posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 04:15 PM
a reply to: sheepslayer247
Communism falls into the same trap as other ideologies that are intrinsically linked to heterodox economic theory that does not accurately model human
behavior. The people who fought for communism in the early part of the 20th century didn't do so because they wanted to live in a society oppressed by
a totalitarian state. Their intentions were good and unfortunately they were wrong.
The same sort of trap is evidenced in the love affair some ideologies have with pure laissez-faire
capitalism. I expect if this thread stays up
long enough, there will be some well meaning libertarians who may even post something about how great economic growth was in 19th century America —
perhaps the closest to this ideal any society has come.
What they won't tell you is that while the economy was booming, the average person wasn't enjoying a similar increase in their standard of living.
They'll probably also completely ignore macroeconomic factors contributing to economic growth and the changing world (and society) we live in.
Sure we could put children in factories and do away with environmental regulation and the GDP would go up faster but...
We need to accept that while capitalism has advanced society, it's modern mixed economies that have kept it going and it's just as likely that pure
capitalism would result in disaster. In purely pragmatic terms, I see a need for some sort of wealth redistribution from the top
to the bottom.
Think it through. The richest people are amassing fortunes that they likely won't spend in their lifetimes — sucking the wealth out of the rest of
society and locking it up in banks and vastly expensive assets. A lot of people get stuck on what's fair
from somebody to give
to somebody else, right? This is dogmatic horses# that will get us nowhere. We live in the real world
and we need to do what works the best for everyone, PERIOD.
I also would like to quote Thomas Paine from Agrarian Justice
Separate an individual from society, and give him an island or a continent to possess, and he cannot acquire personal property. He cannot be rich.
So inseparably are the means connected with the end, in all cases, that where the former do not exist the latter cannot be obtained. All accumulation,
therefore, of personal property, beyond what a man's own hands produce, is derived to him by living in society; and he owes on every principle of
justice, of gratitude, and of civilization, a part of that accumulation back again to society from whence the whole came.
edit on 2014-8-23 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)