Lose Lose Economy

[Dan74]

Tell it to the Pilgrims, Dan. Convince them that starving is better.

I'll be perfectly honest in admitting that capitalism was a progression from the systems that existed before.

It does. Which is a hell of a lot more than you're doing. Let's talk about the Pilgrims' progress by discarding collectivist practices. Oh wait, I should read, you should read, no one should give their interpretation. That's a helluva memorized rebuttal you got there. Takes so little effort to put into text.

You can't criticize Marxism by criticizing collectivism. The Nazis wanted a collectivist society, did they not? Many things are collectivist. Now stop it with this incredibly foolish argument and actually start debating Marxism with me.

[Winter wind]

No.

Then how do you convince someone that communism can function on any level? How do we know it's not inherently susceptible to dictatorships because of how centralized the government has to be in order to implement communism? How do you avoid such dictatorships arising in the future.

[Senor Hoint]

The Nazis weren't collectivists. To say that they were is to be ignorant of the definition of collectivism. The philosophical roots of the Nazi movement were no more complicated than a bully on a playground monopolizing the equipment simply because he is bigger than the other children, with a bunch of borderline-insane racial theories thrown in to leaven the mix.

[Dan74]

Then how do you convince someone that communism can function on any level? How do we know it's not inherently susceptible to dictatorships because of how centralized the government has to be in order to implement communism? How do you avoid such dictatorships arising in the future.

Why should they need one? Surely people can understand cause and effect.

The Nazis weren't collectivists. To say that they were is to be ignorant of the definition of collectivism. The philosophical roots of the Nazi movement were no more complicated than a bully on a playground monopolizing the equipment simply because he is bigger than the other children, with a bunch of borderline-insane racial theories thrown in to leaven the mix.

Carrying the Volk to victory isn't collectivist?

Even if your point is valid, it doesn't mean that collectivist failures undermine Marxism or even communism in any way.

[Winter wind]

Why should they need one? Surely people can understand cause and effect.

I'm not sure what question that's addressing.

If your saying that it's trivial to convince people that your brand of communism works, I heartily disagree. One, the philosophy of "modern Marxism" has seven plus variants. There isn't just one Marxism anymore, so I don't know which "modern Marxism" you are referring to. Two, the fundamental idea of people working extra for the good of their government rather than their own good is a mostly alien concept to the USA, and I think it's nieve to set up a system that relies on everyone working for the greater good rather than themselves, because I'm not convinced even a majority of people will do that. Three, strong central governments have, historically, not worked for the good of all the people, but for the good of the people in power, so I'm not convinced a strong centralized government won't stop the people working in that government working for their own good (ie a Politburo).

[Elithium]

1: You are not entitled to a university education. Less than 1/3 of all jobs in America require a university education.
2: Manage your money better.
3: Find a better paying job.
4: Find an alternative route, such as joining the military or teaching English over seas during your summer break.
5: Go to a community college and get an associates first and then transfer to a university. It is cheaper, takes the same amount of time, requires less direct effort, and allows you to secure a moderately higher salary for the last 2 years.
6: You live a quality of life that is better than 80% of the world's population. You are simply to ignorant of the reality of the world to appreciate it. America is the wealthiest large economy in the world. The real per capita income in America dwarfs that of other developed countries (with a few small specialized economies as exceptions, such as Norway and Luxembourg). Americans pay less in taxes than other developed countries.
7: You aren't entitled to ANYTHING simply because you want it. Your salary is commensurate of your contribution to society (with some exceptions). That doctor earns a lot more than a garbage man because far fewer people are capable of doing what that doctor does. 90% of the population can be a garbage man. 1% are capable of being a competent doctor. I enjoy a decent income because I am the only competent person in my area that provides the service that I provide. If I didn't receive the salary that I received here, I would relocate to some where that paid what my abilities are worth.
8: Communism is a horrible system. It can work, if properly executed, on a small scale but in a large scale it is unmanageable. An analogous system is the difference between dictatorships and republics.

A dictatorship has a top down system. In small and simplistic systems, it is actually more efficient than representative republics. Decisions are made quicker and executed more efficiently. However, as the system grows in size and complexity, the small number of people at the top have a larger and larger burden placed upon them. It gets increasingly difficult for them to make appropriate decisions and increasingly difficult to execute those decisions. This is why a small and easily managed country such as Singapore thrived under a dictatorship while large countries always struggle under dictatorships.

Communism is also like this. The government controls the allocation of resources through out society. This works well if everyone lives a simplistic life style with similar needs and desires. However, for a complex society, such as any wealthy country would have, the demands for various individuals are almost a diverse as the people themselves. In such a situation, communism simply becomes impossibly complex to efficiently manage. The bureaucracy burgeons and causes great inefficiencies. The more complex the system, the more inefficient it becomes.

People who advocate communism are unknowingly advocating a simplistic lifestyle and a quality of life comparable to that of under developed countries. If you actually lived in such a system, you would lament your current advocacy of it.

This isnt about the gap between the poor and the rich. I did the math for my own life and this is what i came up with.
America's economy is arranged to keep you poor and uneducated unless you can work the system in your favor and even then you're left with debt to pay off. If i worked full time (40hrs/week) the most I would expect to make (max) in one year is $12,000. After $9,000 to school (pre-books) and $1,800 for half rent I would be left with $1,200 for the entire year for food, insurances, bills, gas and other necessities. $100 a month to live on isn't enough. One solution is sure to work more, but being a full time student (18hrs/wk) and one full time job (40hrs/wk) with normal sleep (8hrs/day) I am left with the equivalent of 7hrs/day to study outside of class, work a second job, eat, shower, grocery shop(if i had the money), or anything demanding such as those. The education system suggests 3hrs out of class study for every hour in class to achieve high standing. That eliminates all the time left. So it seems like there is no "right" way to approach this problem, get more money now do terrible in school and work those two jobs your whole life. Place precedents on school and you will not have enough money to survive unless you bury yourself in debt. Worse for wear you can loose your job because you cannot work a flexible schedule due to your classes , like I have, so that even the loans wont cover living... It makes no sense to have a lose lose system.

[Dieval]

Capitalism doesn't provide everyone with some sort of blank slate to work with. Some people are born into intrinsically bad situations. Go to any slum, ghetto, or downright wasteland. Capitalism doesn't seem to have done anything to bring those people out of their misery. It's only fueled it.

Capitalism is not designed to make everyone the same, nor do most people want to be the same.

[Elithium]

I grew up in a trailer park to alcoholic drug addicts. My brother was living on the street by the age of 16 and blamed society and my parents for all of his woes. I got a job and paid my way through school with out any help or loans. Since the birth of my first, of three, child, I have saved roughly half of my income. I have invested that money in a variety of areas that earn passive income. I am only 32 years old and my passive income is already half of my active income, enough (hopefully) to cover my children's education expenses.

The problem with people is that they don't look for a solution to their problems. They simply look for some one to blame instead. Life is not hard if you simply don't make stupid decisions. If you make stupid decisions, you should suffer the consequences of your actions.

For instance, I exercise regularly. I eat healthy foods. I save a large portion of my income by living within my means. As such, if a medical problem should arise for myself or my family, I am financially ready for it. Yet, others who are completely irresponsible are covered through taxes collected on my income. How is that remotely fair? Why should I have to pay for other people's gluttony and irresponsibility?

Capitalism doesn't provide everyone with some sort of blank slate to work with. Some people are born into intrinsically bad situations. Go to any slum, ghetto, or downright wasteland. Capitalism doesn't seem to have done anything to bring those people out of their misery. It's only fueled it.

[Dieval]

I grew up in a trailer park to alcoholic drug addicts. My brother was living on the street by the age of 16 and blamed society and my parents for all of his woes. I got a job and paid my way through school with out any help or loans. Since the birth of my first, of three, child, I have saved roughly half of my income. I have invested that money in a variety of areas that earn passive income. I am only 32 years old and my passive income is already half of my active income, enough (hopefully) to cover my children's education expenses.

The problem with people is that they don't look for a solution to their problems. They simply look for some one to blame instead. Life is not hard if you simply don't make stupid decisions. If you make stupid decisions, you should suffer the consequences of your actions.

For instance, I exercise regularly. I eat healthy foods. I save a large portion of my income by living within my means. As such, if a medical problem should arise for myself or my family, I am financially ready for it. Yet, others who are completely irresponsible are covered through taxes collected on my income. How is that remotely fair? Why should I have to pay for other people's gluttony and irresponsibility?

But I thought if you came from a "slum, ghetto, or downright wasteland" your life was so tough that it's completely and utterly impossible to get anywhere, unless we all become socialists/communists and everything is provided to us?? What is this blasphemy of being responsible for yourself that you speak of??

(yes there's an abundance of sarcasm in my comments )

[Dodds]

Capitalism is not designed to make everyone the same, nor do most people want to be the same.

What makes one person "better" than another?

[Dodds]

But I thought if you came from a "slum, ghetto, or downright wasteland" your life was so tough that it's completely and utterly impossible to get anywhere, unless we all become socialists/communists and everything is provided to us?? What is this blasphemy of being responsible for yourself that you speak of??

(yes there's an abundance of sarcasm in my comments )

Do you wan't me to bring up social mobility rates again?

[Dieval]

What makes one person "better" than another?

Nothing. But being "better" is irrelevant to this discussion.

Do you wan't me to bring up social mobility rates again?

This is yet another example of someone taking responsibility for them self and succeeding.

Do your "social mobility rates" explain who is and who isn't being responsible for them selves? Oh wait...That's right....no one has any personal responsibility in your examples of "social mobility rates".