Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests

Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and debate

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by biochem   » Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:50 am

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA

Howard T. Map-addict wrote: the One Thing that a country needs to be free,
is an Independent Judiciary!


I do agree that an independent judiciary is crucial for freedom. And to that point as well, I like to see a supermajority (60%) support for lifetime appointments. To be truly effective and trusted, an independent judiciary needs to been seen as neutral. These lifetime appointment people are going to be around for a long long time and thus should have their neutrality confirmed by broad support from across the ideological spectrum. A supermajority requirement helps to ensure that.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by Zakharra   » Mon Nov 03, 2014 12:17 pm

Zakharra
Captain of the List

Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:50 pm

That would require an amendment to the US Constitution.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by biochem   » Mon Nov 03, 2014 1:12 pm

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA

Zakharra wrote:That would require an amendment to the US Constitution.



Agreed.

There used to be a Senate rule that ensured this but Harry Reid dumped it. Obviously we can't trust the politicians on this one.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by Starsaber   » Mon Nov 03, 2014 4:42 pm

Starsaber
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:40 am

Zakharra wrote:That would require an amendment to the US Constitution.


Either that or legislators who oppose or support appointees based on their qualifications, not on who nominated them. Problem is that we can't seem to get that from either side of the broken hyperpartisan system we have now.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by Tenshinai   » Sun Nov 09, 2014 1:17 pm

Tenshinai
Admiral

Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:34 pm
Location: Sweden

pokermind wrote:
CCCP or Union of Soviet Socialist Rebublics

NAZIs officially the German Socialist Worker's Party

Shows the Twentieth Century European definition of socialism differs, and has led to confusion ;)

Poker


That is incorrect. The "National Socialist German Workers' Party". "Nationalsocialist". That has as much to do with socialism as democracy and republic had to do with the Deutsche Demokratische Republik, or East Germany.




Daryl wrote:Classic communism has been proven to be a failure as modern systems are too complex to be detail managed centrally, and there is no incentive to excel. A supposedly true story of the communist Soviet Union was that chandelier factories were lumped in with other industries that were judged on the weight of their output, and thus produced impractical cast iron light fittings.


Beds, not chandeliers(that i KNOW of at least). It didn´t start like that though, they started with very decent wooden beds, but then there were problems with corruption, so the beds kept getting lighter and lighter because material was sold on illegally.

So the counter was to start using weight as a measure of quality. Which eventually led to the cast iron monstrosities.

However, noone has really PROVEN "classic communism" as a failure, because any system will fail when corruption is handled poorly, or when economics is handled badly overall.

And seriously, have you ever tried running any kind of realistic economic simulator on USSR? Do try it before you say communism failed, because achieving the industrial expansion that happened historically 1920 to 1940 is literally insanely difficult.

And after the extreme devastation of WWII, well try a simulation running with pure capitalism and by 2015 you will have an economy like the mid 60s at best.

Central planned economy is extremely effective for SOME very limited things, like massive expansion and reaching specific goals, it´s just very poor at keeping up a "nice" economy that people in general will like the results of longterm when there is no good reason not to have all the "good things".

The idea that it must be inflexible is also a myth, because that´s the fault of those giving the orders, a planned economy is in fact potentially more flexible than a market economy(for example, there is never a lack of resources for a new venture, if the venture has been decided on, resources can be made available nearly instantly).
The usual problem is that neither politicians nor planners have much direct input in what they should make the economy do.

As a comparison, it would be like having democracy having an extra layer in between election results and who ends up in parliament. IF that extra layer works well, then it can function extremely well, but achieving that is not a defaultprobability.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by biochem   » Wed Dec 03, 2014 4:56 pm

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA

Starsaber wrote:
Zakharra wrote:That would require an amendment to the US Constitution.


Either that or legislators who oppose or support appointees based on their qualifications, not on who nominated them. Problem is that we can't seem to get that from either side of the broken hyperpartisan system we have now.


I've been seeing lots of commentary lately from political historians about how once a rule of this type (and Obama's immigration debacle - the two are often combined in the same commentary) is broken, then the opposition cites it as a reason that they don't need to follow it either. So we may be looking forward to a long period of tit for tat from both parties on this issue, especially as the Senate keeps switching back and forth.

Politicians being politicians with gigantic egos, they always forget the politician's variation of do unto others as you would have them do unto you: do unto others and when it's their turn they WILL do the same unto you. Politicians aren't much for turning the other cheek. To bad, some civil discourse might help the situation.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by Michael Riddell   » Wed Dec 03, 2014 7:57 pm

Michael Riddell
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 352
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:10 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.

biochem wrote:So we may be looking forward to a long period of tit for tat from both parties on this issue, especially as the Senate keeps switching back and forth.


That's always the problem with politics. It inevitably deteriorates to a game of tit for tat and point scoring against the opposition.

It hasn't exactly been helped in the UK by the general low quality of the politicians. :roll:

Mike.
---------------------
Gonnae no DAE that!

Why?

Just gonnae NO!
---------------------
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by MAD-4A   » Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:00 pm

MAD-4A
Captain of the List

Posts: 719
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:48 pm
Location: Texas

Daryl wrote:Classic communism has been proven to be a failure as modern systems are too complex to be detail managed centrally, and there is no incentive to excel.
No Communism failed because it doesn’t exist, not what the “communist” claim on paper. What are listed as “communist republics” are just dictatorships! They are certainly NOT a republic. When power is shifted to the government completely, those in charge of the government are the ones who then have complete power over everything, and they (being human) become dictators, nothing else. Communism and Socialism are not market types they are government types. Communism is a form of socialism (as is “NAZI” or “Fascism”) the market type under socialism is Monopoly. The government owns and runs everything and so runs a monopoly. The only difference than in a free market monopoly is that the government IS the Robber-Baron so you can’t go to the government to complain about the problem because it IS the problem!
-
Almost only counts in Horseshoes and Nuclear Weapons. I almost got the Hand-Grenade out the window does not count.
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by DDHv   » Tue Dec 09, 2014 2:04 pm

DDHv
Captain of the List

Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:59 pm

In historical results, look at this:

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/ ... ampaign=nl

Basically the brass hat mentality always thinks it knows best. But in a modern economy, the problem becomes data flow choke, which is best handled by multiple processors. These are people in an economy. Even if you have high capability at the core, it is hard to get information to and from the core. This is without even thinking of the problems low capability or corruption can cause when centralized. So the brass hat type just causes problems, instead of solving them. The label does not always tell what the contents are.

One example of modern data overload:

Congress’s current dysfunction is rooted in its assumption, over the years, of more responsibilities than it can handle


From:

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/ ... ampaign=nl

In general, the best systems handle things at the lowest level possible, and only go to the next level up when it is actually needed. This principle is designed into many manufacturing systems, and should be designed into the political system. A close to the situation control can react faster and with more accuracy, so we have the central computer pass the desired result to the servo controller, which does the immediate control.
Douglas Hvistendahl
Retired technical nerd

Dumb mistakes are very irritating.
Smart mistakes go on forever
Unless you test your assumptions!
Top
Re: Capitlism, Communism, and Socialism discussion and deba
Post by MAD-4A   » Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:23 am

MAD-4A
Captain of the List

Posts: 719
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:48 pm
Location: Texas

DDHv wrote:In general, the best systems handle things at the lowest level possible, and only go to the next level up when it is actually needed. This principle is designed into many manufacturing systems, and should be designed into the political system. A close to the situation control can react faster and with more accuracy, so we have the central computer pass the desired result to the servo controller, which does the immediate control.
This is how the United States was designed – that is why it is NOT “America” but “the United States“ it was designed so that the local governments (cities, counties etc…) would be in-charge of the local day-to-day running of their local areas. Anything bigger would be handled by the “State” Governments, which would have autonomy within their states. Only on major issues (interstate & international issues) would the federal government step in. The Constitution is a bill-of-rights for the federal government, telling them what they can do not, what they can’t do – if it’s not listed then it’s not part of their prevue. The problem came when some states (being run by jerks at the time) started persecuting people and denying them the rights given by the Bill of Rights (which was only supposed to apply to the federal government not the state & local governments). This caused lawsuits and litigation resulting in the SupCrt deciding to apply the Bill of Rights to all government levels, and this has since created the precedence of the fed interfering in state and local matters (which in turn resulted in the war for Southern Independence – wrongly labeled a “Civil War”). Had the layered government system been maintained then the 2nd amendment that liberals like to miss-interpret would only apply to the Fed not having gun control laws. The states could (if the voters desired) pass their own laws, but that is not the case because then states could pass other laws bypassing free press, jury trials etc… (Which was the problem in the first place). The real problem is that the same is true of repeal of the 2nd Amendment, this is not just a separate Amendment like "Prohibition". It is part of the “Bill of Rights”. This means that its repeal means the effective repeal of the entire bill-of-rights (precedence has been set) and that means no free press, no jury, no protection against trial without indictment or double jeopardy etc… all gone!
-
Almost only counts in Horseshoes and Nuclear Weapons. I almost got the Hand-Grenade out the window does not count.
Top

Return to Politics