Communists

[spuriousmonkey]

SpuriousMonkey: The following shows how intelligent you are. You seem like the type to act before thinking. I am old enough to be your grandfather, but win, lose, or draw you would get hurt if you tried to kick my ass. After it was all over, I would be happy to have you arrested for assault. A jackass like you would make an unsympatheitc defendant in both the crimimal assault trial and the later civil trial. A smart attorney could easily stack the jury with people who would be eager to getr you for attcking a poor old man. It would be interesting to see if I could manage to take you. I was a fair grappler with some martial arts experience. My stamina is not what it once was, but with a little luck I could have you in trouble before I got tired.

First you spit someone in the face. Then you sue them if they react. The american way of life.

No need for comment I would say. Socialism just keeps getting more attractive. It not only seems to have the intellectual upperhand in this discussion it also seems more friendly. Like sesame street. Share with your friends instead of beating them up.

 

[Facial]

America does not run those so called sweat shops, the like of which never existed in America.

This shows a rabid ignorance of history.

 

[Dinosaur]

Facial: Some documentation about American sweatshops?

 

[Chatha]

guthrie,

There is nothing special about the U.S.A, what pisses me off is when people are actually trying to say other countries are better than the U.S.A with no real insightful detail. America is like any other community, if you are an outsider you are going to be cheated and eventually adopt a minority physchology, same in Europe, as in China, and same in Brazil; unless of cause you have money. People are the same everywhere, don't pretend and insinuate that Some nationals are better than others, no country fell from heaven. One thing I know for sure deep down in my heart is that people are never satisfied, even if you they live in the ritz hotel all their life and have totally free healthcare and food, no way, so you see people are not and can never be satisfied. People will always find something wrong with the system. France for instance, with the fantastic socialism they have are containing protests by workers these days; this after all what the government has done for them. Its not a mystery people are insaciable ding bags. Therefore it all comes down to preference, thats why right off the bat I knew Sporiusmonkey had an agenda. I don't mind anybody advertising their own country, I am sure a lot of people here would like to but keep it to yourself and don't come with childish excuses. He mentions Nokia, technology, GNP, price index, exchane rate, all that stuff, but exactly what has that got to do with putting food on the table for the average man. America has provided for many peope, far more than any country can and probably ever will, I think it deserves a little bit of respect my dear friends. There is a man in Texas right now working hard to make a living who isn't complaining as long as he knows his socio-economic an civil status. America has catered for women, minorities, pioneers, e.t.c. In all respect some of your accusations are right, people are fucked up and this has nothing to do with nationality. Personally I am an avid supporter of the have nots and not the pretentious types so I am in favor of anything American. By the way sporiosmonkey you said Americans are greedy, if you weren;t so greedy maybe you wouldn't be complaining, after all in reality it takes a greedy man to spot another one. If you read some of my earlier posts you will find out that I am not entirely in favor with capitalism so I am not being patial here. Maybe you are right, maybe Finland can cater for everybody regardless of status or skin color, maybe it has a better living standard, I better move to Finland then, I better back order order my vodka. Just one question, then again how in the world can an average man like me make a good living in Finland, last a checked its economic enterprise is not as bouyant as even the United Kingdoms?

 

[Chatha]

Finland has been declared the most competitive country in the world for three consecutive years 2003-2005 (four times in the last five years) by the World Economic Forum.

For christ sakes. China had a 9% economic growth for 4 consecutive years, don't you think they ought to have some say in this? Are you saying Finland is actually in competitive league with China or Japan?

But why should we care about you?

Given that the UK, my home country, had the largest Empire the world has yet seen, and now has almost nothing, and is possibly heading towatrds bankruptcy, whats so special about the USA?

And so the jealousy begins, sorry your country had to falter. Oh poor soul don't weep, to make you feel better think about the hundreds of countries that are torn in wars and economic tomoil. Let it go guys... its not about America, it never was.

 

[Chatha]

hell!there are people in North Africa living with higher living standards than America or finland, those families have a lot of wealth, does that mean the living standard in North Africa is better? When you get off your pretentious high pony let us know.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

You fail to see how this discussion on America started off. Let me remind you how.

I wonder how many people posting here have any knowledge of history. I find it hard to believe that comunist/socialist principles have such a strong following.

SpuriousMonkey: For about 150 years, ending some time in the late 1900's or early 20th century, America (at least in the North) had a good approximation to laissez faire capitalism (I put the beginning of the end at 1913). During that time, the life of the average man improved greatly. If you compare life in the USA (except for slaves in the South), all were better off than the average person under the Feudal system which capitalism replaced.

By 1900, the average American work had a standard of living only surpassed by the nobility of the feudal era.

The so called robber barons had to provide jobs as well as good and services at prices affordable to the average person. Their activities were a net benefit to the average person. Today, few but the politicians, lobbyists, and favored special interests benefit from the monstrous bureaucracies established at almost all levels of government.

Legislation, labor unions, and welfare programs did not result in the production of all the items available to the average worker in America. Today, we are all aware of the cars, computers, TV's, cell phones, household applinances, entertainment, and other goods/services available to us.

How many are aware of conditions around 1900? If you were to study a Sears Roebuck catalog from the 1900-1910 era, you would be amazed at the items available and affordable to the average worker. 100-200 hundred years earlier, only the very wealthy (mostly land owing nobility) could afford such items. Yet that era was near the end of the so called robber baron era.

To me it is sad that America has been in decline for at least 50-60 years. It is a tribute to how high we got that USA is still one of the best places in the world to live.

I think that we have gone down hill mainly due to the implementing of socialist principles, which have undermined the work ethic of long ago. With or without socialist policies, we have suffered from an excess of government control over the economy. Demagog-like politicians have made a bogeyman out of big business in order to justify big government and become more powerful and affluent.

With emphasis on this part of the post regarding this thread:
I think that we have gone down hill mainly due to the implementing of socialist principles, which have undermined the work ethic of long ago. With or without socialist policies, we have suffered from an excess of government control over the economy.


And this is utter nonsense. Finland proves that it is possible to have a society based on socialist principles that is economically competative and with living standards that are on average just as high.

And on average actually translates that the average person has it better in Finland than the average person in the US because the wealth in the US is more concentrated in the upper tiers of society.

for instance:

Microsoft CEO Bill Gates has more wealth than the bottom 45 percent of American households combined

Because Finland is based on socialist priniciples (compared to american standards they should be labeled as stinkin' commies) the society is more egalitarian. The wealth is spread. That's why taxes are high for higher incomes, and there is more support for lower incomes (such as the forementioned chilc support, rent subsidy, national healthcare etc).

According to socialist criteria Finland is better. In practice for the average joe Finland is better. Obviously Bill Gates could never have been as rich in Finland as he is in the US. He probably wouldn't have wanted to be that rich. The Finnish Bill Gates is Linus Torvalds (linux).

 

[Xeeg]

Actually Catha, i believe Isreal is one of the nations that fell from heaven...

But to be serious, there are good things about all the political systems, otherwise they wouldn't exist in the first place. If you notice something, the larger the country the more likely it is to have a central government and a lower the quality of living. A good example of this is current day China. With over a billion people, China has to worry about alot more factors to humanity than just quality of life. Since average people in society are mostly self-interested in improving their own life (or families), it is difficult for them to worry about bigger pictures such as global environment and future world needs.

For one thing, a style of ecological/economic business called "symbiosis" is much more possible in a centralist government. I've been very interested in this style of business since i first heard of the success with a Danish coal powerplant, which has been the cleanest coal plant running for the last 30 years. www.symbiosis.dk if you are also interested.

However the same benefit with centralist governments is the same risk. If the government is not interested in improving anything but their own standard of living, then there are horrible concequences for the average people, as history has shown.

But take another look at America's standard of life, and the creation of pollutants per population. America has by far the highest pollution per capita than any other nation in this world. One must take all the factors into picture. If China suddenly jumped to the same standard of life that americans enjoy, what would happen to the planet?

Theres more at stake here than being able to afford a nice car and a big house.

 

[fadingCaptain]

Spurious,
"And this is utter nonsense. Finland proves that it is possible to have a society based on socialist principles that is economically competative and with living standards that are on average just as high."
Very well. However, I don't see how we can really do any direct comparisons with Finland and the US. The enormous differences in geography, population, etc. make it impossible to draw meaningful conclusions. In short, debunking Dinosaur's claim of the socialist downfall of the US should require evidence based on the circumstance being discussed. He may well be completely wrong but Finland has nothing to do with it.

On a side note, someone else pointed out the fact that socialism and communism are not the same. There are many successful countries with extensive socialism...but where are the countries that are ruled by the working class? Has there ever been a country fulfill the promise of communism and become stateless, classless?

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Spurious,
"And this is utter nonsense. Finland proves that it is possible to have a society based on socialist principles that is economically competative and with living standards that are on average just as high."
Very well. However, I don't see how we can really do any direct comparisons with Finland and the US. The enormous differences in geography, population, etc. make it impossible to draw meaningful conclusions. In short, debunking Dinosaur's claim of the socialist downfall of the US should require evidence based on the circumstance being discussed. He may well be completely wrong but Finland has nothing to do with it.

You are quite right on that. I do not think America can ever be based on socialist principles because they have strayed to far of the socialist road. The mindset of the average american would prevent socialist principles to thrive in the US. There is no comparison as such. There is the conclusion though that a society CAN be succesful by incorporating socialist principles into the fabric of society and moreover, be competitive with 'capitalist' nations. Success and socialism are not exclusive principles.

On a side note, someone else pointed out the fact that socialism and communism are not the same. There are many successful countries with extensive socialism...but where are the countries that are ruled by the working class? Has there ever been a country fulfill the promise of communism and become stateless, classless?

No, there never has been such a state. Since I am not really a communist but a socialist I wouldn't really want to build a state around communist principles. And you can't say of course that the US as a state hasn't got socialist qualities. It sure does. Everything is relative though. Some states are just more socialist than others.

 

[Chatha]

First let me clear some things up. Books are still ideas written by human beings, I don’t care if it’s by the U.N or world economic forum daily. The notion of living standard by all definition is largely subjected to point of view as long as the difference in choices available is not crystal clear such as living in Darfur or Quebec. My definition of living standard is having an apartment, a car, a reasonably job, and a computer, anything else is televised, advertised, and publicized jargon. I see no reason to move to freezing Finland when the weather is better in Florida or California, maybe if I wanted to go fishing in freezing waters I’d move to Finland, but still that’s no way to live by my own definition. People everywhere are looking for different things and saying one place is better than the other, well, that’s just your own cup of sugar. I personally like experiencing various cultures, I easily get bored of the same things over again, so I would move to London or New York before Helsinki, that’s my own way of living. Socialism is by no doubt the best form of socio-political system and I am happy it is working well for some people, but not everything works best for everybody, including America. America is a country subliminally segregated, with people from all sorts of background, and it’s going to be tedious setting up an effective socialist system without one group trying to partial to their affiliation. However with capitalism there is no promise or opportunity of cheating another group. Remember what happened to the communist Soviet Union? Part of the reason for the much sporadic civil unrest was because one ethnic group constantly complained about how bad the system treated them. This in fact is the primary reason for the break up and factions of the union we see today. The same thing happened in Communist Vietnam and Korea. Therefore you have to create a sort of illusion to create equality, and that illusion is capitalism, at the very least it creates plasma televisions. But this is just an idea of mine, I am not entirely sure of its superiority though I am sure it makes some sense. Brazil, U.S, Japan, Germany, these countries are capitalist countries but with some implementations of socialism. In fact in New York anyone can find a totally free healthcare paid for by the New York State if you qualify. Agriculture, research, Public amenities, education and scholarships, health care, veteran and military benefits, and unemployment comp, all these are still subsidized by the same capitalist governments. Capitalist governments do provide for their citizens in their own way, most notably defense, wasn’t it sweet as honey as President Bush swiftly invaded another country for the attacks of innocent civilians? Strong Socialism will do better for some countries, most notably Africans. America just happens to be a socialist state with something a little special. But like I said before even if America implements an effective socialist network people will still find something wrong with their lives and living standards; at the end of the day you have to live your own life and that’s really what’s much difficult than your nation’s socio-politics.

 

[guthrie]

guthrie,

There is nothing special about the U.S.A, what pisses me off is when people are actually trying to say other countries are better than the U.S.A with no real insightful detail.

You mean like all the economic etc statistics that have been posted?

America is like any other community, if you are an outsider you are going to be cheated and eventually adopt a minority physchology, same in Europe, as in China, and same in Brazil; unless of cause you have money.

So, definitely only money counts in teh USA. Gotcha. That explains a great deal.

People are the same everywhere, don't pretend and insinuate that Some nationals are better than others, no country fell from heaven.

But some countris are better than others. The UK is better than India when it comes to starvation levels. But, if you go back 200 years, the UK was as bad, if not worse. It all depends on what you are looking at. But yes, if you take the long view, no country is better or worse than another.

Its not a mystery people are insaciable ding bags.

No, plenty of people arent. Thats the flaw with rabid capitalists or socialists- they project their own idealistic concerns on other people, and assume that everyone is like them. They are not.

Therefore it all comes down to preference, thats why right off the bat I knew Sporiusmonkey had an agenda.

Yup, he has different preferences.

but exactly what has that got to do with putting food on the table for the average man.

Everything, if your in a socialist country in a global free market economy.



So, let me get your argument straight- no country is better than another, but the USA is better than others? Gotcha.

 

[guthrie]

On a side note, someone else pointed out the fact that socialism and communism are not the same. There are many successful countries with extensive socialism...but where are the countries that are ruled by the working class? Has there ever been a country fulfill the promise of communism and become stateless, classless?

Yup- cant think of any. Just like no country has a libertarian or even anything approaching anarchist or minarchist set up. Personally, I view communism as more of an ideal than a necessarily practical reality.

 

[Chatha]

guthrie,

Everything, if your in a socialist country in a global free market economy.

In socialism the government does the merchandising and selling, in capitalism the people do the merchandising and selling. Both ideas are essentially the same if you ask me. According to “sporiousminkey” French or Finish money grows on trees, to me all those nice ports and subsidies had to come from somewhere. In socialist systems such as the French’s the government owns and peddles a huge amount of businesses in goods and services including cars, electronics, defense, banking and insurance, telecom, clothing, e.t.c. Finland does the same practice, they sell vodka, technology, agriculture, e.t.c, they particularly trade with E.U states. The govnt also makes out loans to individuals as capital. Hence it is actually the socialist governments that’s bigger in size and power compared to the capitalist government, everybody knows this. Another reason why the U.S is not compatible with socialism is because of the population size. Any government would rather prefer the people go out and fend for themselves; its called division of labor, no government likes the burden of having to cater for 200 million people. Its not impossible to cater for 200 million people but it’s the mighty daunting task that strains any government, plus you can imagine how big the government has to be to accommodate this task. The U.S government can’t even repatriate 12 million people much less provide for 200 million; which doesn’t make much sense. Once your population is more than 50 million it may be time to start thinking about letting the people handle themselves, its like having a child, once the kid is 25 years old its time to let him go into the world and handle himself; at the very least its entertainment for you. Capitalism and socialism are basically the same notions. Now you see how silly the statement by guthrie above is? In my opinion if you want to compare Finland, compare it with another socialist state like France, it’s only fair.

So, let me get your argument straight- no country is better than another, but the USA is better than others? Gotcha

As far as capitalist countries are concerned, and as far as it's my opinion...yes. A lot of you are talking about the U.S, there is another gaint just up North called Canada, at one time Canada was one of the richest countries in the world and its still up there i living standard. However, from what I hear its more socialist than the U.S, though it is mighty cold.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

In socialism the government does the merchandising and selling, in capitalism the people do the merchandising and selling. Both ideas are essentially the same if you ask me. According to “sporiousminkey” French or Finish money grows on trees, to me all those nice ports and subsidies had to come from somewhere.

Show me where I said money grows on trees. It seems to me you have no arguments, statistics, facts to back your own points up and now you try to ridicule a caricature of socialism.

In socialist systems such as the French’s the government owns and peddles a huge amount of businesses in goods and services including cars, electronics, defense, banking and insurance, telecom, clothing, e.t.c. Finland does the same practice, they sell vodka, technology, agriculture, e.t.c, they particularly trade with E.U states. The govnt also makes out loans to individuals as capital. Hence it is actually the socialist governments that’s bigger in size and power compared to the capitalist government, everybody knows this. Another reason why the U.S is not compatible with socialism is because of the population size. Any government would rather prefer the people go out and fend for themselves; its called division of labor, no government likes the burden of having to cater for 200 million people. Its not impossible to cater for 200 million people but it’s the mighty daunting task that strains any government, plus you can imagine how big the government has to be to accommodate this task. The U.S government can’t even repatriate 12 million people much less provide for 200 million; which doesn’t make much sense. Once your population is more than 50 million it may be time to start thinking about letting the people handle themselves, its like having a child, once the kid is 25 years old its time to let him go into the world and handle himself; at the very least its entertainment for you. Capitalism and socialism are basically the same notions. Now you see how silly the statement by guthrie above is? In my opinion if you want to compare Finland, compare it with another socialist state like France, it’s only fair.


As far as capitalist countries are concerned, and as far as it's my opinion...yes. A lot of you are talking about the U.S, there is another gaint just up North called Canada, at one time Canada was one of the richest countries in the world and its still up there i living standard. However, from what I hear its more socialist than the U.S, though it is mighty cold.

The country with the highest HDI in the world is actually Norway.

You fail to see however the main advantage of a socialist system. You see, it is always remarkable to me that this needs to be explained to Americans. Equality. The rich are less rich and the poor are less poor. Everything is pulled towards the middle. In the US extreme poverty is rampant. That is the third world aspect of its society. It's easy to wave the high GDP per capita in other people's faces, but if you would do that to me I would expect you would do that in utter embarrasment. The highest GDP per capita and still so much poverty.

That's where socialism wins hands down. The excesses are less.

And btw Finland has one of the most competitive economies in the world. I think you have no clue about the workings of any European country if I read your post. It's just all made up. A work of fiction you present as the truth. You have learned during your indoctrination as a proper capitalist that this is how socialist countries work and that is how it is. Shame it has nothing to do with the truth.

And are you returning again to the size argument? The US is so big it can't be socialist? What's this then? One of the motto's of capitalists is that big is better. Companies merge because then they can be more competitive. Bigger means less! Germany is a third the size of the US. They seem to have no trouble maintaining socialist aspects in their society, and that even after absorbing a bankrupt nation (DDR). If you really want to throw in the size argument you better come up with something to back up your claim.

 

[leopold]

in my opinion you cannot compare finland and america due primarily to their size difference.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Then I compare Finland with florida. Same conclusion.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

In fact, if size is the issue you should start a movement to split the US up.


But let me guess: blaming it all on size and not on the underlying principles of a society takes the blame away from you. So you can drive by the homeless without feeling guilty.

 

[leopold]

In fact, if size is the issue you should start a movement to split the US up.


But let me guess: blaming it all on size and not on the underlying principles of a society takes the blame away from you. So you can drive by the homeless without feeling guilty.

well see thats my point spurious
have any idea how many immigrants come to america each year illegally?
our economy cannot possibly absorb all these people.

how would finland deal with all those immigrants?

i am all for helping someone when they are down and out but i be damned if i am going to support their lazy ass when they are able to work

sorry about the delay in responding i am keeping an eye on some downloads from the archive.

 

[The Devil Inside]

i would be interested in your opinion on comparing maoist communism to soviet communism, in regards to how they competed with the american free market system, chatha.

do you even know the difference?