Under Capitalism, man oppresses man.
Under Communism, it’s the other way around.
No thanks. I’ll take the system I have now, which is that I can buy whatever food when I want, from whom I want, in whatever quantities I want, and it isn’t anyone’s business but mine and whoever is selling me the food.
Why on earth do you suppose some other nebulous individual is capable of determining how much food I “need” to buy?
Two words: Dave Thomas. Orphan, high school dropout, started working at a KFC franchise and went on to become a manager, then to start Wendy’s.
Anyway, you’re wrong again. The vast majority of businesses are small businesses, most of them started by enterprising individuals. If I flip open the Yellow Pages and start looking through, I’m going to find literally thousands of small, individually-owned businesses or businesses with just a few partners organized in a legal partnership or LLC. And that’s true of every single city in the United States. Every one. Most people in this country are employed by local businesses.
Colonito67: I would just like to point out that when you said that giving students a writing assignment and expecting them to do it without incentive of a grade is ridiculous, you weren’t fully accurate. As a student, I am never given assignments without benifit of a grade; however, I do often go above and beyond the criteria without expectations of extra credit. I also, when bored, sometimes take the initiative and research a subject interesting to me, an activity which is not at all required nor does it in any way shape or form raise my GPA.
msmith, you seem to be well versed in the theories of neo-classical economics. You have to understand that although neo-classical economics is taught in most high schools and colleges around the nation, it does not mean that it is right. The idea that supply is effected by demand is a theory, not a fact. My economics teacher of a million years ago proved this fact to us and I’ll try and dig up my notes, the class had that much of an impact on me that I still have them to this day (I hope).
Government guidance is necessary to keep the economy running smoothly instead of careening forward like a 18 wheeler smashing back and forth against the guardrails. That does not mean that the government should control all aspects of productin.
People with no skills to offer are at a significant disadvantage in a capitalist economy.
If there was no protection of ownership, a person’s full time job would have to consist of foraging for supplies and protecting their home from those who would want to take it. Nothing of significance can be created because production is limited to what one person (and perhaps a few trusted allies) can create and defend.
The problem is that people who perform menial jobs generally have skills that are easily replaced. That’s why McDs employees are often high school students or high school dropouts and not PhDs.
Or you could also try a “bank”.
I never said it was easy. Personal contacts help, but people aren’t going to give you money just because you’re their drinking buddy. Education and experience are also generally helpful but thatt doesn’t mean you have to be a Wharton grad to start a business. There are plenty of people who are self employed contractors or owners small businesses who have a modest upbringing. Just because any uneducated doof cant become a CEO doesn’t mean the system is unfair.
Well yes, but like I said, that does not mean the government should control everything.
There will always be people born with certain advantages. That is not an excuse.
Unless people can provide all of their needs by themselves, there will always be a need for exchange and barter.
For people with few skills or education, their time is a commodity like an apple that can easily be replaced by another apple.
It’s not laziness, its getting people to do jobs that they find undesireable. Few people, given the choice, would choose to become janitors, garbagemen ditchdiggers or grill-cooks. If you can’t entice them with the “carrot” of better wages, you are left with the “stick” of threatened starvation or even forced labor at gunpoint.
Sharing works out nice for the guy who gets the handout. It sucks for the guy who has to give.
What is wrong with wanting nice things? Or wanting to live in a safe neighborhood? Or wanting financial security? What do you consider filthy rich anyhow?
Half of all businesses are small businesses. Do you own any shares of stock? A lot of people do. Those shares represent ownership in a “means of production”.
Under communism you need x amount of goods for y amount of people. That means each person on average must produce a average quota of x/y goods. How does a communist economy influence its population to produce that minimum? What happens if that economy cant produce x? Does the entire population go without?
Double-plus is a reference to 1984.
We call that “fantasy”.
You are incorrect. The laws of economics are as irrelevant to the form of government as the laws of physics.
Well, as long as we’re not being Luddites, here, there’s something a bit odd about using a computer to register discontent at technology.
wow…whatever quantity you want of whatever you want? You must be quite wealthy (or maybe you just don’t have a taste for fine food).
statistically meaningless. For every person who makes it rich the way Dave Thomas did, I could probably point to a multi-million dollar lottery winner.
I mean c’mon, would you tell kids to drop out of school because Dave Thomas made it rich?
Where do you buy your groceries? At a small food store owned by a local? How about your clothes? Who made your automobiles, furniture, computers, drugs, phones, and tv? A local business? If you live in the US probably not.
Of those small business people, how many are from poor backgrounds with little education? How many are operating the business that was already set up for them by their parents?
Saying that the vast majority of businesses are small businesses can be deceiving. If I buy a few ounces of grapes and twenty pounds of melons, you might be able to say that I have a larger number of grapes, but still I have more melons by weight.
Your assertion that most people in this country are employed by small businesses is encouraging to me, but I don’t know if I would believe that without a cite.
Anyway the number of small businesses isn’t my point. My point is that as long as capital is unevenly distributed, the “haves” have the capacity to set the wages to their liking. I believe we have an implicit socialist system here in the US. It’s not true capitalism. If we only relied on market forces and greed, we would have a lot more starvation, child labor, and dangerous working conditions.
I think saying that the students are more interested in “learning” is inaccurate. Students may be more interested in participation and discussing the material in class, but that doesn’t mean that there is more learning going on, just more discussion. I’d like to see statistics of how much was actually -learned- by these students as opposed to students in a more traditional classroom setting.
I’m all for de-formalizing classrooms and providing a more relaxed, stress-free environment for students, but I don’t think that the motivation to just learn is enough, in most cases. There will always be exceptional students, but most will slack off, relax, and be disruptive, making it difficult for the real students to succeed. A completely de-formalized classroom, like Communism, caters to the whims of the formless masses while stifling the more capable.
Unfortunately, I’m leaving town in five hours and won’t be home for four days, so I’m going to have to drop out of the thread. Colinito67, I really enjoyed my first foray into Great Debates, and I thank you for not flaying me. 
Fair enough. Does communism require government control though?
You are assuming that people need to steal. If people had a house why would they take yours? If people had food why would they steal yours?
My rationale is that if a job sucks people should get paid more to do it. If we don’t want to pay people enough to do the work without facing threat of starvation maybe we can’t afford to eat out (or we’re not getting paid enough).
How much do you think a McDs worker would get from a bank?
Well let’s think about why a person might be uneducated. If it wasn’t for public schools the parents of most children couldn’t afford to send their kids to school. If it wasn’t for government regulated low interest college loans with lenient payment terms many folks couldn’t go to college either. These are some things we’ve done to level the playing field, and they have nothing to do with the free market.
I agree. Communism will not be succesful at gunpoint. At some point, people have to show a genuine concern for their neighbor.
An excuse for what?
Ok, but what are we bartering with? Is there really a need for some people to have so much bartering power? Can you really say Bill Gates earned every dollar he has control over?
I’m not satisfied with that view of people’s lives. It’s dehumanizing and unnecessary.
I wouldn’t propose handouts unless people are medically unable to provide for themselves. People would still need to work, but they wouldn’t have to do it in an economy were they have no bargaining power.
There’s nothing wrong with those things intrinsically. Nice things are well and good, but people shouldn’t become obsessed with them. Nothing about communism implies that you can’t live in a safe home or have security. When people’s need to dominate other humans causes others to live in perpetual servitude I consider that sick.
I would venture that the number of people that own enough stock to offer them some alternative to the labor market is very small.
Yes it would be ironic. I’m not registering discontent with technology but how it’s used in a capitalist society.
Because some people will always want to take the ‘easy’ path. Why work 40 hours for my paycheck when I can ‘work’ for 5 minutes and just take yours?
So then people will compete for the jobs that suck, since they will pay more. If flipping burgers gets me $100,000/year in your world, of course I would have majored in burger-flipping rather then CS.
The bottom line is that those ‘equipped’ for a successfull career (motivation, willpower, social skills, education, etc) will get whatever careers pay the most. (Assuming that is the interest of the person.) It matters not if that career is digging ditches or executive management.
If we could count on the goodwill of other people, then we would have no need for laws or armed forces.
Can you say that he hasn’t? Who determines what is enough? The Party? The Central Commitee? Don’t we all have the right to determine ‘what is enough’ on our own, or does the State do that for us?
What is dehumanizing is taking away people’s ability to determine their own destiny.
Ahhh, the crux of the matter. Since you (and others like you, to be fair) have determined for me that I am too obsessed with materiel goods, I will have to accept a lower standard of living, for my own good. How nice.
If YOU do not want to be materialistic, then thanks to our free society, you do not have to be!
But if I am willing to go through the trouble of preparing myself for a good career, and then finally getting into said career, I should not be allowed to do so? Are you saying that no matter how much I educate myself, no matter how hard I work, I will not get paid more then some lazy slob?
Communism depends COMPLETELY on the goodwill of ALL people. Since universal goodwill will never take place, so ‘communism’ will never take place. In the several thousand recorded years of human history, has there ever been a successfull communist group of some sort?
Or maybe I’m perfectly capable of determining how much I need, and when I need it, without the interference of meddling do-gooders.
“If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life…” — Henry David Thoreau, Walden
Yes. Someone has to fix the roads and run the schools.
All thieves are not Jean Valjean stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family. Violent crime is not going to just suddenly end.
That’s not how it works.
Not too much. Of course, why is this person working as an adult at a job usually reserved for high school kids?
An excuse for not getting where you want to be in life. Why do some peole rise above the hand theyve been delt in life while others prefer to complain about how other people have it so easy and do nothing? I know plenty of people who grew up in nice families and did jack-shit with their life.
-Bill Gates was not born wealthy
-Most of Gates wealth is directly tied to the performance of -Microsoft in the form of stock
-Gates made a lot of people very wealthy
-Gates products added a huge productive value to the worlds economy
-What was the last great invention to come out of communist country since Sputnik?
What bargaining power do people have under communism? Explain to me how a system where people just go do whatever job they feel like actually works.
No. Most people still have to work. My point is that ownership of the means of production is not in the hands of a few people. And the leverage you have in negotiating a job depends on a lot of factors, including the economy, your skills and background, the prestige of the company, etc.
Go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics site (www.bls.gov). You will have all the stats you need.
There are thousands of reasons. I know plenty of people with college degrees that work menial jobs. They’re not lazy. They are qualified for better jobs, those jobs just simply aren’t available right now.
You’ve just thrown out a couple of stereotypes. Yeah, I’ve known people that sit around and complain. I’ve known people that have worked hard all of their lives for diddly squat too.
Gates products? When was the last time Gates made anything? He has teams of programmers, financial analysts, advertisers working for him. If Gates programmed a single line of code in the latest Windows I would be surprised. Did Bill Gates make a “lot” of people wealthy or did Microsoft?
Well, that’s not what I’m proposing. There will always be a certain amount of work that needs to get done that isn’t that fun. It’s not that people will be able to do whatever they want whenever they want. But I think more people could share in the labor so that nobody had to break their backs working 40hrs a week digging ditches.
I’m not proposing some kind of Maoist 5 year plan to redistribute wealth. I’m trying to look at some actions we’ve already taken to mitigate problems with a free market as a trend that can be continued. This should happen slowly and only with the willing support of a democratic society. It would take generations to acheive what I’m talking about.
I’m assuming that some of you will assert that humans are fundamentally selfish and incapable of rising above their selfishness. To me, it’s like saying that our ancestors could never master fire because they had always run from it from fear before.
I think there are intrinsic benefits to a society where people have their needs met and folks also act out of a concern others as well as themselves. In an ideal society we would treat everyone with the same respect and concern that we treat out friends. I think this is fundamentally more satisfying than trying to impress people with objects of wealth. We can work towards that end, or we can retreat behind our walls in fear and greed.
Look around you, how many products near you were made by hand? Where I’m at, I don’t see anything hand-made except a few pieces of art. The capacity to own a factory is beyond the poor and even the middle class.
Most of the entreprenurial opportunities have been from the service sector. Which means people are still just selling their labor. They’ve just taken a more pro-active stance about it. They incur more risks too. Risks that would be foolhardy if you didn’t have a certain amount of financial security to begin with.
I don’t think that the wealth=means of production analogy is too far off. So here’s a neat statistic:
perspective, you don’t like Dave Thomas? OK, here’s another example: This guy. I can talk more knowledgeably about him, because I work for him.
Started out as just an average, middle-class guy from the West Coast. Went to Stanford, joined the Army, flew planes during WWII (also wrote for the Stars & Stripes during that period). When he got out, worked as a reporter for UPI and a PR person for GE.
Started his company in 1962, just him and one other person. Today, in 2002, he employs more than 400 people at 28 offices in four countries. The company is still owned by him, so he has no stockholders to be responsible to. One quote in the link, discussing his employee benefits: “If you remove employees’ financial problems,” he says, “the result is a group of experienced staffers who will stay forever. Business Wire’s interests and theirs are the same.” I can assure you this is not just a good sound bite for its own sake.
The man gives away money like nobody’s business, both to employees and to charities and other parties. He gave $20 million to Stanford two years ago to help fund their new $62 million research facility. He built a school in Israel. He’s sent me to Australia, Germany and Maui in the last two years.
And he’s just one person. There are literally thousands of these kinds of success stories in this country. You can probably go outside, spit, and hit one.
Are there barriers to entry? Certainly, and I’m not going to pretend that race and perceived social (as distinguished from economic) class are not two of them. I believe that those barriers should be eliminated, and opportunities made as equitable as possible. But the barriers to entry can be overcome. People do it everyday.
the capitalist propagandists usually use the US as an example for the greatness of capitlism. you may notice that they usually don’t mention that the so called native americans were wiped out to get the land to build capitalism on. so the private ownership is the result of war and genocide. not good.
we aren’t in an ideal world and probably never will be, but i think we should try to filter our the bullsh!t produced by the propagandists.
Adam Smith is usually promoted as a hero of the capitalists, but Adam Smith disapproved of what he called “joint stock” companies. a “joint stock” company is what we now call a corporation. in 1886 the US supreme court decided that a corporation was a person. Adam Smith died in 1790 and wasn’t told. a corporation is a form of collective ownership. a corporation is a form of communism. LOL!
see the book: THE AFFLUENT SOCIETY by John Kenneth Galbraith
Galbraith and David Hapgood are about the only economists that have any brains.
how much do American consumers loose on depreciation of automobiles each year in this CAPITALIST society? the CAPITALIST economists never seem to mention it.
Dal Timgar
Please. Native Americans are people who are born in America. My ancestors were not Native Americans; they were Cherokee. Or if you must, Indians.
And I’ll call your Affluent Society and raise it with Human Action, the most important economics treatise of all time. You can read the entire text online.
Gates runs Microsoft. If you think its so easy to run a billion dollar company or any company for that matter, go do it.
This “means of production”/“laborer” stuff is bullshit anyway. For every billionare CEO there are probably hundreds of people who own the “means of production” of little mom and pop stores who probably make no more money than I do as a “laborer” in a big corporation. A capitalist economy allows an entire spectrum of socio-economic achievement.
You aren’t proposing anything. You are simply hopeing that everyone will chip in and do the work. I am telling you that every society needs some mechanism to to allocate labor to those tasks that need it most. In a capitalist society, market prices perform this role with the guidance of the government. If you can’t find a job in a certain field because the hard realities of the market, you try to another field.
There is also the matter of opportunity costs. If 20 people are digging a ditch, that means there are 20 people not growing food or building houses.
And what does it matter if Bill Gates or the Ministry of Labor own the means of production. I still have to do what they tell me at work or I don’t get paid.
a cherokee libertatian? what an incredible concept.
actually i prefer “indians” myself. mom says i’m 1/8 Creek.
searched HUMAN ACTION for obsolescence to see what it said about “planned obsolescence.” got no hits.
must be garbage.