Communism vs Capitalism

[Bee King of Zombies]

It would work for me. I'd be happy alone. No human contact what so ever. No laws or rules. I wouldn't go around saying you get your ideas about government from a teen movie. Even though mathew lillard kicks ass. I recomend you read the book Ishmael.

[Buckaroo]

Alright, I made a mistake bringing the culture into this. Sure the European Colonialists fucked them over. They were idiots then and still are now. At least they introduced technology to them, but not much else. If after the Europeans left and the Dictators that control a lot of African countries now didn't come into power Africa would be as rich as America, if not richer, no matter what the culture. They have more resources and people than us and have the same capibility to become rich and powerful. They just need the ability to do so. Rather than helping them with humanitarian things, why don't you get rid of the Dictators who are the cause of the problem. Then do all the humanitarian stuff you want.

Have you ever, personally, seen a rich man exploit a less rich man? Have you been in the room at the time when you saw it happen? Rich men who have worked their asses off to get rich deserve to be rich. They are rich because they made a product that people liked. Because they made a product people liked, they made a better one, and worked even harder to make that. If they didn't make a good product then they would go back and make it better or go out of business. The rich people I hate are the ones that inhereted their money. They are the ones who did nothing to get their money, and if anyone exploits it is that type of rich person. Take Bill Gates for example, he created a computer that was better than anything anyone could have thought of, even IBM which literally went bankrupt (in the 80's) becasuse of Bill Gates. IBM never thought that people would want personal computers, but they were wrong, and therefore, because of competition were forced to change what they make because Bill Gates made a better product. That is true Capitalism at its purest form, Bill Gates, one man, who even though was overshadowed by the huge IBM company, produced a better product on his own, and became rich because of it. No matter how small the person and big the competitor, if you can make a better product than the big guy then your product will be appreciated, and the big guy will have to change to stay in business. That's the way things work. Baseball players make money because people like what they do. I don't like CEO's, they just abuse power, those are bad rich people too, they didn't do jack shit to make their money, they're just as bad as the inheriters. Just because one guy has more money or is bigger doesn't mean bull. Just because they are big doesn't mean they can produce a better product, it just means they are big. It takes ingenuity, and intelligence, and independent thought to produce something worthwhile, not cooperative shit. For instance, video game producers are all good at what they do. The graphic artist creates great art, the level producer produces great architecture. They all have good ideas, produced on their own, then they put them together to produce a product the public likes because each person had a mind, the ingenuity, the capibility, and each produced great work.

"Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime." Rather than give the poor money and give them government programs, why don't you actually go out there and them a job. GIVING them money will just make them do less work because they will think that the government will protect them from now on. I hate that kinda shit. Go out there and find a job for them, something that they were once good at and are still good at. Then they will start making money and become better at what they do and then they will get more money, and if not beceome rich they will have a good life. Do that to several thousand poor people around the country and things will start to change. Just handing out money to them without them doing anything for it will give them a false sense of joy and will cause even more economic stagnation.

Not only do 4000 children die, people die in car crashes, plane crashes, sickness (and not just in poor countries). Should I feel sorry that thousands die because they smoke. Fuck smokers. They are fucking idiots, they should die because they screwed with their bodies. It is bad that people die because they have no food, but it is not just because they are homeless. People die because they have no food because of dictators in Africa, because of Dictators in South America, because of Castro, because of Sadam, because of Kim Jong Il. Kill those bastards and free some people and make give them food. So what if you kill civilians, it happens in war, you have to deal with it, I feel very sad because of Civilian deaths, but it happens in war, and for the war to end, and for peace to be restored to a dictatorial country, it has to happen, in a case such as that the needs of the many do outway the needs of the few. Sure I feel sad that civilians are killed in Iraq, but more than 300,000 will killed by Sadam, and about the same by his underlings. They raped civilians, they fed them to dogs (literaly, I read it in the news), they killed them for no reason, they invaded three countries. The deaths of a few thousand civilians is a small price to pay for the freedom of a whole country and for the chance for all the other people to not have to worry that if the next day Sadam will kill their son, their daughter, or husband, or wife, if not the whole family. I seriously thought that the Vietnam war was a waste, and Kennedy should never have gotten us into it and LBJ should have definitely NOT gotten deeper into it. Russia didn't need a war to collapse it, it was already failing in the 50's. Thank god that Nixon got us out of the Vietnam war, though he didn't do anything else good as president.

That fact that Russia had a bad military and a bad space program and basically everything technological they did was bad does indicate something. Don't you think? If they have bad equipment, then their must be something wrong with the culture? No, that isn't it, their must be something wrong with the philosohpy? Aha, now you've got it! Bad economy, produces shitty products. The most technological thing Russia did was the Nuke, but they even copied that from us.

Yes we gave Afghanistan weapons, but only to fight the Russians. It was the right thing to do. How did we know then that Al Qaeda would kill about 3000 Americans. We did know that after the first WTC attack though, and should have premptively killed Al Qaeda. Bill Clinton even acknowledged that Al Qaeda was behind the first WTC attack. He actually acknowledged that they were behind 20 separate attacks during his presidency, but he never went after Osama himself. Osama actually spoke out in Somalia and when they drove that truck into our barracks in Africa. He said himself that he was behind it and would do more. I am glad that Bush ripped Al Qaeda apart, even if we didn't get Osama. It was too late however, for those 3000 dead Americans. :(

Yes we gave Sadam weapons to fight Iran, but we thought it prudent, and that WAS a mistake. I am amazed America did that. But it happened, and Sadam is either now dead, or really mad that his sons are dead. Actually, he probably doesn't give a flying fuck about his sons.

[Buckaroo]

I think the book Ishmael is a piece of shit, fucking bull. It is the worst piece of liberal shit I have ever read in my life and I feel the worse for reading it.

[Bee King of Zombies]

what?! how the fuck can you say that? what is shit about it? The only way someone could hate that book is if they didn't want to face the truth about society.

[Buckaroo]

No, the only way someone could hate that book is if they have a different philosophy, and I think the giver and taker shit in that book is barely even recognizable as philosophy.

[Bee King of Zombies]

maybe you didn't understand it.

[Buckaroo]

I think I should explain my Anarchy viewpoint better. People don't need a government to set up the Police or Army, or anything else, nor do they need them telling them what to do. People should make morals based off how they judge things, and how they want to live. If they want to be a pimp, then their life will be worthless, and eventually, they will pay for it. That is how it should work. Independent people can start the Army, the Police. Why do people join the Army now? They want a job, they want a life, they want to protect their country. Any of those reasons, but number one, they are not forced to join, they join on their own free will based off their decisions. People with the drive and capibility to start companies or protection agencies will and people will join just as they do now. People would still run courts, but their would be no need for laws. If someone threatened your family with a gun, and terrorized your home, then you make a moral decision, do you want your family to live, or do you want some crazy fuck to terrorize them. Kill the crazy fuck. No need for law their. If someone wanted to go around humping people then they will if they wish, but they will learn, they don't need someone telling them to, they will learn, their friends will also help teach them a lesson. I haven't explained how everything would work without a government, but if you want to know how, ask me.

[Buckaroo]

BTW, don't confuse Capitalism as a form of government, it is only a form of economy. Democracy is a form of government. Communism is also just economy, but typically, it is used as a tool to kill people by the dictators of the world.

[Buckaroo]

Oh I understood it perfectly, it is a talking Ape why not just use a human? who thinks that our society is materialistic and that a society where we should (this is meant to be flowerly and would have a better effect if spoken by a hippie) love nature and live with the animals and that the rich are bad and..., fucking hell, what a bunch of shit. What do you think made that paper you are writing on you fuck...or that printing press that printed it out, technology, which was produced because man is intelligent and because we don't live with fucking nature and we aren't animals.

[Buckaroo]

Boy, I am glad that my girlfriend (if you don't remember her name from that discussion we had, it is Esther Kim), shares my philosophical viewpoints (which includes economy, politcs, and life, which are all parts of philosophy.) If she didn't I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

[Bee King of Zombies]

...You mention your girlfriend a lot I think you made her up.

[Buckaroo]

She exists. I haven't mentioned her a lot. Just that one thread, which did have a phony picture. And this one post.

[ShenmueWeb]

Man why do you have to write so much?

Alright, I made a mistake bringing the culture into this. Sure the European Colonialists fucked them over. They were idiots then and still are now. At least they introduced technology to them, but not much else. If after the Europeans left and the Dictators that control a lot of African countries now didn't come into power Africa would be as rich as America, if not richer, no matter what the culture. They have more resources and people than us and have the same capibility to become rich and powerful. They just need the ability to do so. Rather than helping them with humanitarian things, why don't you get rid of the Dictators who are the cause of the problem. Then do all the humanitarian stuff you want.

Africa's technology was actually progressing quite rapidly at the time of colonialization. Zimbabwe's beautiful stone palaces are a symbol of this. Many African nations, such as Ghana, did not turn to dictators after they gained independence. Ghana became independent in 1957 and was led by an elected president named Kwame Nkrumah. They still use a democratic system. Colonialization and the slave trade pushed Africa far behind us. I generally agree with your statements.

Have you ever, personally, seen a rich man exploit a less rich man? Have you been in the room at the time when you saw it happen? Rich men who have worked their asses off to get rich deserve to be rich. They are rich because they made a product that people liked. Because they made a product people liked, they made a better one, and worked even harder to make that. If they didn't make a good product then they would go back and make it better or go out of business.

Most rich people got rich from inheritance... it is ignorant to assume that most rich people made some breakthrough invention or worked their asses off. Many of the rich worked a little bit at first... but then immediately hired people at low wages to make them richer. And no, rich people don't sit in the same room as poor people and exploit them... but I have seen unions on strike that have very basic demands get shut out and fired.

The rich people I hate are the ones that inhereted their money. They are the ones who did nothing to get their money, and if anyone exploits it is that type of rich person. Take Bill Gates for example, he created a computer that was better than anything anyone could have thought of, even IBM which literally went bankrupt (in the 80's) becasuse of Bill Gates. IBM never thought that people would want personal computers, but they were wrong, and therefore, because of competition were forced to change what they make because Bill Gates made a better product. That is true Capitalism at its purest form, Bill Gates, one man, who even though was overshadowed by the huge IBM company, produced a better product on his own, and became rich because of it. No matter how small the person and big the competitor, if you can make a better product than the big guy then your product will be appreciated, and the big guy will have to change to stay in business. That's the way things work.

if bill gates is the symbol of capitalism you should also look at his twisted monopoly and anti-trust cases. i agree with everything you said about companies influenced by a better product... but you have to understand that under socialism there would still be huge advances in technology and production because you have all of an industry working together instead of a bunch of smaller ones.

Baseball players make money because people like what they do. I don't like CEO's, they just abuse power, those are bad rich people too, they didn't do jack shit to make their money, they're just as bad as the inheriters. Just because one guy has more money or is bigger doesn't mean bull. Just because they are big doesn't mean they can produce a better product, it just means they are big. It takes ingenuity, and intelligence, and independent thought to produce something worthwhile, not cooperative shit.

Think about it... it's not really about the size it's about the lack of competition that would make it better. Of course in socialism there would be different groups of people working to make a product... not just one big building full of people working on one thing. It would be a lot like capitalism except these different "corporations" would be working for the same cause and for the same goal of bettering society.

For instance, video game producers are all good at what they do. The graphic artist creates great art, the level producer produces great architecture. They all have good ideas, produced on their own, then they put them together to produce a product the public likes because each person had a mind, the ingenuity, the capibility, and each produced great work.

exactly... the videogame producers are COOPERATING with eachother to produce a final product. The graphic artists and the level producers are not in competition with eachother... they are all working for the same goal. Way to go proving my point man!

"Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime." Rather than give the poor money and give them government programs, why don't you actually go out there and them a job. GIVING them money will just make them do less work because they will think that the government will protect them from now on. I hate that kinda shit. Go out there and find a job for them, something that they were once good at and are still good at. Then they will start making money and become better at what they do and then they will get more money, and if not beceome rich they will have a good life. Do that to several thousand poor people around the country and things will start to change. Just handing out money to them without them doing anything for it will give them a false sense of joy and will cause even more economic stagnation.

communism/socialism isn't about giving poor people money. if you don't work, you don't get paid. unless you have some disability, really old age, or an excuse not to work, you don't get paid. oh and one of the main features of socialism is a free advanced education... would that not kick ass?

Not only do 4000 children die, people die in car crashes, plane crashes, sickness (and not just in poor countries). Should I feel sorry that thousands die because they smoke. Fuck smokers. They are fucking idiots, they should die because they screwed with their bodies. It is bad that people die because they have no food, but it is not just because they are homeless. People die because they have no food because of dictators in Africa, because of Dictators in South America, because of Castro, because of Sadam, because of Kim Jong Il. Kill those bastards and free some people and make give them food.

smokers have nothing to do with this. is it really our business to go out and "free" these people? and since when do we liberate a country by bombing it? how would you feel if someone bombed your house because he said you were being oppressed? man i don't care what you say... 4000 children per hour is a heartbreaking statistic.

So what if you kill civilians, it happens in war, you have to deal with it, I feel very sad because of Civilian deaths, but it happens in war, and for the war to end, and for peace to be restored to a dictatorial country, it has to happen, in a case such as that the needs of the many do outway the needs of the few. Sure I feel sad that civilians are killed in Iraq, but more than 300,000 will killed by Sadam, and about the same by his underlings. They raped civilians, they fed them to dogs (literaly, I read it in the news), they killed them for no reason, they invaded three countries.

most of those 300,000 deaths were caused by saddam fighting a kurdish uprising.... now who gave him the horrible weapons to fight the kurds? the united states of america led by President George Bush. that's right, he had our immediate approval and was provided with gas-based weapons to do the job. hey... now aren't we partly responsible for those deaths? should we bomb ourselves now so we can be free? and seriously man, when you're watching the news do you really expect to see the whole picture? no news is free of propaganda. oh, and i wonder if you feel the same way about the september 11 attacks... were those just victims of al queda's war on america... does that make it ok?

The deaths of a few thousand civilians is a small price to pay for the freedom of a whole country and for the chance for all the other people to not have to worry that if the next day Sadam will kill their son, their daughter, or husband, or wife, if not the whole family. I seriously thought that the Vietnam war was a waste, and Kennedy should never have gotten us into it and LBJ should have definitely NOT gotten deeper into it. Russia didn't need a war to collapse it, it was already failing in the 50's. Thank god that Nixon got us out of the Vietnam war, though he didn't do anything else good as president.

nixon blows... he started the fbi program called "COINTELPRO" which spied on hundreds of revolutionaries, black liberationists, and socialists throughout america. it even went as far as assassinating several. it IS a myth that saddam just goes around and kills people. yes he is oppressive but i'd be more inclined to believe that a corrupt police force has more to do with any more current deaths.

That fact that Russia had a bad military and a bad space program and basically everything technological they did was bad does indicate something. Don't you think? If they have bad equipment, then their must be something wrong with the culture? No, that isn't it, their must be something wrong with the philosohpy? Aha, now you've got it! Bad economy, produces shitty products. The most technological thing Russia did was the Nuke, but they even copied that from us.

hey, but their cosmonauts were the first to reach orbit right? hey, i bought this compaq computer that crashed on me and needs a new hard drive. it was a crappy product... maybe that's a sign that i live in a crappy economy... oh fuck! any economy has crappy products and good ones.

Yes we gave Afghanistan weapons, but only to fight the Russians. It was the right thing to do. How did we know then that Al Qaeda would kill about 3000 Americans. We did know that after the first WTC attack though, and should have premptively killed Al Qaeda. Bill Clinton even acknowledged that Al Qaeda was behind the first WTC attack. He actually acknowledged that they were behind 20 separate attacks during his presidency, but he never went after Osama himself. Osama actually spoke out in Somalia and when they drove that truck into our barracks in Africa. He said himself that he was behind it and would do more. I am glad that Bush ripped Al Qaeda apart, even if we didn't get Osama. It was too late however, for those 3000 dead Americans. :(

that's exactly why we shouldn't be the global police and get involved in everyone's business. why do you think we cared so much? o i l.

Yes we gave Sadam weapons to fight Iran, but we thought it prudent, and that WAS a mistake. I am amazed America did that. But it happened, and Sadam is either now dead, or really mad that his sons are dead. Actually, he probably doesn't give a flying fuck about his sons.

oh... you missed that we also provided weapons for iran during that war... shady huh?

what about how we put saddam in power? and that saddam has been directly connected with the CIA since the age of 21. and i'd like you to discuss the look-alike cluster bombs and food relief packages... also the depleated uranium missles that will devistate the country until the end of time. oh and also discuss halliburtons control over iraq's oil fields as well as the fact that we are not giving them a free election, but instead choosing a new ruler for them much like we chose saddam.

[Buckaroo]

I am not talking about how pretty their buildings look, I am talking about how good their medicine is, or their defense system, or their ability to communicate. I know that Northern African countries have technology like this, but a lot don't.

Unions are all good and fine when it comes to low pay, but when I heard that dock workers were complaining that they were to be replaced by machines, I couldn't believe it. If you are getting replace because you are no longer needed, why complain, get a new job.

Bill Gates does not have a Monopoly on anything. Monopolies can't even exist in a Capitalist society. There are other companies that are rich that produce operating systems and video games and computers like Dell, Symantec, IBM...you see what I mean. Just because he produces a lot of software and videogames and computers that people like doesn't mean he has a monopoly. Other companies produce computers and software as well. They are rich, and just like Bill Gates, lost a lot of money in the Stock Market crash, which we are finally starting to get out of. The only monopoly that really exists is the government, it has a monopoly on force. They can tell anyone what to do, and I hate that.

You haven't proved to me that cooperation would be better, it works on a small scale, but having a whole country cooperate wouldn't work, prove to me that a whole country would be better off cooperating.

Precisely, I hate wellfare. Hong Kong doesn't have wellfare because the kids take care of the parents, it is the tradition of the Cantonese.

I think the COINTELPRO program is a great idea, you have to spy on your enemy.

So what if the Cosomaunts were the first to reach orbit, we made it to the moon more than once.

[ShenmueWeb]

I am not talking about how pretty their buildings look, I am talking about how good their medicine is, or their defense system, or their ability to communicate. I know that Northern African countries have technology like this, but a lot don't.

true, but their problems exist because of colonialization and the slave trade... agreed?

Unions are all good and fine when it comes to low pay, but when I heard that dock workers were complaining that they were to be replaced by machines, I couldn't believe it. If you are getting replace because you are no longer needed, why complain, get a new job.

ok i won't really respond to that. but i bet if you were a trained dock worker and were trying to feed a family you'd complain too.

Bill Gates does not have a Monopoly on anything. Monopolies can't even exist in a Capitalist society. There are other companies that are rich that produce operating systems and video games and computers like Dell, Symantec, IBM...you see what I mean. Just because he produces a lot of software and videogames and computers that people like doesn't mean he has a monopoly. Other companies produce computers and software as well. They are rich, and just like Bill Gates, lost a lot of money in the Stock Market crash, which we are finally starting to get out of. The only monopoly that really exists is the government, it has a monopoly on force. They can tell anyone what to do, and I hate that.

There is debate as to whether Microsofts business tactics have given it monopoly. read here

You haven't proved to me that cooperation would be better, it works on a small scale, but having a whole country cooperate wouldn't work, prove to me that a whole country would be better off cooperating.

ok... it would work similarly to the "small scale" cooperation you mentioned. towns would cooperate within themselves. cities or neighborhoods would even do the same. their own "small scale" cooperation. on a larger scale, nationally and internationally distributed goods would be made the same ways, in the same factories... the only difference being that they are not competing with the other manufacturers. the advantage to this would be an ending of poverty by removing money from the wealthy and making it availiable for everyone.

Precisely, I hate wellfare. Hong Kong doesn't have wellfare because the kids take care of the parents, it is the tradition of the Cantonese.

ok. in a society with such high unemployment rate as ours is right now, we need to provide welfare because there just aren't enough jobs for everyone. it's not that these people are lazy it's that there aren't many jobs availiable. so they don't deserve to starve.

I think the COINTELPRO program is a great idea, you have to spy on your enemy.

you have no idea how sick cointelpro was. watch Steal This Movie and read some about it. they framed and assassinated their own citezens. they used propaganda in the media to discredit anything decidedly radical, anti-american, or anti-war. it was a sick system that the fbi has apoligized for. however, the patriot act has recently made it legal for them to do such things again.

So what if the Cosomaunts were the first to reach orbit, we made it to the moon more than once.

i was just joking around... the whole discussion on the russian space program seems a bit off topic and i fear that if we keep talking about it that it will lead to a lugubrious conversation.