Calling brother Faust. Am I a commie?

[sgreger1]

I don't agree with communism as a political structure, but I believe it is right in it's general message, that there is a small group of humans who hoard the resources while the rest of us starve or go without even when the planet is abundant in things such as food, and that we must "equal" that out if you will.


I had this conversation with my wife last night about something similar. I took my salmon I was eating (only half finished) and walked over to the trash can to throw it away. Half of a perfectly good salmon, some potatoes and spinach. I pointed at the trash can where I had just discarded the remainder of my meal, (since I was no longer hungry) and said "For nearly 200,000 years a human being has not had the luxury of doing what I just did." and even in many parts of the world today, there are millions of those that do not have the luxury of "choosing" what sounds appetizing for dinner, and then once full to the point where they can no longer eat, throw away whatever is left on their plate (which is usually enough leftovers to feed an adult for a day).

This is because of many things, but mainly because humanity is engaged in a never ending class war, where those who are better at controlling money will gain unthinkable riches, while those who are not educated in such things will find that money slips through their fingers as quickly as butter does through a hot fork.

Do I believe communism (as lenin supported) will fix this? No, because while it does engage in the nobile task of making sure things are "equal", it does nothing to account for the fact there there will always be those that are good at manipulating the system in their favor (greedy/smart people).

There are 6.79 billion people on planet earth, 18% of them are not even literate, and a large percentage (if not the majority) of the remaining 82% are able to read, yet not literate in the art of handling money etc.

There are now an estimated 10 million millionares in the world. 10 million out of 6.79 billion people on planet earth means that of every living being in existance, only 0.1473% of them will ever become a millionare or better. Yet the world does not need everyone to be a millionares, we need to find a way to equal it out so that there are less billionares and more people that make more than what is required to eat each day.

Call that communism or leninism, but I believe that is humanism, and while I don't agree with communism on a host of issues, it is right about the need for more equality.


Comrade Faust, does this make me an official commie? Or are perhaps our goals as the working class just very similar, regardless of what political structure we envision will fix things.

[Ainkor]

The main problem I have with that type of ideology is that by nature, humans are lazy, until they reach a critical mass of motivation. We are in fact nothing more than smart (lol) animals.

Take this situation.... My dog got into the trash can last night. Made a hell of a mess all over the floor. Why did she do that? She wanted to eat something that was in there. Her hunger compelled her to take action. Neither right nor wrong, just an act.

Now, look at people. I am going to use a group of people that I am very familiar with. Let me first say that what is to come is in no way indicative off the members of this particular group, just a large percent.

I ran a restaurant for a while on an Indian reservation. One of the most wealthy ones at that. This particular tribe distributed profit sharing twice a year, usually amounting to around $4,000 each time.

He was in high school when I hired him and at the beginning of his senior year. One day we got to talking about the per-cap (as it's called) and he explained that every member of the tribe gets it. If your under 18 it is held in a trust until you are 18. The amount in his trust was about $85,000 at that point. A kid born this year would have about $350,000 once they turn 18 though.

When he turned 18, what did he do with his per-cap? He went first and bought a $35,000 car. He then went to Florida for a month and partied on the rest of it. He came back broke begging for his job back. I hired him back because he was a good kid, just acting stupidly. When the next per-cap came, he got his usual $4,000. He quite the day before with no notice and had a good 'ol time with it. Two months later, he came back asking for his job back again. This time, I told him no since he has proven himself to be a irresponsible kid.

I saw him and his car about a month later and the back bumper of his $35,000 car was missing. He didn't have car insurance and now the single biggest thing he will ever purchase is trashed.

After much discussion with other members of the tribe, I was able to determine that a family of 2 making $7.50 an hour working 35 hours a week has the actual spending power of a family of two making a touch over $50,000 a year, bring home. Now, there is something to be said about how the USA has treated the natives in the past, but the odd thing is that they now have most of them locked into a socialist culture with no end in sight.

Super cheap housing, medical insurance, college, computers etc etc etc... all provided for free. They have no critical mass of motivation to get themselves moving. Of course it's not everyone, just as with any group of people there are extremes at both end of the scale but having witnessed this and many other situations just like it, there are a larger percent of people that just exist. Try going to Wal-Mart or Best Buy during per-cap week. it's just nuts. You best bet is to hit the pawn shops 3 months later and get some great deals on very current stuff.

What does this have to do with communism and socialism? There has to be that critical mass of motivation in order for people to reach outside their comfort zone. I wanted to make sure I could afford to send my son who graduates high school next week so I busted my ass working our budget and our spending to make that a reality. It wasn't by chance and its a great accomplishment in my opinion. If I did not have to worry about that, would I have put in that extra bit of work and discipline? I don't know, but I can guess that because I am a human being, I wouldn't have.

A great quote I read years ago about Russia is that you may be alive, but you won't feel like f*&%^$g. Sorry, I like to be alive, and I love f*&^%$g. If that means I need to put forth that little bit of extra effort to differentiate myself from others then so be it.

Now, I am certainly not against social programs that help people in need as long as they don't do what the welfare lady told my wife and I when we were 18, high school drop outs and our son just born. She told me the state would provide everything we needed. I just needed to work less than 30 hours a week. Screw that I said. I picked up my son, grabbed my wife and hauled ass outta there so fast she still looked amazed as I turned around at the door. I dropped them off at home and went to work and picked up an extra shift so we could pay the power bill.

Show me where a communist or socialist society can drive people to exceed the norm (not under force, btw) and I'll listen, but I'll tell you, it doesn't exist. We are far too stupid of a people to see the rationality of it and until the median intelligence level raises exponentially, we will still be driven by the base needs that all animals are driven by.... Eating, Sleeping, housing and f&*&^%g. Meet those base needs and there is no need for anything else.

[Ainkor]

I did want to add that there has to be a strong judicial system with clearly defined rules that protect those of us that are not in the super elite from the super elite though. Rampant greed and abuse of those around you are far worse than communism and socialism IMO.

[Roo]

What's so "luxurious" about throwing good salmon in the garbage you wastrel? lol. You could've had it for breakfast this morning, dumbass

[sgreger1]

Outstanding post Ainkor! That is exactly why I DON'T agree with communism or socialism, it doesn't account for human nature. I still maintain that capitalism has been the most successful system we've seen yet, but like I stated above, it has inherent flaws. The main flaw being that some people are harder working, smarter, or just better with money than others because we are absolutely NOT created equal, and therefore over time, the greedier, smarter and more hard working amongst us will live in luxury, yet the majority will live a mediocre existence at best.

But this is the thing, how to mitigate against this flaw? I want to be able to have a better car then my neighbor if I work harder, this concept brings innovation and creates wealth because it becomes a race to make the most money (by either producing something, inventing something etc) which is good for the country as a whole. Yet how do we reform it so that we don't find ourselves ruled by oligarchs and a ruling class of criminals like we do today? Because after all the most enterprising, greedy, and smart people tend to choose crime as their preferred occupation. I don't mean your local crack dealer, but the mob bosses and banksters of the world, the best and brightest figure out how to scam people in better ways than the average joe does.


So while I agree with communism in saying that it shouldn't be this way, that we should all have a piece of the pie, if there is no incentive to do better the pie never comes into existence because no one is there to produce it. So how do we solve this dilemma? Heavily regulated capitalism? That leads to people with money lobbying government to change regulations in their favor. Communism perhaps? We all know why that doesn't work, and there are host of failed countries that have tried this and failed miserably, so communism won't work. Where do we turn? The technocrats? The socialists? None of them seem like they are sustainable in the long term.

Does anyone have any good ideas they'd like to throw around for the sake of discussion?

[sgreger1]

What's so "luxurious" about throwing good salmon in the garbage you wastrel? lol. You could've had it for breakfast this morning, dumbass

I wasn't trying to frame it as a luxury as me and you would see it. I was instead saying that for most of mankind we have never had the choice of going to a supermarket and spending 30 minutes worth of labor to purchase whatever sounds good, which we then stuff ourselves with until full (3 times a day) and then if we are done eating, we can throw it away. You've traveled Roo, in many countries people would love to eat even the scraps I throw away each day. That was my point, relative to someone in africa, me throwing away the rest of my meal without a second thought is a "luxury". While it is easy for me to eat whatever I want and surround myself in abundance, half the world will never know this "luxury". Because things are unbalanced. Is a man in Africa less of a human being than me, is he less hard working, or perhaps too stupid to feed himself? For the most part no, it is because powers greater than him or myself control markets and stifle development in one area so as to exploit their cheap labor, in order to enable me to buy a toaster for $6 at Walmart.


Edit: Reheated salmon is f$*#ing nasty bro, fish is not one of the things I like to eat the day after. (so suck it)

[Roo]

haha I was just joking. The thought of someone relishing the opportunity to throw away food because it feels good and luxurious was just funny to me. And I don't reheat fish, that is nasty, but cold salmon for breakfast? lol maybe I'm just too Seattle.

[sgreger1]

haha I was just joking. The thought of someone relishing the opportunity to throw away food because it feels good and luxurious was just funny to me. And I don't reheat fish, that is nasty, but cold salmon for breakfast? lol maybe I'm just too Seattle.

I didn't mean to say it like "I was feeling luxurious so I threw out my food just because I can!". I meant that I knew I wasn't going to eat it so I disposed of my leftovers, something many would consider in itself a "luxury".

(Also cold salmon is nasty unless rolled in sushi)

[bsd777]

sgreger1,
The answer is staring you in the face. You're living in the most equitable country man has known. As originally founded, our country provides equal opportunity for all and provides the highest standard of living mankind has ever known. Regions with the greatest amount of poverty are not free republics. This should be obvious to all. How many of those millionaires are Cuban? Capitalism not only provides the greatest amount of wealth, it also provides the most equitable distribution of gains. If the free market does not decide distribution, who does? If you want to redistribute gains, you must first take from the rightful owner. How is that not theft?

[bsd777]

So while I agree with communism in saying that it shouldn't be this way, that we should all have a piece of the pie, if there is no incentive to do better the pie never comes into existence because no one is there to produce it. So how do we solve this dilemma? Heavily regulated capitalism? That leads to people with money lobbying government to change regulations in their favor. Communism perhaps? We all know why that doesn't work, and there are host of failed countries that have tried this and failed miserably, so communism won't work. Where do we turn? The technocrats? The socialists? None of them seem like they are sustainable in the long term.

Does anyone have any good ideas they'd like to throw around for the sake of discussion?

You can ignore my first post. I'm a slow typer and I see some sanity in your latest post. No we do not need more regulation. We need less. Almost every problem we face is CAUSED by the government and regulation. The Gulf of Mexico gusher is another example. Regulations have forced exploration to depths which make fixing a problem nearly impossible. If the well were closer to land, this thing would have been plugged weeks ago.

[Premium Parrots]

did that salmon taste alittle like oil?

[sgreger1]

sgreger1,
The answer is staring you in the face. You're living in the most equitable country man has known. As originally founded, our country provides equal opportunity for all and provides the highest standard of living mankind has ever known. Regions with the greatest amount of poverty are not free republics. This should be obvious to all. How many of those millionaires are Cuban? Capitalism not only provides the greatest amount of wealth, it also provides the most equitable distribution of gains. If the free market does not decide distribution, who does? If you want to redistribute gains, you must first take from the rightful owner. How is that not theft?

It is theft, that's the problem with all other systems imo. You are saying what I have always said, that imperfect as it is, this system of a republic backed by a free market has been the most successful model mankind has ever seen. But as we grow larger, and moving forward, we must work to fix the inherent flaws of our system so it doesn't become volatile like it is now and inevitably crash. We don't have a free market, we have a blend of many different systems, some free market some socialist super regulation, that's what I think our problem is today. Plus the rich just lobby gov to make the regulation in their favor. Regulation is good, but like anything it can be abused.

[bsd777]

It is theft, that's the problem with all other systems imo. You are saying what I have always said, that imperfect as it is, this system of a republic backed by a free market has been the most successful model mankind has ever seen. But as we grow larger, and moving forward, we must work to fix the inherent flaws of our system so it doesn't become volatile like it is now and inevitably crash. We don't have a free market, we have a blend of many different systems, some free market some socialist super regulation, that's what I think our problem is today. Plus the rich just lobby gov to make the regulation in their favor. Regulation is good, but like anything it can be abused.

Corruption and inequality of opportunity are the problem with most systems. Our problem is we have drifted far. We had a Free Republic, not a democracy. What we have now is more akin to a socialistic democracy with faded remains of a republic, with far too much regulation. Capitalism is natural and like all things in nature, it has cycles, from lean to rich, there is nothing that can, or should, be done to prevent this. Government interference, not a lack of, has created greater highs and lows (an longer too) than would be encountered naturally.

[sgreger1]

Corruption and inequality of opportunity are the problem with most systems. Our problem is we have drifted far. We had a Free Republic, not a democracy. What we have now is more akin to a socialistic democracy with faded remains of a republic, with far too much regulation. Capitalism is natural and like all things in nature, it has cycles, from lean to rich, there is nothing that can, or should, be done to prevent this. Government interference, not a lack of, has created greater highs and lows (an longer too) than would be encountered naturally.

It's for this reason that I don't like the concept of bailouts or "too big to fail". We needed to make a correction in the market and by artificially stimulating it with cheap free money at low interest rates, we have just put a small bandaid on an wound where the arteries are splashing out blood. The bandaid will do minimal help and only short term.

[Ainkor]

Ultimately there really isn't anything we can do. We have to depend on the balance between free market capitalism at constant conflict with various socialist principles. The one thing that makes the good 'ol USA unique compared to other countries is our faith that we will step up to the plate and fix what ever issues comes our way. Our country is the ultimate expression of yin and yang. If we swing too far one way we tend to snap back moving closer to the center and often times right past it only to have another correction coming soon. Inherently, I don't think there is a more perfect system than ours, even for all of it's flaws because it still focus on the individual and the enormous potential that exists via motivational critical mass.

What we really need to do is improve our educational system in order to increase the mean intelligence level. By doing that we allow people to see through the bullshit shoveled up by both sides of the political aisle. Unfortunately there are far more ignorant blissfully blind followers now than there ever has been. Very few people have the wherewithal to form an opinion of their own. Too many people take talking heads at their word and dont bother to dig deeper or understand that often times both sides have excellent points on the same subject and that true compromise really is the foundation of our government.

As far as lobbyist mucking things up? Thats what I pay mine for :P