Comunnism Vs. Capitalism

[austinset]

which is better in economic, freedom, ability to suceed, and power sense?

I say capitalism...better economy...

[Kardas]

*obligatory COIN counter*
Honestly the criteria are a bit limited. I vouch for neither (mainly because communism is near-impossible to successfully apply, seriously, no communist state is truly communist). Socialism is my preferred option. Regardless:
Economics: can be both, it's just that the capitalist system built the market system giving them an innate advantage. But the point of communism isn't/shouldn't be to make money anyway.
Freedom: Again, both ways. All the communist states till now have not been good in the freedom department, but that's because they're not truly communist either. Plenty of capitalist dictatorships are and were about. Pinochet's Chile and Myanmar make reasonable examples.
Ability to succeed: capitalism. Communism is practically impossible to successfully implement, as you need to be sufficiently selfless. Communism counts on selflessness- without it, you get examples like the communist states you see now.
Power sense: ?

[Neo Nibu]

If I may quote one of Bob Dylan's songs;

Union Sundown

Well, my shoes, they come from Singapore
My flashlight’s from Taiwan
My tablecloth’s from Malaysia
My belt buckle’s from the Amazon
You know, this shirt I wear comes from the Philippines
And the car I drive is a Chevrolet
It was put together down in Argentina
By a guy makin’ thirty cents a day

Well, it’s sundown on the union
And what’s made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
’Til greed got in the way

Well, this silk dress is from Hong Kong
And the pearls are from Japan
Well, the dog collar’s from India
And the flower pot’s from Pakistan
All the furniture, it says “Made in Brazil”
Where a woman, she slaved for sure
Bringin’ home thirty cents a day to a family of twelve
You know, that’s a lot of money to her

Well, it’s sundown on the union
And what’s made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
’Til greed got in the way

Well, you know, lots of people complainin’ that there is no work
I say, “Why you say that for
When nothin’ you got is U.S.–made?”
They don’t make nothin’ here no more
You know, capitalism is above the law
It say, “It don’t count ’less it sells”
When it costs too much to build it at home
You just build it cheaper someplace else

Well, it’s sundown on the union
And what’s made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
’Til greed got in the way

Well, the job that you used to have
They gave it to somebody down in El Salvador
The unions are big business, friend
And they’re goin’ out like a dinosaur
They used to grow food in Kansas
Now they want to grow it on the moon and eat it raw
I can see the day coming when even your home garden
Is gonna be against the law

Well, it’s sundown on the union
And what’s made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
’Til greed got in the way

Democracy don’t rule the world
You’d better get that in your head
This world is ruled by violence
But I guess that’s better left unsaid
From Broadway to the Milky Way
That’s a lot of territory indeed
And a man’s gonna do what he has to do
When he’s got a hungry mouth to feed

Well, it’s sundown on the union
And what’s made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
’Til greed got in the way


I was gona give a link, but the Bob Dylan version isn't on tube, only crappy cover versions are.

[Kardas]

Gandhi condenses it nicely: "There is enough for everyone's need, but not enough for everyone's greed."

[blooscornia]

Well, greed doesn't stop if a government is socialist or communist. Capitalism is inherently a better system because it encourages the creation of more wealth, and if more wealth exists in a system, then humanity as a whole benefits. However, what I fear we may find in the future is that capitalism is not, as an economic system, environmentally sustainable, and through the use of such a system, we are leading the world to a mass die off of sorts.

[Kardas]

A class on sustainable economics has given me new arguments to arm myself with:
@ Blooscornia: Your point on greed is correct. Greed depends on the people. It is one of the seven sins after all. However, capitalism is directed at making money (profit) while communism is focused on social equality. (Overall) wealth is a means to an end in a communist system; it does not take center stage.

Furthermore, Adam Smith's idea of the 'invisible hand' is not always correct-the Tragedy of the Commons provides an (environmentally-oriented) counterargument, where people deplete one resource (the overfishing is a good practical example) while attempting to gain most of it for themselves. No one wants to deplete the resource, but in the end, separate efforts add up to a scenario where it does.

As well as that, the 'invisible hand' is not all-powerful. Individuals can hinder the work of the invisible hand by creating unfair advantages for themselves which can disrupt the market. Cartels and monopolies are some of those unfair advantages. Problem is, in a competitive market, businesses may easily use one of those tactics simply to outperform the others. Victory, but at what cost?
On to your second point, the questioning of "growth is good" is a cornerstone of sustainable economics. While increased wealth in a system may bring technological benefits and a higher standard of living, there are two weak points:

One: does this translate to a higher living standard for everyone?
Two: Does this lead to increased happiness? The point of life, I believe, is not to have as much stuff or as much money as you can. One is supposed to have a happy life. Look at the United States- its GDP has doubled at the very least since the 1950s. But are the people happier? Given the current situation in the US, with the Tea Party and all that, I sincerely doubt that. The Dutch are a good example too: We have some of the highest standards of living in the world, yet we are incredibly pessimistic as a whole. I believe this is partly because we are not aware of the high standards of living, but this is a side issue. There are plenty of people with lower standards of living around the world who can be happy. Happiness is not directly proportional to money.

Besides, there can be better GDP measures. GDP does not measure environmental costs for example. An oil spill will be positive for GDP simply because of the cleanup jobs it creates.

Capitalism does retain one advantage in my opinion though- it is less prone to corruption in practice, and thus more practical, than communism simply because the power of decision is not in the hands of one individual or organization. Communism can be better, but it requires a level of selflessness that I have not seen before.

[Rusienne]

Communism is more prone to corruption in government, capitalism is more prone to corruption in corporation.

However, as economic models, communism is at least stable. Capitalism might progress faster, but there's also these recessions, and tariff wars, among others. I realize that there are no nations that can be used as examples for true communism, but Cuba is the only nation in the Western hemisphere that operates within its environmental means. The counter-example is of course North Korea, but the only reason that state can't feed its people is because Kim Jong-il is an idiot and only cares about his military.

Meanwhile nations like Ireland which have adopted neoliberal policies are now suffering greatly, and the next three-four generations of Irish citizens are going to have to pay dearly for a brief prosperity.

[sap3179]

The problem of a traditional socialist economic system is CENTRALLY PLANNED STATE CAPITALISM, which has, historically failed. We need to find a new system. For example I think there is something going on in venezuela as we speak. Venezuela is a oil-rich country, as we know. Bolivia, on the other hand does not have much natural resources. Venezuela has trade agreement with bolivia, by which bolivia gives cattle to ven. according to its need and venezuela reciprocates by giving oil according to bollivi's need.
If I have understood anything about Marxism, it calls for a statist principle to end the corporate greed, and yes we have failed (I say yes even though i all really was a member of student organisation), but the alternative system has the colour dark red, for the blood may be dry, but it never lost its colour.
and lastly, I admit as a system, capitalism has been has been more successful,but the recession has been a classic case of its own anomaly, and hopefully, its beginning of the end.

[sap3179]

PS: thankfully ns has no war provisions, and austinset wont attack me to for posting the above(going by the history, he should).

[austinset]

history? ya ive heard of that...ever hear of soviet russia? THAT was a communist state and they FAILED as an economy...so did cuba and china if they hadnt adopted the capitalist economy...lets compare the US capitalist economy vs Soviet russias economy shall we?

Comparison between USSR and US economies (1989)
according to 1990 CIA The World Factbook[10]
USSR US
GDP (1989 - millions $) 2,659,500/ 5,233,300
Population (July 1990) 290,938,469/ 250,410,000
GDP Per Capita ($) 9,211/ 21,082
Labor force (1989) 152,300,000/ 125,557,000

Capitalism also has much more freedom then the soviets and power sense is the control over their people

[austinset]

left side is soviets and right is the US

[Neo Nibu]

Austin you confused Stalinism with Socialism/Communism/Marxism, many people do. There has never been a really real Socialism/Communism/Marxism state.

And it's not just about which is economically better, but what's better for people as a whole, look at US History Capitalism has rescissions, and is weak in the ability to care for the weak and less fortunate of society.

[austinset]

no country can pull off communist economy...thats a guarenteed fact....if they arent gone or fallen they are poor and struggling while capitalist are succeeding

[Neo Nibu]

I can agree here, Communism won't succeed in a world with so many other Capitalist Countries, and I think most people in America either view Communism as Stalinism, Or they could never go along with what a true Communist state would require to work.

[sap3179]

Ah nowdont go to to economy austin, do u know why mr obama came to , India? to beg for a few jobs. Your country is also failing as a state (admit it!) and hopefully we will see the end in another 20 years. and neo, u r a trotskite?
really?