How can you Capitalists Make Such Claims? - Lack of Motivati

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

The number one argument used against Communism that is not easily refuted by simple logic is the one taht accuses folks in communism to be unmotivated. You say how the removal of economic incentives would result in an unmotivated populace. Think about what you are saying, people are driven by economic incentives to attain some social status, not to buy crap! In communism, social status will obviously not be derrived from finacial superiority, there would be none.

Before making accusations of the consequences of communism, take a look at your beloved Capitalism. The hardest-working people make some of the least money, while some of the least hard-workers make the most. Why doesn't the hard-working group stop working? Are they unmotivated? Clearly not. So why would it happen in Communism? In America, your beloved Capitalist haven, this is best expressed by a quick look at the middle-class. Mediocre middle-class Americans rarely move up socialy. Is it because they do not want to? They think the can, Americans think they can be whatever they want, but can they really? If asked, a simple, average, mediocre, suburban American would feel at the top of their carrer, while working as a simple, average, mediocre, suburban American worker. They would feel no desire to rise in this sense. Though every American is status-seeking, they have only their simple average, mediocre, suburban American neighboors to comapre to, not Bill Gates. No American has actual aspirations to be a millionare. This attitude is the product of an aristocraticaly-run government. Why do I say this? If middle-class Americans managed to rise significantly, would American capitalism survive? Capitalism rests on the fact that the money, and thus the power will rest upon the hands of a few, if not, the system would collapse. So don't tell me about lack of fucking motivation!

[kelvin90701]

Quote: from Victorcommie on 4:59 am on April 5, 2003
The number one argument used against Communism that is not easily refuted by simple logic is the one taht accuses folks in communism to be unmotivated. You say how the removal of economic incentives would result in an unmotivated populace. Think about what you are saying, people are driven by economic incentives to attain some social status, not to buy crap! In communism, social status will obviously not be derrived from finacial superiority, there would be none.

Before making accusations of the consequences of communism, take a look at your beloved Capitalism. The hardest-working people make some of the least money, while some of the least hard-workers make the most. Why doesn't the hard-working group stop working? Are they unmotivated? Clearly not. So why would it happen in Communism? In America, your beloved Capitalist haven, this is best expressed by a quick look at the middle-class. Mediocre middle-class Americans rarely move up socialy. Is it because they do not want to? They think the can, Americans think they can be whatever they want, but can they really? If asked, a simple, average, mediocre, suburban American would feel at the top of their carrer, while working as a simple, average, mediocre, suburban American worker. They would feel no desire to rise in this sense. Though every American is status-seeking, they have only their simple average, mediocre, suburban American neighboors to comapre to, not Bill Gates. No American has actual aspirations to be a millionare. This attitude is the product of an aristocraticaly-run government. Why do I say this? If middle-class Americans managed to rise significantly, would American capitalism survive? Capitalism rests on the fact that the money, and thus the power will rest upon the hands of a few, if not, the system would collapse. So don't tell me about lack of fucking motivation!

Fine. Communist theory is great.

All I have to do is point to collaspe of the CCCP and the free market-izatlion of China. Communist in the CCCP predicted the collaspe of the USA in the 1950s. All I have to say is NA NA NA NA NA NA. Were still here, and your not.

What does this prove? Nothing, but NA NA NA NA NA NA NA. Were still here your not.

You say we "SUCK", NA NA NA NA NA NA, your communist paradise has crumbled, but were still here and only getting RICHER and FATTER.

In the same time period worker idealism in China and CCCP was rewarded from no running water and electric lights, to having them and not moving on from there; we in free markets went on to having two car garages and satellite TV. NA NA NA NA NA.

(Edited by kelvin90701 at 5:41 am on April 5, 2003)

[Pete]

Except of course the untold hundreds of millions, or billions, who starve in free market economies because of their explotation.

[kelvin90701]

Quote: from CrazyPete on 5:41 am on April 5, 2003
Except of course the untold hundreds of millions, or billions, who starve in free market economies because of their explotation.


Billions? Then that would mean that the people who live in a free market, the starving out number the not starving.

Check your math again.

[Pete]

I said 'or billions' as I am unsure of the toll of poverty in exact term.

the starving out number the not starving

That is what I was saying.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Billions? Then that would mean that the people who live in a free market, the starving out number the not starving.

Check your math again.


I think you say this sarcasticaly, but the 3rd world nations hold 80% of the world's population while the 1st world nations hold only 20%. I realize that not evryone in third wolrd is dieing of starvation, but a vast majority is certainly living in poverty.

[Blibblob]

And there is a large number of Americans dying of starvation. Some stuck themselves there, such as drunks. But others were born into that position, because their parents screwed up they have to starve.

[Boris Moskovitz]

I think Capitalism... the idea is ''Man must crush man''. So there is only a specific ammount of people who fatten themselves, and the others, starve. This is not fair, like in many poor countries, the richer are doing that to them, they put them in work factories, and barely pay them. This is not a very moral thing.

I think capitalism is nothing more than gold-colored shit. It seems like a paradise itself, but it is all a fuckin' illusion. Behind that, if you never looked deep enough, you would never know that your about Nikey shoes, the fuckin' Americans are barely paying kids to do that, they treat them like crap, and make a whole load of shit outta this. And as many people here said... only some people get rich.

I think we should deserve to be treated as equal, not that an unworking bum should get the same ammount of money as you, but that we should help each other, not slamming the damn door in each other's faces!

Well... I don't exactly say we're all equal, I'm actually an Anarcho-Communist. I think we should all be TREATED as equal, and that power is fuckin' wrong. Lets take a look, what were the causes of all wars? Some fuckin' leader wanted something. Hitler wanted Jews dead, Napoleon wanted to get rid of Monarchy, Bush wanted to get some cold cash, and there are many more.

Fuck capitalism,
Boris

PS: I think that I am going to say the same things over and over again until the subjects change. Oh well...

I am for Communism, but I personnally believe a lot more in Anarcho-Communism. I am 100% against Capitalism.

[Tkinter1]

"The hardest-working people make some of the least money, while some of the least hard-workers make the most."

You don't make money by not working hard. Give me an example of someone earning money, yet not having to work hard to get it.

[Boris Moskovitz]

Nike... Childrens do the work for those scums.... I don't think its hard work to force kids to work for you.

[englandsgay]

physical labor yes........ but mental? or are you telling me that a doctor didn't have to work hard while he was paying back loans and going through 8 years of school.

last time I checked i did't want a garbageman preforming an operation on me, while I wouldn't worry in the least if my doctor went and collected my garbage.

anyone can do menial labor, we're all human and born with more or less the same physical abilities except in rare circumstances(cripples and superstar athletes)

give me a break.

[Tkinter1]

"Nike... Childrens do the work for those scums.... I don't think its hard work to force kids to work for you."

Believe me, despite their inhumane business practices they are still working hard.

[Pete]

The people working in the inhumane practices, though, are not getting what there work is worth allowing the necktie workers to pull in more money than their work is worth. They are not working as hard as they should. Anyways most of that bullshit about managers working hard and paperwork is created by the Multinational itself, and so much is intermangeral stuff that does not need to be done (trust me my dad *****es about this enough).

England, the Dr. GM arguement is interesting, but they are both interdependant on eachother, with the GM holding the more imporatant position, because they in a way preform preventative medicine by making sure we don't live in our own filth.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

On the garbage collector and the doc. Well, the garbage collector was not given an equal opportunity to achieve the position that the doctor reached, for financial reasons certainly.

A better yet example would be a man who makes money from the stock market vs. a garbage collector. The stock owner did nothing but buy a share of the people's labour, no intelect required, no manual labour required, only lots of money.

Boris, did I understand that you are not in favor of an equal wage for all workers. Finacial superiority would only bring social classes and thus oppression, think about what you are saying.

[Tkinter1]

"The stock owner did nothing but buy a share of the people's labour, no intelect required, no manual labour required, only lots of money."

Heh, well there's a little more to successful investing than that, but what is stopping the garbage man from investing?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I suppose anyone can invest, but to make large profits, it takes large investments.

[Boris Moskovitz]

''Boris, did I understand that you are not in favor of an equal wage for all workers. Finacial superiority would only bring social classes and thus oppression, think about what you are saying.''

I know that this is also true, but this is a little tight, one side, it is your point, but I hear some other people saying that they don't want an unworking bum to get the same salary than they do. A person may be dumb, and stupidly enough, think ''Since I get the same salary whether I work or not, I guess I should just sit on my butt all day and do nothing.'', then, everyone else will do that, thus... ruining the whole economy.

But if everyone's working equally, as they get the salaries equally, then I have nothing against at all. In fact, I think it is great. A bum does not help. but if each person can contribute at least a penny for the society, it can turn out better. I think everyone is able to do something. Let's not include handicaps, and etc...

So if no one does anything, nothing can work. If everyone does something, then it is perfect.

[Tkinter1]

"I suppose anyone can invest, but to make large profits, it takes large investments."

It takes smart investments to make large profits.

[Boris Moskovitz]

In my beliefs... investments are really just partly intelligence, but mostly luck