Originally posted by grey580
An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. That class had insisted
that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said ok, we will have an
experiment in this class on socialism.
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test the
grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second
test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they
studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F.
The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All
failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to
succeed is great; but when government takes all the reward away; no one will try or want to succeed.
Without getting into school/education structures (ie Steiner Schools vs. Slave Factories), let me purpose a solution to this “reward=effort”
dilema, Perhaps the students receiving A’s were “rewarded” with student leadership positions, given interesting problems to solve with fun and
creative solutions, free time to self-teach with other A students, some sort of accumulative notation that would present opportunities later in life
(leadership, advisory, relationships), medals to be worn on school uniform, good tickets to events/entertainment/restaurants etc etc.
What is money really getting us? It’s really just a faulty means of determining someones worth or contribution. For example, why are the companies
who produce genetically modified, mass produced, less nutritious fruits and vegetables - rewarded more than the people who produce bio-dynamic,
organic, sustainable, more nutritiously dense fruits and vegetables?
Capitalism is flawed because 9 times out of 10, it rewards quantity and cost:price ratio more than quality and renewability.
Originally posted by Bunken Drum
You know why communism will never work? Because human beings have an instinct to control more resources than the next person so that we can obtain the
best mating opportunities we can & provide the best security for our offspring. It is as simple as that.
You know why capitalism will never work? For the exact same reason.[...]
All of these inferences arise from the understanding that throughout our evolutionary journey we have had to survive in an environment of scarcity.
Correct. Capitalism perpetuates this, so as to keep profits up, it’s a symptom of a system that is built on differential-advantage. If instead we
did a scientific analysis and determined how much aluminium is in the ground, how much aluminium is needed – and distribute it in accordance with
stability and sustainability in mind – the amount of waste and obsolescence would decline sharply.
As for procreation, it’s a shame people are turned-on by physical manifestations of material wealth – as if somehow this expresses the internal
qualities needed for creating a better human being than those who conceived it. I think a world filled with people who thrive on intelligence and
love are more important than people who are driven for a nest with more shiny things than their neighbours. And it’s not like everyone has to have
Originally posted by paraphi
Just to answer the question "is communism good"?
Well, no it is not. Communism has proven to be bad, bad, bad. Oh, I know there are those who cry that capitalism is bad too and they are here in
this thread saying how terrible it all is and this, that and the other. Pleaes keep in mind that you are typing on a keyboard which is the direct
result of capitalism. If mankind was entirely hobbled to communism it would stagnate.
Technology and tools come about because it makes life easier, people who create things (not the same as produce things) do so because it feels good
– not because of money. Sure the person who invented the keyboard should be immortalised and given rewards (see above), but monetary gain isn’t a
motivating force worthy of praise – as to use your example, instead of having just a few of the highest quality, most ergonomic and functional
keyboards, we have hundreds of inferior designs that are cheap, not as good and as a result resource depleting.
Originally posted by PreyBird
I just got back from Cuba this weekend and went on a historic tour of the city of Havana. Alot of great info was provided. [...]
So jealous! I want to go and see it for myself too, just not it a position to do so at this point in time. I try to refrain from victim mentality,
but whenever anyone talks about Cuba, you’ve got to remember that this is a tiny 3RD WORLD COUNTRY CRIPPLED BY SANCTIONS, yet it has shown itself to
be more well off, and achieved amazing things more so than most if not all countries with a similar GDP.
As for Freedom of the Press, I wouldn’t allow it either if I had the US as my neighbour free to pollute my population with materialistic
distortions of reality to create wanton lust and greed for things that would be wasteful and detrimental to society in the long run as it gradually
progresses all the trappings associated with free-trade – ie consolidation of power in invested interests.
As for control and bureaucracy, alot of that could be put into computerised calculations and automated information distribution.
So yeah Communism is good – it’s just gotta be international enough so as to not be in fear of scarce resources and/or an invasion from vested
Let the revolution begin!!