Why won't the nightmare dream of communism die?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
DarkLight said:
One thing I’d point out is that this worked because Aldi’s already had a large amount of money to come in and do that. I’m more concerned about the person who doesn’t have all that. It doesn’t help much if you need another big business to compete with a big business. The question is whether 18 year old Joe Blow who doesn’t have anything other than a high school degree can make a life for himself without either putting himself deep into debt or staying working at a dead-end job. From what I’ve seen, the answer in libertarian capitalism is that he can’t, because the people who already have money can do it better and it benefits them to keep his wages down.
Click to expand...
Yes, as I mentioned Aldi can do that because it is backed by capital. There is nothing wrong with that. The capital can be from saved business income (all the better) or raised capital (owned by shareholders) or bank loan (provided by depositors). Everyone can thus share in these companies creation of wealth.

The average man’s individual wealth when accumulated with others far exceeds that of rich individuals. Look at Rupert Murdoch or Frank Lowry and their (now) minority ownership in the very companies they helped to create. The people win there.

Joe Blow may or may not make a life for himself. I’d suggest he get his high school qualification to help him to do that. I’d suggest that if he wants to take part in the success of society that he develop his skills and work in an area that suits him. In the West because capitalism is so developed Joe will have many more opportunities. He can even be one of the web designers, transport workers or packaging professionals who work with the supermarkets (or online competitors) and share in the created wealth.

Joe has a whole life time to make ‘a life for himself’. The supermarket doesn’t owe him a life but for at least part of the journey they can help each other. Or perhaps he will choose a completely different industry.

Yes there are pressures to keep prices down such as the price of labour, but don’t forget that there are also pressures to raise prices, including the price of labour.

Joe is a participant not a slave. That is a difference in thinking between a capitalistic mindset advocating a plurality of people creating wealth and a mindset of authoritarian government control.
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
Joe Blow may or may not make a life for himself. I’d suggest he get his high school qualification to help him to do that. I’d suggest that if he wants to take part in the success of society that he develop his skills and work in an area that suits him. In the West because capitalism is so developed Joe will have many more opportunities. He can even be one of the web designers, transport workers or packaging professionals who work with the supermarkets (or online competitors) and share in the created wealth.
Click to expand...
I don’t know what part of the west you’re in, but the part I’m in if you want to share in the wealth that’s certainly not going to work. Unless he has family paying for him, he’s going to have to take out a heavy loan in order to get skills to be able to work anywhere but said supermarket. Unless you either take out loans for a degree or have someone to help support you, you have basically no opportunities at all with just your high school degree (which is, I should mention, socialism) - and that’s if you’re able to work a 60+ hour week to support yourself and learn something else on the side.
 
Last edited:
DarkLight said:
I don’t know what part of the west you’re in, but the part I’m in if you want to share in the wealth that’s certainly not going to work. Unless he has family paying for him, he’s going to have to take out a heavy loan in order to get skills to be able to work anywhere but said supermarket. Unless you either take out loans for a degree or have someone to help support you, you have basically no opportunities at all with just your high school degree (which is, I should mention, socialism) - and that’s if you’re able to work a 60+ hour week to support yourself and learn something else on the side.
Click to expand...
You have to create wealth to share in it. That is capitalism.

Some companies will invest in training people to the benefit of both.

Government interference in universities has increased the fees charged in some areas and government support for immigration is lowering wages and increasing housing costs. Government restriction in education has resulted in many areas in a lowering of standards which does not serve the population well.

I am living mainly in the Philippines but my western reference as you can guess mostly comes from Australia. I took out loans to go to university there and obtain a science degree. I worked for the best part of 20 years and funded myself to go back and get a teaching degree.

Both of my parents worked in blue collar jobs and we were not rich. We never had holidays and my father was a low level union representative where he worked as a printer.

There are opportunities if we think a little outside of the box and get involved in an area of industry that we have genuine enthusiasm in.

It can be done with the right attitude. If it is too late in one life then it can be the children that should gain from the experience such as with my parents. It is never easy but the opportunities afforded to people where the government is in control are far less in my opinion. It can work for a short time in places like Venezuela where the wealth already exists but the system has to encourage a continued creation of wealth otherwise it will fail.

You don’t have to answer as it is a personal question, but what sort of things are you interested in or good at?
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
You don’t have to answer as it is a personal question, but what sort of things are you interested in or good at?
Click to expand...
From a personal perspective…I’m learning to do computer work. But I also recognize that for me personally, a lot of that is helped along by that other people have money. My computer was a gift. I rely for help on my father in the same field and on some of his professional contacts. While my degree was not in computers, it was paid for by my family. If I get sick, I know if I really need to I have people who will help pay my bills. Our public schools where I grew up didn’t work for me, so my mother stayed home to teach me, which relied on my father having the kind of income to do that. When I got a job in college, I was able to use it to save up because I wasn’t supporting myself.

Even then, it’s hard just because it’s hard for me to both put in the time to actually pay my bills now, take care of my own place, and find the time and energy to make serious progress on studying. I often find after putting in the work necessary to support and take care of myself I have very little energy to be able to focus on studying. And I recognize I have a lot of advantages that, while they don’t rely on me having money myself, they rely on the fact that I know people who do have money and are willing to use it to my benefit.
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
government support for immigration is lowering wages and increasing housing costs
Click to expand...
Dang!!!

In the US, we had a housing bubble which burst. I anticipated that would happen due to demographics, because the Boomers had fewer children and the population would shrink.

So the government lets in lots of immigrants to keep housing prices level, because housing is a huge economic indicator.

Dang!
 
I agree (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
That’s 20-30 million people over the course of approx. 80 years.

Certainly that’s a lot of people, but it pales in comparison to the mass “cleansings” of Stalin, where so many millions died in a roughly ten year span.
 
ProdglArchitect said:
Certainly that’s a lot of people, but it pales in comparison to the mass “cleansings” of Stalin, where so many millions died in a roughly ten year span.
Click to expand...
800 thousand people were executed under Stalin from 1921 to 1953. That is a lot less than 20-30 million historians say were killed by the US regime.
However estimates vary:
“Historian and archival researcher Stephen G. Wheatcroft of the University of Melbourne claims Stalin can be charged with the “purposive deaths” of “something in the order of a million people”, which includes 791,570 executions from 1921 to 1945, purposive excess deaths in the gulag and 208,430 deaths in exile from 1930 to 1945; if those who perished from criminal negligence and irresponsibility are included, the number increases to roughly 3 million deaths this total excludes famine deaths, which Wheatcroft and historian R. W. Davies estimate to be around 5.5 to 6.5 million).”
see:

 
That is far lower than any other estimate I have ever seen, but even if it’s true, you also have to take into consideration the historically-violent communist regimes of other Russian leaders, as well as the Chinese leaders and other attempts at communism, all of whom killed scores upon scores of their own citizens.

Comparing body counts is not a valid way of determining whether or not a governing system is good. The fact is that communism systematically denies the humanity of its citizens, and tries to have government act in the place of God.
 
ProdglArchitect said:
Comparing body counts is not a valid way of determining whether or not a governing system is good. The fact is that communism systematically denies the humanity of its citizens, and tries to have government act in the place of God.
Click to expand...
The thread concerns the question of why communism doesn’t die (since it is a nightmare)?
 
AlNg said:
The thread concerns the question of why communism doesn’t die (since it is a nightmare)?
Click to expand...
Two reasons: The evil will to power of the few to dominate the many. The belief of the many in the lie of the few that fallen man can return the the Garden of Eden.
 
o_mlly said:
40.png
AlNg:
The thread concerns the question of why communism doesn’t die (since it is a nightmare)?
Click to expand...
Two reasons: The evil will to power of the few to dominate the many. The belief of the many in the lie of the few that fallen man can return the the Garden of Eden.
Click to expand...
One the other hand, on a practical level it is dead.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
One the other hand, on a practical level it is dead.
Click to expand...
If “it” means the evil will to power or the gullibility of the many to wish an escape from freedom then I think those human frailties are very much not dead.
 
Last edited:
o_mlly said:
If “it” means the evil will to power or the gullibility of the many to wish an escape from freedom then I think those human frailties are very much not dead.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but that has nothing to do with socialism.
 
I’m not really interested in making moralistic judgements about the communist movement. Communism doesn’t need to justify itself on universal principles of justice or morality - the proletarian movement is egotistical, and revolts to free itself from capital. However I don’t believe such deaths would be necessary to abolish capital, and often historically the acts of terror and party dictatorship that are associated with communism have been used against the communist movement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top