i agree jrod

jrod,

I agree with what you have said and it is insightful.

one must decide if they wish to be measured on the yardstick of money or not.

that is your decision even though society prefers that measure of a human, you have the right to not believe in it. That is the beauty of the US system, there is a way for everyone to fit in and do what their natural drive allows them to do within reason. The people that are most angry and whine the most about the system there are people that want to make it big but don't know how to do it or don't want to do the work. That is why we have unions and government employees. In my opinion many of those people live above their contributions to society and they are hypocrites.

the problem with the american system of government is that although people do succeed, they can only do so at the expense of someone else. that is the basis of a market economy. it might work in the sense that a minority will get rich, but is that really what is desired from a political system. isnt that exactly what you argue is the main flaw in communism - the ruling elite prosper whilst everyone else suffers?

i also find the idea that america is great because people can be born into wealth quite strange as it contradicts the theory of meritocracy that is one of the foundations of free market capitalism. how can capitalist justify someone contributing nothing yet having vast wealth?

communism also does not automatically mean uniformity. people remember the years in russia when people basically wore the same clothes and drove the same cars, and i agree this is not acceptable. but under true communism (ie not a stalinist dictatorship) there ias choice. the society is constructed on the not too unbelievable idea that people do not judge others on the basis of money/materialism, but on the basis that humans are universally equal. choice is available: distribution according to need rather than want.

i propose that a system where people are equal (not exactly the same) is better than a system where people die of starvation while others have more money than they could spend. i'll accept that you think this is idealistic, but i dont understand how you can argue it is undesirable.