Economic Ideologies

Posted by: dr.jimmythefish

Pure Capitalism; no government intervention. Radical Communism; no money government controls all.

  • Pure Capitalism

  • Radical Communism

59% 33 votes
41% 23 votes
  • Cooperative selfishness > government oversight

  • Liberty

  • Pure Capitalism is best. But I stipulate capitalism in a way that you earned it, not ripped it off. Capitalism to me is a business that has a product or service that people voluntarily purchase, not are forced to purchase. People control their destiny that way. Solutions are a mixed bag, not pure ideas. So other ideas have to be considered. Communism works well with insurance models, capitalism would never work for example.

  • When it comes to the extremities of economic thought, I'd rather my ideology be in line with human nature rather than a reliance on the good will of man.

  • Not everyone is created equal, and people should be rewarded for their hard work. Oh and not to mention every country that has tried communism has ended in a totalitarian regime that murders it's own citizens.

  • The people who actually work hard will be successful. What a novel idea. I don't need the government telling me what to do and taking away my hard earned money and possessions.

  • Communism has killed around 100,000,000 people. Naziism only killed 60,000,000 people.

    Posted by: 124275
  • I don't believe in a completely free market, but anything is better than communism.

  • Lol. All the brain dead Commies in the comments. If you hate Capitalism then leave our country. Dumbass Commutards. Lmao.

  • While I believe there should be some (but minimal) government oversight (therefore not PURE Capitalism), it has been proven time and time again that capitalism outproduces communism on a national scale. Communism advocates equality of outcome. This results in the government taking all the production from every "worker" and then distributing an equal amount to everyone whether they worked or not. Human nature is to strive for greater personal success. If you remove the incentive (by taking 100% of a persons productivity), you remove their desire to strive. This always results in a dramatic reduction in the productivity of each individual which results in a reduction of the total pot to be distributed by the state. Capitalism advocates equality of opportunity. This results in everyone being protected equally under the law, and having the same ability to strive for personal success (whatever that means to the individual). It also means personal responsibility for personal actions. If you work hard and smart, you will have a chance to succeed. If you do not work hard, you will starve. If you do not work smart, you will end up in the "lower class". This equality of opportunity, (but inequality of outcome) is far superior to communism's equality of outcome!

  • Crapitalism

  • Still better than Crapitalism.

  • Communism tells us about the equality. Just for an example of we organize a party, communism tells us that for that party everyone would get same food, cloth and other living necessities. Not only that if there is a hand of rice to eat among 10 men. Everyone would get same quantities. Through it equality will be established. In India when communist movement started their policy was to tit for tat. So that if any capitalist or industrialists tried to stop its extension for their selfishness he had to be murdered. They wanted to establish a dream. For the farmers for the working class that did a lot. But the worshiper of democracy who want to think about himself only, they could not tolerate them. And they were murdered by the pistol of small selfishness of capitalists in the mask of democracy. Democracy is nothing but an expression of capitalism in other way. If communism wins what will be happened? Cuba is it's example. They are greater than the worshiper of democracy USE. There are no beggars. Everybody hace their fundamental needs. Literacy rate is 98.8%. They are ahead among all countries in human resources. So communism is better than democracy or capitalism.

  • viva equality!

  • It's about equality, from the poor man to the rich. Marxism, a type of communist belief, had this trait. It didn't believe that a more rich class of people should vote, but rather have the workers, who do much of the work, vote along with everyone else. It's simple as that, so don't just take my word for it, take the others who took more of their time explaining it, because they understand more than I can say.

  • Communism has never been done correctly, it is a "on paper" ideology, it has only been around for about 150-200 years, and capitalism has had basically since the beginning of currency and trade to evolve and work out the kinks. The only problems are: 1. People are too close to their material objects to let go and make communism work. 2. Corporations and the Government have made these material objects necessary to your survival. And 3. Communism would require a violent uprising to enforce communism, like every other time communism took over. Communism needs all of us to get it to work.

  • Communism is not against human nature since human nature is based on the situation. Capitalism is being replaced by socialism and then communism. You can see this today. More and more countries are becoming socialist and are very successful because of it

  • I'd prefer a system where cooperation, mutual aid, and social betterment is emphasized over domination, cynicism, and egotist ideals. Communism is the truest freedom since the people who work in the mills and factories also manage it. To call a society where you have to rent yourself for a wage in order to survive "freedom" is just nonsensical and downright Orwellian.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
BrendanD19 says2016-12-18T00:21:00.5294321Z
Democratic, Market Socialism
RonPaulConservative says2016-12-18T01:15:30.9967965Z
Oxy-moron
reece says2016-12-18T02:34:36.5438009Z
@RonPaulConservative Socialism is an umbrella term. Without some forms of regulatory socialism, capitalism would run rampant. I admit capitalism is capable of corrupting socialism. Just look at how CEO's buy politicians in exchange for corporate welfare.
reece says2016-12-18T02:39:33.0861018Z
CEOs*
triangle.128k says2016-12-18T07:13:19.1801966Z
@reece Excessive lobbyist is the literal opposite of free market capitalism. Laissez-faire goes both ways, with minimal government influence in private enterprise and minimal to no corporate influence in government.
Capitalistslave says2016-12-18T07:42:24.4246025Z
There's a lot of irony in this poll. The pollster claims radical communism is when "government controls all" but has Karl Marx as the picture representing communism. Do they not realize that Karl Marx believed communism is a stateless society? There would be no government under communism. So, they have a fundamental misunderstanding of what communism is. When the government controls all, that's known as totalitarianism, not communism.
reece says2016-12-18T08:13:07.8740009Z
@triangle.128k You don't seem to understand. Capitalism doesn't comprehend the concept of restraint. As soon as the government loosens its grip, capitalism will tighten its jaw. The government will further turn into an oligarchy. Did you know the Supreme Court ruled that money is speech? Look who Trump assigned as treasury secretary. Trump is draining the swamp straight into everyone's mouths.
reece says2016-12-18T08:15:43.4069979Z
Mouth*
triangle.128k says2016-12-18T08:20:28.1388416Z
Wtf i hate capitalism now
reece says2016-12-18T08:58:53.1639988Z
You can admire the good parts while judging the bad. Karl Marx had this mindset.
reece says2016-12-18T09:00:37.2634661Z
@Capitalistslave You're talking about anarcho-communism, right?
Gareth_BM says2016-12-18T12:35:11.9936144Z
Both extremes aren't particularly attractive.
triangle.128k says2016-12-18T17:06:47.5885002Z
@reece No, the government having more control leads to more cronyism. There would be lessnlobbyism and cronyism if the government was less involved in the economy. Remember that a lot of burdensome regulations actually benefit big businesses and hurt smaller ones.
Juan_Pablo_4_hillary says2016-12-18T18:17:19.9034475Z
Living quality over freedom. Always.
reece says2016-12-19T01:29:38.5407025Z
@triangle.128k What is the cause?
Juan_Pablo_4_hillary says2016-12-19T19:51:46.3390546Z
Capitalism is tied to competition and the class system. Competition and the class system will also stir paranoia and promote jealousy and hatreds. It will always promote an "us versus them" mentality. Communism is one way to avoid this, but the aggressive autocratic versions of the past have been complete disasters. Democratic socialism is still the future of most of the planet, I say.
PetersSmith says2016-12-19T20:07:23.1475083Z
People seem to be ignoring the fact that "radical capitalism", also called Anarcho-Capitalism, and "radical communism", also called Anarcho-Communism, are both anarchist ideologies.
dr.jimmythefish says2016-12-19T20:54:58.0681604Z
Capitalistslave that is correct but I like Marx's beard.
dr.jimmythefish says2016-12-19T22:16:50.3904980Z
I know who Marx is and that he would disagree with what I use him to represent, but all other symbols of Communism are a wee bit offensive. One could also argue for irony in goldfinger as he is a control freak.
Vox_Veritas says2016-12-20T01:59:20.8827849Z
I think a lot of leftists don't realise that capitalism can be killed without resorting to authoritarianism. All it'd take is for the government to no longer enforce property laws, as these laws are the only things maintaining our current system of dire inequality.
Vox_Veritas says2016-12-20T01:59:33.2831684Z
I think a lot of leftists don't realise that capitalism can be killed without resorting to authoritarianism. All it'd take is for the government to no longer enforce property laws, as these laws are the only things maintaining our current system of dire inequality.
RonPaulConservative says2016-12-20T02:01:47.2585232Z
Vox_Veritas So the govt should stop preserving peoples liberty because inequality? Income inequality isn't an issue, someone else earning more money doesn't harm anyone, but actually betters people.
Capitalistslave says2016-12-20T02:04:19.8414053Z
Reece: I'm just talking about communism in general: communism "is the radical social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism Note that it says communism is a society which has "the absence of... The state"
Capitalistslave says2016-12-20T02:07:07.9324828Z
If there is a government, it's not communism. What the pollster described was Totalitarianism, which was what the USSR in actuality had.
reece says2016-12-20T02:34:16.5534186Z
@Capitalistslave You're talking about anarcho-communism. Communism can't work without an establishment to deliver on its principles. It's true for any successful political ideology.
Capitalistslave says2016-12-20T02:35:59.4655823Z
If I was talking about anarcho-communism and communism are one in the same essentially.
Capitalistslave says2016-12-20T02:36:49.2455014Z
Whoops, omit the "If I was talking about" part. I was going to write something else, but then changed it and forgot to delete the first part
reece says2016-12-20T02:45:06.6095856Z
Anarchists are children that can't comprehend the consequences of their actions.
reece says2016-12-20T08:54:21.1798625Z
@jo154676 Like Pol Pot whose campaign was funded by the CIA.
Communist445 says2017-01-02T02:47:43.5214578Z
Communism in its most radical form.
Pasco says2017-02-19T06:19:27.5788583Z
This is a very shaky argument, its difficult to determine an answer with such vague descriptions of these two ideologies. "Pure" capitalism, "Radical" communism these adjectives seem to be quite loaded right off the bat. I believe in order to fully make a decision here, we must properly define and agree upon the nature of the economic systems presented to us as options.
Pasco says2017-02-19T06:20:04.3324583Z
This is a very shaky argument, its difficult to determine an answer with such vague descriptions of these two ideologies. "Pure" capitalism, "Radical" communism these adjectives seem to be quite loaded right off the bat. I believe in order to fully make a decision here, we must properly define and agree upon the nature of the economic systems presented to us as options.
Pasco says2017-02-19T06:20:37.4044583Z
This is a very shaky argument, its difficult to determine an answer with such vague descriptions of these two ideologies. "Pure" capitalism, "Radical" communism these adjectives seem to be quite loaded right off the bat. I believe in order to fully make a decision here, we must properly define and agree upon the nature of the economic systems presented to us as options.
Pasco says2017-02-19T06:22:41.7208583Z
This is a very shaky argument, its difficult to determine an answer with such vague descriptions of these two ideologies. "Pure" capitalism, "Radical" communism these adjectives seem to be quite loaded right off the bat. I believe in order to fully make a decision here, we must properly define and agree upon the nature of the economic systems presented to us as options.
dr.jimmythefish says2017-02-21T09:40:54.7610922Z
True in pure capitalism; No government interference. My Communism; total government oversight and no currency.
LuciferWept says2017-02-21T21:04:20.4684633Z
What you're suggesting is noted in "The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek. The abolition of money makes it impossible for people to gauge the value of their work ("From Each According to His Ability, To Each According to His Need"). The problem is that people pursue their own ends, so they will not strive to work more efficiently, and advancements will cease. In fact, people will find that doing the easiest jobs the most rewarding. Gone will be doctors and gone will be engineers. Of course there will be government oversight because there will have to be taskmasters to keep people in the more difficult and dangerous jobs. Hayek puts it quite well "Communism leads to Fascism". This is why Communists and Fascists hate each other so much: it is not because they are so different, but because they are both competing for individuals with the same kind of mindset.
Zephyr_infinity says2017-03-28T06:21:21.6616202Z
Neither extreme works, both result in massive instability and large swathes of the population living in abject poverty. You need a clear and defined system, capitalism is like a untrained dog, sometimes it does what you want but if you don't keep an eye on it it will run off and maul a passerby.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.