|
Is Communism good? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
375 | 66.25% |
| No |
|
191 | 33.75% |
| Total: | 523 votes | ||
|
Hogge Wild posted:I don't understand this post. Every communist country has genocided. The difference between horrible communist regimes and the nazis is that those communist regimes oppressed and murdered in pursuit of their goals, but for the nazis the oppressing and murdering was their goal. That's why, regardless of what economic system you like, equating communists to nazis is stupid.
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Yeah, capitalism gives huge incentives to the collapse of social democracies if you're wealthy enough to weather the storm and callous enough to let people suffer.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
If you're going to have some form of buying then prices of goods should be based on supply and demand. A worker can be paid by the labour they do (and perhaps some small deviation based on need or difficulty or how little people want to do it) if the system allows that (aka the government subsidises in some fashion) because that is what is fair. But if you ever sell anything for less than what someone is willing to pay for it, then there will be a black market. You need to set a goods' price such that every person who is willing to pay that price or more gets as much of that good as they want at those prices. Otherwise people buy it to resell it (or worse, stockpile).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
OtherworldlyInvader posted:Who owns the means of production, the central planners or the workers? If goods are worth the work hours it takes to make them, and it takes me 5 hours to bake a batch of bread, and it takes my coworker 4 hours to bake an identical batch of bread, what is the value of the bread 4 or 5 work-hours? If any extra work-hours spent are added to the price, why wouldn't all of us take as long as possible to make the least amount of bread possible? This answer is baked into Marxism. You'd get paid based on the socially necessary labour time. Basically you'd be paid the average of what it would take to produce what you produced given current society-wide efficiency. And yes it would need to be policed in some fashion to stop collusion. White Rock posted:If you have a a shortage of what people need, then that is your point of failure. Your economy should be robust enough that there is enough of the necessary items. If you have a surplus, great! If you have complete control of the economy, you can also limit purchases if necessary to dissallow cheating. Well if you never have a shortage you'd never have to worry about supply and demand for pricing. I'm assuming there will be shortages though and hoping there will be a system in place to account for when it does. I guess a very simple system of supply&demand would be to set base prices from labour, then aim to create enough that supply covers demand, and then whenever you fall short then you up the price until demand at that price is equal to the supply. But you need to be able to account for shortages and I think prices are the best way to do that. Much better than rationing. You'd also want to be able to lower prices for perishable things you overestimated demand for as well so that you can get rid of them. Futuresight fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Jan 25, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:What's the difference between communists in TYOOL 2017 and people who believe in angels and fairies and stuff anyway? People who believe in angels and poo poo are in power.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 08:50
|
|