Go to first unread
Back
to top
Is communism the best way to get rid of extreme poverty?
Watch
Announcements
Lately I'm feeling pretty uncomfortable with the amount of poverty in the world. Yes, I realise it bothers most people. But I feel guilty spending money on things I don't need and living in a capitalist society where a rich/poor divide occurs. Part of the way we get over this is to simply ignore the people in poverty and dying of hunger amongst other things. I do kind of feel if let's say the problems of Africa were right on my doorstep, we'd act a little differently. And even then us wealthy countries do exploit the poor in other countries when we could be giving more money to them/helping them out more or not trying to exploit them and maintain our better living style over theirs.
While I realise the merits of a capitalist society, if you do work harder you should be rewarded for it. My parents have worked hard, trying to generate as much wealth to provide for me and my siblings. But the thing with capitalism is that, the rich will always want to get richer. And this will happen at the expense of the poor. The rich aren't necessarily bad people, it is a product of the society they grow up in, but it is ultimately the case that some of these rich will take it too far and exploit others (which leads to poverty). It is also apparent that some of these rich will spend money/generate money on things that aren't very important when really people dying of hunger could use that money. But we are bred into a society where we should not feel bad for being rich.
I personally do not mind some people being richer than others. But I am a firm believer that people should not be dying of hunger or below satisfactory living conditions. There are basic needs that should be met and this should be a priority above all else. The top 1% of the world owns 40% of the wealth. We could eradicate poverty four times over just using the wealth of the 1%.
A communist society may not be ideal, but we would make sure that everyone would at least have the basic requirements needed. People would be less motivated by money. Yes things might happen where certain leaders may abuse their power (or themselves be richer than the rest), but if that was the price to rid extreme poverty/hunger, then wouldn't you do it? I'd happily bear that price of some being more "unfairly" advantaged than me if it meant we could solve the hunger/poverty issues. And of course if we could run communism efficiently, then we might be able to prevent "corrupt leaders", ideally installing leaders who are very much good, kind people who give their all to providing for their country and keeping their people well fed and in adequate shelter. I would like to see a system installed where each country in the world would be responsible for ridding poverty in every country, thus money would be shared in order to solve this problem. But of course with poverty in place in each country, the amount of extreme poverty in each country should theoretically reduce. I just can not see us eradicating poverty with a capitalist system. The capitalist system does have merits, just as the communism system does have it's disadvantages, but for me the facing and dealing with extreme poverty would be highest on my list which I just don't feel for the reasons stated, capitalism will really address fully.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Or what are you're thoughts on the current poverty situation and how to deal with it?
While I realise the merits of a capitalist society, if you do work harder you should be rewarded for it. My parents have worked hard, trying to generate as much wealth to provide for me and my siblings. But the thing with capitalism is that, the rich will always want to get richer. And this will happen at the expense of the poor. The rich aren't necessarily bad people, it is a product of the society they grow up in, but it is ultimately the case that some of these rich will take it too far and exploit others (which leads to poverty). It is also apparent that some of these rich will spend money/generate money on things that aren't very important when really people dying of hunger could use that money. But we are bred into a society where we should not feel bad for being rich.
I personally do not mind some people being richer than others. But I am a firm believer that people should not be dying of hunger or below satisfactory living conditions. There are basic needs that should be met and this should be a priority above all else. The top 1% of the world owns 40% of the wealth. We could eradicate poverty four times over just using the wealth of the 1%.
A communist society may not be ideal, but we would make sure that everyone would at least have the basic requirements needed. People would be less motivated by money. Yes things might happen where certain leaders may abuse their power (or themselves be richer than the rest), but if that was the price to rid extreme poverty/hunger, then wouldn't you do it? I'd happily bear that price of some being more "unfairly" advantaged than me if it meant we could solve the hunger/poverty issues. And of course if we could run communism efficiently, then we might be able to prevent "corrupt leaders", ideally installing leaders who are very much good, kind people who give their all to providing for their country and keeping their people well fed and in adequate shelter. I would like to see a system installed where each country in the world would be responsible for ridding poverty in every country, thus money would be shared in order to solve this problem. But of course with poverty in place in each country, the amount of extreme poverty in each country should theoretically reduce. I just can not see us eradicating poverty with a capitalist system. The capitalist system does have merits, just as the communism system does have it's disadvantages, but for me the facing and dealing with extreme poverty would be highest on my list which I just don't feel for the reasons stated, capitalism will really address fully.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Or what are you're thoughts on the current poverty situation and how to deal with it?
1
reply
Report
#2
(Original post by LemonLizards)
Lately I'm feeling pretty uncomfortable with the amount of poverty in the world. Yes, I realise it bothers most people. But I feel guilty spending money on things I don't need and living in a capitalist society where a rich/poor divide occurs. Part of the way we get over this is to simply ignore the people in poverty and dying of hunger amongst other things. I do kind of feel if let's say the problems of Africa were right on my doorstep, we'd act a little differently. And even then us wealthy countries do exploit the poor in other countries when we could be giving more money to them/helping them out more or not trying to exploit them and maintain our better living style over theirs.
While I realise the merits of a capitalist society, if you do work harder you should be rewarded for it. My parents have worked hard, trying to generate as much wealth to provide for me and my siblings. But the thing with capitalism is that, the rich will always want to get richer. And this will happen at the expense of the poor. The rich aren't necessarily bad people, it is a product of the society they grow up in, but it is ultimately the case that some of these rich will take it too far and exploit others (which leads to poverty). It is also apparent that some of these rich will spend money/generate money on things that aren't very important when really people dying of hunger could use that money. But we are bred into a society where we should not feel bad for being rich.
I personally do not mind some people being richer than others. But I am a firm believer that people should not be dying of hunger or below satisfactory living conditions. There are basic needs that should be met and this should be a priority above all else. The top 1% of the world owns 40% of the wealth. We could eradicate poverty four times over just using the wealth of the 1%.
A communist society may not be ideal, but we would make sure that everyone would at least have the basic requirements needed. People would be less motivated by money. Yes things might happen where certain leaders may abuse their power (or themselves be richer than the rest), but if that was the price to rid extreme poverty/hunger, then wouldn't you do it? I'd happily bear that price of some being more "unfairly" advantaged than me if it meant we could solve the hunger/poverty issues. And of course if we could run communism efficiently, then we might be able to prevent "corrupt leaders", ideally installing leaders who are very much good, kind people who give their all to providing for their country and keeping their people well fed and in adequate shelter. I would like to see a system installed where each country in the world would be responsible for ridding poverty in every country, thus money would be shared in order to solve this problem. But of course with poverty in place in each country, the amount of extreme poverty in each country should theoretically reduce. I just can not see us eradicating poverty with a capitalist system. The capitalist system does have merits, just as the communism system does have it's disadvantages, but for me the facing and dealing with extreme poverty would be highest on my list which I just don't feel for the reasons stated, capitalism will really address fully.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Or what are you're thoughts on the current poverty situation and how to deal with it?
Lately I'm feeling pretty uncomfortable with the amount of poverty in the world. Yes, I realise it bothers most people. But I feel guilty spending money on things I don't need and living in a capitalist society where a rich/poor divide occurs. Part of the way we get over this is to simply ignore the people in poverty and dying of hunger amongst other things. I do kind of feel if let's say the problems of Africa were right on my doorstep, we'd act a little differently. And even then us wealthy countries do exploit the poor in other countries when we could be giving more money to them/helping them out more or not trying to exploit them and maintain our better living style over theirs.
While I realise the merits of a capitalist society, if you do work harder you should be rewarded for it. My parents have worked hard, trying to generate as much wealth to provide for me and my siblings. But the thing with capitalism is that, the rich will always want to get richer. And this will happen at the expense of the poor. The rich aren't necessarily bad people, it is a product of the society they grow up in, but it is ultimately the case that some of these rich will take it too far and exploit others (which leads to poverty). It is also apparent that some of these rich will spend money/generate money on things that aren't very important when really people dying of hunger could use that money. But we are bred into a society where we should not feel bad for being rich.
I personally do not mind some people being richer than others. But I am a firm believer that people should not be dying of hunger or below satisfactory living conditions. There are basic needs that should be met and this should be a priority above all else. The top 1% of the world owns 40% of the wealth. We could eradicate poverty four times over just using the wealth of the 1%.
A communist society may not be ideal, but we would make sure that everyone would at least have the basic requirements needed. People would be less motivated by money. Yes things might happen where certain leaders may abuse their power (or themselves be richer than the rest), but if that was the price to rid extreme poverty/hunger, then wouldn't you do it? I'd happily bear that price of some being more "unfairly" advantaged than me if it meant we could solve the hunger/poverty issues. And of course if we could run communism efficiently, then we might be able to prevent "corrupt leaders", ideally installing leaders who are very much good, kind people who give their all to providing for their country and keeping their people well fed and in adequate shelter. I would like to see a system installed where each country in the world would be responsible for ridding poverty in every country, thus money would be shared in order to solve this problem. But of course with poverty in place in each country, the amount of extreme poverty in each country should theoretically reduce. I just can not see us eradicating poverty with a capitalist system. The capitalist system does have merits, just as the communism system does have it's disadvantages, but for me the facing and dealing with extreme poverty would be highest on my list which I just don't feel for the reasons stated, capitalism will really address fully.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Or what are you're thoughts on the current poverty situation and how to deal with it?
3
reply
Report
#3
(Original post by LemonLizards)
The top 1% of the world owns 40% of the wealth. We could eradicate poverty four times over just using the wealth of the 1%.
The top 1% of the world owns 40% of the wealth. We could eradicate poverty four times over just using the wealth of the 1%.
£20,600.
How much could you take from those people before they too are in poverty? And who would volunteer for that?
0
reply
(Original post by SocialistIC)
Capitalism is a very flawed system and so is communism. I think the best system would be democratic socialism. Unlike under communism, a lot of the benefits of capitalism (democracy, freedom etc) would stay but inequality would start to be reduced. There needs to be a living wage for all; no ifs no buts. There needs to be taxes on the rich to help pay for people who are struggling (disabled people, people who are unemployed through no fault of their own and so on) and for initiatives that help to build up the country and get more people in to employment (as well as the obvious free education and healthcare). Fewer companies need to be run by a boardroom of executives and more need to be run fairly, and by everyone who works for the company democratically (an example of two large companies already like this are The Co-Operative and Waitrose). This isn't just a pipe dream; larger changes in society have happened and it can work because it gives everyone the chance of getting to high positions; at the moment less intelligent people who happen to be from successful background are more likely to be successful than poorer but more intelligent people. If we had a larger pool of academics and successful businessmen etc from all walks of life, there would be better quality of life, more scientific advancements and inventions etc. It would make the world a much better place all with just a little less profit for people at the top.
Capitalism is a very flawed system and so is communism. I think the best system would be democratic socialism. Unlike under communism, a lot of the benefits of capitalism (democracy, freedom etc) would stay but inequality would start to be reduced. There needs to be a living wage for all; no ifs no buts. There needs to be taxes on the rich to help pay for people who are struggling (disabled people, people who are unemployed through no fault of their own and so on) and for initiatives that help to build up the country and get more people in to employment (as well as the obvious free education and healthcare). Fewer companies need to be run by a boardroom of executives and more need to be run fairly, and by everyone who works for the company democratically (an example of two large companies already like this are The Co-Operative and Waitrose). This isn't just a pipe dream; larger changes in society have happened and it can work because it gives everyone the chance of getting to high positions; at the moment less intelligent people who happen to be from successful background are more likely to be successful than poorer but more intelligent people. If we had a larger pool of academics and successful businessmen etc from all walks of life, there would be better quality of life, more scientific advancements and inventions etc. It would make the world a much better place all with just a little less profit for people at the top.
. Thanks for your response.
0
reply
Report
#5
*Looks at the former USSR countries*
*Looks at Western Europe*
Communism-not even once
*Looks at Western Europe*
Communism-not even once
1
reply
Report
#6
The only place where communism has gotten rid of extreme poverty is Cuba. So it is possible I think, but it needs to be a small country.
0
reply
Report
#7
capitalist doesnt only reward those who work hard, they also reward the kids of those who work hard.
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by GnomeMage)
capitalist doesnt only reward those who work hard, they also reward the kids of those who work hard.
capitalist doesnt only reward those who work hard, they also reward the kids of those who work hard.
The only system guaranteed to provide wealth and equality is Socialism.
1
reply
Report
#9
(Original post by Martyn*)
And what about the children of parents who have to work two jobs just to make ends meet? Capitalism is only a rewards system for those on the right side of it, and those on the wrong side of capitalism are outweighing those on the right side.
The only system guaranteed to provide wealth and equality is Socialism.
And what about the children of parents who have to work two jobs just to make ends meet? Capitalism is only a rewards system for those on the right side of it, and those on the wrong side of capitalism are outweighing those on the right side.
The only system guaranteed to provide wealth and equality is Socialism.
0
reply
Report
#11
no its not because communism is not a productive system and so what it will do is to distribute poverty as apposed to alleviating it.
0
reply
Report
#12
(Original post by SocialistIC)
Capitalism is a very flawed system and so is communism. I think the best system would be democratic socialism. Unlike under communism, a lot of the benefits of capitalism (democracy, freedom etc) would stay but inequality would start to be reduced. There needs to be a living wage for all; no ifs no buts. There needs to be taxes on the rich to help pay for people who are struggling (disabled people, people who are unemployed through no fault of their own and so on) and for initiatives that help to build up the country and get more people in to employment (as well as the obvious free education and healthcare). Fewer companies need to be run by a boardroom of executives and more need to be run fairly, and by everyone who works for the company democratically (an example of two large companies already like this are The Co-Operative and Waitrose). This isn't just a pipe dream; larger changes in society have happened and it can work because it gives everyone the chance of getting to high positions; at the moment less intelligent people who happen to be from successful background are more likely to be successful than poorer but more intelligent people. If we had a larger pool of academics and successful businessmen etc from all walks of life, there would be better quality of life, more scientific advancements and inventions etc. It would make the world a much better place all with just a little less profit for people at the top.
Capitalism is a very flawed system and so is communism. I think the best system would be democratic socialism. Unlike under communism, a lot of the benefits of capitalism (democracy, freedom etc) would stay but inequality would start to be reduced. There needs to be a living wage for all; no ifs no buts. There needs to be taxes on the rich to help pay for people who are struggling (disabled people, people who are unemployed through no fault of their own and so on) and for initiatives that help to build up the country and get more people in to employment (as well as the obvious free education and healthcare). Fewer companies need to be run by a boardroom of executives and more need to be run fairly, and by everyone who works for the company democratically (an example of two large companies already like this are The Co-Operative and Waitrose). This isn't just a pipe dream; larger changes in society have happened and it can work because it gives everyone the chance of getting to high positions; at the moment less intelligent people who happen to be from successful background are more likely to be successful than poorer but more intelligent people. If we had a larger pool of academics and successful businessmen etc from all walks of life, there would be better quality of life, more scientific advancements and inventions etc. It would make the world a much better place all with just a little less profit for people at the top.
Also, no you must be absolutely insane to think communism helps poor people.
0
reply
Report
#13
(Original post by Drewski)
You know how much it takes to be in the 1%?
£20,600.
How much could you take from those people before they too are in poverty? And who would volunteer for that?
You know how much it takes to be in the 1%?
£20,600.
How much could you take from those people before they too are in poverty? And who would volunteer for that?
0
reply
Report
#15
Considering the Soviet Union managed to drag itself to world superpower status under a supposed version of communism, you can't deny its effectiveness.
Although no debate like this can be done seriously on these forums. Most people will simply throw tidbits they've remembered from Year 9, or if we're feeling ambitious, GCSE, history classes where the entire course of political history is boiled down to Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
I guess my ultimate answer is: nobody knows. Now submit!
Edit: Just after I wrote this, I found this:
Thank you for proving my point.
Although no debate like this can be done seriously on these forums. Most people will simply throw tidbits they've remembered from Year 9, or if we're feeling ambitious, GCSE, history classes where the entire course of political history is boiled down to Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
I guess my ultimate answer is: nobody knows. Now submit!
Edit: Just after I wrote this, I found this:
(Original post by GnomeMage)
socialism is a break off branch of marxism
socialism is a break off branch of marxism
0
reply
Report
#16
(Original post by Himynameis3)
Lmao look at the last labour government to burst your little bubble about this perfect social democracy. It's utter lunacy.
Also, no you must be absolutely insane to think communism helps poor people.
Lmao look at the last labour government to burst your little bubble about this perfect social democracy. It's utter lunacy.
Also, no you must be absolutely insane to think communism helps poor people.
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by Himynameis3)
Lmao look at the last labour government to burst your little bubble about this perfect social democracy. It's utter lunacy.
Lmao look at the last labour government to burst your little bubble about this perfect social democracy. It's utter lunacy.
1
reply
Report
#18
(Original post by Bill_Gates)
That's income right?
That's income right?
0
reply
Report
#19
(Original post by GnomeMage)
socialism is a break off branch of marxism
socialism is a break off branch of marxism
0
reply
Report
#20
(Original post by Drewski)
Net. Income, assets, everything. If all you cumulatively own/earn is more than £20,600, you are part of the global 1%.
Net. Income, assets, everything. If all you cumulatively own/earn is more than £20,600, you are part of the global 1%.
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
