Which is better for the public? Free Market or Communism?
Which is better for the public?
Free Market
Side Score: 5
|
 |
Communism
Side Score: 6
|
|
|
|
|
The Free Market and Communism are not necessarily Mutually exclusive. The difference, however, is that in a supposedly Libertarian Free Market each individual has a right to his own property, while in a Communist society the people at any time can seize the property of a minority if they see fit. I disagree with that because I am a minority in ethnicity, political views and religious views, and cultural practice. In a libertarian society, i am still protected. Communists simply don't care so long as the majority are satisfied. Side: Free Market
1
point
From my understanding, Communists see personal property as smaller things that can't be sufficiently shared with others (like cell phones, a serving of food, laptops, etc.) To Communists, the idea of private property is things that should be shared but aren't (like land, large crops, natural resources, etc.) So if a man owns a house the Communists, if enough people felt it necessary, could just move in. The thing is, in a Libertarian/Free Market society, no one could possibly own a lot of land because they would have no means of taking that ownership. It would require cooperation in the first place. We're talking elimination of the State, and only the State can reinforce the ownership of so much land. There is no standardized currency that one could use to bargain for a patch of land or a river or w/e. Instead, it would all depend on this person's ability to produce trade-able assets. To me, Anarchists are often arguing semantics. Anarcho-Capitalists believe in the liberty to purchase property no matter how big, but the reality of it is that it would never be able to be that big. Side: Free Market
0
points
You see, once a teacher scored a class with a communist approach to teach them what it meant. The modal average grade was given to all the students and they all got B's. That was great for the ones who slacked off, but made the high flyers angered. As they decided there wasn't any point, the next test they got everyone got an F. So a communist public may seem like a good idea on paper, but if it's put in practice the ecomomy will most likely come crashing down. Side: Free Market
1
point
|
1
point
As an ideology communism is a no brainier, all people are equal and has access to same stuff, no discrimination, no poverty... However in reality it had failed. Free market is a simply about moving resources from one to other. It's pretty much based on making "unbalance". It makes poor future less people and on the other side ridiculously rich people that will pass their wealth on their children ...that makes it pretty much a medieval-like monarchy. Side: Free Market
1
point
Communism is the freest "market" there is. Most supporters understand it to be a gift economy Which should allow for greater quality of life to be had once it reaches a large scale through making private interests also public interests and vice versa. The so called "free market" results in socialized losses and private gains. Side: Communism
I like the system the 'souls' had in the book 'The Host' where people work for free and don't need money to buy things. Dishonesty would be a major failing for us though, but we could have a system which monitors transactions. (yep, that brings us straight into moneyless communism) Side: Communism
|
