Do we really need the Olympic Games?

[beaku 2,656]

Government is not a master in democracy. People are. People pay taxes and those people decide where the money will be spent on. Rich people pay more taxes, hence THEIR money cannot be entirely used up on feeding the poor. Government has its own restrictions. However, some rich philanthropist themselves open charity to help the poor.

[I.WalkAlone 548]

If you consider the Sovjet-Union communist, the north-korea is as well. Whether it's truly communist I can't tell.

 

There isn't really any truly communist country in the world.

But I think communism is not what we want nowadays. Considering the past it has had. The reason those leaders in the past did that because the communism gave him the oppurtunity to become a dictator, and it pretty much is in human nature to grab more power when a human can.

Yeah, true communism is not possible. The only people who can make it possible will not, because they don't want to relinquish their power. That's why a mixture of the values of communism and dictatorship is essential for growth of a country in all spheres. Pure capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, and thus generates a barrier amongst the population.

I agree. Two things should be limited for humans: money and freedom.

Sure, I agree with this post; but is it possible? As I have stated in my post above, the people who have the power to make this true will not give it up to help the future of their country. That's basic human nature. Edited March 6, 2015 by I.WalkAlone

[beaku 2,656]

There is something about communism that brings out human's greatest weakness. Laziness. I am sure many of you know the story which I am about to narrate but for those who don't, here it is :

A class once had a big debate on whether communism is better or capitalism. The class teacher came up with an innovative way of teaching them. Next day, he announced that those who get high grades in exams will get better facilities and those who don't will not be allowed to access those facilities like computer, library, etc.

Over next few days the class became divided. Both the groups started to have a feeling of resentment towards each other and the average students suffered the most since they were resented by both groups. High graders thought then to be too low and low graders called then nerds. Slowly, this caused huge protests from both the side. The teacher then announced that everything will be changed.

Then the teacher said that all students will be given the grade which will be average of grades of all students. The students who got lower grades were happiest. The ones who were hardworking for high grades were unsatisfied with result. Slowly, even those hardworking people decided not to work hard since every ounce of work they did provided then with no more reward than those who didn't.

As expected the average grade of the class started to go down until it became the worst class.

The teacher then asked the students, what they learnt from the experiment.

What did you learn??

[shadewarttt 3,350]

There is something about communism that brings out human's greatest weakness. Laziness. I am sure many of you know the story which I am about to narrate but for those who don't, here it is :

A class once had a big debate on whether communism is better or capitalism. The class teacher came up with an innovative way of teaching them. Next day, he announced that those who get high grades in exams will get better facilities and those who don't will not be allowed to access those facilities like computer, library, etc.

Over next few days the class became divided. Both the groups started to have a feeling of resentment towards each other and the average students suffered the most since they were resented by both groups. High graders thought then to be too low and low graders called then nerds. Slowly, this caused huge protests from both the side. The teacher then announced that everything will be changed.

Then the teacher said that all students will be given the grade which will be average of grades of all students. The students who got lower grades were happiest. The ones who were hardworking for high grades were unsatisfied with result. Slowly, even those hardworking people decided not to work hard since every ounce of work they did provided then with no more reward than those who didn't.

As expected the average grade of the class started to go down until it became the worst class.

The teacher then asked the students, what they learnt from the experiment.

What did you learn??

Both of dem sux. 

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

There is something about communism that brings out human's greatest weakness. Laziness. I am sure many of you know the story which I am about to narrate but for those who don't, here it is :

A class once had a big debate on whether communism is better or capitalism. The class teacher came up with an innovative way of teaching them. Next day, he announced that those who get high grades in exams will get better facilities and those who don't will not be allowed to access those facilities like computer, library, etc.

Over next few days the class became divided. Both the groups started to have a feeling of resentment towards each other and the average students suffered the most since they were resented by both groups. High graders thought then to be too low and low graders called then nerds. Slowly, this caused huge protests from both the side. The teacher then announced that everything will be changed.

Then the teacher said that all students will be given the grade which will be average of grades of all students. The students who got lower grades were happiest. The ones who were hardworking for high grades were unsatisfied with result. Slowly, even those hardworking people decided not to work hard since every ounce of work they did provided then with no more reward than those who didn't.

As expected the average grade of the class started to go down until it became the worst class.

The teacher then asked the students, what they learnt from the experiment.

What did you learn??

Nice example. But, communism is different than you think. In communism, if you are working harder than your co-workers, you can get your salary increased. Communism doesn't mean everybody should get exactly the same amount of money, it just means someone can't be wealthier than someone else. Also, in Soviet times, people who don't work well used to lose their jobs, so people had to work hard.

But, I have my own ideology. How about a world where everybody works and they all are rich? For example, a teacher who works hard gets $ 5000 a month.

[I.WalkAlone 548]

Nice example. But, communism is different than you think. In communism, if you are working harder than your co-workers, you can get your salary increased. Communism doesn't mean everybody should get exactly the same amount of money, it just means someone can't be wealthier than someone else. Also, in Soviet times, people who don't work well used to lose their jobs, so people had to work hard.

But, I have my own ideology. How about a world where everybody works and they all are rich? For example, a teacher who works hard gets $ 5000 a month.

Then, the worth of 5000$ will go down. Why? Well, if a teacher starts getting more, then evidently that applies to everyone. This implies costlier houses, dishes, cars etc. So, she will still be in a similar state as will everyone else.

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

Then, the worth of 5000$ will go down. Why? Well, if a teacher starts getting more, then evidently that applies to everyone. This implies costlier houses, dishes, cars etc. So, she will still be in a similar state as will everyone else.

Right. How about decreasing the price of everything, so everybody could get whatever he/she wants easily. Just like in Soviet times. Life would be easier then.

[I.WalkAlone 548]

Right. How about decreasing the price of everything, so everybody could get whatever he/she wants easily. Just like in Soviet times. Life would be easier then.

Decreasing the price of everything would mean a less profit margin for manufacturers and thereby, factory workers.

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

Decreasing the price of everything would mean a less profit margin for manufacturers and thereby, factory workers.

No, not at all. If the price of everything was decreased, manufactures would pay less for the materials they use to produce things, so even with the decreased price, they would earn as much as they used to.

You know what, money system should be removed. We should work not for money, but for our daily needs, place to live, food, etc.

[I.WalkAlone 548]

No, not at all. If the price of everything was decreased, manufactures would pay less for the materials they use to produce things, so even with the decreased price, they would earn as much as they used to.

You know what, money system should be removed. We should work not for money, but for our daily needs, place to live, food, etc.

If the cost of the raw materials would go down, then the producers of those raw materials would also receive a lesser amount of money. Reducing the price of everything is not possible without making a particular strata of the society suffer. What is cost to one person is income to the other. The second part of your post is an excellent idea but it would involve a major hand of the government. Private companies would have to be disestablished for such a system to work effectively.

[delnina2 1,570]

Umm interesting ,,, 

 

What about it ? 

 

A teacher gets 5000$ . A pilot will receive 10000$ . 

 

Wow that's great ! Wait a minute that Capitalism.

Edited March 6, 2015 by delnina2

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

If the cost of the raw materials would go down, then the producers of those raw materials would also receive a lesser amount of money. Reducing the price of everything is not possible without making a particular strata of the society suffer. What is cost to one person is income to the other. The second part of your post is an excellent idea but it would involve a major hand of the government. Private companies would have to be disestablished for such a system to work effectively.

But, the price of everything is decreased, so the money they earn would worth same. But if the salaries of employees stay stable, the money they get would worth more. So, manufactures would get same money, but employees would be more.

 

Umm interesting ,,, 

 

What about it ? 

 

A teacher gets 5000$ . A pilot will receive 10000$ . 

 

Wow that's great ! Wait a minute that Capitalism.

Who told you a pilot would get 10k? All jobs are equally important, so the pilot would get 5k too. Who needs more, if they use their money cleverly?

[I.WalkAlone 548]

But, the price of everything is decreased, so the money they earn would worth same. But if the salaries of employees stay stable, the money they get would worth more. So, manufactures would get same money, but employees would be more.

 

The salaries of employees cannot remain stable if the profit the company makes is reduced. What you are suggesting would need the minting of more money which reduces the value of a currency.

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

The salaries of employees cannot remain stable if the profit the company makes is reduced. What you are suggesting would need the minting of more money which reduces the value of a currency.

This is too complicated. Why don't we remove the money itself? My suggestion is to work to live. For example, if you are working, you should be given a special card that you can buy everything you want (but with limited amount). For example, if I am a single doctor, I should be able to get 1 kilo of bread (for example) a week, and not more. If I am married, and have children, I should be permitted to get more, according to how many children I have. Same with other food, etc. But, what I get using the card should be recorded, so that, I can't get too much; there should be a limitation.

[SmexyGiraffe 584]

OK, but it has turned into communism discussion. Can I make another topic to discuss communism instead of this one?

 

Communist countries has always been better for people. For example, in Soviet Unions time, the education was free and quality. Also, everything was cheaper. For example, a litter of gas used to be 10 current American cents in Soviet times.

 

That doesn't mean communism is bad.

 

The idea of communism appears to be benevolent, but in history is has shown to be a futile way of goverment.

[I.WalkAlone 548]

This is too complicated. Why don't we remove the money itself? My suggestion is to work to live. For example, if you are working, you should be given a special card that you can buy everything you want (but with limited amount). For example, if I am a single doctor, I should be able to get 1 kilo of bread (for example) a week, and not more. If I am married, and have children, I should be permitted to get more, according to how many children I have. Same with other food, etc. But, what I get using the card should be recorded, so that, I can't get too much; there should be a limitation.

Yeah, true. That would, however, eliminate the existence of private companies; as for something like this to happen, a large, single and centralized organization like the government would be required. And I don't think that this would go down too well with the owners and stakeholders of such large companies. This would make it impossible to implement without a violent confrontation, which is highly desirable.

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

The idea of communism appears to be benevolent, but in history is has shown to be a futile way of goverment.

That doesn't mean future communism will be bad. Let's give a chance to young ideologist communists.

[I.WalkAlone 548]

The idea of communism appears to be benevolent, but in history is has shown to be a futile way of goverment.

 

As previously stated, that was mostly due to the existence of power-hungry dictators as heads of the government, lack of a properly organized system and corruption. Problems, which I agree, are not so easily overcome due to human imperfection and inefficiency.

That doesn't mean future communism will be bad. Let's give a chance to young ideologist communists.

That would require a complete rework in the way society functions. And humans tend to react rather negatively to any large changes to their everyday lives.

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

Yeah, true. That would, however, eliminate the existence of private companies; as for something like this to happen, a large, single and centralized organization like the government would be required. And I don't think that this would go down too well with the owners and stakeholders of such large companies. This would make it impossible to implement without a violent confrontation, which is highly desirable.

I know, I've thought that too. The government can help supplying raw products for existing big companies, so they would work in parallel with government, so both of them would help each other. The government would get food, etc. for people, and the company members would get special cards.

 

 

As previously stated, that was mostly due to the existence of power-hungry dictators as heads of the government, lack of a properly organized system and corruption. Problems, which I agree, are not so easily overcome due to human imperfection and inefficiency.

 

That would require a complete rework in the way society functions. And humans tend to react rather negatively to any large changes to their everyday lives.

We have a long life for that.

Edited March 6, 2015 by jokersus.cava

[I.WalkAlone 548]

I know, I've thought that too. The government can help supplying raw products for existing big companies, so they would work in parallel with government, so both of them would help each other. The government would get food, etc. for people, and the company members would get special cards.

 

 

We have a long life for that.

Hmmm... Interesting. A co-operative system has the potential to work very well. The special cards, however, would generate inequality in the system which would render the system a bit contradictory. And yet, the companies would refuse to do this without any incentive.

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

Hmmm... Interesting. A co-operative system has the potential to work very well. The special cards, however, would generate inequality in the system which would render the system a bit contradictory. And yet, the companies would refuse to do this without any incentive.

See, that's the problem of the people of this world. It is a small world, and people have to support each others, but they all care about their own benefits.

[BlitzPanzer12345 241]

Pardon me

But with the amount of fighting going on

i think there is s possibility that thiz topic will be closed

[jokersus.cava 1,503]

Pardon me

But with the amount of fighting going on

i think there is s possibility that thiz topic will be closed

No problem

We're not fighting, it's just a friendly discussion, and friendship wins.

[BlitzPanzer12345 241]

Affirmative

Though the argument with delina and pigrule waz.....

[SmexyGiraffe 584]

 

As previously stated, that was mostly due to the existence of power-hungry dictators as heads of the government, lack of a properly organized system and corruption. Problems, which I agree, are not so easily overcome due to human imperfection and inefficiency.

I see your point, but i think its going to be impossible to achieve what communism strives for.