Indy Stone Mod development stops - News at 9
tjstreak:
Quote from: Chocolate Milk on 2009 August 13, 22:56:01
Perhaps you're right about communism in its purest and most academic form, but practically, it involves a top down central government system that is in fact much the same as that exhibited in fascist systems. Just look at what happened to the Soviet Union; the government tried to coordinate everything, and that was completely inefficient.
I guess you have never dealt with corporate America? Big businesses try to create cookie-cutter jobs so their management can micro-manage everything. They create policies, procedures and practices which everyone is required to follow. No one is allowed to exercise any independent judgement. These policies, procedures and practices are developed by some nameless wonk at a corporate headquarters across the country.
Then they lose money hand over fist and expect the government to bail them out with taxpayer funds because they are "too big to fail." So I guess you have described capitalism as well. In Capitalism, one man exploits another. In Communism, it's the other way around.
J. M. Pescado:
Quote from: tjstreak on 2009 August 29, 11:55:12
Then they lose money hand over fist and expect the government to bail them out with taxpayer funds because they are "too big to fail." So I guess you have described capitalism as well. In Capitalism, one man exploits another. In Communism, it's the other way around.
In true capitalism, there is no bailout, so they would just fail in a big fiery ball visible from space. This serves as a lesson to others.
tjstreak:
Quote from: Chocolate Milk on 2009 August 13, 23:40:53
I was explaining Pescado's comment, which I believe was just referring to the "top-down" governmental system, which is a feature of practical communism.
Actually, it's Leninism. Marx actually calls for the withering away of the state. But then, few who talk about Marxism have actually read Marx. Otherwise, they would understand that the term "capitalism" was actually coined by Marx.
You see, according to Marxist theory, places like Russia and China were not suitable for Communism because they economy had not sufficiently developed. Nations had to go through a capitalist period to develop the economic structures necessary for socialism. In 1917, Russia was still a feudal society where serfs had (at least legally) just been liberated. Lenin, and then Stalin, came up with the notion of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat where the government would create the infrastructure needed for Socialism. Of course, this is diametrically oppposed to Marx's actual teachings, where the development of Socialism is the natural and INEVITABLE result of the historical dialectic.
tjstreak:
Quote from: J. M. Pescado on 2009 August 29, 11:58:36
In true capitalism, there is no bailout, so they would just fail in a big fiery ball visible from space. This serves as a lesson to others.
What we have is not true capitalism, but best described as Lemon Socialism. Others might call it Crony Capitalism.
But anyone who thinks that true Capitalism is either possible or desirable is sorely mistaken. The Efficient Market Theory is just as much an ideology as Marxism, and just as flawed. After all, both Marxism and Social Darwinism (i.e. capitalism) are both 19th century ideologies. While the 20th century was not the most pleasant period in human history, we did learn something during the past century.
The Efficient Market Theory, actually has very little empirical evidence to support it and it's conclusion that its results are desirable are based entirely upon questionable value judgments. Generally, when people don't know how something works or what the results of a policy might be, they fall back on the Efficient Market Theory.
JamesNine:
Quote from: tjstreak on 2009 August 29, 11:55:12
I guess you have never dealt with corporate America? Big businesses try to create cookie-cutter jobs so their management can micro-manage everything. They create policies, procedures and practices which everyone is required to follow. No one is allowed to exercise any independent judgement. These policies, procedures and practices are developed by some nameless wonk at a corporate headquarters across the country.
Then they lose money hand over fist and expect the government to bail them out with taxpayer funds because they are "too big to fail." So I guess you have described capitalism as well. In Capitalism, one man exploits another. In Communism, it's the other way around.
A great example of a horribly run company which, in true capitalism, wouldn't make it and will fall to competition. A good corporation will use a more horizontal style hierarchy, use better management practices, encourage their employees to be creative, and give incentives to their best workers to be productive. Causing them to be ahead of the market and will result in better results all around.
Both examples have their extremes which will fail, always remember that.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page