Communism and crisis

[Subversive Pessimist]

Let's say there was peace, prosperity etc, but suddenly there was a huge shortage of food. How are we going to distribute the food, so that everyone can have what they need (I say need, because a 95 pound girl would not need as much food as a guy weighing 200 pounds)? Would it be neccesary to start using money, again?

[The Feral Underclass]

Political neurosis!

No one can be specific about such a question. I believe that the nature of a communist society would make people deal with it in a rational, fair and democratic way, to find the best solution possible.

[Subversive Pessimist]

Why don't we make a rational, fair and democratic solution, to find the best solution possible, right here? :)

[The Feral Underclass]

Because it's pointless.

[Subversive Pessimist]

Why do you think so? Because it is difficult?

Cricis like this could happen because of many reasons, but the problem would still be there. People couldn't just go in a store and buy what you want. That would ruin the society. The point is, maybe we would have to go back to using money.

[Louis Pio]

The point is this is to abstract to deal with here. In real life there would be countless things to take into consideration. Also why would there be a shortage of food?

[Pawn Power]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 12:12 PM
Let's say there was peace, prosperity etc, but suddenly there was a huge shortage of food. How are we going to distribute the food, so that everyone can have what they need (I say need, because a 95 pound girl would not need as much food as a guy weighing 200 pounds)? Would it be neccesary to start using money, again?
the 95 pound girl would not take as much food, its as simple as that
one would take as much as they need understanding it is a crisis and we would hope no one would be greedy but just take the emount of food to satisfy them selves

[Subversive Pessimist]

Also why would there be a shortage of food?

Use your own imagination. ;)



one would take as much as they need


I know how harhs you might feel I am right now, but this is what I see.
You have no idea what starving to the brink of dying feels like. Your suggestion is unrealistic. In my opinion, you will either need authotarian rule, to distribute according to needs, or you would need money. When people don't have enough food, they don't think.

Have a nice day :)

[Raisa]

Originally posted by glory+May 19 2004, 08:27 PM--> (glory @ May 19 2004, 08:27 PM)
[email protected] 19 2004, 12:12 PM
Let's say there was peace, prosperity etc, but suddenly there was a huge shortage of food. How are we going to distribute the food, so that everyone can have what they need (I say need, because a 95 pound girl would not need as much food as a guy weighing 200 pounds)? Would it be neccesary to start using money, again?
the 95 pound girl would not take as much food, its as simple as that
one would take as much as they need understanding it is a crisis and we would hope no one would be greedy but just take the emount of food to satisfy them selves [/b]
What is strange about this, is that in order for communism, it would have to be a world wide thing. So this is a whole world that has food all over itself.
When their is a shortage someplace, maybe for a real short while you could do what you have said and distribute the little there is for now accordingly, and maybe put some water in it, untill a more supple region can help you out. With one world, these things shouldnt be such a problem.

If there is like a country that is in famine, and every one is dieing,sometimes what i really hope they do is go to a near by country that is loaded with food and just go eat. There is no reason for their to be a famine in one place and a buffet in the other.

[DaCuBaN]

Because it's pointless.

If this is pointless, then so is every single other intellectual exercise.


I say need, because a 95 pound girl would not need as much food as a guy weighing 200 pounds

Well, this is a tad misleading... different people have different metabolisms: some are better at storing energy as excess body fat, and hence have better natural reserves should there be a famine.

As far as a solution to this problem goes, I'm stumped though.

[Roses in the Hospital]

Okay, here's my take on the situation:

If there's obsoluetely no way that everyone could be fed, then priority should be given to those in the food producing industries like farmers, bakers etc. As logically, we would need people like that to solve the problem in the long run...
After that people like doctors and teachers should get their share, followed by everyone else. This should go hand in hand with policies such as universal birth control to prevent things getting worse. Obviously anyone found profiteiring from the crisis would be dealt with accordingly.
I know this isn't exactly a perfect solution but in times of crisis hartd desicions would have to be made. I also thing that famine on this scale would be highly unlikely in a country which would have reached the level of economic development to support true communism. It's also completely ignoring the issue of foreign aid and such like...

[Hate Is Art]

There is plenty of food to feed the world at the moment, it's just not being distributed and shared properly. With us (the rich west) using up huge ammounts of everything!

What kind of global scale catastrophe would cause a huge in drop in food reserves and food production? The chances of something like this happening are a million to one, and even then we could probably survive quite easily, we may have to go without some small luxuries and other things but does that really matter in the grander scheme of things?

[Organic Revolution]

symple answer: everyone gets as much as they NEED not how much they want.

[STI]

To be quite honest, nobody knows for sure what a communist society would look like. A lot of people have a "general idea", but not down "to the last detail". It would be up to the people living in the communist society to determine what would be done.

That being said, I don't see any reason for the re-introduction of money. Rationing, yes, but not money. It's just a pointless "dance with the devil".

And, as good as it is to be asking questions, there's not much point in fretting over what may or may not happen sometime in the next thuosand years. It's draining, and our mental energies would be better spent somewhere else.

[MiniOswald]

the money couldnt be the solution, i mean if it can be used to solve it there must be enough food for everyone to be bought, and if that is there then go and get it already!

I hope that made sense to someone out there
im sorry its very late