Communists do you think freedom is Bad?

[Capitalist]

The following freedoms are banned by all communist.

Are these freedoms bad and evil?

I mean take a look at what you support.

Freedom of Enterprise/Capitalism - Ban the right to private ownership of business? Do you really think government can run a business better than a private owner? Is it government's right to put a wage tap on the reward for a worker's contribution to society. Is it fair to spend millions in medical research and then be denied the right to profit on your hard work?

Freedom of Press/Media - Ban the right for opposing parties to express their point of view. Ban all newspapers and media that express a different point of view - a view that encourages self-interest and personnel freedom.

Freedom of Education - Is it government's job to tell people where and how they will educate their children? Why give the money to schools when the money could go to parents instead in the form of vouchers - giving them the choice of where to send their children to school. Why do we allow government to pick the school for our children? Parents should choose - not government. The rich can decide/afford where to send their children for private/excellent education - those same rights should not be denied to the poor.

Freedom of Assembly - is it Cuba's right to deny workers their right to form a union that is independent of government influence? Is it Cuba's right to deny people from assembling political parties that counter the radical/ignorant views of communists?

Right to Bear Arms? - Is it government's right to deny arms to people, yet enable the military to have arms to defend itself against democratic revolution?

Right to self-interest - Is it government's right to label you as "Greedy" just because you believe in personnel freedom and desire to better yourself, family, friends and community.

Right to free elections - Is it government's right to deny the people closed ballot elections or appoint leaders that are loyal only to the tyrant or government?

Right to free speech - Is it the Cuban Government's right to put a man in jail for 4 years for the simple crime of hanging a Cuban Flag upside down.

Rights given away to tourists - Is it Government's right to deny Cuban People the right to walk on "Tourist Only" beaches?

What about political prisoners? - What has happened to the Cubans that crashed a bus into the Mexican Embassy seeking freedom from their oppressive government. Mexico handed them back to Cuba - What has happened to these prisoners? - Why doesn't the world press care? - Why is there a public outcry for the Taliban Priosners in Cuba, yet total ignoring of Cuban prisoners in Cuba?

Communists represent BIG GOVERNMENT

SLAVE GOVERNMENT

Take a look at what you support.

[Valkyrie]

You are mistaking totalitarism with communism. True Communism is FOR humanity and their creative rights and freedom. depotic leadership is AGAINST people and quelches these freedoms. Yours is a mental block that most people have regarding communism.

[Valkyrie]

From your list above, Capitalist, There are two that I am against: The right to Bear Arms... Soceity should evolve itself so people do not have to bear arms against eachother.. and the right to Capitalism... No, It is not o.k. that Bill Gates has 65 billion dollars while whole continents of people live in abject poverty.

[Capitalist]

If it was not for Bill Gates and others like him - we would not have internet or computers.

I'm sure Paris doesn't have Microsoft either to prove her loyalty to the anti-capitalistic way of life.

You are a HYPOCRIT.

Bill Gates deserves every dollar earned - he has improved the lives of billions and in return he receives billions.

Bill Gates has donated billions upon billions to charity organizations.

Bill Gates has provided quality jobs to millions

Microsoft has made the workday sooooooo much more efficient.

A man born middle class in America is now more powerful than the King of England.

He earned it too!

You are going to need to pick a better example of the evils of Capitalism if you want to win this arguement.

[Kez]

Quote: from Capitalist on 7:41 pm on April 12, 2002
If it was not for Bill Gates and others like him - we would not have internet or computers.



Well, the Soviet Union created Colour TV, so unless you watch black and white all the time, then you support a communist invention, according to your flawed argument

[vox]

"If it was not for Bill Gates and others like him - we would not have internet or computers."

Better check your history. Ever hear of Bell labs and ARPAnet?

vox

[I Will Deny You]

Cuba isn't a communist country. You have a pretty thick skull for someone with such a small brain.


I mean take a look at what you support.

I never said that "you support" every action of every capitalist country on the planet, especially the shadier ones.


Freedom of Enterprise/Capitalism - Ban the right to private ownership of business? Do you really think government can run a business better than a private owner? Is it government's right to put a wage tap on the reward for a worker's contribution to society. Is it fair to spend millions in medical research and then be denied the right to profit on your hard work?I teach tons of kids, but I'll never ask that they pay me back if the skills that I teach them come in handy and help them succeed. To be completely honest, if a shy kid that I taught ended up becoming a famous actor, I would be insulted if he/she gave me money. I chose my job because it rewards my heart, and my heart is more important than my wallet. Is it fair that in a capitalist country, the man who mops the floors in the medical researcher's building and gives the researcher a nice, clean environment to work in gets minimum wage and can barely feed his children?


Freedom of Press/Media - Ban the right for opposing parties to express their point of view. Ban all newspapers and media that express a different point of view - a view that encourages self-interest and personnel freedom.In short, no. I do not support this.


Freedom of Education - Is it government's job to tell people where and how they will educate their children? Why give the money to schools when the money could go to parents instead in the form of vouchers - giving them the choice of where to send their children to school. Why do we allow government to pick the school for our children? Parents should choose - not government. The rich can decide/afford where to send their children for private/excellent education - those same rights should not be denied to the poor.There isn't enough money floating around to pay for excellent private education for the rich and poor. If the government wanted every middle- or working-class kid to get a private school-quality education, this would require a huge tax raise. (Which is not something that I'm guessing you'd like.) Also, raises for teachers would encourage more people to become teachers, which would mean better educators and a better teacher/student ratio. But the right has constantly ignored the teachers' union (just like all of the other unions). And it's the right, not left, which wants the big bad federal government to ignore states' rights and impose standardized testing requirements nationwide.


Freedom of Assembly - is it Cuba's right to deny workers their right to form a union that is independent of government influence? Is it Cuba's right to deny people from assembling political parties that counter the radical/ignorant views of communists?No. I'm not the one who told them to. I doubt anyone on this board is.


Right to Bear Arms? - Is it government's right to deny arms to people, yet enable the military to have arms to defend itself against democratic revolution?The constitution says well-regulated militia. I'd really like to see some statistics that show the number of guns that were used by five-year-olds when they found them in their parents' bedrooms and shot other five-year-olds, and the number of American guns that are used by well-regulated militias.

The American government doesn't allow its citizens to own nuclear bombs; obviously, even they realized that the line has to be drawn somewhere. The countries that draw that line a bit more closely are also the countries with much lower murder rates. How odd that you found the time to mention Cuba's strict weapon control laws, but not US-ally England's.


Right to self-interest - Is it government's right to label you as "Greedy" just because you believe in personnel freedom and desire to better yourself, family, friends and community.In a communist country your friends, family and community would be just as well-off as everyone else's friends, family and community. If you desire to help your friends, family and community by starting a free day care program for the working mothers down the street I can't imagine a communist leader who would object, but if you desire to help your friends, family and community at someone else's expense then you are indeed greedy.


Right to free elections - Is it government's right to deny the people closed ballot elections or appoint leaders that are loyal only to the tyrant or government?Maybe they should do it the American way and toss the citizens a few butterfly ballots before they let the loyal, mindless ass-kissers into high positions. I don't support Cuba or America's election systems. (I've never committed a felony, I've already sent in my tax forms and I truly believe that I've done America more harm than good. I'm a registered voter living in the US but I don't have an elected representative with a voice in Congress!)


Right to free speech - Is it the Cuban Government's right to put a man in jail for 4 years for the simple crime of hanging a Cuban Flag upside down.Maybe they should put him in jail for ten years for burning it.


Rights given away to tourists - Is it Government's right to deny Cuban People the right to walk on "Tourist Only" beaches?If the US would let its citizens visit Cuba on goodwill missions, foreigners would spend more time in volunteer hospitals and schools than on beaches.


What about political prisoners? - What has happened to the Cubans that crashed a bus into the Mexican Embassy seeking freedom from their oppressive government. Mexico handed them back to Cuba - What has happened to these prisoners? - Why doesn't the world press care? - Why is there a public outcry for the Taliban Priosners in Cuba, yet total ignoring of Cuban prisoners in Cuba?Because the Cuban prisoners aren't kept in cages? No, wait. Because William Kunstler's dead! That's why!


Communists represent BIG GOVERNMENT

SLAVE GOVERNMENT
Yeah, it was those damned commies who enslaved all of my ancestors . . . no, wait. It's those damned commies whose portraits are hanging next to portraits of (the anti-Vietnam War) Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights leaders, as well as Abraham Lincoln in my parents' apartment.

[Xvall]

[i]Bill Gates deserves every dollar earned - he has improved the lives of billions and in return he receives billions.[i/]

Hahaha! Sorry, I just must laugh. He did not earn EVERY hard earned dollar. Fact is, he's probably sitting at a desk right now, deciding where his next vacation will be. He HAS donated to charity on occasion, I'll give him that. But anyways..

I don't consider cuba a communist country, but even if so, it does not mean that communism itself preaches that, or that all communist believe that. Cuba's flag has red white and blue on it. That does not mean that every flag with red white and blue on it, is bound to follow any limitations Cuba has imposed on it's civilians. Just felt like droping a line.

- Drake Dracoli

[Communist Dominion]

Too much freedom is bad too, then people will turn out like amsterdam and well become corrupted.Originally communism was too "free" the workers in a sence but anyway, Communism is not totalitarianism, and do you realise you put more people into slavery through sweat shops and exploitation than any other nation you stupid cappie?

[Nateddi]

Quote: from I Will Deny You on 8:36 pm on April 12, 2002

Yeah, it was those damned commies who enslaved all of my ancestors

Nice one Lindsay

[Communist Dominion]

"Not enough money to fund rich and poor kids going to private schools", well really capitalism puts this price on things, you need to be rich to get good school, well by this way some of the worlds most brillient minds could be lost, we can give good education to all, there is enough wood to build the class rooms, enough people to teach, enough computers to befit many schools IT labs. We have the resources but capitalists put the price on it.
there is enough building materials and food for us all to loive in mansions and eat good food but capitalism demands that there be a gap between the classes, Stalin announced that his people would become "wealthy", there is nothing wrong with it as long as we all are.

[pce]

enterprise - yeah i'm against that (to a large degree)

media - no i'm not against freedom of the media

education - i'm for education being free to everyone - i've never heard of the government deciding where people go to school. where did you hear that?

assembly - no i'm not against freedom of assembly

arms - i am against the right to bare arms. this is the most bullshit thing. presumably this was put in the constitution so that if the government is corrupt, the people can revolt against the government. yeah right. what are the chances of any group getting enough power to overthrow any modern, and advanced army? even if they do, isn't that undemocratic? so yes, i am against the "right" to bear arms if for no other reason that the very reason it was put in place is undemocratic

self-interest - i am against self interest when it causes people to take advantage of others. whether that's in the form of sweat shops or paying someone $50,000 a year and making millions (or billions) off of them.

free elections - not against

free speech - not against

rights given away to tourists - just because cuba does this (as you say) it doesn't mean all communists believe in it. tell me where in the communist manifesto it says "the government will make separate beaches for tourists which are better than the natives' beaches. "

What about political prisoners? - the reason there isn't an outcry for cuban prisoners in cuba is because no one in the world cares about cuba. your so-called freedom of press also means the freedom to not report things in fear of loosing viewers

[Nateddi]

Quote: from pce on 12:26 am on April 13, 2002
education - i'm for education being free to everyone - i've never heard of the government deciding where people go to school. where did you hear that?


Well, you have to go to the local public school in your community.

Right Wingers want to privatize education (and everything else which can be privatized). They believe instead of fixing schools (by fixing bad communities), people should have the liberty of going to another school.

This doesnt solve the problem, but than again, fixing a community "takes away your liberty".

(Edited by Nateddi at 1:02 am on April 13, 2002)

[IzmSchism]

Where is the freedom (entrepreneurial speaking) to create your own wealth when big corporations keep swallowing the smaller companies within these indusrties, how can "Jonny Computer" compete with Billy Gates, when netscape cannot even keep afloat, congratulations Bill Gates you worked hard (after you ripped off the GUI idea from Jobs and Wosniak) now you create jobs for rich people and keep the little man from acomplishing anything but becoming a means to his own end, which hardly justifies your notion of freedom, and besides how does freedom co-exist with slavery?

I think the reason people favouring capitalism have such issues with Marxist thought is that it attacks your very idea of freedom, the right to choose and act in any way you decree, why should someone work hard and not recieve relative compensation? I agree, only to a point, the whole notion that marx fought for, and as i am an amateur i stand to be corrected was that salvation was to be fought for in a historical perspective, liberation is not to be thought of as the christian sense of the ressurection, but in marxist thought a means to an end of human slavery, and to achieve a global humanitarian end. Where is the humanity in Gates, sure he donates a couple billion of his worth, which I bet, in the end is more of a cunning investment than anything of a just and moral endownment to the benefit of the greater good. Either way you look at it, I am not marxist, but I agree with some of the theory, but I am definitely against starvation, exploitation and greed!

[poncho]

Freedom of Enterprise/Capitalism - Private business is allowed in Cuba once you aquere the proper licenes. Open a store or any business in the U.S without a license and see what happens.

Freedom of Press/Media - To a certain degree American press is pretty silenced in Cuba, but they lie to the people so rightly so.


Freedom of Education - Education is pretty free or the same as a U.S. public school. Vouchers are usely proprosed for the rich. Puerto Rico went the private school route large portion of the population can not afford to send there child to school know.


Freedom of Assembly - You are free to assemble just not to overthrough the government. Seattle or Quebec comes to mind here!

Right to Bear Arms? - does more harm than good.


Right to self-interest - Self interest and community interest are taken more seriously in Cuba.



Right to free elections - Elections where more democratic than America's last one..


Right to free speech - Yes free speech is important but not when it can be twisted to re-enslave the Cuban people.

Rights given away to tourists - Is it Government's right to deny Cuban People the right to walk on "Tourist Only" beaches? cubans are allowed inside hotels and on the beaches.

What about political prisoners? - The criminals who crashed the bus are in jail where they belong!


Take a look at what you support.

I have taken a look by going to Cuba and seeing it for what it really is. Its worth defending.

[Nateddi]

I know a female communist from Canada who is a travel agent to Cuba, she defends Cuba very well, and is proud of Canada having good ties with it. She would most likely state something similar to what you said, poncho.

[Guest]

People, it has been proven that communisme doen't work!!

China: Big communes were put up where people lived and worked together. People were given their own forges so make their own tools, but there was not enough metal to go around. Result: people breaking of the railroads and melting it again to get metal. another result of the communes: Biggest famine in China in it's history.

USSR: Do you really think it's fair to pay a miner the same wage as a doctor?? someone who spends his entire life learning a difficult proffesion get wage equal to his achievements? In theory communisme is good, but in reality, well.. absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Cuba: Fidel was going strong, he had good points, his revolt a blessing...., but again absolute power corrupts...
What ever happened to his election promise? or is the revolution still not over?
Cuba got it's freedom and the promise that they would never be invaded, but at what price?

Please, democracy like we have here in holland is good.
You can from various left wing parties and various right wing parties and some of them are hanging in the middle. One man's power stretches only so far.
Every decsision is made by a parlement who have to agree. the more votes your party has the more input you have. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's better than communisme.
How many of you can honestly say they never drank that capatalistic cola, or wear levi's. who here wears nike.

[Nateddi]

EDIT: There is seriously something wrong with this iB quote script.




People, it has been proven that communisme doen't work!!

China: Big communes were put up where people lived and worked together. People were given their own forges so make their own tools, but there was not enough metal to go around. Result: people breaking of the railroads and melting it again to get metal. another result of the communes: Biggest famine in China in it's history.

The Chinese attempt at communism didn't succeed, I agree. Its awfully hard, likely impossible to transform a backward country such as China without problems like this. Marx said that communism can work in countries which already have ready industry to use. Chinese and Russian communist revolutions, in my opinion, were more of a radical backlash against the previous society, than a real attempt at socialism. Nevertheless, Chaing Kai Chek and the Romanov Dynasty were worse than the following communist attempts.


USSR: Do you really think it's fair to pay a miner the same wage as a doctor?? someone who spends his entire life learning a difficult proffesion get wage equal to his achievements? In theory communisme is good, but in reality, well.. absolute power corrupts absolutely.
This argument is heard way too often.
If I remember correctly, the doctor did have a higher wage than the miner, and also, the doctor has a better, easier working environment than the miner. There is a difference. "Everyone is equal" is just a anti-communist argument to make communism seem like a system which treats everyone like a cog in a machine without fairness.


Cuba: Fidel was going strong, he had good points, his revolt a blessing...., but again absolute power corrupts...
What ever happened to his election promise? or is the revolution still not over?
Cuba got it's freedom and the promise that they would never be invaded, but at what price?
I agree with you that absolute power corrupts. Please make a thread against Saddam, or Mussolini, or Stalin, or Franco, or any of the other countless dictators who sought power for powers sake. Cuba is not failed at all. I don't see people in other Latin American countries enjoying their tropical paradise, while the Cuban people are always oppressed by an evil communist government. The fact remains that Cuba is the most civilized Latin American nation. With a free-market which may come as a result of open capitalist parties (the US will give them major $$$ until they overflow all airwaves with the propaganda of the good side of American life), with a free-market system, Cuba will eventually turn into a shithole like the rest of Latin America.


Please, democracy like we have here in holland is good.
You can from various left wing parties and various right wing parties and some of them are hanging in the middle. One man's power stretches only so far.
Every decsision is made by a parlement who have to agree. the more votes your party has the more input you have. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's better than communisme.
I support democracy. Who said I don't?


How many of you can honestly say they never drank that capatalistic cola, or wear levi's. who here wears nike. [/quote] I boycotted all of them. The thing is, you prove our point. These exploitative companies do infact control great aspects of life, even you admit that it is hard to go without using them.


(Edited by Nateddi at 3:23 am on April 13, 2002)


(Edited by Nateddi at 3:24 am on April 13, 2002)

[Guest]

The problem remains that people know they only live 1 life.

If you are a doctor in a communist country you earn far less money than in most western countries. Why wouldn't you "Flee" to a western country to collect a nice fat pay check.

Communisme is an utopia on paper, but in reality you cannot implement it. You need perfect people to do this.

You don't think the Cubans enjoy spending their free time and hollidays working on the sugar fields do you?

In Batista's regime a large portion of Cuba's food productionw as exported, This is still the case.

It is true that education, housing, medicine, etc has improved in Cuba, but far less than castro wanted. And that is because people were expected to work hard all the time and they were becomming russia's puppets.
Even Che was against Russia's influence remember?
Because Che saw this comming. Cuba would have been better of working with America than against them. But it was CAstro's personal hatrad against the united fruit company that made his judgement cloudy and all.

[Guest]

Oh one thing I should make clear btw,

I am against a capatalistic regime and against a communist regime. But if I must choose I see myself more socialist than capatalistic.

I am very much against privatising everything.
I think some aspect in a country should be state controlled like,
Railway company, hospitals, schools, phone company, airports, etc.

[Guest]

in short, the companies that make up the infrastructure of a country should be state controlled or state monitored.

[Communist Dominion]

Guest 62.131.85.202 do you realise that you are speaking out of your arse? in the soviet union the workers were paid in two sums, the "payok" and the pay according to your level of work. The payok was the neccesities of life etc and the other pay was in cash that was in context to your level of work, and a miner is just as important as a docter, the metal for the scalpels etc?
And it was your choice of what level pay you got because school was free, even the stalinest universities.

And Communism uses the same governing system as the US a "republic", Castro is chairman of the republic, so really if he is corrupt so is all the US presidents becasue they have abosolute power! over the world!

And the docters were looked after in the soviet union, as did all administrational workers etc, its just the miners and farmers were easier to do for the commen person, it really was their choice.
And all american companies make up the full capiatlist infustructure, so the state should controel them all, so that no one will be exploited.

[poncho]

"Rights given away to tourists - Is it Government's right to deny Cuban People the right to walk on "Tourist Only" beaches"

Assignment for Capitalist...Go to any local hotel DO NOT REGISTER as a Guest and try swimming in there pool, if nobody notices make the staff know you are not a guest or friend of one and see what happens.

[Michael De Panama]

Quote: from Capitalist on 7:41 pm on April 12, 2002
If it was not for Bill Gates and others like him - we would not have internet or computers.

I'm sure Paris doesn't have Microsoft either to prove her loyalty to the anti-capitalistic way of life.

You are a HYPOCRIT.

Bill Gates deserves every dollar earned - he has improved the lives of billions and in return he receives billions.

Bill Gates has donated billions upon billions to charity organizations.

Bill Gates has provided quality jobs to millions

Microsoft has made the workday sooooooo much more efficient.

A man born middle class in America is now more powerful than the King of England.

He earned it too!

You are going to need to pick a better example of the evils of Capitalism if you want to win this arguement.


Earned it?

Do you realize that the only reason he got to where he is is because he BOUGHT the MS-DOS program from the original programmers and claimed it as his own?

The money that he donates to charity now is pocket change. Just enough to buy the image of not being such a greedy monopolist tyrant in the eyes of people like you.

Here's a better example: Look at a fucking Nike sweatshop. Children working 14 hours a day for about $.17 an hour in hot factories. Then look at Tiger Woods advertising the shoes built in that sweatshop for a couple billion dollars. Capitalism THRIVES on this.

[pastradamus]

ah shut the hell up you stupid cappie prick,bill gates is richer than peru how about that,what a fucker!

[STALINSOLDIERS]

hey usa doesnt have freedom look at how many cameras are there spying on people all the time..look at how many cops are there oh not only that cia, fbi and other agents to go after or spy on people and ruin there lives...and for school they they keep people seperate private school for the rich and public are for the poor.....in public school they brain wash kids into making lots of money making own busineses and imperialism and hating other nationalities like now and days islam or indians.....they even tell kids to join the army to die for the rich....while rich kids whipe there asses with money the poor has to fight and die for them.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Guest on 10:33 pm on April 12, 2002
If you are a doctor in a communist country you earn far less money than in most western countries. Why wouldn't you "Flee" to a western country to collect a nice fat pay check.
Because if I became a doctor, I would have done it for the same reasons that Che became a doctor and I became a teacher: To help my community, to make the world a better place.

If you took two countries right next to each other with equal economies and one had a communist revolution, the majority of the people in that country would earn more money. All doctors fleeing communist countries is just as plausible as all waitresses fleeing capitalist countries.

If Bill Gates earned all of his billions of dollars, I would think that the starving eight-year-olds in your average sweatshop would be "earn"ing more than $6 per week. Those children never get the chance to improve the office conditions of millions of people because they spend their days making basketball sneakers.

[Guest]

OH yes I agree it is very plausible to ask Bill gates do donate all of his money to a socialist empire.

Ok, please I beg of you.
Please give me 1, only 1 example of a socialist country that thrives?

Cuba isn't doing that great and don't tell me it is because of the Boycots.
Cuba wanted independence from the Yankee oppression and they got it.
Yes it is true that most countries boycot Cuba, but they are in fact all satalite states of the USA. So no trade with the USA means NO trade with Europe or other Allies.
Couldn't they think of this?

If Castro would have just installed elections instead of making his revolution a 1000k year revolution to stay in power I can guarentee you that Cuba would be doing a lot better and Castro would now be a worldwide respected and honored person instead of a dictator.
Cuba bet on the wrong horse to be dependent of USSR and install a Stallinist regime.

[Angie]

In agreement with IWDY ...


Quote: Guest 62.131.85.202
If you are a doctor in a communist country you earn far less money than in most western countries. Why wouldn't you "Flee" to a western country to collect a nice fat pay check.If you were a doctor in a Communist country, who agreed with the principals of Communism, you wouldn't wish to go out looking for that "nice fat pay check"; It wouldn't have been the reason you became a doctor in the first place, thus the interest would not have been there.

Even my own doctor, here in a mainly Capitalist, somewhat Socialist nation, is in it for the wish to help people, more than the wish for a fat paycheck.

[Guest]

russia still fell... and how i love the smell of commerce in the morning. regards, nameless guest who refuses to register

[Moskitto]

I mean take a look at what you support.

RETARD. We don't support those things. Take an IQ test and stop repeating youself.

[SA160]

What freedom? Freedom to consume, is that it? And where is freedom in the workplace? All private enterprises are perfect models of dictatorship. Freedom...Give me a break! This is FREEDUMB.

[PaulDavidHewson]

The freedom to say: "hey crappy goverment, step down and let others try it"

Change = progression!!

The freedom to express yourself.
The freedom to start your own company specialised in producing coffee machines
The freedom to worship any damn religion you want.
The freedom to go anywhere you like in the world
The freedom to VOTE!
The freedom to refrain from voting
The freedom to abortion
The freedom to Live and not be lived.
The freedom to stop working

Etc etc etc bla bla bla.

(Edited by PaulDavidHewson at 12:19 am on April 17, 2002)

[PaulDavidHewson]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family. Choose a fucking big television, Choose washing machines, cars, compact disc players, and electrical tin openers. Choose good health, low cholesterol and dental insurance. Choose fixed- interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose your friends. Choose leisure wear and matching luggage. Choose a three piece suite on hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY and wondering who you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing sprit- crushing game shows, stuffing fucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the end of it all, pishing you last in a miserable home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fucked-up brats you have spawned to replace yourself. Choose your future. Choose life...

---Trainspotting---

[Guest]

i want to be a stripper because it's good money. i suppose socialist government would regulate the pay for strippers too? i don't know why it took me so long to figure it out but the living wage is like one huge tax, amazingly huge. how i hate taxes and how i love the smell of commerce in the morning. regards, nameless guest....

[Thich Quang Duc]

yep, choose all that shit, but those wide screen tvs are made by kiddie slaves in the east.... how does that make u feel?? communism wouldn't ban wide screen tv's i'm sure hitler or stalin would but if say... some one decent was in charge... or maybe more then one person, say... pure democracy then i'm sure all those luxuries could come under communism!

[PaulDavidHewson]

equality for all, right?
That means everyone has a wide screen TV?

And about the slave thing:
Those television are not made by kid slaves they are made in the US and Japan and Holland and other countries.
Philips Wide screen tv's are produced in Holland itself.

I agree that nike and Gapstar and whatnot have sweatshops and it's awful, but they aren't slaves they can quit working and die of hunger if they choose.
Yes, I agree Nike underpays them and working condition should improve, the vast majority of the world agrees on this.

Please next time you answer be sure to mention the communist slaves in Korea. don't fortget the Gulag etc etc etc.

[poncho]

14 million children die due to a mixture of hunger and a lack of proper medical care. Not one lives in Cuba!

[poncho]

Quote: from PaulDavidHewson on 10:24 pm on April 17, 2002


I agree that nike and Gapstar and whatnot have sweatshops and it's awful, but they aren't slaves they can quit working and die of hunger if they choose.
Yes, I agree Nike underpays them and working condition should improve, the vast majority of the world agrees on this.



So what your saying its o.k. to have children working as long as they are well paid?

You accuse me of being a fascist...

[PaulDavidHewson]

in developing countries it might be better if children contributed in some way to the survival of their families.
Survivial being the key-word here.

Of course it would be extremely nice if those children could enjoy thier youths in a care free way and enjoy proper education, but untill that day comes the conditions in which they work and the pay they receive should be increased.

There is nothing facist about this I assure you.

[deadpool 52]

Do any of you cappies think being free is waiting for your next paycheck day in and day out, wondering what will come next with the economy, firings or 'lay offs.'
Slave to you job, whore to your wage, that is not way to be free.

[PaulDavidHewson]

well, that's how you look at it.

I can actually choose not to wait for my pay-check and sit on my ass all day, or maybe I'll start my own company which specialises in Toy-whores.

That way I'm a slave to my own wits.

[poncho]

Quote: from PaulDavidHewson on 12:12 am on April 18, 2002
in developing countries it might be better if children contributed in some way to the survival of their families.
Survivial being the key-word here.

Of course it would be extremely nice if those children could enjoy thier youths in a care free way and enjoy proper education, but untill that day comes the conditions in which they work and the pay they receive should be increased.

There is nothing facist about this I assure you.


Oh think I get it its there fault they are poor and suffering; so once they serve out the sentance not of there making they can be free! Capitalist only wrong is not paying them a better wage so they can help themselves and not get a bum hand-out!!!!

[PaulDavidHewson]

Poncho, are you finished?

In your last few posts I heard nothing from you but nonsense, Your refrain from answering questions and you try to attack a point I already explained quite clearly.

Once again I will tell you:
Those families cannot afford their children to go to school. This is a political issue of the country itself.
Those families are lucky if there is a good harvest and they can actually buy some food with the limited funds they have. Those working children are contributing to the survivial of their own families. abolishing child labour in those countries would prove to be a devastating move. Many families would most probably be even more underfed or even worse dead....

Untill the day comes the international world tackles the root of evil that causes certain countries to live in extreme poverty we can only contribute to a somewhat more pelasant live by improving the working conditions in whcih those children work, heck call me crazy, but maybe even double their wages.

Please comment on this Poncho and please don't just jump to another subject without any regard for which I just said.

[poncho]

"Those families cannot afford their children to go to school. This is a political issue of the country itself.
Those families are lucky if there is a good harvest and they can actually buy some food with the limited funds they have. Those working children are contributing to the survivial of their own families. abolishing child labour in those countries would prove to be a devastating move. Many families would most probably be even more underfed or even worse dead...."

Corporations make the situation worse (if I have to explain entirely why than you know nothing of the issue)

The worse part of the problem is that most of these places in the third world have no inferstructure, so in order to attract factories the country borrows money from a world bank, alot goes into the politicians pocket and the rest goes into building the comapnies needs includeing building the factory, mine, oil line or whatever the sector of business the company is in. Who pays for it not the company they will pay usely a dollar a year spread out over thirty years or simular arrangement. They'll also make a make concessions like paying no income taxes. Suddenly the company needs better shipping ports, or sophisticated phone lines or better power supply. Again the country borrows more money and the company pays nothing the people do! In short your plan just creates a cycle of poverty and slavery.

[PaulDavidHewson]

It's more scary to remove control from the multi-nationals without giving more control to the people like in Cuba and other 3rd world countries.

Yes, we all agree that sweatshops are bad and that the working conditions and wages should be improved, but there is nothing bad with international companies investing by building companies in third world countries.

Also it might be a good idea to read this:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/ThirdWo...evelopment.html (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/ThirdWorldEconomicDevelopment.html)

It's also very odd to automaticaly assume that International companies like Shell etc make matters worse. In reality those companies have invested a great deal and the welfare they are bringing and the employement they are bringen attracts more investors.
The buildings build by those companies and other companies that automatically move in do create a better infrastructure and the money the countries are making from these big investors do directly benefit the country, not in all cases of course there are always exceptions.

[poncho]

Quote: from PaulDavidHewson on 7:01 pm on April 18, 2002
It's more scary to remove control from the multi-nationals without giving more control to the people like in Cuba and other 3rd world countries.

Yes, we all agree that sweatshops are bad and that the working conditions and wages should be improved, but there is nothing bad with international companies investing by building companies in third world countries.

Also it might be a good idea to read this:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/ThirdWo...evelopment.html (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/ThirdWorldEconomicDevelopment.html)

It's also very odd to automaticaly assume that International companies like Shell etc make matters worse. In reality those companies have invested a great deal and the welfare they are bringing and the employement they are bringen attracts more investors.
The buildings build by those companies and other companies that automatically move in do create a better infrastructure and the money the countries are making from these big investors do directly benefit the country, not in all cases of course there are always exceptions.

Why is it scary to allow people to have control over there country?

I'm a capatilist and have no problem with companies investing in the third world.

You really think with better wages is the solution. Your either naive or have no grasp on what the track record of Nike, Shell Oil, United Fruit and many other multi-national corporations in the third world. Either that or you wanna close your eyes and make it go away!

The problem with Capitalism is people like you, I'm ashamed I ever admited to being one!

The state of South Carolina in the United States has been warmly praised by the business press for its successful competitive bid for a new BMW auto plant. The company was attracted in part by cheap, nonunion labor and tax concessions. In addition, when BMW said it favored a 1,000 acre tract on which a large number of middle class homes were already located, the state spent $36.6 million to buy the 140 properties and leased the site back to the company at a $1 a year. The state also picked up the costs of recruiting, screening, and training workers for the new plant, and raised an additional $2.8 million from private sources to send newly hired engineers for training in Germany. The total cost to the South Carolina taxpayers for these and other subsidies to attract BMW will amount to $130 million over thirty years.

The reason this works in the United States is that both state and federal laws protect the workers and society; in even Mexico and other third world country's this model simply does not work and leads to more poverty. The differance between South Carolina and a third world country is "ethics" and "greed" above people. First in the U.S. they have enviromental laws that a factory will have to conform to or face heavy fines. Second the workers if they decide they can form a union; barring that state and federal laws offer protections heavily in favor of the workers and society. The displaced family's are "middle class" with the laws both federal and state ensure they received fair market value for the land. Plus they have jobs so they can buy new homes and they already have a standard of living level.Side benifits real estate values increase. New business and people will move in. Money will flow and stay! Everybody wins and benifits.....In the third world enviroment laws do not exist and if the country tries to bring in some the company will leave because its cheaper to build a new factory somewhere in a new undeveloped country. If the workers try and form a union again the companies will smash it with the police/military. They may receive fare value for the land but that is not protected; since the people who live in the third world are already poor if they do get money its spent on food. When property value's increase the low wages and the money if any given makes it impossible for them to buy a new home. In short the money flows in but into the pockets of corrupt government politicians and the money only stays if the conditions of poverty stays as well because that is what attracted the corporation to invest. Its a loose situation.But worse of all is how it effects children i.e:child labor, illness from enviromental destruction etc etc etc.

Under your logic better wages and let them figure it out as long as it does not interfere with my profits!



(Edited by poncho at 10:54 pm on April 18, 2002)

[RGacky3]

Are these freedoms bad and evil?


[/quote]

Communism is against the freedom of EXPLOITATION, if owning buisinesses and running corperations leads to exploitation well then yes we are against it. Also communism has nothing to do with slavery, it has to do with equality, in capitalism you are a slave to your employer, becouse he decides weather you have a sorce of income or not.

[RedRevolutionary87]

Quote: from PaulDavidHewson on 10:33 pm on April 17, 2002
well, that's how you look at it.

I can actually choose not to wait for my pay-check and sit on my ass all day, or maybe I'll start my own company which specialises in Toy-whores.

That way I'm a slave to my own wits.


well if you start your own company your profit would come from the unpaid labour from those working there, and please dont say that they should start their own company, because trust me there is not enough resources on this planet for everyone to be rich, remember there is a product behind the dollar.

[RedRevolutionary87]

communism simply prevents ones freedom being someone elses slavery

[PaulDavidHewson]

"It's more scary to remove control from the multi-nationals without giving more control to the people like in Cuba and other 3rd world countries.

Why is it scary to allow people to have control over there country? "

Poncho, justy for this remark I have just vowed to not respond to you anymore for the time being.

You constantly twist my words and interpret them in some strange and twisted way to suit your own goals.

On numerous recent occasions I have asked you not to twist my words and to respond to my question, instead you turn to facts about issues that don't even matter and mostly they are not being discussed on this thread.

have fun with your stallinist propoganda.

[poncho]

It was a legitimate question on why you would feel its better for multi-nationals to have control over another's counrty.

[Anarcho]

I think what he's trying to say (Kind of hard to follow all the twists here) is this:

-If a country gets a loan from the IMF or WB, and a percentage ends up in the politicians pocket, it is the politicians fault, not the fault of Nike.

-If a company can get away with paying 17c an hour, they will. It is the responsibility of the country in question to inforce laws that require a living wage.

Is that right?

[El Che]

I think freedom to murder is bad

I think freedom to rape is bad

I think freedom to abort is bad

I think freedom to exploit is bad

So capitalist, in good keeping with your simplistic tradictions:

Capitalism=exploitation

[poncho]

Quote: from Anarcho on 6:38 am on April 19, 2002
I think what he's trying to say (Kind of hard to follow all the twists here) is this:

"-If a country gets a loan from the IMF or WB, and a percentage ends up in the politicians pocket, it is the politicians fault, not the fault of Nike."

I explained why its Nike faults COUNTRY"S GET LOANS TO BUILD FACTORIES FOR THESE COMPANY"S, THE PEOPLE PAY NOT THE COMPANY BECAUSE THEY GET CONCESSIONS IN ORDER NOT TO PAY TAX CLEAR ENOUGH. IF THE PEOPLE TRY TO IMPROVE ANYTHING THAT WOULD MAKE A COMPANY PAY ANYTHING OR KEEP A SMITTEN OF THE RESOURCES THEY ARE STEALING AND TAKING OUT OF THE COUNTRY THE COMPANY GETS THE GOVERNMENT TO SEND IN THE POLICE AND OR MILITARY TO SMASS THE DISSENT AGAINST DEMOCRACY.

"-If a company can get away with paying 17c an hour, they will. It is the responsibility of the country in question to inforce laws that require a living wage."

SAME GOES FOR BETTER WAGES POLICE SENT TO SMASS THE MOVEMENT IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY. IF THE COMPANY ENDS UP PAYING MORE IT JUST LEAVES AND GOES TO ANOTHER COUNTRY. IF NO MORE COUNTRY"S CAN CUT A DEAL THE U.S MILITARY GETS INVOVLED.
Is that right?


IT's still a valid question he said it: "It's more scary to remove control from the multi-nationals without giving more control to the people like in Cuba and other 3rd world countries."

Did not change a word unless he does not know the meaning of scary!

The lite weight first goes I'm a propganda spreader when I back it up, I'm twisting his words!

No other country or multi-national comapnay has the right to tell a country no matter the system of government what to do.

lets see him back it up

[PaulDavidHewson]

"No other country or multi-national comapnay has the right to tell a country no matter the system of government what to do. "

I completely agree, couldn't agree more.

btw, were you adressing me or Poncho?


(Edited by PaulDavidHewson at 6:40 pm on April 19, 2002)

[James]

Does anyone believe that they are free? i don't

[Communist Dominion]

El Che you are correct, capitalism is the most anti freedom system on this planet. it exploits many for the benifit of few.

[PaulDavidHewson]

"It's more scary to remove control from the multi-nationals without giving more control to the people like in Cuba and other 3rd world countries.

Why is it scary to allow people to have control over there country? "


What I was trying to say is:
You can limit the rights multi-nationals have in a given country to compensate the exploited work force.
By setting more standards for companies and increasing tax rates etc, so that the goverment can actually make sure their people have a better living.

But if you limit the rights multi nationals have in a country and not give it back to the people, but instead let the entire state control it than the people still don't have any control over it.

The state of Cuba seized control over the assest of United fruit. Now the state has a lot of land, but the people still have nothing.