Debate Capitalism v. Communism

If you look in any economics textbook, it will always say that free-trade is the best economic system. This is because trade allows for specialization and expansion of production possiblities. Capitalism is as close to free-trade as we get in modern nations. In addition, the capitalist system creates a "work hard, get rewarded" mentality.

Communism deals with government distribution of resources and products. This paired with the fact that it has no incentive system creates a very ineficient economy.

People may say "WELL LOOK AT CHINA!" the fact is china is using more free trade and capitalist practices without actually slapping a label on it. and there still is a high degree of government control within communism.


There's no debate, it's a fact. capitalism is easily superior.

NOTE: when talking about capitalism, it is not synonymous with America. the only thing better than capitalism is free-trade with no government intervention. But I suppose that's debatable depending on what economic thought you take - keynesian or classical.

 

The reason majority of the world population perceive communism is a bad thing is because the power tempts too many people. Too many 'bad' people want to be in control, and not enough 'good' people. Even if a benevolent leader is in control, a plot to kill him and his successors is possible so that the evil people can rise to power, who only think of doing what is good for himself and his empire, and not the people.

 

While Communism is in itself a wonderful idea, it is simply not achievable. Because we are human. Each person has that little thought he/she is better than everyone else and deserves more. Therefore the government must use force o enable this. Government using force=public unhappiness=revolt.

Also, the competitiveness of Western society is what makes our economy grow. With a government controlled economy the economy, i think, will not grow as much, ut may also be protected from the vagaries of global market.

 

Hmmmmm...... Polotics is a difficult thing. Capitalism embraces the voice of the people allowing for what they want. However Communism rules in more a 'this is what we need, but the people won't like it' sort of way. I would say it depends on the world political climate, like now with the current war, I would say capitalism

 

More like voice of the majority or voice of the very small minority that controls most of the money.

 

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?
"No!" says the man in Washington, "It belongs to the poor."
"No!" says the man in the Vatican, "It belongs to God."
"No!" says the man in Moscow, "It belongs to everyone."

Sorry, I couldn't resist. But honestly, I am almost shocked at the amount of people for the Communist way for the economy. Well, I almost am. To be honest, I really don't know that much because I honestly don't care, for in the end I believe that the money a man makes is his own, and he is entitled to it. He should not pay it to the Government for his right to live, he should not pay it to the Church for Salvation, and he should not pay it to his neighbor for the good company. The Government can use other methods besides taxation (though argueably taxes are needed, but regardless I feel like it is a system that is curently broken in America) to acquire their own wealth, and the neighbor can work his own way to success. I am not going to even discuss how ridiculous it is to pay for "salvation". However, people want what will most benefit them at the moment, whether that be government provided "allowences" or the money they made themselves for themselves. I understand, you're poor and it's not how you want to live your life. You look up at the wealthy man without heart and wonder why fortune smiles upon him, and why must you be the one polishing his shoes. On the flip side, you are that wealthy man, being forced to delve out your profits to those who merely existed and did not work as hard as you did to get where you are then. To be honest, I think Nitrous and KratosAurion said it the best in another thread:

The government should not interfere with the economy, and that I agree with. Yes, it is true that I support the idea that instead of corporate bailout, it should be distributed amongst the tax paying American people. My reason being is that they are already doing it, and they are doing it with American tax dollars. If that money was just returned to those who paid those taxes, I would consider that a justified government interaction. However, this is not the point. The point being is that there should be no group, no sect, no person telling you what you have to do with your money. It is yours for a reason, regardless of what that reason might be, and you are entitled to it.

(For the record, just because I quoted a fictitious video game character, that doesn't mean I agree with his views. I simply used that quote as an example of that which somewhat mirrored my own very varried thoughts.)

 

So you are saying that businesses that fail from poor practice need to be saved in order to save jobs? That the invisible hand of the people cannot keep a business afloat? That the government must intervene, thusly creating a support everyone can fall back upon?

So a man who chooses not to work is now not allowed to do so? He has to now get a job because otherwise he would be taking advantage of a new system? Wouldn't it be better if a man who did not work payed for it himself by not having money, where his actions only affected himself and did not require government involvement to set him straight? No, that makes too much sense, it is far more logical to just give everyone money and then punish people we deem not "giving back" to its government and community good enough. He'll still be known as a lazy slob, nothing there will change. The only difference is money, merely cash. The oil in the gears of the world. Psh, who gives a **** about their money?

And you know what, you say this is not a "Democracy vs Communism" debate, but it is. You cannot be a democracy when a person does not have the freedom to weild their income how it is they want. It isn't a democracy if the government gets more involved with society more than it already is, which communism (the one I see you preaching) will result in. You say a government can't be partially involved, it has to be all in or all out. Well then I'd want them all out, because if a government went all in and started declaring how I have to live my life, then that isn't living.

 

And this is where I differ with many of you (Is it on topic to talk about the economy?). Anyways, I believe in government regulation of buisness, mostly because I have the belief that man can not be trusted with ambition. If buisnesses were deregulated then the elite few would monopolize their industry (much like the late 1800's).

Also on another point in talking about the economy, I believe the stimulus money was crudely handed out, but we had no choice in the matter. We would either have to bail out failed buisnesses or let our whole financial institution fall and suffer a similar depression as we had before. In a way, we are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

One of the flaws of communism is that it assumes people are going to choose the right decision and not be selfish. Capitalism uses the greed of the people to better the community.But the flaw with capitalism is it places the power and money into the hands of the elite few while letting those less fortunate not get the chance to better their lives.

 

Canada's healthcare is great. the only thing i find is that, it takes a hel of a long time to get into hospital rooms, unless its an emergency, then your put infront of everyone else, i dont know much about healthcare in US but the only difference pretty much is that, you dont have to worry about paying a bill after your getting out of the hospital, canadian taxes are higher than US, but when we pay taxes, it pays for our healthcare, so its not free, prepaid should i say?

What do you meen by the elite few?

 

The top of the upper class. The one's who make the most money in the U.S. I can't find the statistic, but it says that the majority of the money in the U.S. is controlled by the elite few (I guess that's common knowledge).

 

Socialism is the best way. Capitalism makes people to greedy, and communism gives people no reason to try hard. At least with Socialism, there is a way for people who start with nothing to catch up. Capitalism allows for growth on an exponential scale. Meaning that there will always be a big gap between the rich and poor. This is one of the reasons that I strongly support Barack Obama. He agrees with Socialism on many levels

 

I completely disagree with the above statement. I am not poor but not rich and I reject all forms of socialism. I believe that although some people who aren't getting on as well as others, the people who are making due with what they have should not suffer at the expense of those who are either A) Less fortunate as many would call them B) Lazy because the promises of a socialist regime in america has neutralized their work ethic or C) Just don't care because they have gotten used to their role in society and aren't working to better themselves.

I live adjacent to Detroit where there are many poor people and Obama's Socialist views are very popular here due to his promises of making people not homeless and giving them money. Where is that money coming from though? It certainly isn't coming from our 9 trillion dollar deficit of a government we have going and it's not coming from other countries. It's coming from the hard working middle class. Which, not to be racist, is primarily whites.

In 2040 the white population has been extrapolated to being a minority. This is because of people like Obama who isn't doing enough to keep illegal immigrants and other illegals out of America. He is making it too easy for them to thrive here without having to try. Because of this it is not only making America a bad place to live but it is welcoming paracetic immigrants that are running our nations banks dry and taking jobs from real Americans.

All Socialism is bad unless you are in the lower classes.

Capitalism FTW.

 

So true, im sure most people slowed down there work, because if this "change" i mean if the lazy people who arent getting money,And Obama Promises all these new things, why would they find a job?

 

Why do you only talk about lazy people? There are those people out there who are poor and are working very hard that don't go up in the social or economic ladder. Just because you work hard doesn't mean you will be successful. For many of them it is not their fault that they were born into a poor family in a bad neighborhood, and in some ways they can't escape that town or that way of life.

 

i wasnt, i was just supporting that one part of his thing, i dont know much about american politics, but i know thats one effect from socialism.