Why communism doesn't work.

[Eamonnca1]

Eamon this is all fine and well but I didnt ask you about communism

I had mentioned breifly about technocratic form of government.

You picked it out of my post and said that it tended toward dictatorship

I asked you how or why you thought it done this

You said that communist world tried it and it didnt work.

I asked you for a specific examples

You started this thread which is completely unrelated

I am thoroughly confused???

The only examples of technocratic government I can think of were in the communist block. That's why my post was focused on governance rather than the economic policies of communism. If you can think of any other examples of technocratic government I'd be happy to discuss them.

[magpie seanie]

Capitalism has failed repeatedly and has caused misery everywhere it has been tried.

Weird how you can interchange words that have completely different meanings....

[Main Street]

Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man, Communism is the reverse.

Close, very close

The question asked  is why communism doesn't work.
In the USSR, the wealth that was created was reasonably distributed,  the main defect with communism was with the production standards, only a  small amount of the profit made, went back  to the producers, production was sluggish, of a general inferior standard, amidst worker apathy cynicism  and a general  inefficiency throughout. The commune system suffered from acute shortages and always food was imported from capitalist countries.

Under capitalism. the profit made is concentrated in the hands of a tiny minority and therefore money/wealth is not circulated. Inflation is inevitable when (new) money is printed/ borrowed to finance new investment and when it is printed  in abundance, based on the inflated boom time value of that investment, a big depression (bust) is inevitable.

Both economic systems are equally defective.

[muppet]

Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man, Communism is the reverse.

Close, very close

The question asked  is why communism doesn't work.
In the USSR, the wealth that was created was reasonably distributed,  the main defect with communism was with the production standards, only a  small amount of the profit made, went back  to the producers, production was sluggish, of a general inferior standard, amidst worker apathy cynicism  and a general  inefficiency throughout. The commune system suffered from acute shortages and always food was imported from capitalist countries.

Under capitalism. the profit made is concentrated in the hands of a tiny minority and therefore money/wealth is not circulated. Inflation is inevitable when (new) money is printed/ borrowed to finance new investment and when it is printed  in abundance, based on the inflated boom time value of that investment, a big depression (bust) is inevitable.

Both economic systems are equally defective.

Under Communism people had money, but often nothing to spend it on. The shops were frequently empty. Under Capitalism, in this scenario, prices would rise and thus those with money would be better off. But prices were fixed. Money was often irrelevant.

[seafoid]

I am not so sure that capitalism does what it says on the tin either

"Jonathan Portes, director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, says the staggered effect of unconventional monetary easing appears to do nothing for a long time, then "hits you in the face". He argues that Britain's flexible labour market also explains the unexpected strength of the recovery."

ie they don't know what is going on.

George Osborne promised to reduce the budget deficit to zero before the next UK election but falling tax receipts due to unexpected wage deflation banjaxed that. So now it's a very scaled down boast. 

http://wpm.ccmp.eu/wpm/419/ContentUploads/2094324152_2014-10-1/economyposter.jpg

Nobody really knows what's going on.

[Ulick]

That's a spectacular bit of point-missing you've got there, Ulick. Did you read my post in full? It doesn't seem that way because I DID discuss different democratic systems (did you miss the bit where I talked about parliamentary systems v presidential systems?), I DID say that democracy is far from perfect. And the point that sailed over your head, but is there in big letters nonetheless, is that all systems are prone to corruption, it's just that democracy is better at avoiding it than the alternatives.

By your own admission, not one single communist state reached the desired utopia. Not one. Every single one degenerated into dictatorship. Can't say that about democratic countries, can you? Congratulations on managing to conjure up a couple of exceptions and one hypothetical one, but Hitler and Musolini are hardly typical of leaders who came to power through the democratic process now, are they?

If you're going to tell someone that they're posting "arrogant uniformed (sic) Yankee bullshit. The kind of shite we all sigh at hearing when coming across a loudmouthed Yank spouting off in a Kerry pub. It usually falls apart though on any kind of cursory examination leaving us wondering why we even bothered," you might want to think about reading it first to make sure it fits that description.

No, you started from an assumption that communism is not or could not be democratic, which is just plain wrong. As I pointed out they are not mutually exclusive – mainly because they are not comparable concepts. 'Communism' is a complete socioeconomic theory or system. 'Democracy' is a political concept. Versions of communism may be democratic and others not so much in the same was that capitalist societies may be democratic and others not. Save us the stars-and-stripes land of the free, we're the best and only, bollix. 

[Ulick]

What are the actual changes to day to day life that I would expect to see under your idea of a correctly implemented democratic-communism/democratic socialist system ? In what way would my economic situation improve? What social improvements would accrue ?

Where exactly did I claim ownership over anything? My post was simply to point out the false prepositions at the core of the discussion. I didn't say anywhere that I had a preference of one form over another.

hmm......your response to EamonCA clearly implied a preference ..

I'll just ask you straight out so, do you think that communism (in any form you choose) is a good socioeconomic system ? Just your own opionion. I'm not claiming you represent anybody or anything.

Hmm... nothing. I pointed out falsehoods in the discussion and argument. Nothing more.

[Eamonnca1]

No, you started from an assumption that communism is not or could not be democratic, which is just plain wrong. As I pointed out they are not mutually exclusive – mainly because they are not comparable concepts. 'Communism' is a complete socioeconomic theory or system. 'Democracy' is a political concept.

Concentrate.

Communism requires a technocratic government. Technocratic governments tend towards dictatorship.

Versions of communism may be democratic and others not so much in the same was that capitalist societies may be democratic and others not.

Show me a communist system that's also democratic.

Save us the stars-and-stripes land of the free, we're the best and only, bollix.

Huh? I don't know what you're smoking but since I've never said that in my life I'm hardly going to start now.

[Eamonnca1]

Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man, Communism is the reverse.

Close, very close

The question asked  is why communism doesn't work.
In the USSR, the wealth that was created was reasonably distributed,  the main defect with communism was with the production standards, only a  small amount of the profit made, went back  to the producers, production was sluggish, of a general inferior standard, amidst worker apathy cynicism  and a general  inefficiency throughout. The commune system suffered from acute shortages and always food was imported from capitalist countries.

I once heard a great explanation for why communism collapsed.

Producers want prices kept high, consumers want prices kept low. If you're not going to let prices find their own level, you can't keep both sides happy without subsidies, so in the communist system they subsidised the living daylights out of everything to the point where subsidies grew to engulf over a quarter of all public spending. The natural forces of supply and demand were thrown out the window, shortages abounded, and without competition there was no incentive to make anything better, so quality plummeted too.

Under capitalism. the profit made is concentrated in the hands of a tiny minority and therefore money/wealth is not circulated. Inflation is inevitable when (new) money is printed/ borrowed to finance new investment and when it is printed  in abundance, based on the inflated boom time value of that investment, a big depression (bust) is inevitable.

Under capitalism wealth can spread around via service industries. This can get corrupted by anti-competitive practices, cartels and the like, which is why a certain amount of regulation is necessary to ensure competition.

Both economic systems are equally defective.

[magpie seanie]

Eamonca1 - do you think Capitalism works? Do you think our system of government in capitalist countries is democratic?

Capitalism is Communism with better PR.

[muppet]

Eamonca1 - do you think Capitalism works? Do you think our system of government in capitalist countries is democratic?

Capitalism is Communism with better PR.

In a proper capitalist system the banks would have been on their own and allowed to fail. The bondholders wouldn't have got a cent from the tax-payer. But we cherry pick between the two and the working classes get the worst of both worlds.

Don't get me wrong, I would cherry pick bits of both as well, but not the Troika way: When its a profit we are capitalist and when its a loss we are communist.

[magpie seanie]

Eamonca1 - do you think Capitalism works? Do you think our system of government in capitalist countries is democratic?

Capitalism is Communism with better PR.

In a proper capitalist system the banks would have been on their own and allowed to fail. The bondholders wouldn't have got a cent from the tax-payer. But we cherry pick between the two and the working classes get the worst of both worlds.

Don't get me wrong, I would cherry pick bits of both as well, but not the Troika way: When its a profit we are capitalist and when its a loss we are communist.

Yes, I agree.

[seafoid]

Most capitalist governments outside the OECD have limited freedom. The global system is based around freedom and resources for people in rich countries .

I think communism in the Soviet Union collapsed partly because they didn't allow for the time value of money so they made a lot of really stupid decisions. The UK is going through something similar with the private finance initiative.