Communism vs Capitalism Sticky


#421

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391218, member: 6563”]The goal is to produce an economic mechanism that circumvents the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[/QUOTE]

This sticks out like a sore thumb. What inefficiencies are associated with capital accumulation and the profit system? Which socialist changes would fix these inefficiencies? You can spout ideological shit against capitalism all day, but until you provide both evidence and reason towards overthrowing a system that’s had radical success in increasing the well being of people globally, I can’t take you seriously.


#422

[QUOTE=“ShanklinR, post: 391219, member: 1790”]This sticks out like a sore thumb. What inefficiencies are associated with capital accumulation and the profit system? Which socialist changes would fix these inefficiencies? You can spout ideological shit against capitalism all day, but until you provide both evidence and reason towards overthrowing a system that’s had radical success in increasing the well being of people globally, I can’t take you seriously.[/QUOTE]
[LIST]
[]Speculation. It is used to obtain more financial gain, but it is structurally useless as a whole, it can be detrimental for an enterprise if it goes wrong, and Socialism would not need it.
[
]Enviromental destruction, contamination and global warming (self-explanatory).
[]Planned obsolescence (self-explanatory again -I hope-).
[
]Externalities (self-explanatory).
[]Advertisement. It is very used for promoting products, but it has been proven to be detrimental. [x][/URL] [URL=‘https://web.archive.org/web/20090418155714/http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/issues_teens_marketing.cfm’][x][/URL] [URL=‘http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED238396.pdf’][x][/URL] [URL=‘http://national.deseretnews.com/article/1483/extreme-body-image-in-media-impacts-males-too.html’][x]
[
]The creation of the consumer society, which is partially caused by advertising and follows no natural order.

[]Inflation-Deflation.
[
]Unemployment. There will always be a reserve army of unemployed even in times of economic growth.
[]Poverty. It can be minimized with public services, government programs and charity, but it is a constant problem even in First World countries.
[
]Wealth inequality, especially when it increases.
[]The money and power that a certain enterprise can gain, especially in countries where lobbying is a problem.
[
]Sustainability issues. [x]
[/LIST]
These are the ones I can think of by now, but I feel @oli is much more qualified than myself to this subject.


#423

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Speculation. It is used to obtain more financial gain, but it is structurally useless as a whole, it can be detrimental for an enterprise if it goes wrong, and Socialism would not need it.[/QUOTE]
And what changes would be more constructive than speculative finance?

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Enviromental destruction, contamination and global warming (self-explanatory).[/QUOTE]
Right, but that’s not strictly irreconcilable with a capitalist system.

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Planned obsolescence[/QUOTE]
So?

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Externalities[/QUOTE]
Externalities will always exist, unless you think socialism would somehow completely negate the fact that humans have incomplete knowledge

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Advertisement. It is very used for promoting products, but it has been proven to be detriment
al[/QUOTE]
That’s a social issue, once again not irreconcilable with Capitalism. Not to mention that it’s not a negative on the whole, or on an individual basis.

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Unemployment. There will always be a reserve army of unemployed even in times of economic growth.[/QUOTE]
How does socialism fix this?

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Poverty. It can be minimized with public services, government programs and charity, but it is a constant problem even in First World countries.[/QUOTE]
Real income levels increase globally under capitalism as it is. Socialism wouldn’t automatically fix this in any way.

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Wealth inequality, especially when it increases.[/QUOTE]
Has been decreasing globally, unless you’re one of those who would consider debt “negative wealth” in which case you’re severely misguided. Not only that, it’s pretty much a minimal problem when it does increase.

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]The money and power that a certain enterprise can gain, especially in countries where lobbying is a problem.[/QUOTE]
A lot of lobbying is constructive. The average person isn’t very good for determining policy.

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]Sustainability issues. [x][/QUOTE]
Also not irreconcilable with capitalism.


#424

[QUOTE=“StrangeSignal, post: 391221, member: 6563”]
[LIST]
[]Speculation. It is used to obtain more financial gain, but it is structurally useless as a whole, it can be detrimental for an enterprise if it goes wrong, and Socialism would not need it.
[
]Enviromental destruction, contamination and global warming (self-explanatory).
[]Planned obsolescence (self-explanatory again -I hope-).
[
]Externalities (self-explanatory).
[]Advertisement. It is very used for promoting products, but it has been proven to be detrimental. [x][/URL] [URL=‘https://web.archive.org/web/20090418155714/http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/issues_teens_marketing.cfm’][x][/URL] [URL=‘http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED238396.pdf’][x][/URL] [URL=‘http://national.deseretnews.com/article/1483/extreme-body-image-in-media-impacts-males-too.html’][x]
[
]The creation of the consumer society, which is partially caused by advertising and follows no natural order.

[]Inflation-Deflation.
[
]Unemployment. There will always be a reserve army of unemployed even in times of economic growth.
[]Poverty. It can be minimized with public services, government programs and charity, but it is a constant problem even in First World countries.
[
]Wealth inequality, especially when it increases.
[]The money and power that a certain enterprise can gain, especially in countries where lobbying is a problem.
[
]Sustainability issues. [x]
[/LIST]
These are the ones I can think of by now, but I feel @oli is much more qualified than myself to this subject.[/QUOTE]

I’m going to make a few points when I get back from school but I’m just going to tag @New Classicist (have fun :))


#425

[QUOTE=“A341, post: 391224, member: 2382”]I’m going to make a few points when I get back from school but I’m just going to tag @New Classicist (have fun :))[/QUOTE]

I am starting to think that this will turn into an all-out war in the end, but I don’t want to tag the comrades [I]just yet[/I].

Oh, and @lake avenue already tagged him.


#426

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#427

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#428

Communism is illogical, non-market economic systems are too slow and primitive for a industrial nation. Market socialism would be to only logical choice.


#429

There’s very little evidence financial speculation plays a major role in the business cycle. It’s also incredibly ignorant to imply financial speculation has precisely zero social value.

Enviromental destruction, contamination and global warming (self-explanatory).

Which economists have policy prescriptions for.

Planned obsolescence (self-explanatory again -I hope-).

This only ever really happens in captured markets. . .

Externalities (self-explanatory).

I didn’t realise socialism had the magical powers of ensuring factories don’t pollute, or that fishers don’t actually kill fish. . .

Advertisement. It is very used for promoting products, but it has been proven to be detrimental. [x][/URL] [URL=‘https://web.archive.org/web/20090418155714/http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/issues_teens_marketing.cfm’][x][/URL] [URL=‘http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED238396.pdf’][x][/URL] [URL=‘http://national.deseretnews.com/article/1483/extreme-body-image-in-media-impacts-males-too.html’][x]

I agree, but that doesn’t make me a socialist.

The creation of the consumer society, which is partially caused by advertising and follows no natural order.

So?

Inflation-Deflation.

Haha, what? These are almost always failures of the central bank; they aren’t inherent to the capitalist system.

Unemployment. There will always be a reserve army of unemployed even in times of economic growth.

Believe it or not, but a lot of people like to [I]freely move jobs[/I]. Most unemployment during boom times is frictional.

Fuck, it’s irrelevant anyway; even with 0pc unemployment there would still be a [I]vast [/I]pool of potential labour given the amount of citizens who don’t participate in the labour force.

Poverty. It can be minimized with public services, government programs and charity, but it is a constant problem even in First World countries.

Nobody in America is [I]truly [/I]poor by global standards except perhaps the homeless; even the poorest in the US are part of the global middle class. That said, the rapid decline in absolute poverty in places like India, China, etc. demonstrates that this point isn’t really a point at all. . . .

Wealth inequality, especially when it increases.

All you’re doing is telling me this should be an issue; [I]why [/I]is wealth inequality an issue? [I]How [/I]would socialism stop one person owning more assets than another? How would socialism regulate the value of these assets, and still retain a stock price-esque mechanism to transfer information.

The money and power that a certain enterprise can gain, especially in countries where lobbying is a problem.

Because undue influence over government only happens in capitalist countries, right?

Not to mention, you are ignoring the fact that liberal democracies have comparatively low rates of corruption.

Sustainability issues. [x]

We’ve discussed this before; there is no physical limit on potential future growth. Why do you insist on sourcing scientists on matters of economics?


#430

[QUOTE=“Alaje, post: 391252, member: 5490”]Communism is illogical, non-market economic systems are too slow and primitive for a industrial nation. Market socialism would be to only logical choice.[/QUOTE]
The High-tech IT systems of today could soon sort these problems out - the ‘market’ of course does not cater for social issues either


#431

While I initially started as a capitalist who saw the owner-worker relationship as “symbiotic,” I’m starting to lean more toward seeing it as largely parasitic over anything else. The worker doesn’t need the CEO, but the reverse isn’t true. Without the worker, the bosses have nothing. And yet they make more money and get more vacation time. Why should those who work the hardest make the least?


#432

[QUOTE=“Luna, post: 409009, member: 3029”]Why should those who work the hardest make the least?[/QUOTE]
How do they work the hardest? I’m sure running a company aint easy, looking at stress levels rising correlating with wealth rising I’m sure it’s stressful.


#433

[QUOTE=“Luna, post: 409009, member: 3029”]The worker doesn’t need the CEO, but the reverse isn’t true. Without the worker, the bosses have nothing. And yet they make more money and get more vacation time. Why should those who work the hardest make the least?[/QUOTE]
It’s about supply and demand. Ancedotal, but I’ll use my fast food work experience. From the get-go I put in more physical labor than my store’s operator but I’m also expandable and can easily be replaced by somebody else who only needs a couple days of training. Managers and senior members of a company have years of experience, knowledge of how the company operates, invest their finances, and just over-all are a bigger asset than a low-level entry position. And in order to keep these valuable members employed, things such as bonuses, vacation time, etc are offered


#434

[QUOTE=“Sir Alois Heinrich II of Saxe-Weimar, post: 409010, member: 4679”]How do they work the hardest? I’m sure running a company aint easy, looking at stress levels rising correlating with wealth rising I’m sure it’s stressful.[/QUOTE]

I’m not suggesting it’s easy. But it’s certainly easier than performing grueling labor.


#435

[QUOTE=“Luna, post: 409014, member: 3029”]I’m not suggesting it’s easy. But it’s certainly easier than performing grueling labor.[/QUOTE]
Most manual labour jobs arent nearly as hard as you’d expect, they’re just tedious.


#436

[QUOTE=“Luna, post: 409009, member: 3029”]While I initially started as a capitalist who saw the owner-worker relationship as “symbiotic,” I’m starting to lean more toward seeing it as largely parasitic over anything else. The worker doesn’t need the CEO, but the reverse isn’t true. Without the worker, the bosses have nothing. And yet they make more money and get more vacation time. Why should those who work the hardest make the least?[/QUOTE]
Whoa. From every person in this forum I could expect this to be said, it is you. I did not see this coming.

But it’s true, workers do not need CEOs. A well organized workers’ union can run a factory just as well, and collective enterprises are, in fact, successful due to their horizontal and decentralized structure. This is what labour unions once attempted to do, even before Marx.

[FONT=Book Antiqua][SIZE=4][I]“They have taken untold millions that they never toiled to earn,[/I]
[I]But without our brain and muscle not a single wheel can turn.[/I]
[I]We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn[/I]
[I]That the union makes us strong.” - “Solidarity Forever”, Ralph Chaplin, 1914.[/I][/SIZE][/FONT]


#437

but of course, even in a union, there needs to be some form of hierarchy - so who works out the pay rates for the union members/leaders?


#438

[QUOTE=“Luna, post: 409009, member: 3029”]While I initially started as a capitalist who saw the owner-worker relationship as “symbiotic,” I’m starting to lean more toward seeing it as largely parasitic over anything else. The worker doesn’t need the CEO, but the reverse isn’t true. Without the worker, the bosses have nothing. And yet they make more money and get more vacation time. Why should those who work the hardest make the least?[/QUOTE]
Capitalists aren’t opposed to labor-owned business like cooperatives. We just think business models should compete for purposes of efficiency. Let’s examine your statements more closely.
[LIST]
[]If laborer’s don’t need CEOs, why don’t more laborers band together to form decentralized business models? Market theory would dictate that if CEOs and bosses in general were unnecessary, they wouldn’t exist.
[
]Comparing workloads is completely fallacious. Different jobs are given to due to difference in skills. If your skill lies in business coordination, in order to coordinate you must be higher in the hierarchy than those being coordinated.
[*]Managerial roles take a higher level of education and training than manual labor, and are more important to the business model itself for creating an efficient and competitive environment. They’re more experienced and the supply is lower.
[/LIST]


#439

[QUOTE=“ShanklinR, post: 409051, member: 1790”]If laborer’s don’t need CEOs, why don’t more laborers band together to form decentralized business models? Market theory would dictate that if CEOs and bosses in general were unnecessary, they wouldn’t exist.
[/QUOTE]

I guess market theory must ignore the fact that starting up a productive entity requires capital…


#440

[QUOTE=“oli, post: 409094, member: 579”]I guess market theory must ignore the fact that starting up a productive entity requires capital…[/QUOTE]
Right, I forgot that suddenly laborers couldn’t make investments. I also forgot that competitive markets suddenly entrench wealth. You’ve convinced me. I’m a communist.