Is Communism / Sociolism the wave of the future?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

rocadelpunk

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2001
5,589
1
81
op

look up the word "bubble economy" for China.

It's well predicted in a commy econ system that if you open it up for free trade, there will just be a huge huge growth b/c people haven't had the opportunity. As stated by someone before, there's only a few economic hotzones that were opened up and they are incredibly successful, but the government is not going to open more. (look up j-curve...the CCP wants to stay in power : P)

The majority, like 90% of Chinese business is still under state control...basically, those businesses are propped up by the government and at some point the economic zones are going to stop growing so much and won't be able to make up the difference/support the propped up govt business...

Especially now that China joinged the WTO and will have to begin to play fair.

---

Now communism has been fairly successful in China b/c their ability to not oppress for the sake of oppresion...and when they do, it's concentrated in the city. I'm sure most of China is still rural farmers whose standard of living isn't that high...I mean really, there's not much of a middle class at all.

Look up unitary system as to why the rural peeps are content with CCP.

Also look up legitmacy of results/habit

and the history of the CCP (seen as fighters for China...in comparison to the nationalists who fled to taiwan)

----

Nobody, absolutely nobody predicted/wrote a paper even in like 1988/89 that communism would begin to fall, so it is kinda foolish to predict that China's govt. will...nothing is inevitable. However, there are some possibilities that eventually the commies will fall...

1 part bubble economy
1 part so called "experts" who are generally younger and may study in the u.s. (like a computer guru for example) are being allowed into the party (if you're in top of party you're the most influential)...these people are not chosen so much for their beleifs in adhering to communism/mao/etc..

These aren't gurantees, but it might be.




--------------


Now russia is interesting:

Russia is democratic, but Putin has been doing lots of things to consolidate lots and lots of power for himself. i.e. his own party, getting rid of radical parties but doing it with 7% minimum majority vote...v.s. other countries who have like 3-4...appointing governors of provinces...slew of examples. So, there is the worry that he might not step down after second term...among other things

Can't argue with the fact that Russians love a strong leader..

Once again, look up j-curve for Russia...even with help of intellectuals...there were just too many unforseen consequences, and it wasn't as easy a transition as people expected. There's a huge huge disparity between rich/poor...mostly b/c right after the switch to free market, people were given 25 dollars to invest and obviously people with know how/higher ups in soviet union made much much better investments.

Another reason as to why China's govt. is strong is b/c it's such a blend of various communist examples, they basically learn from past mistakes of everybody else.


ok. i'm done.

cliffs: China's economy is a bad example as to why they're succesful commies
However, China may still be communist for quite a while.
Putin is criticized (by outsiders from Russia) on his ...tricks...stay up to date with news I guess : P
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: aswedc
Originally posted by: So
On paper it's a terrible idea. Quit parroting that. Any system in which everyone is a slave to everyone else is immoral, no matter what.
It's not immoral for 20% of the population to control 84% of the wealth? :confused:

If 20% of the population earned 84% of the wealth, then no it's not immoral.
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: aswedc
Originally posted by: So
On paper it's a terrible idea. Quit parroting that. Any system in which everyone is a slave to everyone else is immoral, no matter what.
It's not immoral for 20% of the population to control 84% of the wealth? :confused:

versus in communism 0.0001% (government leaders) control 100% of the wealth.
 

foghorn67

Lifer
Jan 3, 2006
11,883
63
91
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Philippine Mango
Originally posted by: fitzov
Money is the key to freedom

rofl--take a look at post WW1 Germany and think again--wheelbarrels full of money worth nothing

Money meaning like wealth, like gold... Gold doesn't really lose it's value..

ahh so you mean wealth is the key to freedom--a key that is 55% held by 5% of the people.

Anchorman? Works 60% of the time, everytime.
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
Marxism was never practiced properly, so how can you argue one way or other?

Doesn't make it any less immoral, impractical, inhuman, and illogical.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: aswedc
Originally posted by: So
On paper it's a terrible idea. Quit parroting that. Any system in which everyone is a slave to everyone else is immoral, no matter what.
It's not immoral for 20% of the population to control 84% of the wealth? :confused:

versus in communism 0.0001% (government leaders) control 100% of the wealth.

Don't waste your breath... some people will never get it.
 

fitzov

Platinum Member
Jan 3, 2004
2,477
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.
 

fitzov

Platinum Member
Jan 3, 2004
2,477
0
0
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: aswedc
Originally posted by: So
On paper it's a terrible idea. Quit parroting that. Any system in which everyone is a slave to everyone else is immoral, no matter what.
It's not immoral for 20% of the population to control 84% of the wealth? :confused:

versus in communism 0.0001% (government leaders) control 100% of the wealth.

No. Communism is an economic theory in which the working class owns the means of production--not the government.
 

ruffilb

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2005
5,096
1
0
Communism is as much an economic system as it is a political system. Besides, none of these countries is ACTUALLY communist.
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.

Economics and political structure are inherently tied. You can't have a free market without producing a tendency towards a free society and you can't maintain a communist economy without a statist government.
 

fitzov

Platinum Member
Jan 3, 2004
2,477
0
0
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.

Economics and political structure are inherently tied. You can't have a free market without producing a tendency towards a free society and you can't maintain a communist economy without a statist government.

All that Communism requires is the working class to own the means of production. What sort of government involvement is required for that?
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: fitzov
All that Communism requires is the working class to own the means of production. What sort of government involvement is required for that?

:laugh:

Because within a few years, some people will work harder / get lucky / manipulate others / whatever and come back into ownership of the means of production, either overtly, or in a de facto manner. Then you're right back to the free market. In order to maintain a 'communal' system, a large authoritarian government is needed to prevent that.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.
Communism (as an economic system) is inherently tied to authoritarian government systems and cannot be separated from such without collapsing (after all, what but an authoritarian government can keep the people from trading on their own?). The so-called "communist ideal" does not, will not, and cannot exist. It's a pseudo-religious fantasy.

The system of value is fixed insofar in that all labor is valued the same, regardless of output (or else it would be an "unfair" meritocracy, would it not?). The comparison was an analogy.

Wealth is created by labor creating capital, and that capital being found valuable to another in a free marketplace.

As a lover of and believer in absolute freedom, I will humor your faith in your religious beliefs the same as I would humor another zealot's. Some believe that Christ will return to save us, others believe that a violent revolution of the oppressed worker classes can do the same. Who am I to say which is the more idiotic?
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.

How can anyone explain economics to someone who thinks the economy is zero sum :roll:
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.
Communism (as an economic system) is inherently tied to authoritarian government systems and cannot be separated from such without collapsing (after all, what but an authoritarian government can keep the people from trading on their own?). The so-called "communist ideal" does not, will not, and cannot exist. It's a pseudo-religious fantasy.

The system of value is fixed insofar in that all labor is valued the same, regardless of output (or else it would be an "unfair" meritocracy, would it not?). The comparison was an analogy.

Wealth is created by labor creating capital, and that capital being found valuable to another in a free marketplace.

As a lover of and believer in absolute freedom, I will humor your faith in your religious beliefs the same as I would humor another zealot's. Some believe that Christ will return to save us, others believe that a violent revolution of the oppressed worker classes can do the same. Who am I to say which is the more idiotic?

Vic, do you have a newsletter and can I subscribe to it? ;)
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.
Communism (as an economic system) is inherently tied to authoritarian government systems and cannot be separated from such without collapsing (after all, what but an authoritarian government can keep the people from trading on their own?). The so-called "communist ideal" does not, will not, and cannot exist. It's a pseudo-religious fantasy.

The system of value is fixed insofar in that all labor is valued the same, regardless of output (or else it would be an "unfair" meritocracy, would it not?). The comparison was an analogy.

Wealth is created by labor creating capital, and that capital being found valuable to another in a free marketplace.

As a lover of and believer in absolute freedom, I will humor your faith in your religious beliefs the same as I would humor another zealot's. Some believe that Christ will return to save us, others believe that a violent revolution of the oppressed worker classes can do the same. Who am I to say which is the more idiotic?

No need to bash Christians. Christians are the ones that propagated the modern free market system. In fact, one can argue that if you believe in God you must believe in free markets.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.
Communism (as an economic system) is inherently tied to authoritarian government systems and cannot be separated from such without collapsing (after all, what but an authoritarian government can keep the people from trading on their own?). The so-called "communist ideal" does not, will not, and cannot exist. It's a pseudo-religious fantasy.

The system of value is fixed insofar in that all labor is valued the same, regardless of output (or else it would be an "unfair" meritocracy, would it not?). The comparison was an analogy.

Wealth is created by labor creating capital, and that capital being found valuable to another in a free marketplace.

As a lover of and believer in absolute freedom, I will humor your faith in your religious beliefs the same as I would humor another zealot's. Some believe that Christ will return to save us, others believe that a violent revolution of the oppressed worker classes can do the same. Who am I to say which is the more idiotic?

No need to bash Christians. Christians are the ones that propagated the modern free market system. In fact, one can argue that if you believe in God you must believe in free markets.

I disagree with this, and 1500 years of history of Catholic rule back me up.
 

jlbenedict

Banned
Jul 10, 2005
3,724
0
0
The growth of China is only relivant to the exploding Walmarts that are popping up on each & every corner in the United States. Every thing sold in Walmart is manufactured and made in China.

Walmart FTL!!

:)
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: fitzov
Originally posted by: Vic
Communism and other authoritarian governments will all eventually fail economically because they are horribly inefficient. The so-called "invisible hand" always exists, and the laws of nature cannot be repealed.

Marxism is -- and always will be -- a pipe dream failure. The basis of his economic theories is that market values could be replaced by a fixed system of value based on labor. As though a pile of dog sh!t could be worth the same as gold. It can never be practiced "properly" because it has no actual basis in reality.

It's not authoritarian, as is no economic system, but thanks for spreading the fear-filled propaganda McCarthy style, as if this were the 50s.

It's not a fixed system, but the value is derived from labor and material, and your follow-up statement about comparing ****** to gold just shows your lack of understanding--as value is determined by labor and material, the material is only one aspect of how much something would be worth as a product.

But please, continue in your strange way of thinking about economic theories that have an "actual basis in reality". But I would also like to hear how you think wealth is created.
Communism (as an economic system) is inherently tied to authoritarian government systems and cannot be separated from such without collapsing (after all, what but an authoritarian government can keep the people from trading on their own?). The so-called "communist ideal" does not, will not, and cannot exist. It's a pseudo-religious fantasy.

The system of value is fixed insofar in that all labor is valued the same, regardless of output (or else it would be an "unfair" meritocracy, would it not?). The comparison was an analogy.

Wealth is created by labor creating capital, and that capital being found valuable to another in a free marketplace.

As a lover of and believer in absolute freedom, I will humor your faith in your religious beliefs the same as I would humor another zealot's. Some believe that Christ will return to save us, others believe that a violent revolution of the oppressed worker classes can do the same. Who am I to say which is the more idiotic?

No need to bash Christians. Christians are the ones that propagated the modern free market system. In fact, one can argue that if you believe in God you must believe in free markets.

I disagree with this, and 1500 years of history of Catholic rule back me up.

Catholicism isn't real Christianity. It was started by men to control other men. This is why the Catholics and Protestants tried to kill each other (ironically).

If someone starts a religion saying it's based on the Bible, yet doesn't follow much of the theology in it, can you really call them Christian?
 

SagaLore

Elite Member
Dec 18, 2001
24,036
21
81
Communism and socialism has nothing to do with it. It has to do with Capitalism, which would not exist without Democracy. The United States is making it possible for those nations to build up their economies.
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: SagaLore
Communism and socialism has nothing to do with it. It has to do with Capitalism, which would not exist without Democracy. The United States is making it possible for those nations to build up their economies.

Can't a benevolent dictator allow Capitalism in his country?