Freethought & Rationalism Archive

beyelzu · 02-03-2003, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by moon

And, let me repeat:

Most of the world is capitalist. Most of the population of the world lives in soul-crushing misery.

two things moon

1 this thread is about why communism doesnt work. so please prove that it does, I would like to see such proof. While you are at it, prove god exists, I think you can use your rhetoric to do both at the same time.

2. you ask others to back up there assertions yet you keep making the same tired "most of the population of the world lives in soul-crushing misery" assertion with absolutely no proof.

come on dont you have a study about how 5 billion(which would be most) people live in soul crushing misery?

David M. Payne · 02-03-2003, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by hal9000
Or (C) They have resulted in an authoritarian system.

More interesting is the use by moon of the type of arguments that the fundies use to deflect the arguments on the existence of god and the authoritarian dogma of religion. Deny reality or change the subject. It looks like the people who support capitalism here such as enchidna made pretty good arguments on the value of capitalism. The issue isn't the failures of capitalism on this thread moon, it's the failure of communism to ever work. Don't change the subject, provide an example of a functioning communist nation today. Well, it's late, *yawn* got to get up early and go to work, have fun.

Well, I guess this bears repeating.

David

"God, Marx, and religion, the oldest scam(s) in history, and they still suck them in today. So free your mind, and your body will follow!

Me and Me · 02-03-2003, 11:40 PM

Hal 90

So you believe that the failure of communist countries reflects the system itself. Yet you seem to not hold Capitalism to that same standard. Does the failure of capitalist countries reflect upon the system?

Vorkosigan · 02-03-2003, 11:40 PM

Don't get too upset at the ravings of the anti-communist fanatic bloc on this board. The reason they throw around blanket statements like "every Marxist system ever tried has resulted in an authoritarian system", blah, blah, blah, is because of one of two reasons. Either (a) they are ignorant, or (b) they cannot defend their position.

You can be Communist. Or you can have a democracy. But you can't do both.

or the fact that Russia in the 1930's experienced the greatest economic expansion of any country in history,

Ah, moon, you crack me up. By 1932, Russian ag yields were at less than 1928 levels, production targets were not met, consumer goods were in short supply and inflation loomed. Agriculture in particular stagnated throughout the 1930s and fell backward, and in the Second World War, as newly released data from the Soviet archives shows, the collapsing Soviet system was heavily dependent on US imports of food, trucks and cars, explosives, rolling stock, locomotives, and petroleum to keep going. Hell, the Soviets were so behind, they hadn't discovered how to make high octane gas -- it was the US that showed them. No high octane gas, no air force.

Never mind that food rationing was introduced in the mid-1920s, and the death penalty for stealing even a small amount of grain in 1932, followed by the terrible famines of the 1930s. Roughly half of all sheep, horses, and cattle died during this period. That's some economic success! Rationing of bread and other staples would not be lifted until 1935.

It is probably true that Russian national income tripled over the period 1928-1937, but it is hardly surprising given that both S Korean and Taiwan have experienced similar booms in even shorter periods of time (for example, S Korea tripled in 7 years from '65 to '72) that were closely related -- all three represented recovery from war and population movement, and all three were based on pillaging agriculture to support industry. The difference is that both S Korea and Taiwan laid a broad-based economic foundation that has continued to propel real growth -- Taiwan averaged 9% growth from '65 to '88. The Soviet Union by contrast, without an export-led growth strategy and with major problems of inefficiency, technological advancement, factor productivity gains, and of course, the necessity for an expensive military and police state that consumed 20-25% of GDP, collapsed in an ineffective heap after 1975. The real difference between Russian growth and other kinds is that the Russians couldn't sustain. As Russia, Taiwan, Japan and S Korea all proved, and China is currently proving, you can sustain short run import-substitution growth by pillaging agriculture to boost industrialization, but sooner or later you've got to switch to export-led growth so you can upgrade your capital base and improve your workers' skills.

Sorry about the econ 101 lesson, guys.

Vorkosigan

David M. Payne · 02-03-2003, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Beyelzu
two things moon

1 this thread is about why communism doesnt work. so please prove that it does, I would like to see such proof. While you are at it, prove god exists, I think you can use your rhetoric to do both at the same time.

2. you ask others to back up there assertions yet you keep making the same tired "most of the population of the world lives in soul-crushing misery" assertion with absolutely no proof.

come on dont you have a study about how 5 billion(which would be most) people live in soul crushing misery?

Nicely said Beyelzu.

David

Quote:

Originally posted by hal9000
Or (C) They have resulted in an authoritarian system.

More interesting is the use by moon of the type of arguments that the fundies use to deflect the arguments on the existence of god and the authoritarian dogma of religion. Deny reality or change the subject. It looks like the people who support capitalism here such as enchidna made pretty good arguments on the value of capitalism. The issue isn't the failures of capitalism on this thread moon, it's the failure of communism to ever work. Don't change the subject, provide an example of a functioning communist nation today. Well, it's late, *yawn* got to get up early and go to work, have fun.

Well, I guess this bears repeating, again.

David

"God, Marx, and religion, the oldest scam(s) in history, and they still suck them in today. So free your mind, and your body will follow!

beyelzu · 02-03-2003, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Me and Me
Hal 90

So you believe that the failure of communist countries reflects the system itself. Yet you seem to not hold Capitalism to that same standard. Does the failure of capitalist countries reflect upon the system?

the difference is that EVERY capitalistic society has not failed. the same can not be said of communism.

Vorkosigan · 02-03-2003, 11:46 PM

Really? So, say, Nicaragua under the Sandinistas was authoritarian? Or Revolutionary Cuba? Or Bishop's Grenada? Or Vietnam?

Yes.

Vorkosigan

beyelzu · 02-03-2003, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David M. Payne
Nicely said Beyelzu.

David

Well, I guess this bears repeating.

David

"God, Marx, and religion, the oldest scam(s) in history, and they still suck them in today. So free your mind, and your body will follow!

thanks for the compliment.

personally, I think you could repeat the quote ad infinitum and moon would keep either not reading it or not responding to it.

I do look forward to that world wide study on soul crushing misery though

please moon, if you can find some sort of communist propaganda site that backs up that claim, I would love to read it for shits and giggles.

David M. Payne · 02-03-2003, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vorkosigan
Don't get too upset at the ravings of the anti-communist fanatic bloc on this board. The reason they throw around blanket statements like "every Marxist system ever tried has resulted in an authoritarian system", blah, blah, blah, is because of one of two reasons. Either (a) they are ignorant, or (b) they cannot defend their position.

You can be Communist. Or you can have a democracy. But you can't do both.

or the fact that Russia in the 1930's experienced the greatest economic expansion of any country in history,

Ah, moon, you crack me up. By 1932, Russian ag yields were at less than 1928 levels, production targets were not met, consumer goods were in short supply and inflation loomed. Agriculture in particular stagnated throughout the 1930s and fell backward, and in the Second World War, as newly released data from the Soviet archives shows, the collapsing Soviet system was heavily dependent on US imports of food, trucks and cars, explosives, rolling stock, locomotives, and petroleum to keep going. Hell, the Soviets were so behind, they hadn't discovered how to make high octane gas -- it was the US that showed them. No high octane gas, no air force.

It is probably true that Russian national income tripled over the period 1928-1937, but it is hardly surprising given that both S Korean and Taiwan have experienced similar booms in even shorter periods of time (for example, S Korea tripled in 7 years from '65 to '72) that were closely related -- all three represented recovery from war and population movement, and all three were based on pillaging agriculture to support industry. The difference is that both S Korea and Taiwan laid a broad-based economic foundation that has continued to propel real growth -- Taiwan averaged 9% growth from '65 to '88. The Soviet Union by contrast, without an export-led growth strategy and with major problems of inefficiency, technological advancement, factor productivity gains, and of course, the necessity for an expensive military and police state that consumed 20-25% of GDP, collapsed in an ineffective heap after 1975. The real difference between Russian growth and other kinds is that the Russians couldn't sustain. As Russia, Taiwan, Japan and S Korea all proved, and China is currently proving, you can sustain short run import-substitution growth by pillaging agriculture to boost industrialization, but sooner or later you've got to switch to export-led growth so you can upgrade your capital base and improve your workers' skills.

Sorry about the econ 101 lesson, guys.

Vorkosigan

No apology necessary Vork, looks like a good lesson to me, and in line with what I have learned in my studies over the years in school, and in the events of the real world. This is reality, as opposed to the fantasy world of the Marxists and the utopian workers paradise Marxist state, that has never survived for some reason.

David

"God, Marx, and religion, the oldest scam(s) in history, and they still suck them in today. So free your mind, and your body will follow!

beyelzu · 02-03-2003, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vorkosigan
Don't get too upset at the ravings of the anti-communist fanatic bloc on this board. The reason they throw around blanket statements like "every Marxist system ever tried has resulted in an authoritarian system", blah, blah, blah, is because of one of two reasons. Either (a) they are ignorant, or (b) they cannot defend their position.

You can be Communist. Or you can have a democracy. But you can't do both.

or the fact that Russia in the 1930's experienced the greatest economic expansion of any country in history,

Ah, moon, you crack me up. By 1932, Russian ag yields were at less than 1928 levels, production targets were not met, consumer goods were in short supply and inflation loomed. Agriculture in particular stagnated throughout the 1930s and fell backward, and in the Second World War, as newly released data from the Soviet archives shows, the collapsing Soviet system was heavily dependent on US imports of food, trucks and cars, explosives, rolling stock, locomotives, and petroleum to keep going. Hell, the Soviets were so behind, they hadn't discovered how to make high octane gas -- it was the US that showed them. No high octane gas, no air force.

Never mind that food rationing was introduced in the mid-1920s, and the death penalty for stealing even a small amount of grain in 1932, followed by the terrible famines of the 1930s. Roughly half of all sheep, horses, and cattle died during this period. That's some economic success! Rationing of bread and other staples would not be lifted until 1935.

It is probably true that Russian national income tripled over the period 1928-1937, but it is hardly surprising given that both S Korean and Taiwan have experienced similar booms in even shorter periods of time (for example, S Korea tripled in 7 years from '65 to '72) that were closely related -- all three represented recovery from war and population movement, and all three were based on pillaging agriculture to support industry. The difference is that both S Korea and Taiwan laid a broad-based economic foundation that has continued to propel real growth -- Taiwan averaged 9% growth from '65 to '88. The Soviet Union by contrast, without an export-led growth strategy and with major problems of inefficiency, technological advancement, factor productivity gains, and of course, the necessity for an expensive military and police state that consumed 20-25% of GDP, collapsed in an ineffective heap after 1975. The real difference between Russian growth and other kinds is that the Russians couldn't sustain. As Russia, Taiwan, Japan and S Korea all proved, and China is currently proving, you can sustain short run import-substitution growth by pillaging agriculture to boost industrialization, but sooner or later you've got to switch to export-led growth so you can upgrade your capital base and improve your workers' skills.

Sorry about the econ 101 lesson, guys.

Vorkosigan

Personally I appreciated the econ 101 lesson and the facts, sometimes its kind of easy to get snowed by moon's rhetoric cuz I dont know a whole hell of alot about russia in the the 30's

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-03-2003, 11:40 PM	#63
Me and Me Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: California Posts: 600	Hal 90 So you believe that the failure of communist countries reflects the system itself. Yet you seem to not hold Capitalism to that same standard. Does the failure of capitalist countries reflect upon the system?

02-03-2003, 11:40 PM	#64
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Don't get too upset at the ravings of the anti-communist fanatic bloc on this board. The reason they throw around blanket statements like "every Marxist system ever tried has resulted in an authoritarian system", blah, blah, blah, is because of one of two reasons. Either (a) they are ignorant, or (b) they cannot defend their position. You can be Communist. Or you can have a democracy. But you can't do both. or the fact that Russia in the 1930's experienced the greatest economic expansion of any country in history, Ah, moon, you crack me up. By 1932, Russian ag yields were at less than 1928 levels, production targets were not met, consumer goods were in short supply and inflation loomed. Agriculture in particular stagnated throughout the 1930s and fell backward, and in the Second World War, as newly released data from the Soviet archives shows, the collapsing Soviet system was heavily dependent on US imports of food, trucks and cars, explosives, rolling stock, locomotives, and petroleum to keep going. Hell, the Soviets were so behind, they hadn't discovered how to make high octane gas -- it was the US that showed them. No high octane gas, no air force. Never mind that food rationing was introduced in the mid-1920s, and the death penalty for stealing even a small amount of grain in 1932, followed by the terrible famines of the 1930s. Roughly half of all sheep, horses, and cattle died during this period. That's some economic success! Rationing of bread and other staples would not be lifted until 1935. It is probably true that Russian national income tripled over the period 1928-1937, but it is hardly surprising given that both S Korean and Taiwan have experienced similar booms in even shorter periods of time (for example, S Korea tripled in 7 years from '65 to '72) that were closely related -- all three represented recovery from war and population movement, and all three were based on pillaging agriculture to support industry. The difference is that both S Korea and Taiwan laid a broad-based economic foundation that has continued to propel real growth -- Taiwan averaged 9% growth from '65 to '88. The Soviet Union by contrast, without an export-led growth strategy and with major problems of inefficiency, technological advancement, factor productivity gains, and of course, the necessity for an expensive military and police state that consumed 20-25% of GDP, collapsed in an ineffective heap after 1975. The real difference between Russian growth and other kinds is that the Russians couldn't sustain. As Russia, Taiwan, Japan and S Korea all proved, and China is currently proving, you can sustain short run import-substitution growth by pillaging agriculture to boost industrialization, but sooner or later you've got to switch to export-led growth so you can upgrade your capital base and improve your workers' skills. Sorry about the econ 101 lesson, guys. Vorkosigan

02-03-2003, 11:46 PM	#67
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Really? So, say, Nicaragua under the Sandinistas was authoritarian? Or Revolutionary Cuba? Or Bishop's Grenada? Or Vietnam? Yes. Vorkosigan

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.