/watch?v=ihhCoJ72fQE

    Capitalism can produce 200 brands of toothpaste compared to hunger in.......Africa ?

    how is that related ?

    Africa is over populated, they've pretty much done it to themselves. Whether you install communism, capitalism or any other ism, won't matter until either their soil becomes more fertile or they can lower their population. Other countries feeding africa is not sustainable.

    The main difference between the free market and communism is freedom. In a capitalist country much like the one you're living in, you can choose to do what you want to do with your money to a certain extent (because there's taxes). In a communist country, you don't get that. You get what the government wants you to get. And hence no freedom. If the government doesn't like a certain kind of toothpaste and you do, you're in trouble for even liking it.
    1. Populations lower when you raise living standards (ask economics God Hans Rosling) http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_roslin...th?language=en

    2. Other countries feeding Africa is indeed not sustainable - yet you neglect to mention the impact of climate change on food security. Surely rather than doing it "to themselves" we have played a major role...

    3. How does soil become more fertile? Most importantly there is an increasing lack of water available for agricultural purpose for which no substitutes exist

    3. Your understanding of the minutae of differences between capitalist and communist economic system probably warrants a look at the earlier posts...

    4. Agree about the irrelevance of toothpaste and the African situation
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Reduce inflation for once
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    communism, and even that system will fail
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Apparently, half of the worlds total wealth is in the hands of 1% of the population.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FlareBlitz96)
    Apparently, half of the worlds total wealth is in the hands of 1% of the population.

    ... who pay significantly less tax than the rest of us :mad:
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mazzletazzle)
    ... who pay significantly less tax than the rest of us :mad:
    then ask government to lower taxes to a flat rate for everyone. that would make sense. A minimal tax that no one would mind paying.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Niassuh)
    We'll have to start by abolishing capitalism. About world hunger, we actually produce enough food to feed the population and then some, the problem is distribution i.e that people can't afford it. If there are actual shortages in food production, sustainable farming methods like urban polyculture and high yield Aquaponics would be suitable for that method.

    Capitalism was very progressive in abolishing feudalism, no doubt about it. It's outlived it's usefulness now.
    So agree with this.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Stop voting conservatives
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Viridiana)
    Whaat? People in the Nordic countries are everything but not poor compared to the rest of the world... :P



    Who will want to get rich then? Who will have the motivation to work hard and think of new ways of doing things etc?
    take a look at Scandinavian countries high taxes on the rich is working there, why shouldn't it work here. In Denmark for instance if you loose you're job you get like 90% of your salary paid by the state for 2 years that's amazing
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _icecream)
    take a look at Scandinavian countries high taxes on the rich is working there, why shouldn't it work here in. In Denmark for instance if you loose you're job you get like 90% of your salary paid by the state for 2 years that's amazing

    I think this kind of changes, if they should be implemented, they it should be gradually, these people were brought up with this system and perceive it as fair but if you suddenly start taking money away from people without making them believe it's for the good of the society etc., they'll simply move into another country, store money in other countries etc...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I honestly don't think we can abolish poverty altogether. If you are talking about the western world, then maybe. We need to start by raising tax to improve facilities to help the poor. I honestly believe all this 'trickle-down' economics is rubbish and does not work.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mazzletazzle)
    ... who pay significantly less tax than the rest of us :mad:
    ...who are depleting the world's finite resources for profit.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mazzletazzle)
    I'm sure the Naxalite/Naxalbari/KWP/Zapatista/NCP revolution is imminent... i'll get my red t shirt ready
    Actually, the Naxalites hold a chunk of India known as the "red corridor" and the Indian government considers them a bigger threat than Muslim terrorists [X].
    So there's that.

    The Kurdish Workers Party is abbreviated PKK, if you've seen any articles on Kobane in Syria you'll know that the PKK or Peshmerga as they're known are heroically resisting ISIS across a huge front. They already have an autonomous zone known in Rojava [X] Put your red shirt on because the revolution is here already :P

    I forgot to mention the Communist Party of the Philippines, which released their statement on LGBTQ rights recently [X].

    I respect you for taking on zedeneye about Africa. I usually give up on people like that.

    (Original post by zedeneye1)
    USSR boasted 100% unemployment. Typing mistake ?
    Haha, yes. Thank you for pointing that out!

    (Original post by zedeneye1)
    here's that youtube video wihout you needing to "fiire" up your VPN (there's no petrol what you gonna fire it up with anyways?):

    playit.pk/watch?v=ihhCoJ72fQE
    I mean it takes a while to start up and I couldn't be bothered, ok. Not a fan of the Beatles, could care less what they have to say about Communism.

    (Original post by zedeneye1)
    Capitalism can produce 200 brands of toothpaste compared to hunger in.......Africa ?

    how is that related ?
    Capitalism is lauded as efficient but efficient at what? Feeding people? Guaranteeing a good standard of living for people? Nope. As a system, capitalism is based on private ownership of the means of production, the function of money as a rationing device makes it impossible for a hell of a lot of people to get food. Under capitalism, there are a lot of redundant brands of products while a lot of people don't get even the essentials. Do you get me?

    (Original post by zedeneye1)
    Africa is over populated, they've pretty much done it to themselves. Whether you install communism, capitalism or any other ism, won't matter until either their soil becomes more fertile or they can lower their population. Other countries feeding africa is not sustainable.
    Actually I was going to respond to this and was digging out my effects New Imperialism sources when I read how you responded to mazzletazzle and decided it's not worth it.

    (Original post by zedeneye1)
    The main difference between the free market and communism is freedom. In a capitalist country much like the one you're living in, you can choose to do what you want to do with your money to a certain extent (because there's taxes). In a communist country, you don't get that. You get what the government wants you to get. And hence no freedom. If the government doesn't like a certain kind of toothpaste and you do, you're in trouble for even liking it.
    No, the main difference between capitalism and communism is that in capitalism there are classes, states, money etc while that all doesn't exist in communism. The main difference between the free market and socialism is that in capitalism the factors or means of production are owned privately while in socialism they are held in common.

    In communism there is no government. You get what is produced. In socialism, the transitory phase between capitalism and communism, you get what the government says, I suppose. The government being Workers Councils of course. Don't define socialism by the USSR, I have stated multiple times in this thread that they made the huge mistake, that 21st century Marxists acknowledge, of crushing workers councils/the Soviets and merging the Party and the state.


    (Original post by Clip)
    In these hypothetical "fair" communist societies - what happens to the unemployed?
    Same as disabled people, elderly people and anyone else unable to work. They live off welfare. The goal is 100% unemployment anyway! Post-scarcity society, full automization etc. Hopefully, a century into the future no one will have to work.

    (Original post by NHM713)
    ...who are depleting the world's finite resources for profit.
    Btw, I appreciate the support! Thank you
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Niassuh)

    1. I mean it takes a while to start up and I couldn't be bothered, ok. Not a fan of the Beatles, could care less what they have to say about Communism.

    2. Capitalism is lauded as efficient but efficient at what? Feeding people? Guaranteeing a good standard of living for people? Nope. As a system, capitalism is based on private ownership of the means of production, the function of money as a rationing device makes it impossible for a hell of a lot of people to get food. Under capitalism, there are a lot of redundant brands of products while a lot of people don't get even the essentials. Do you get me?

    3. Actually I was going to respond to this and was digging out my effects New Imperialism sources when I read how you responded to mazzletazzle and decided it's not worth it.

    4. No, the main difference between capitalism and communism is that in capitalism there are classes, states, money etc while that all doesn't exist in communism. The main difference between the free market and socialism is that in capitalism the factors or means of production are owned privately while in socialism they are held in common.

    5. In communism there is no government. You get what is produced. In socialism, the transitory phase between capitalism and communism, you get what the government says, I suppose. The government being Workers Councils of course. Don't define socialism by the USSR, I have stated multiple times in this thread that they made the huge mistake, that 21st century Marxists acknowledge, of crushing workers councils/the Soviets and merging the Party and the state.
    1.
    a. Use tor browser.
    b. I didn't even watch that video, just made it available to you. Argue with original poster.

    2. I don't laud capitalism as efficient. Efficiency is irrelevant. There will always be inefficiencies in any system. Even communism is inefficient.

    3. Go ahead. Debate is always good.

    4. There are classes, states, money in communism as well. But restricted to an even fewer elite with no(or extremely reduced) chances of the ordinary people joining them. You don't have that problem in the free market, everyone has the oppportunity to get rich.

    5. Where there is no government, that is the free-est possible market. Where you can do what ever you want to do and take control of anything you can take control of. That is infact a libertarian's dream. How you can have a concept of common ownership without having to enforce it is beyond me.

    The difference between communism and the free market is quite obvious. Opportunity vs no opportunity. You get nothing more for working harder in a communist economy and there is no incentive in working harder thus and that just creates a sad state of affairs for everyone. In capitalism you have something to look upto. You look upto a rich person and want to be like him, so you work harder and smarter.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.