REAL war protest

[MrNubyagi]

discriminatingly banned by decimator

[tombom]

To me a vauge comprimize between unflinching, dog eats dog capitalizem and 'everything for everyone' communisem, is the best bet...

I think it's called "Canada"

um no it's called europe

we invented all ur political systems we win

[Zoombie]

The last bit was mostly a joke. Also I really like Canada, cause it's a cool place.

Huh? Huh? Get it!

[rattle]

Nope. Not getting it.
/me goes back to chop some more trees...

[SpikedHelmet]

Congratulations, you've just contradicted yourself and proved yourself a hypocrite.

I'm sorry, I have no willingness to waste my time on an idiot like you who can't seen to wrap his head around the concept of not needing to hate something to realize that it must be stopped. Did every American soldier hate every German soldier? No. THEN THEY MUST ALL BE HYPOCRITES, RIGHT? It saddens me that shallow, idiotic people like yourself are allowed to hold jobs and become members of society proper.

And I can prove it by the fact that the communist countries back in the day had horrible economies

First, I'd like to see you provide one shred of evidence supporting that any self-professed Communistic societies were infact Communist. I'll save you the trouble and inform you that you won't be able to, because the furthest we've gotten is socialism.

The problem with communism is that it goes against evolution and human nature. People like having as much control over their lives as possible, and communism takes away their control and gives it to the government.

Wrong again. For one thing, I've already explained how Communism would allow everyone to lead truely free lives. Secondly, capitalism and property-owners and employers are the ones taking away control from the average worker, who has very little or no say in his wage, in his working environment, or in his job security -- so by your definition, Communism would actually compliment human nature.

And people have NO natural predisposition to work hard just for the good of their government, which makes the overal output of a communist country lower than that of a capitalist country, hence the crappy economy.

Again wrong, and this statement shows that your knowledge of Communism revolves around the Discovery Channel. The boost to Russia and China and Cuba's economy were massive immediately after their respective evolutions, and as I've previously expressed, they weren't even Communist; just socialism that eventually degraded to state capitalism.

A free market system also is much more efficient, because instead of the government deciding what people should do, the people decide what they should do.

Again wrong. I've already explained.

And the wonderful system of supply and demand ensures that everyone will always try to provide the good or service that there is the most demand for.

More Discovery Channel economics. Our "wonderful" system of supply and demand ensures that any commodity in high demand will have its price raised as much as possible to maximize profits for whomever has control over its production. Read this document, it explains it better than I can: http://www.pcr-rcpcanada.org/crc/crc-document.php

In a capitalist country, there is less need of a huge government of people who regulate everything, so then those people can actually work, and the GDP increases.

Wtf? That doesn't even make sense. I hope to god that's not what they're teaching you in school!

Also, while communism is good for the poor, uneducated, unskilled, or just lazy, it is bad for everyone else.

I think you failed to realize the critical point that those whom Communism is "good for" make up 80% of the population, while those that it is "bad for" make up a piddly minority.

Which causes the entreprenuers, engineers, scientists, doctors, and skilled people to leave those communist countries for places like the US where they can make a lot of money, and the poor, uneducated, unskilled, and lazy to travel to those communist countries.

Well, you're partially right. The call of money and greed is a strong one and is always calling and it is for this reason, the fact that there is always a place to placate greed in the world, that needs to be addressed and fixed.

Which hurts the communist countries, and further wrecks their economy.

Anyway, to the contrary, Cuba is chalk-full of skilled labour and their quality of life is quite high, particularly when compared to the drudgery they went through under Batista. Literacy rates are higher than in the US, birth death rates are lower, life expectancy is nearly the exact same and there are more doctors per 1,000 population than almost any country in the world, coupled with one of the most efficient healthcare systems that makes an absolyte mockery of the US system (even of the Canadian system).

America and probably at least most of Europe will always be free market.

Believe that if you want.. I'd hate to see what happens when the foundation of that markete collapses.

[Zoombie]

I'd like to know where you've gotten your statistics on Cuba from. I mean, you've provided sourses on other things (something that I have not, so I suppose that makes you a better or at least more hardcore arguer), why not that as well?

[Erom]

Cuba(pseudo-commy) >> Cuba(Batista) is a given.

But I'm not convinced Cuba(pseudo-commy) > Cuba(capitalism that doesn't suck) of course I'm not saying the reverse is true, either. I'm just not sure there's been enough studies done to show either way.

I'm not some fool hopelessly in love with Capitalism, every economic model has it's ups and downs, especially when considered mathematically. I mean, China is really improving, economically, but who knows how much of that has to do with modernization, and how much of it has to do with whatever they use now (It's really more state-capitalist than socialist now, isn't it?)

Either way, I think American Capitalism is a little rampant at this point. I wouldn't mind scaling it back some, being more European, with a much higher income tax gradient, and better social services. Especially more money toward education - grade school / high school system could really use the money. By the same token, true communism scares me. I like actually being able to get ahead a little if I work harder/better than the next guy. Call me greedy, sure, but only a little bit and that's pretty much human nature.

[BlackLiger]

To all you folks arguing the bit over this:

http://s12.invisionfree.com/The_Project/index.php?

We've debated this before, here. Feel free to come read through our discussions, and even join in :) Just say I invited you if asked, cause people might.

[Cabbage]

You might consider the fact that fewer than 3000 US soldiers have died in iraq. That number is astoundingly low, and speaks to the professionalism and skill of our armed forces.

That number is the lowest of any war in history.

That number is the lowest of any war in history.

roflcopter lolcaek!

I think after a comment like that it would be hard for any reaonably informed person to take anything you say seriously ^^

Only just started reading the thread, i know it was said a while again but its such a whopper i couldnt keep quiet!

I think, FA, that you will find the lowest figure killed in a war is actualy 0, zero, none, nil. Off the top of my head, there was the conflict between Britain and some west african state with no casulties (A British dreadnaught fired a warning shot at something and they offered to surrender within 2 minutes i think, it'll probably be on wikiepedia or something. But it was officaily a war.)

There was the falklands conflict between the U.K. and Argentina in the 80's, i think there were 1xx casulties, largely from the sinking of HMS sheffied by an exorcet i think, cba to check all the details.

I'm sure there are many many more, but im not going to go looking.

So er basicly... umm you're sillly

Oh and fighting a bunch of untrained nutters with secondhand weapons is probably why there are so few militry casulties

Edit: oh yes, and the casulties in the first gulf war were very low on the NATO side of things. And ofc this time round, thre war officaly ended when bush did his funny "mission accomplished" thing in 2004 didnt it, with few casulties (mostly by friendly fire if i remember correctly).

[SwiftSpear]

To all you folks arguing the bit over this:

http://s12.invisionfree.com/The_Project/index.php?

We've debated this before, here. Feel free to come read through our discussions, and even join in :) Just say I invited you if asked, cause people might.

Frankly they seem a fair bit... below me...

I suppose I can drop in and contribute for a few threads.

[Fanger]

hah, the communists are funny.. OOH capitalist societies will eventually collapse.. eventually..

and If cuba is so great, why are they still trying to get in the US on boats and stuff all the time..

The russian and chinese economies right after they became "communist" did not get a massive boost in all areas, they got a massive boost in some areas at the neglect of others which eventually lead to the collapse of russia, and which is why china has become increasingly more capitalist after Maos death.. Those wonderful 5 year plans failed to comprehend the increasing cost increased production, and although they took the economy of those 2 countries to new heights, this was because they were respectively in the toilet when they started, they really could not go anywhere but up..

Anywho, china and russia werent communist.. IT DOESNT WORK, evolution functions on competition and survival of the one most able to function in that enviroment, a society where everything is held in commen goes against that principle..

[Kixxe]

Again, Communism and Capitalism are two extremes.

To try to compare them two is kinda silly, since Communism is as far right as you can get, and anything extreme is never good.

Now if we saw all out capitalism... i wonder if that would be much better.

I would't want to live in either a none functioning communist society which relies on the goodness of humanity to share nor would i want to work in an ultra consumerism country where everything needs to be consumed, where money goes above all and where the companies rule.

[MrNubyagi]

discriminatingly banned by decimator

[Lindir The Green]

When we run out of oil, the price of it will go up, and so in a Capitalist society there will be a huge economic incentive to switch to some other fuel source.

And it's already happening now. As the price of gasoline is going up more people are buying fuel efficient cars and putting solar panels on their houses and stuff.

In this case I pretty much completely agree with Fanger and Kixxe. Though I think that the most capitalist country (probably the US) would be a much better place than the most communist country (USSR... except Spiked seems to think that it wasn't communist... And so his definition of communism must be different from the standard definition.)

[Zoombie]

And yet no one has backed up Spiked's claims about Cuba with a link or even some other statistics...

Either way, I think American Capitalism is a little rampant at this point. I wouldn't mind scaling it back some, being more European, with a much higher income tax gradient, and better social services. Especially more money toward education - grade school / high school system could really use the money. By the same token, true communism scares me. I like actually being able to get ahead a little if I work harder/better than the next guy. Call me greedy, sure, but only a little bit and that's pretty much human nature.

+2200000000 for me!

Also I have a question. In a 'true communist utopia' is there any room for writers and other creative people? Thats something I've always wondered.

[MrNubyagi]

discriminatingly banned by decimator

[Zoombie]

I find it personally offensive that being 'creative' is 'curropting the kids'.

Unless thats not what you meant, because (no offence) you're grasp of english is lacking in some areas. I don't want to start a flame war because I misunderstood what you wrote...I mean, how embarrasingly stupid would that be?

[Fanger]

Obviously the US is not entirely capitalist, an entirely capitalist nation would not have have state institutions of any sort, things like medicare, welfare, social securty and such cannot function under a purely capitalist system since it is entirely sink or swim. Both capitalism and communism sow the seeds of their own destruction, it is only through a measure of middle ground that you can have a sustainable system. It depends on the overall philosophy of the people but essentially almost all nations on this earth have some sort of capitalist/communist system in place, it is simply the amount of each that exists that determines the overall bent of the system. The US leans farther towards capitalism that some, and some other countries farther towards communism. The current situation in the US could use some scale back in terms of coporations and large franchises and their ability to step on the little guy, but of course you cannot over regulate that. Balancing an economic system is much like balancing a game in terms of that it can be opinionated and everyone expects something slightly different, its only through attempting to piece together these compromises that you can attain something.

Pure Commuism only works in small groups of people, roughly a family unit or extended family unit where everyone knows everyone else. Once you branch beyond this group size, you start to have multiple individual groups within the whole, this will cause a natural trend of one group being better suited to the enviroment created by this society, this is evolution, once one group attains a superior position they can reinforce it and thus you no longer have a purely communist society. This happens all the time throughout human history.

Pure Capitalism also would only work in small groups because once it surpasses a certain number one of the groups will again demonstrate better potential than the others and surpass and encompass them. This will lead to one group essentially winning the competition that drives capitalism and breaking the system by establishing for all intensive purposes a monopoly.

You have to balance these two extremes. Everything is not black and white spiked..

[MrNubyagi]

discriminatingly banned by decimator

[Zoombie]

"sure just not at the surface, corrupting everybody and especially kids

when it comes to porn and vice, creativity is at its best in capitalism "

As a writer, I can tell you why this statement can be REALLY confusing to anyone who didn't write it. The first line, in responce to "how do writers fit in communisem" makes it sound like you are saying: "Yes it's fine to be a writer, as long as you're not on the surface curropting everybody and especially the kids"

You can see how someone who loves writing and reading could find that offensive. The second line is also dissasosiated with the first because of the space. A space like that between two sentences that are supposed to be linked is VERY disconcerting.

It's like saying:

"Communisem is

A system of goverment"

Also you'd be suprised how much creativity you can cram into just about anything, including porn and such. Not that this is done because people usually skip any story and go straight to the sex because if they wanted a story they woulden't be watching pornos