If Communism/Extreme Socialism took over the world.....

[JMapleton]

Like I said, you can not invest MILLIONS OF REAL ESTATE & RETIREMENT FUNDs!!!!

LOL I don't even know what to say.

Retirement funds aren't invested in something? Do your parents live in million dollar houses?

 

[Tristicus]

I'd die trying to reverse it.

 

[shangshang]

This sounds like another boring anti-commie post by an American who knows shit about it.
Note: I didn't say communism is good nor bad. I'm saying you know shit about it.

 

[MJinZ]

LOL I don't even know what to say.

Retirement funds aren't invested in something? Do your parents live in million dollar houses?

No, they don't live in million dollar houses. The one they live in might touch 1 million, but 1/2 of it is rented out (2 family house).

Retirement funds are very limited in what kind of markets you can invest in. And even if they made 10% a year (which they used, or around 8%), you can't touch it until you're old anyway.

So basically all of their money goes towards mortgage and costs, very little of it can even be used, and by the time they retire, they'll be able to either keep living in the same houses and have some decent change to go on trips or buy some stuff, but for the next 10 or 15 years, they're not living any sort of rich lifestyle.

THESE are the present day middle class.

If you aren't like this and are able to save for retirement, you're probably just lower class living above your means.

I see these people everywhere, driving BMW 3 series and living in apartments they can't afford... saving basically squat. And they think they're middle class...

 

[JMapleton]

No, they don't live in million dollar houses. The one they live in might touch 1 million, but 1/2 of it is rented out (2 family house).

Retirement funds are very limited in what kind of markets you can invest in. And even if they made 10% a year (which they used, or around 8%), you can't touch it until you're old anyway.

So basically all of their money goes towards mortgage and costs, very little of it can even be used, and by the time they retire, they'll be able to either keep living in the same houses and have some decent change to go on trips or buy some stuff, but for the next 10 or 15 years, they're not living any sort of rich lifestyle.

THESE are the present day middle class.

Sorry brah. Most people would disagree that your parents are middle class.

Middle class is typically blue collar and they live in modest housing with little or no savings.

Modern populations have twisted the definition of "middle class" into meaning everyone who isn't poor or isn't rich because it's tacky to just admit you're rich.

 

[MJinZ]

Sorry brah. Most people would disagree that your parents are middle class.

Middle class is typically blue collar and they live in modest housing with little or no savings.

Modern populations have twisted the definition of "middle class" into meaning everyone who isn't poor or isn't rich because it's tacky to just admit you're rich.

So you're saying then... that Middle Class are all FUCKED?

Because when they get old, they have what, Social Security to fall back on?

 

[DucatiMonster696]

This sounds like another boring anti-commie post by an American who knows shit about it.
Note: I didn't say communism is good nor bad. I'm saying you know shit about it.

Sometimes you don't need to put your hand on hot stove to understand that doing so is not a good idea.

Though let me be the first to inform you that communism is god awful system. I know this because I have family members who had to endure living under such a system until they came to the US.

 

[piasabird]

What makes you think it hasn't?

 

[Anarchist420]

I would revolt.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

:sneaky:

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I'm not referring to UK style socialism but I'm talking about extreme socialism where large amounts of private wealth are nearly outlawed and everyone is pretty much coerced into a life of middle class labor and employment.

Would you participate in it or would you live in the edge of society either as a thief or revolutionary or some other anti-society figure?

I couldn't image complying with the request of such a society's demands, where I do not have the ability to live out my ambitions and I am forced into a life of normalcy.

Are you certain you wouldn't be content living in the middle class utopia you seem to be projecting? Would you really be that unhappy if you had, say, an 1800 ft house and one car, free health care, few job/career stresses, no debt, and only had to work 40 hours/week with 1 month of vacation time each year?

For those that support extreme socialism or Marxism, what do you do with people like me who refuse to comply or "work" in such a society. I do not wish to work for anyone else but myself or else I will not work, but I'd rather steal or live as a revolutionary.

I suppose that the only appropriate punishment would be to send you to a nation with extreme capitalism where you could learn about how real laissez-faire capitalism would work and enjoy being part of the 95% of the populace that would be impoverished in spite of whatever Howard Roarkian or John Galtian spirit they might possess. You would have your "de jure" economic freedom but in actuality very little "de facto" freedom.

I suspect you'll discover that your Herculean work ethic and productive ability won't help you too much when efficient corporations and the wealthy own almost all of the wealth, land, and resources and when you have to compete against impoverished labor both domestically and from abroad. If you scrimp and save you might eventually be able to save up enough money to purchase a little property and open your own business, but you'll discover that the established corporations are just much better and more efficient at it and that you can't compete with the billions of other poor people around the world who are willing to work for less or that at least you cannot compete while being able to charge enough money to be able to afford the middle class lifestyle you could have had in the evil people's state socialist utopia that Ayn Rand tried to warn us about with her strawman portrayals.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I think you're overshooting the mark a bit, here.

Waiting in bread lines for your daily rationing of bread, eggs, and cheese is far from "middle class".

For my money, though, I would go against the grain as much as possible.

Yeah, that's what I found funny about his post. He would seem to oppose socialism yet says that in the socialist nation everyone would be middle class. However, that was the hypo he gave us.

Wolverines!!!!!!!!!!

I recognize the "Red Dawn" movie reference. Don't ask how, but sometimes I just remember trivia like that.

Not really, our distribution of welath is much more broad.

Is 25% of the populace having 87% of the wealth a broad distribution?

And we dont have bread lines.

However, we do have 1/8 of the population subsisting on food stamps.

Granted we are going down that path, but nowhere near it yet. I say give us 30 years when entitlements are kicked in and Obamacare has crumbled. Then the middle class will truely be squashed under taxation and inflation.

The main problem will not be the entitlements themselves but rather the increased need for the entitlements and the populace's inability to pay for them as a result of foreign outsourcing, H-1B and L-1 visas, mass immigration, and population explosion.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

That pretty much describes the USA right now doesn't it..

Uh...that's completely wrong. Ever been to China? Over there they have the waaaay upper class and the lower class - there isn't much of an in-between. Over there you basically see 3 kinds of cars in cities: nice Audis, shitty taxis, and rickshaws.

 

[MJinZ]

Uh...that's completely wrong. Ever been to China? Over there they have the waaaay upper class and the lower class - there isn't much of an in-between. Over there you basically see 3 kinds of cars in cities: nice Audis, shitty taxis, and rickshaws.

Huh? China is Capitalist and Nationalist.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Huh? China is Capitalist and Nationalist.

You're right - China isn't really communist in practicality. But they are about as socialist as they come, and the amount distributed by the government effectively creates a huge wealth gap. The extremely rich aren't badly hurt by the wealth redistribution, but the middle class has ceased to exist. The lower class, on the other hand, is supported by subsidized everything.

As far as the USA, we still have a middle class (although it is quickly disappearing due to rising taxes and frivolous spending). The wealth in the U.S. is more evenly distributed than in most countries. Most of the rest of the world is still operating on a nearly feudal system where the peasants have to do whatever the rich say.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

You're right - China isn't really communist in practicality. But they are about as socialist as they come, and the amount distributed by the government effectively creates a huge wealth gap. The extremely rich aren't badly hurt by the wealth redistribution, but the middle class has ceased to exist. The lower class, on the other hand, is supported by subsidized everything.

As far as the USA, we still have a middle class (although it is quickly disappearing due to rising taxes and frivolous spending). The wealth in the U.S. is more evenly distributed than in most countries. Most of the rest of the world is still operating on a nearly feudal system where the peasants have to do whatever the rich say.

The cities in China that carry their entire economy are the most capitalist zones on the planet.

Yes, I agree that their federal government rapes and pillages the mainland under the name of communism and the greater good. But their leaders know that they need an economy so they ignore hong kong.

 

[Atheus]

For those that support extreme socialism or Marxism, what do you do with people like me who refuse to comply or "work" in such a society.

Round you up and hang you. Duh.

 

[Atheus]

the amount distributed by the government effectively creates a huge wealth gap.

That doesn't make any sense...

 

[boomerang]

Well I think the communist dream is that everyone would be lower middle class and have food on their plate, although not too many wasteful luxuries.

In reality, communism has produced nothing but poverty.

It's produced more than that. How about tens of millions of dead folks who wouldn't tow the line? There's no room for dissension in Communism.

From the first link in my sig;

Von Hayek accurately foretold the fate that would befall dissenters from the plan. They simply could not be allowed to get in the way. Opposition would soon be treated as subversion, with debate shriveling to non-existence under the glare of the state. Those who refused compliance would first be marginalized, then dehumanized, and finally (failing re-education) eliminated. Collectivism and individualism cannot long share the same bed. They are political oil and water, and neither can compromise its position without eventually succumbing to the other. The history of the twentieth century is littered with the remains of those who became "enemies of the state" for merely drawing attention to this flaw. As Von Hayek predicted, the socialist vision would not be achieved without bloodshed.

Stalin killed 20 million (this number is widely felt to be accurate)
Mao killed 60 million (the numbers are thought to be between 50 and 70 million)
Hitler killed 11 million (once again this is the number felt to be accurate)

 

[ProfJohn]

That pretty much describes the USA right now doesn't it..

Really??

This is a 1990 Trabant, a typical car in Socialist countries.

This is a 1990 Honda Civic

Which car would you rather drive?

Oh... btw if you wanted a 1990 Trabant you would have had to placed your order in 1975. If you wanted a 1990 civic you could have drive off in one the same day.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

I want a country where a person or group of people can get together and build automobiles for sale. Government regulation in this country has made this impossible. Also, compare that 1990 USDM Honda to a 2010 USDM Honda and try not to vomit. 50% of the car is stupid crap that only exists to meet regulations. Imagine what kind of gas mileage we'd have today without the government getting in the way. Little cars used to get 40mpg, now they get 25-30. Gotta tow around all that expensive crap!

 

[sandorski]

Don't respond to me unless you're willing to put up an argument.

I don't need another political troll wasting my time.

I respond appropriately. Sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[JMapleton]

Are you certain you wouldn't be content living in the middle class utopia you seem to be projecting? Would you really be that unhappy if you had, say, an 1800 ft house and one car, free health care, few job/career stresses, no debt, and only had to work 40 hours/week with 1 month of vacation time each year?

First of all, extreme socialism would not produce such results, everyone knows this. You would be talking more 1000 square foot houses, which is common in Europe, and cheap econo cars and poor healthcare.

I suppose that the only appropriate punishment would be to send you to a nation with extreme capitalism where you could learn about how real laissez-faire capitalism would work and enjoy being part of the 95% of the populace that would be impoverished in spite of whatever Howard Roarkian or John Galtian spirit they might possess. You would have your "de jure" economic freedom but in actuality very little "de facto" freedom.

I suspect you'll discover that your Herculean work ethic and productive ability won't help you too much when efficient corporations and the wealthy own almost all of the wealth, land, and resources and when you have to compete against impoverished labor both domestically and from abroad. If you scrimp and save you might eventually be able to save up enough money to purchase a little property and open your own business, but you'll discover that the established corporations are just much better and more efficient at it and that you can't compete with the billions of other poor people around the world who are willing to work for less or that at least you cannot compete while being able to charge enough money to be able to afford the middle class lifestyle you could have had in the evil people's state socialist utopia that Ayn Rand tried to warn us about with her strawman portrayals.

You are completely talking nonsense, I don't even know how to respond, but you're completely speaking from imagination not reality.

The economically freest countries in the world are not as you describe. They provide lots of opportunity for everyone willing to work hard and save.

Believe it or not, China is the perfect example of this. People work hard and save their money, investing in businesses and industry, which is why so much wealth is being created over there. China btw is not at all "socialist" and certainly not communist, it's more of a capitalist dictatorship that parades itself as communist.

Extreme socialism does not work in the long run because it spoils people. You need to work long and hard hours to make it on this Earth. We cannot all sit around and work 35 hours a week and expect to have a world economy. It's like a labor union, wages go up and up and over time the employees become spoiled, like the auto union workers were, and the scheme they built crashes down on them.

Socialism takes all the success of capitalism and builds a protectionist wall around it, keeping that wealth in for a temporary time, but eventually the party ends and the walls come crashing down. You people who think you can keep the protectionist/unionist scheme going indefinitely are clueless. It's not a viable economic situation because it relies on the success and hardwork of capitalists in other countries or capitalists that existed in previous generations that created the economic gains that protectionists intend to "protect." Unions didn't create Ford Motor, a capitalist did, it was the unions it harnessed the success and tried to build a protectionist wall around, sucking it dry until the wall around it crumbled.

 

[JMapleton]

As far as the USA, we still have a middle class (although it is quickly disappearing due to rising taxes and frivolous spending). The wealth in the U.S. is more evenly distributed than in most countries. Most of the rest of the world is still operating on a nearly feudal system where the peasants have to do whatever the rich say.

The United States has a shrinking middle class because we have little education in terms of finance and savings. Most poor people in the United States could move to middle class, even without extensive education, by simply financial education and better working habits. I don't know the solution to the problem, but I know people need training on how to be better employees and they need more motivation to work, live cheaply, and save and invest.

 

[Hacp]

The United States has a shrinking middle class because we have little education in terms of finance and savings. Most poor people in the United States could move to middle class, even without extensive education, by simply financial education and better working habits. I don't know the solution to the problem, but I know people need training on how to be better employees and they need more motivation to work, live cheaply, and save and invest.

No amount of financial education is going to slow down the competitive pressures of India and China.

There are two ways to tackle this.Either wall ourselves up for 20 years until the standard of living in those countries are high enough that we're somewhat competitive with them, or lower our standard of living to compete with them.