Open message to communists

[Papa bull]

The OP did not have an actual argument, you just wanted to show everyone you are a good guy because you hate the evil communist devil. Accusing communists of wanting to steal other peoples money is a bad joke. The communists you find on a forum like this are the kind of upper-middle class intellectuals who live quite comfortably and would lose out during redistribution.

I see what you did there. I assume you were using the word "intellectual" loosely in that context.

 

[German guy]

Just for the record: I agree communism sucks. By "communists", I mean revolutionary Marxists and/or Leninists, Stalinists, Maoists ... all the supporters of "dictatorship of the proletariat" same as or similar to what has been implemented in the past.

Dogmatic Marxism is simply disproven by history, as I understand it: Marx' social analysis of 19th century European capitalism simply doesn't fit anymore for modern Western societies. There is no such thing as a "working class" anymore, due to very high social mobility (unlike in 19th century Europe, the rule "born poor, always poor" doesn't apply anymore, because there are many ways to climb the social ladder today). Then, the social structure does no longer resemble a "pyramid" with very few on top and the huge masses at the bottom, but we have more of an "egg" (huge middle class, few on top and bottom). Republican/democratic government has sufficiently answered the "social question" of the 19th century, by improving political participation, social mobility, labor protection laws and social security nets -- and capitalism, within the frame of democratic government, has done much more for the material welfare of the masses than socialism/communism of any kind ever has. And the 20th century has proven that empoverished peoples will not necessarily turn to communism, as Marx predicted, but to other extreme ideologies as well, proving that the mind shapes reality a little more than Marx thought.

So claiming to be a Marxist "communist" today is rather pointless. Much like claiming to be a Whig or a supporter of the Confederacy -- the social context in which this label was initially conceived and made some sense, simply doesn't exist anymore.

That said, not everybody who is concerned about worker rights, the growing gap between rich and poor, equality of opportunities or existing problems with the current capitalist order is a "communist" or "socialist". There are many good points to be made and many legitimate concerns, and as long as the people advance these concerns by using the political process instead of violence or oppression, they are entitled to do so, IMO.

 

[Sisyphus]

Collective wealth is a communist idea. There is no "collective wealth". That is merely the communist way of thinking of everyone else's wealth as something they have some entitlement to. After all, it's the nation's collective wealth and they're part of "the nation", so they deserve their fair share, right? It's bull****. It's just a way of rationalizing why you should be entitled to the wealth of others.

No, it's the combined net worths of individuals and non-profits. Here it is in graph form:

 

[Verax]

Collective wealth is a communist idea. There is no "collective wealth". That is merely the communist way of thinking of everyone else's wealth as something they have some entitlement to. After all, it's the nation's collective wealth and they're part of "the nation", so they deserve their fair share, right? It's bull****. It's just a way of rationalizing why you should be entitled to the wealth of others.

So what do the millions of workers in the U.S. do? They help create wealth with their work. They are the engine of the U.S. When you take their product and give them too little in compensation problems arise.

This is the ugly fact you're running from, sprinting as hard as you can away. You call anyone that recognizes this fact a communist.

We've already gone over the criminal element of capitalism in the U.S. and you deny that even exists in any significant fashion. Now I imagine you will say the same about "the people" demanding a better paycheck. There is no problem and they are commies too right?

 

[Papa bull]

lol. The real world doesn't work that way. Most people aren't in a position to walk away from a job or turn it down.
Do you think the people in Bangladesh working in sweatshops for $1 a day are doing it because they think it's a good deal???

Yes. They're doing it because they think it's a good deal. People who work at Wal-Mart are doing it because they think it's a good deal, too. If you think it's a better deal not to work, then don't. If you don't think you get paid enough, then hold out for more pay. If you can't get anyone to pay you more, then maybe you need to re-evaluate your estimation of what you're worth. The world isn't required to pay you whatever YOU think you deserve. Someone has to agree to pay your price. I don't owe you a job. You don't owe me a job. If I've got work and you're willing to do it for a price that we both think is fair, then you've got a job. If not, then it just doesn't happen.

 

[Verax]

You're the one that continually lies about what someone else said when you're "rewording" it for them....

You seem to be trying really hard to win the coveted pot-calling-the-kettle-black award for the year, aren't you?

You said...

I don't think you can say that it's not effective unless you want to count all the crimes where there isn't any evidence to convict because they're all crimes in your head. When there are real crimes, we can press real charges.

You said there were no real crimes...

You can't be honest as usual.

 

[German guy]

Yes. They're doing it because they think it's a good deal. People who work at Wal-Mart are doing it because they think it's a good deal, too. If you think it's a better deal not to work, then don't. If you don't think you get paid enough, then hold out for more pay. If you can't get anyone to pay you more, then maybe you need to re-evaluate your estimation of what you're worth. The world isn't required to pay you whatever YOU think you deserve. Someone has to agree to pay your price. I don't owe you a job. You don't owe me a job. If I've got work and you're willing to do it for a price that we both think is fair, then you've got a job. If not, then it just doesn't happen.

One might object that we all live in a society and thus have to take responsibility for one another. And with wealth, there comes responsibility.

Most people bashing "socialism" (whatever they mean by that) acknowledge that principle when it's about national defense. They think it's fine and perfectly legitimate when a big government taxes the people to pay for a big government institution called "army", and big government spendings in favor of fancy killing machines to arm this big government army. Why? Because we all are Americans/Germans/French/etc ... we have to defend ourselves *together*, right?

Yet for some very weird reason, the same people who support excessively big, even huge government and the national collective on this matter, often have severe problems when other people claim we have a collective responsibility not only to defend, but to nurture and heal our community. Really weird, eh?

 

[Papa bull]

So what do the millions of workers in the U.S. do? They help create wealth with their work. They are the engine of the U.S. When you take their product and give them too little in compensation problems arise.

This is the ugly fact you're running from, sprinting as hard as you can away. You call anyone that recognizes this fact a communist.

We've already gone over the criminal element of capitalism in the U.S. and you deny that even exists in any significant fashion. Now I imagine you will say the same about "the people" demanding a better paycheck. There is no problem and they are commies too right?

You don't get capitalism at all, do you. The farmer owns the land. He cleared it. He paid for it. He plowed it. He planted it. He watered it. People come to him and ask him if he has any work and he tells them that he needs to have his beans picked and he'll pay 2 bucks a bushel. You take the job.... and then you get your panties in a wad because you come to feel like it's your farm and your beans and that you're being robbed because he's making more money off those beans than you are. You forgot that you aren't the producer. You are merely performing a task for the producer at a price that was amenable to both of you.

You want to produce beans? Buy your own farm and grow your own beans. Then you're a bean producer.

 

[Papa bull]

You said...



You said there were no real crimes...

You can't be honest as usual.

The fact that you have lots of imaginary "crimes" of capitalism in your head is not proof that there aren't any real crimes. How many times do I have to point out that there would be no need for the SEC if there weren't any crimes to investigate? How many before you acknowledge it? Look, don't ever speak for me. Make up lies all you want for yourself, but don't assign them to me.

 

[Verax]

You don't get capitalism at all, do you. The farmer owns the land. He cleared it. He paid for it. He plowed it. He planted it. He watered it. People come to him and ask him if he has any work and he tells them that he needs to have his beans picked and he'll pay 2 bucks a bushel. You take the job.... and then you get your panties in a wad because you come to feel like it's your farm and your beans and that you're being robbed because he's making more money off those beans than you are. You forgot that you aren't the producer. You are merely performing a task for the producer at a price that was amenable to both of you.

You want to produce beans? Buy your own farm and grow your own beans. Then you're a bean producer.

:roll: This overly simplistic joke is just... I know how markets work Papa soap box.

This is far different than large corporations conspiring to systematically screw people out of a decent wage. Or completely rigging the financial markets all under the nose of our "justice department". They've done all this with impunity and you won't recognize it.

 

[Papa bull]

One might object that we all live in a society and thus have to take responsibility for one another. And with wealth, there comes responsibility.

That's why we have charity.

 

[Verax]

The fact that you have lots of imaginary "crimes" of capitalism in your head is not proof that there aren't any real crimes. How many times do I have to point out that there would be no need for the SEC if there weren't any crimes to investigate? How many before you acknowledge it? Look, don't ever speak for me. Make up lies all you want for yourself, but don't assign them to me.

How many wall street criminals did the SEC prosecute for the 2008 collapse? What universe are you in?

EDIT: Here's some links in case you've been living under a rock.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/06/why-can-t-obama-bring-wall-street-to-justice.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-27/obama-s-sec-pick-wary-of-zealous-wall-street-prosecutions.html

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/13/137789065/why-prosecutors-dont-go-after-wall-street

http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2013/03/06/the-real-reason-wall-street-always-escapes-criminal-charges-the-justice-dept-fears-the-aftermath/

http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/01/23/frontline-exposes-dojs-failure-to-prosecute-wall-street/

 

[German guy]

That's why we have charity.

Why don't you finance your military by voluntary donations then?

 

[Papa bull]

:roll: This overly simplistic joke is just... I know how markets work Papa soap box.

This is far different than large corporations conspiring to systematically screw people out of a decent wage. Or completely rigging the financial markets all under the nose of our "justice department". They've done all this with impunity and you won't recognize it.

I know.. I know.... it's all a conspiracy. The reason you don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of is because you have no control over anything. It's "them". "They" are screwing you.

 

[Papa bull]

Why don't you finance your military by voluntary donations then?

Because that's one thing that the Constitution actually does assign as a true responsibility of the government and gives them the right to tax us for: National Defense.

 

[rathi]

I see what you did there. I assume you were using the word "intellectual" loosely in that context.

There is no value judgement in the word intellectual, its simply a descriptive term for someone who pursues intellectual topics like economic distribution systems. The fact you can't ever mention communism in a post without petty insults only proves my point. You are the mirror image of your soviet counterpart who must always spit upon the bourgeoisie whenever they are mentioned.

Try actually arguing against communism using reason rather than spite. Communism is a deeply flawed system, so it really shouldn't be that hard.

 

[CycloneWanderer]

Mandating an increase in employee wages is essentially the same as mandating an increase in the end price of the product produced. That cost is passed along to the people consuming the end product. If that happens everywhere at the same time, few benefit because the money is still worth the same proportionally. In the adjustment period, the people in most need lose employement opportunities as businesses cut employees/stop hiring to keep paying the bills. In the end, the value employees get through their income is the same after the "raise" as it was before it. This type of policy can help those with stable employment who have large debts to pay off, as the value of their debt decreases if the interest rate on their debt is fixed. Elderly individuals from the low-to-middle "class" who have saved their entire lives for retirement are hurt, as their life savings suddenly lose value. If enough value is lost, those elderly individuals will re-enter the workforce to pay the bills. This takes away employments opportunity from younger individuals who are looking for a way into the workforce. So, who really benefits from a mandated increase in minimum wage?

 

[Papa bull]

How many wall street criminals did the SEC prosecute for the 2008 collapse? What universe are you in?

You should learn to do some of your own homework. Maybe it's this lack of motivation on your part that is holding you back more than "the man". Think about it.

A spokeswoman for the Justice Department said the numbers of financial-fraud cases being brought has increased since the crisis. "When we find sufficient evidence of criminal conduct, we will not hesitate to bring charges," she added....

In the three years since the crisis peaked in October 2008, the Justice Department has filed financial-fraud cases against 14,843 defendants, according to the letter to Mr. Grassley. Over that time, it said, more than 1,100 people have been sentenced to prison for mortgage fraud.

 

[Verax]

I know.. I know.... it's all a conspiracy. The reason you don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of is because you have no control over anything. It's "them". "They" are screwing you.

I'm doing just fine, thanks. I love capitalism and I love my country. What I don't love are the people who are ruining it with their crony capitalism. You keep a look out for commies while I deal with the real problems.

 

[Verax]

You should learn to do some of your own homework. Maybe it's this lack of motivation on your part that is holding you back more than "the man". Think about it.

Whatever Papa Bs, keep living in your fantasy world. I'll be getting back to work now.

 

[Papa bull]

I'm doing just fine, thanks. I love capitalism and I love my country. What I don't love are the people who are ruining it with their crony capitalism. You keep a look out for commies while I deal with the real problems.

Yeah... well, thanks for "dealing" with all the real problems. I feel so much better knowing that you've got it all under control. Cheers.

 

[KevinKohler]

That's something that seems to be a common link among communists; a complete contempt for property rights except as it is applied to their own property, which of course, is different.

If by property, you mean, a conglomerate propped up by government regulation and tax dollars that directly affects the lives of millions.....


Then, yes. In much the same fashion I am a fan of leveraging force against my government to uphold accountability.

 

[KevinKohler]

And that's where the "honest discussion" fails. I've seen some of your "legitimate complaints".

We have court systems that deal with LEGITIMATE complaints about LEGITIMATE abuses stemming from capitalism.

Yeah? And how many got rich off Enron vs how many actually went to jail? How bout in 08'?

Oh, right, "justice" in this country is just another commodity to be bought and sold.

 

[KevinKohler]

I don't think you can say that it's not effective unless you want to count all the crimes where there isn't any evidence to convict because they're all crimes in your head. When there are real crimes, we can press real charges.

In order for something to be deemed a crime in court, there must be a law against it. Who owns the law makers?

 

[KevinKohler]

Throw a rock into a pack of dogs and the one that yelps is the one you hit. Lots of yelpers here.

I think it's entirely justified for companies to give employees a good wage. I just don't think "they" should be "forced to"... not by you, anyway. Market forces handle that. If no one wants to work for them any more, then they're hands are called. If they can't get the calibre of worker they need for the wages they pay, then they're forced to do better. For you to "force" them just because you have an arbitrary value for their labor in your head is wrong. You have no right to force your will on other people, particularly in regard to what they must do with their money.

This is your problem. You're trying to apply free market principles to a not free market. It's pretty safe to say that's a big pile of fail.