Babylon and on - the new capitalism/communism thread

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by GePap


More scientific breakthroughs came out of communist Russia than capitalist Spain. How come you never hear much about Slavadorea scientists? As far as scientific breakthroughs go, the issue is how resources are invested. The Russians make great strides in various heavily funded lines of research, and this should be no surprise, given that they were heavilly funded.

You can argue that by being less efficient with resources, a communist society will have less resources overall to invest in technological development and education and reasearch facilities. But saying that communism somehow inherently punishes innovation is not a very good argument. You can claim that a repressive political system and a corrupt one does so, and that is a fine argument, ands as we established before, one cant simply jpoin communism to a certain type of politics.

First off comparing Spain to Soviet Union is like comparing a 2 cylinder car to a V-6. I mean if you are going to start comparing countries lets compar the United States and the Soviet Union shall we? Who lead who in technology? Who lead in standard of living? Who lead in quality of healthcare? The United States did.

Communism always leads to a corrupt and oppressive system of government.

[GePap]

Vel:
Show me one state that was actually communist. Even the Soviets called their system the way to [i]build[/i socialism, since they knew they were not there yet (there was still a state, so according to marxist-leninist ideology the end had not been reached). (Since it is impossible for you to attempt to argue in a way aout the notion of centralized planning without you going into political centralization, i will promptly ignore any of your arguments that continue to do so. It will do wonders for my sanity)

Imran:
Good for Edison.But I really fail to think that without edison there would be no movies, lightbulbs or so forth, they would have come anyway (as they are techincal breakthorughs, not huge annalytical jumps), if not as fast.
As for the incentives Communism can give: since Communism does not actually proclude substantal financial rewads, the question is wht type of communist system and rewards package you have.

(Addemdum: wealth exists without capitalism, ad modern capitalism did not exist when edison was inventing)

[JohnT]

Originally posted by GePap
Vel:
Show me one state that was actually communist.

And the Holocaust never happened.

Historical Revisionism at it's finest. Good job, GePap!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Jack_www
Automation is leading to shift from a manufactoring based economy to a Survice based economy in the US and Europe.

The service sector is also being automated. The recent gains in productivity have been achieved mostly in the service sector. As you know the service sector is by far the largest sector in the US economy.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Ahh, so capitalism didn't exist until a few years ago, so it has no history and therefore can't be historically successful, meanwhile communism has never existed because all of those not communist states trying to be communist states ****ed up and imploded before they got to Worker's Paradise status, so their failures don't count.

You guys would shame used car salesmen.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Good for Edison.But I really fail to think that without edison there would be no movies, lightbulbs or so forth, they would have come anyway (as they are techincal breakthorughs, not huge annalytical jumps), if not as fast.

Understatement of the year (the boldest part). Even Marx acknowledges that technology has grown by leaps and bounds under capitalism. Most of Edison's inventions would have been delayed for decades (with the possible exception of the incandesant bulb).

As for the incentives Communism can give: since Communism does not actually proclude substantal financial rewads, the question is wht type of communist system and rewards package you have.

The ones with the major support sure proclude financial rewards .

[GePap]

Yeah JohnT!

Halfassed, "a two year old could have made an equal response" post at its finest!

You must be proud!

Hey, look, you frgot to post the second half of the comment..I wonder why? maybe it didnt benefit your little "response" as much..?

I am sick of posts as deep as a film of water on a car after a rain.

Communism always leads to a corrupt and oppressive system of government.

Wrong, states that have attempted Marxist-Leninst revolutions or Moaist revolutions have aways ended up with corrupt and oppresive goernments. There is a world of difference there. For example, I could simply argue that the main cause of that is not the underlying marxist notions but the Lenisnist add ons, such as the notion of the party as a vanguard of the revolution, which couls skip ahead and hurry the process through political change prior to the necessary economic gains that original Marxist idelogy aks for. It seems everyone has forgotten the menshiviks.

[JohnT]

I can just hear it now:

Commie 1: "The Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc collapsed!"

Commie 2: "They did? They can't! Communist states can't collapse! It says so in the Bibl... uh, the Manifesto."

Commie 1&2 together: "Then that means that they weren't Communist!"

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Kidicious


The service sector is also being automated. The recent gains in productivity have been achieved mostly in the service sector. As you know the service sector is by far the largest sector in the US economy.

How can waiters and lawers jobs be automated??

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Japher
Obviously we don't, or we would be suppling for everyone.

You do know that you need money in a capitalist system don't you?

Originally posted by Japher
This is what is called the standard of living, something that has been increasing every decade, every century, and not because we have stopped advancing...

The standard of living has increased because of labor law and the sacrifices of the working people. Productivity works against the standard of living by supressing wages.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Productivity works against the standard of living by supressing wages.

Because the more productive countries have lower wages than the less productive countries... and as countries have gotten more productive, the SoL has fallen?!

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Understatement of the year (the boldest part). Even Marx acknowledges that technology has grown by leaps and bounds under capitalism. Most of Edison's inventions would have been delayed for decades (with the possible exception of the incandesant bulb).

Do you have some sort of crystal ball to back this assertion of yours? or maybe a mind reader? Or maybe you see alternate universes now?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Jack_www
How can waiters and lawers jobs be automated??

There is no question waiters can be automated in various ways. Lawyers would be difficult, nuless you chnaged the law code to account for automated lawyers.

[GePap]

Originally posted by JohnT
I can just hear it now:

Commie 1: "The Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc collapsed!"

Commie 2: "They did? They can't! Communist states can't collapse! It says so in the Bibl... uh, the Manifesto."

Commie 1&2 together: "Then that means that they weren't Communist!"

have you read the manifesto?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by GePap
Yeah JohnT!

Halfassed, "a two year old could have made an equal response" post at its finest!

You must be proud!

Hey, look, you frgot to post the second half of the comment..I wonder why? maybe it didnt benefit your little "response" as much..?

I am sick of posts as deep as a film of water on a car after a rain.

Perhaps you ought to read what you type. For further edification, I broke up the second half of the post into 2 paragraphs:

"But I really fail to think that without edison there would be no movies, lightbulbs or so forth, they would have come anyway (as they are techincal breakthorughs, not huge annalytical jumps), if not as fast.

As for the incentives Communism can give: since Communism does not actually proclude substantal financial rewads, the question is wht type of communist system and rewards package you have. "

Paragraph 1 is an opinion, nothing more than a bald assertion of belief. The only counter to it is to say "In my opinion, I think you're wrong", which does not a good counterargument make.

Paragraph 2 has nothing to respond to from me or my side - you ask (in so many words) "what type of communist system and rewards packages are possible?" Well, what type? You're the Commie, not I. Why should I respond to your rhetorical questioning of your theology?