I need convincing - about communism

[Hate Is Art]

Pleas dont reply to this post calling me a right winger ok, two things I am anti-cappie and anti-imperialist and slightly socialist, please i need some convincing that a capitilist nation can work well, I would like some pros and cons of capitlism as well as communism. thank you for helping

Luke

[ComradeJunichi]

You don't need convincing. You say you want both sides of the debate, but you "want convincing". That's a contradiction.

I think what you need is studying and motivation to search on your own.

[Donut Master]

First off, I suggest you do massive amounts of reading on these subjects. If you don't have acute myopia by the time you're done, you didn't read enough. Attain facts about communist/capitalist theory/practice, as well as economics and government in general. As you read, you will begin to form an opinion on your own. But I can start you off...

Capitalism:
Workers are hired by owners of corporations and businesses to produce labor in exchange for money. Let's assume that, according to Engel's Value, Price and Profit (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1865/value-price-profit), (which you should read) a certian amount of labor can be equivocated to a certian sum of money. This is a subjective value determined by the difficulty of the work, the quantity of work performed, and the demand for labor - are there a lot of people seeking this job, or are employers in desperate need of someone to fill the position? How important is the work to the employer? All these factors determines the value of labor.

So, let's say for 1 hour of working at a cash register, Steve the worker produces 10 dollars worth of labor. However, Steve has a boss/manager who collects a certian percentage of this. Steve is actually paid less than 10 dollars, which is called a wage. What does this mean? A boss will always hire a worker for less than the actual value of his produced labor.

Under capitalism, workers also do not own the means of production. The machines in factories that the workers operate are not owned by them. So, not only do workers recieve less money than they deserve, but they do not even own the means of production. If they leave the factory, they starve. It's like slavery with pay. Marx called these workers the proletariat. The rich owners of the factories who employ these workers are the burgoise. Inevitably, a class struggle forms, because you have a division of the people by wealth. Today, you could argue that there are more than 2 classes (there's an additional "middle class" now), but the wealth gap still exists. The result of this is that the very rich people at the top will begin to take controll of the political process, which is exactly what has happened in the US. Money wins elections, decisions are made in the intrest of big business.

When people think of capitalism, they often think of the stock market. Let me explain how this works. When people "buy stock", they purchase a little portion of the company. They are now investors in that company. When business is good, the value of stock goes up, and when it is bad, the value goes down. The investors gain and lose money accordingly. Investors want to buy stock when the value is low, so they can get it cheaply. When the value goes up, they sell their investments, and they have just made some money. With all this trading going on, the stock market is very unpredictable, so it's a little bit like gambling. It also benefits the rich a lot more, since they can buy huge portions of stock. Furthermore, when you buy stock from a company, you are really getting profit taken from the workers of that company. Stockholders do absolutely no work and can amass large sums of cash this way.

The alternative:

There are many alternatives to capitalism, many ways to "patch" it up, and many different forms of socialism. I'm beginning to tire of all this explaining, so I'll direct you to the Common Sense Reasons for Worker Self-Management (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=13&topic=485) thread.

[LoneWolf]

are there many people asking such questions?

[BorgHunter]

Well, I am not convinced about Communism, it just bothers me that the United States has continued to thrive while countries such as the U.S.S.R. have failed...but I'm not really convinced about Capitalism either. ;)

[Conghaileach]

The US is not thriving. There is a serious deficit in the nation's budget. The county depends on warfare. Every state has been told to slash spending. This means an attack on healthcare, education and workers. Something like 35% of the US population live in poverty. This is not a thriving economy.

[LoneWolf]

hehe, yeah, some scientists have told that USA can be in REALLY deep shit in some years :)
economical debt and such

[BorgHunter]

Let me rephrase, then. The United States has continued to thrive except when a Republican (a.k.a. moron) was in office,

[Blibblob]

Not really. Give me a time when it thrived even when a democrat was in office. (not that often, but whatever)

(Edited by Blibblob at 7:57 pm on May 4, 2003)

[BorgHunter]

Clinton. Doesn't this belong in Opposing Ideologies anyway?

[Iepilei]

Clinton and his 'ground-breaking' minimum-wage budget??

hah...

[LoneWolf]

does it?

[革命者]

if only the economy is good a nation is still not neccesarily thriving, if you don't give some money back to the ppl who need it most you're only pleasing th IMF and American conservatives and corporations(libertarians too).