Author Topic: Capitalism V Communism  (Read 16434 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Shigunaru

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
  • I am your "friend"
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #20 on: May 20, 2008, 08:56:00 PM »
Want to talk dictatorship with me? Here in Italy, we have two major political subjects with the same damn program.

Whatever you choose, you lose the game. :wall
Posting guidelines. Read 'em. Use 'em. Love 'em.

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #21 on: May 20, 2008, 09:05:45 PM »

Correction, the United States is a Two-Party Dictatorship

The party system really doesn't matter. No matter who's elected it's the same people buying the decisions.
Even if, after some miraculous events, elections give the results that the majority of voters actually wanted. But nooo.....

Handy Links

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #22 on: May 20, 2008, 09:08:07 PM »
Whatever you choose, you lose the game. :wall

AH!

I just lost the game!

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #23 on: May 20, 2008, 09:13:30 PM »
Want to talk dictatorship with me? Here in Italy, we have two major political subjects with the same damn program.

Whatever you choose, you lose the game. :wall
Made of epic win, no? That's what you get for having two parties and two candidates.

Handy Links

skydragonknight

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3297
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #24 on: May 20, 2008, 10:34:03 PM »
Actually in the United States we have different special interests buying decisions for different parties, so who gets elected matters. The two parties have different styles of dictatorships.
It always seems like the barrels around here have something in them.

Dragon Snack

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
    • Dragon Snack Games and Entertainment
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #25 on: May 21, 2008, 04:51:37 AM »
Not this year...

But anyway, I'm a Capitalistic Communist.  I agree with more of Hegel's Dialectic (aka Dialectical Materialism) than what Marx added.  In short, Communism needs Capitalism to create the means of production.  While quasi-Communist countries may be able to exsist currently, it won't be truely viable until the costs of production are near zero (because people are lazy bastards).
Visit my Message Boards (they're strangely familiar) and my Blog...

If you look at the entire history of the RPG industry, you'll see the same, long, sad story: a mountain of conventional wisdom, usually backed by selective listening, that leads to a long chain of failed games and bad ideas. - Mike Mearls

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #26 on: May 21, 2008, 05:08:33 AM »
I hate Hegel. I had to write a paper discussing Hegel's and Kastely's views on argumentation (using Antigone). I got an "A" on it by writing the paper the night before it was due. On one of my pages, I actually think I wrote essentially the same sentence about 3 times in a row with different wording. My argument boiled down to the fact that neither of them use the established definition of tragedy though (as an art form) and use the more modern definition of tragedy to mean something disappointing, distressing, et cetera.

As such, I can't take anything that he (or Kastely) takes seriously, no matter how intelligent it may actually be.
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]

Dragon Snack

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
    • Dragon Snack Games and Entertainment
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2008, 05:38:29 AM »
Well then, OK?  A lot of people poo poo Hegel, but I think Marx did him a disservice.  It would have been interesting if someone else had taken up the mantle and expanded on his theories with a different approach. 

I would expand on my take, but it's been over 15 years since I even cracked a book on the subject, much less immersed myself in it's study.  And, to be honest, I was just looking to get my degree and get out, so I never did thesis level work on it anyway (let's just say I had personal issues with my department head)...

My degree does say Economics on it though (not that I've done anything with it).
Visit my Message Boards (they're strangely familiar) and my Blog...

If you look at the entire history of the RPG industry, you'll see the same, long, sad story: a mountain of conventional wisdom, usually backed by selective listening, that leads to a long chain of failed games and bad ideas. - Mike Mearls

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2008, 05:50:58 AM »
I think the point I was trying to make in that post is that Hegel didn't even use the applicable definition of the word in relation to the topic he was discussing. If he can't even talk about a subject using the correct definitions, then I'm not going to consider his opinion on subjects (including government and economics) to have much authority.
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]

Dragon Snack

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
    • Dragon Snack Games and Entertainment
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2008, 05:58:51 AM »
Fair enough, I understand that a lot of people dismiss Hegel.
Visit my Message Boards (they're strangely familiar) and my Blog...

If you look at the entire history of the RPG industry, you'll see the same, long, sad story: a mountain of conventional wisdom, usually backed by selective listening, that leads to a long chain of failed games and bad ideas. - Mike Mearls

Dictum Mortuum

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1160
  • always female suspects
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #30 on: May 21, 2008, 09:47:07 AM »
I don't understand why anyone would support capitalism (at least the real-life version). In capitalism all property is owned by individuals or a corporation. Unfortunately not all property is equal.

I'm not entirely a communist, but i lean towards that direction. Note that in a communist environment products like d&d would still exist. It's a system that supports equality and common ownership only refers to the means of production (not your home, car, etc :P).
Dictum Mortuum's Handbooks: My personal character optimization blog.


mace_of_sauron

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Of old he was an elven king...
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #31 on: June 05, 2008, 06:01:47 PM »
In order for evolution to take place you need a dynamic society inwhich the superior can rise to the top and the inferior settle to the bottom and eventual extinction. In order for this state of natural correction to take effect, in society or a ecosystem, you need a playing field that allows the fittest to compete. In a communism one takes all of the achievements of the superior and distributes them to the inferior faction. By doing so you create a stagnent society inwhich no beneficial eveolution will take place. If a society is incapable of taking the evolutionary steps to accept say, gun powder, robotics, or genetics it will fall behind the other societies and be elliminated. By choosing any rigid society, be it a theocracy or communism, a state is dooming itself to an eventual extinction.     

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #32 on: June 05, 2008, 06:33:04 PM »
Quote
In a communism one takes all of the achievements of the superior and distributes them to the inferior faction.
An outstandingly distorted opinion. In case you didn't know, in communism people receive according to their needs, thus you will not lose all the fruits of your labour. Moreover, if the smarter people didn't help the lesser ones, we'd still be living in trees without pants and our food would consist of raw fruits and rotten fish. In my personal opinion, sharing your intelligence is the best thing you can ever do. Clearly you are one of the convervatives who rather stagnate in the 'good old ways' that only help those who're inherently talented or born to rich families. Good for you.

Quote
By doing so you create a stagnent society inwhich no beneficial eveolution will take place.
Bullshit. If you are speaking of biological evolution you are just plain wrong. Humans have already altered their natural biological evolution. If you are referring to social evolution you are still wrong. Helping others by no means stagnates the society, it enriches it. Social benefits and socialism help the poor and less fortunate to survive and develop their abilities, which again increases the level of intelligence and standards of living. Sure, you can achieve the same result by ignoring the poor, but then you are just being a selfish and greedy man who utterly ignores the value of human life. Whatever floats your boat though.

Quote
If a society is incapable of taking the evolutionary steps to accept say, gun powder, robotics, or genetics it will fall behind the other societies and be elliminated.
And how were these steps achieved in the first place? ...oh yeah, by sharing the information with less intelligent individuals... What was it you were saying?

Quote
By choosing any rigid society, be it a theocracy or communism, a state is dooming itself to an eventual extinction.
Rigid? Actually, capitalism is the epitome of being rigid. Globalization and capitalism have thriven millions upon millions of people to a vicious circle where they have to study constantly to keep up with the standards, which again makes them neglect their social lives and, by extension, gets them isolated from the society and job markets. In Finland this is not too large a problem, but in nations of more radical degrees of capitalism this is a serious problem. But yeah, if you want to call equality rigid and happiness-by-inheritance stable, go ahead.

Edit: *expects his G-FU to drop*
« Last Edit: June 05, 2008, 06:51:42 PM by Tshern »

Handy Links

Dragon Snack

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
    • Dragon Snack Games and Entertainment
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #33 on: June 05, 2008, 07:08:59 PM »
You really think that capitalists are so greedy that they don't help others?  Capitalism raises the bar and helps provide means to get out of abject poverty.  Capitalists even help others in times of need with no thought of recompense, just look at what happens when there is a natural disaster.

And Capitalism is definitely NOT rigid, innovation drives profit.

Demagoguing the debate doesn't get us anywhere...

edit: and if I was going to drop your g-fu, I wouldn't have posted...
« Last Edit: June 05, 2008, 07:11:38 PM by Dragon Snack »
Visit my Message Boards (they're strangely familiar) and my Blog...

If you look at the entire history of the RPG industry, you'll see the same, long, sad story: a mountain of conventional wisdom, usually backed by selective listening, that leads to a long chain of failed games and bad ideas. - Mike Mearls

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #34 on: June 05, 2008, 07:23:11 PM »
You really think that capitalists are so greedy that they don't help others?  Capitalism raises the bar and helps provide means to get out of abject poverty.  Capitalists even help others in times of need with no thought of recompense, just look at what happens when there is a natural disaster.
I am keeping my lols to myself for now. As a matter of fact, I never said capitalists don't help each other, but mace_of_sauron said in communism you take everything from the smart/great and give it to lesser people. Additionally, I'd like you to take a good look at the American social welfare system. After this take a step back and check out the systems of less capitalist nature in the Western world and then compare their social security/health care/whatever. Take Canada, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland or something as an example. The fact is TAXES ARE GOOD, even if that isn't too relevant to the discussion between Cap and Com.

Quote
And Capitalism is definitely NOT rigid, innovation drives profit.
Sure it isn't rigid. That is exactly what the millions of people who struggle to get food in the capitalist world think too.

Quote
Demagoguing the debate doesn't get us anywhere...
I answered a provocative post with another one. Sue me?

Handy Links

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #35 on: June 05, 2008, 07:40:44 PM »
I don't understand why anyone would support capitalism (at least the real-life version). In capitalism all property is owned by individuals or a corporation. Unfortunately not all property is equal.

I don't mind. And don't get me wrong. I'm not rich. But I'd like to think that one day I will be above the average. I'm a competitive, arrogant, and somewhat egotistical bastard. Capitalism is the best game to play if you want to be better than other people, not just on an equal (or very similar) footing.


Anyway, I'll address a point made by Tshern now: "Take Canada, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland ... as an example ... TAXES ARE GOOD."
Except, in Canada, because health care is a government service, the wait is absurd, whereas in the United States, if you have the cash, the line is much shorter. Sure, not everyone has the cash. I certainly don't (poor college student syndrome). I still think it's better than trying to guarantee everyone health care and costing many people that could afford it their lives while they wait (yes, I'd prefer that as opposed to costing many people their lives because they cannot afford it). Where medicine is a governmental function, such as in England, fewer people seek jobs as doctors and physicians too because it is a less lucrative practice. As such, fewer major breakthroughs are funded and made in such places. In the long run, as more technologies and medicines are produced, costs drop, and eventually the evil, greedy capitalists are making health care more accessible. Of course, they'll never sell such developments as cheaply as they could because they need to protect their profit margins, but it's still progress.


I will admit I'm not the most informed expert on this topic, but I have studied some of these topics, so I'll throw out information as I find it relevant.

Oh, by the way, we wack-job libertarians are pretty cool. ;)
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]

Banor

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 318
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #36 on: June 05, 2008, 07:55:43 PM »
I don't understand why anyone would support capitalism (at least the real-life version). In capitalism all property is owned by individuals or a corporation. Unfortunately not all property is equal.

I don't mind. And don't get me wrong. I'm not rich. But I'd like to think that one day I will be above the average. I'm a competitive, arrogant, and somewhat egotistical bastard. Capitalism is the best game to play if you want to be better than other people, not just on an equal (or very similar) footing.


Anyway, I'll address a point made by Tshern now: "Take Canada, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland ... as an example ... TAXES ARE GOOD."
Except, in Canada, because health care is a government service, the wait is absurd, whereas in the United States, if you have the cash, the line is much shorter. Sure, not everyone has the cash. I certainly don't (poor college student syndrome). I still think it's better than trying to guarantee everyone health care and costing many people that could afford it their lives while they wait (yes, I'd prefer that as opposed to costing many people their lives because they cannot afford it). Where medicine is a governmental function, such as in England, fewer people seek jobs as doctors and physicians too because it is a less lucrative practice. As such, fewer major breakthroughs are funded and made in such places. In the long run, as more technologies and medicines are produced, costs drop, and eventually the evil, greedy capitalists are making health care more accessible. Of course, they'll never sell such developments as cheaply as they could because they need to protect their profit margins, but it's still progress.


I will admit I'm not the most informed expert on this topic, but I have studied some of these topics, so I'll throw out information as I find it relevant.

Oh, by the way, we wack-job libertarians are pretty cool. ;)

I'm living in Canada an never had any problems with our health care system. I had a grand father that needed an operation really fast and he was able to get it without effort. Free. Also, I would hate living in a system where you can die because you couldn't handle the cost of an operation.

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #37 on: June 05, 2008, 07:56:16 PM »
Quote
I don't mind. And don't get me wrong. I'm not rich. But I'd like to think that one day I will be above the average. I'm a competitive, arrogant, and somewhat egotistical bastard. Capitalism is the best game to play if you want to be better than other people, not just on an equal (or very similar) footing.
This is exactly the problem. Capitalism is perverting the values of normal people and makes them compete against each other in an unhealthy manner.

Quote
Except, in Canada, because health care is a government service, the wait is absurd, whereas in the United States, if you have the cash, the line is much shorter.
As you said, not everyone has the cash. What about them then? They just queue up next to the cemetery? In Canada you can get to a private doctor if you have the money and thus avoid most of the waiting time. In the States you either don't wait or don't get service.

Quote
Where medicine is a governmental function, such as in England, fewer people seek jobs as doctors and physicians too because it is a less lucrative practice.
England doctors working in the private sector as well. So do all the countries I mentioned, don't worry.

Quote
In the long run, as more technologies and medicines are produced, costs drop, and eventually the evil, greedy capitalists are making health care more accessible.
When exactly will this happen? When the gap between the rich and the poor is even vaster than it is now? I'd rather not have the unfortunate wait and I am one of the fortunate ones with an excellent health care system.

Quote
Of course, they'll never sell such developments as cheaply as they could because they need to protect their profit margins, but it's still progress.
Quote
I will admit I'm not the most informed expert on this topic, but I have studied some of these topics, so I'll throw out information as I find it relevant.
Three years of extensive economics, plenty of voluntary study and applying for political history... I've read a little something and gone through these arguments time and time again.

Quote from: Banor
I'm living in Canada an never had any problems with our health care system. I had a grand father that needed an operation really fast and he was able to get it without effort. Free. Also, I would hate living in a system where you can die because you couldn't handle the cost of an operation.
Yep, a few months back we were checking the costs of acquiring a heart transplant in the States and IIRC it was around 100k. Kind of sucks.

Handy Links

Dragon Snack

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
    • Dragon Snack Games and Entertainment
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #38 on: June 05, 2008, 08:10:45 PM »
I am keeping my lols to myself for now.
Actually, since you posted this, you're not...

As a matter of fact, I never said capitalists don't help each other, but mace_of_sauron said in communism you take everything from the smart/great and give it to lesser people.
And while he was technically wrong, I'm sure you know what he meant.  The same could be said about your "To each according to their needs" line (that's Marx's quote, not your paraphrasing).

Additionally, I'd like you to take a good look at the American social welfare system. After this take a step back and check out the systems of less capitalist nature in the Western world and then compare their social security/health care/whatever. Take Canada, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland or something as an example.
We can agree that the US welfare system is a huge clusterfuck.  It's not like there aren't problems in other countires systems either - and they are much smaller systems (which should have lower overhead costs).

And "less capitalist nature" makes me smile...

The fact is TAXES ARE GOOD, even if that isn't too relevant to the discussion between Cap and Com.
Taxes create an excess burden (see also deadweight loss) to society, resulting in economic inefficiencies.  But then I'm an economist.

Quote
And Capitalism is definitely NOT rigid, innovation drives profit.
Sure it isn't rigid. That is exactly what the millions of people who struggle to get food in the capitalist world think too.
How about the millions of people who struggle to get food in Socialist third world countries?

Quote
Demagoguing the debate doesn't get us anywhere...
I answered a provocative post with another one. Sue me?
Mace didn't drop the "distorted opinion" and "selfish and greedy man who utterly ignores the value of human life" lines...
Visit my Message Boards (they're strangely familiar) and my Blog...

If you look at the entire history of the RPG industry, you'll see the same, long, sad story: a mountain of conventional wisdom, usually backed by selective listening, that leads to a long chain of failed games and bad ideas. - Mike Mearls

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Capitalism V Communism
« Reply #39 on: June 05, 2008, 08:15:12 PM »
Quote
I will admit I'm not the most informed expert on this topic, but I have studied some of these topics, so I'll throw out information as I find it relevant.
Three years of extensive economics, plenty of voluntary study and applying for political history... I've read a little something and gone through these arguments time and time again.

I'm about to sound like an ass, but I wasn't asking what your qualifications were, Tshern. Frankly, I don't care that much (not that I don't value your opinion, but your qualifications just aren't a concern to me - I care about what people say, not what people can lay claim to, when discussing topics). I was merely stating that the information I provide might not be wholly appropriate, so it should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm not claiming to be the perfectly omniscient being on this matter.

Anyway, I'm actually waiting for one of my professors to finish consulting with another student so I can discuss my research paper, so I'm off!
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]