View Full Version : oneshare.com: the stupidest thing I've seen today.


Mr. Rhinoceros
07-19-2002, 03:13 PM
<font color=#007AAA>BUY ONE SHARE OF YOUR FAVORITE COMPANY!

Holee fuck. Is this what consumerism has come to? What the fuck is wrong with people!?

------------------
Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 03:34 PM
<font color=00ff33>That's hardly consumerism, fat ass.

Everyone knows that that single share will earn you nothing. It simply gives people the opportunity to physically have a paper piece of stock. Something that very few stock traders even have. It's nothing more than a poster.

Go smoke some weed, and down about thirteen cheeseburgers, dumbass.

Mr. Rhinoceros
07-19-2002, 03:59 PM
<font color=#007AAA>Hardly consumerism? You aren't as smart as you think you are, Capitian Bank Account. Why would anyone buy one share of stock? Well, it says right in the ad: "BUY A SHARE OF YOUR FAVORITE COMPANY!" Do I need to draw a picture?

------------------
Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you.

Magic the Gathering
07-19-2002, 04:02 PM
Now boys, let's play nice.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 04:09 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Rhinoceros:
<font color=#007AAA>Hardly consumerism? You aren't as smart as you think you are, Capitian Bank Account. Why would anyone buy one share of stock? Well, it says right in the ad: "BUY A SHARE OF YOUR FAVORITE COMPANY!" Do I need to draw a picture?

</font><font color=00ff33>Do you know how to read? It serves it purpose as a memento. Nothing more.

I don't know about your ghetto ass home, but the majority of people like to decorate their home with paintings/posters/knickknacks. This falls under that category. And in bold letters for you, NOTHING MORE.

Mr. Rhinoceros
07-19-2002, 04:28 PM
<font color=#007AAA>Decor, eh? But how to decide on which stock to buy...hmm I know, I'll pick my FAVORITE COMPANY.

------------------
Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 04:50 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Rhinoceros:
<font color=#007AAA>Decor, eh? But how to decide on which stock to buy...hmm I know, I'll pick my FAVORITE COMPANY.

</font>
<font color=00ff33>Why the fuck not?

You could buy it for a publicly traded company you work for. Or you could choose a company that makes products that you enjoy.

Don't get jealous because they are making money, and you are not. Apparently you are the only person that feels this way.

By the way, have you gotten any ass lately? Possibly a kiss?

DeviousJ
07-19-2002, 04:55 PM
I see your point Mr Rhino, but owning a single share in many companies affords you perks - usually money off flights, products etc. It's nowhere near as bad as getting a Nike tattoo

Never_Nohen
07-19-2002, 04:59 PM
I dunno...it kind of makes sense on a symbolic level. Like patronizing a fairly stable well-off local business, or buying the CD of a major band, rather than downloading it...doing it doesn't actually have any significant impact on that company, or you, or anything...it's just a symbolic statement of "I support Company X" or whatever. I don't personally have a "favorite company", I think the concept is pretty ridiculous, but I can imagine there are some people out there who are fervent supporters of Starbucks (God knows why.) But yeah, it's still pretty consumeristic...

Too Dumb to Mean It
07-19-2002, 05:06 PM
I don't have anything against you, Rhino, but I find it pretty funny that such an avid fan of professional sports is railing against having "favorite companies".

Mr. Rhinoceros
07-19-2002, 05:11 PM
<font color=#007AAA>1. Companies will fire empoyees when it becomes financially benificial to the company. Why anyone would want to work hard for people like that is beyond me, and part of the problem.
2. Consumerism is identifying part of yourself with the products you buy. "What kitchen set best describes me as a person?" Buying a solitary piece of stock to frame and hang in your kitchen is lame.
3. I think it's more questionable that you assume anyone who is anti-corporate is "jealous". I'm sick and tired of the allmighty dollar being the focal point for our lives. This is a very minor irritant, but still the stupidest thing I've seen today (until you post your pic, that is).

------------------
Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you.

[This message has been edited by Mr. Rhinoceros (edited 07-19-2002).]

Mayfuck
07-19-2002, 05:28 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Rhinoceros:
<font color=#007AAA>1. Companies will fire empoyees when it becomes financially benificial to the company. Why anyone would want to work hard for people like that is beyond me, and part of the problem.
2. Consumerism is identifying part of yourself with the products you buy. "What kitchen set best describes me as a person?" Buying a solitary piece of stock to frame and hang in your kitchen is lame.
3. I think it's more questionable that you assume anyone who is anti-corporate is "jealous". I'm sick and tired of the allmighty dollar being the focal point for our lives. This is a very minor irritant, but still the stupidest thing I've seen today (until you post your pic, that is).

</font>

THIS IZ 4 THA PEOPLE OF THE SUN!

Orchestra
07-19-2002, 05:35 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>That's hardly consumerism, fat ass.

Everyone knows that that single share will earn you nothing. It simply gives people the opportunity to physically have a paper piece of stock. Something that very few stock traders even have. It's nothing more than a poster.

Go smoke some weed, and down about thirteen cheeseburgers, dumbass.</font>

I agree with him

Undone
07-19-2002, 05:43 PM
<font color="CC33CC">It's sorta like buying a tshirt with a logo slapped onto it. Lame, but I'm not too worked up.

Magic the Gathering
07-19-2002, 05:46 PM
I'm convinced. I'm going to buy a share of BUTT LUBE INC. because I believe in what they stand for.

bittertrance
07-19-2002, 06:24 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Rhinoceros:
<font color=#007AAA>1. Companies will fire empoyees when it becomes financially benificial to the company. Why anyone would want to work hard for people like that is beyond me, and part of the problem.
2. Consumerism is identifying part of yourself with the products you buy. "What kitchen set best describes me as a person?" Buying a solitary piece of stock to frame and hang in your kitchen is lame.
3. I think it's more questionable that you assume anyone who is anti-corporate is "jealous". I'm sick and tired of the allmighty dollar being the focal point for our lives. This is a very minor irritant, but still the stupidest thing I've seen today (until you post your pic, that is).

</font>

man where were you before fight club? did you have any opinions?

Ammy
07-19-2002, 06:28 PM
i agree with aff.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 06:31 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Rhinoceros:
<font color=#007AAA>1. Companies will fire empoyees when it becomes financially benificial to the company. Why anyone would want to work hard for people like that is beyond me, and part of the problem.
2. Consumerism is identifying part of yourself with the products you buy. "What kitchen set best describes me as a person?" Buying a solitary piece of stock to frame and hang in your kitchen is lame.
3. I think it's more questionable that you assume anyone who is anti-corporate is "jealous". I'm sick and tired of the allmighty dollar being the focal point for our lives. This is a very minor irritant, but still the stupidest thing I've seen today (until you post your pic, that is).

</font><font color=00ff33>Lamest Post Evar.

The jealousy is more than apparent to pretty much everyone here. You can play like a bitch, and whine about the horrors of money, and the Satan that is corporate America. Why don't you move your bitch ass to Cuba. See how far your idealistic Socialism/Communism will get you. There is a reason why the United States has the highest quality of living, and that, my overweight friend is Capitalism.

------------------
there's good and bad in everyone

Eulogy
07-19-2002, 06:32 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ammy:
i agree with aff.</font>

My Igloo
07-19-2002, 09:33 PM
shut up you fuckin' disgusting American
Consumerist fucks.

Mr.Rhino is right.

------------------
../index.html (http://pinstripe.dontvisit.com) ../xxxxx/index.html (http://pinstripe.dontvisit.com/xxxxx)

Affectation
07-19-2002, 09:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by My Igloo:
shut up you fuckin' disgusting American
Consumerist fucks.

Mr.Rhino is right.

</font><font color=00ff33>Do they have running water in your town yet?

My Igloo
07-19-2002, 09:36 PM
they did. until i poisoned it with
deadly fluoride!!

Affectation
07-19-2002, 09:37 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by My Igloo:
they did. until i poisoned it with
deadly fluoride!!</font>
<font color=00ff33>That movie was almost as gay as you are.

My Igloo
07-19-2002, 09:38 PM
movie?

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-19-2002, 09:44 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Originally posted by Mr. Rhinoceros:
<font color=#007AAA>1. Companies will fire empoyees when it becomes financially benificial to the company. Why anyone would want to work hard for people like that is beyond me, and part of the problem.
2. Consumerism is identifying part of yourself with the products you buy. "What kitchen set best describes me as a person?" Buying a solitary piece of stock to frame and hang in your kitchen is lame.
3. I think it's more questionable that you assume anyone who is anti-corporate is "jealous". I'm sick and tired of the allmighty dollar being the focal point for our lives. This is a very minor irritant, but still the stupidest thing I've seen today (until you post your pic, that is).

</font><font color=00ff33>Lamest Post Evar.

The jealousy is more than apparent to pretty much everyone here. You can play like a bitch, and whine about the horrors of money, and the Satan that is corporate America. Why don't you move your bitch ass to Cuba. See how far your idealistic Socialism/Communism will get you. There is a reason why the United States has the highest quality of living, and that, my overweight friend is Capitalism.



You must be talking about the great capitalistic society where senior executives cheat and profit off of the employees, where ordinary people are told to trust businesses with their money, and then when their retirement earnings evaporate, the rich people shrug and say "tough luck". And it's also the land of the free, meaning that the police force is free to invade your privacy as they wish with no reason. Yep, I sure love capitalism.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-19-2002, 09:51 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
You must be talking about the great capitalistic society where senior executives cheat and profit off of the employees, where ordinary people are told to trust businesses with their money, and then when their retirement earnings evaporate, the rich people shrug and say "tough luck". And it's also the land of the free, meaning that the police force is free to invade your privacy as they wish with no reason. Yep, I sure love capitalism.</font>
<font color=00ff33>I didn't say that it was perfect, moron. It's the best choice available. This isn't utopia, chief.

You DO NOT know that. You cannot say that it is the best alternative when you don't that for sure. Know why? Because, as one of the black rappers (I forget his name now) said on Bill Maher last month, Communism has never had a chance to be fully implemented anywhere in the world. They tried to BEGIN to implement in some places, but they couldn't get the people to stick with it.

slunky_munky
07-19-2002, 09:51 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>There is a reason why the United States has the highest quality of living, and that, my overweight friend is Capitalism. </font>

ONE OF the highest standards of living in the world, not THE highest, despite the might of American capitalism.

When 1/4 of American (and British) children grow up in poverty you can't believe you're living at the pinacle.

Hats off to middle class pretensions.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 09:52 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
...stupid shit...</font>
<font color=00ff33>I didn't say that it was perfect, moron. It's the best choice available. This isn't utopia, chief.

I also with that the police were as currupt as you believe. It would liven things up a bit.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 09:54 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
You DO NOT know that. You cannot say that it is the best alternative when you don't that for sure. Know why? Because, as one of the black rappers (I forget his name now) said on Bill Maher last month, Communism has never had a chance to be fully implemented anywhere in the world. They tried to BEGIN to implement in some places, but they couldn't get the people to stick with it.</font>
<font color=00ff33>The sad truth is that communism can't work. The only idealistic communism that you will ever hear of is christian heaven.

Learn to quote properly.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-19-2002, 10:01 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
[BThe sad truth is that communism can't work. The only idealistic communism that you will ever hear of is christian heaven.[/B]</font>

No, any philosophy can achieve great success if implemented properly. Communism just means strong central control, where capitalism means lack of central control. One is not better than the other.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 10:02 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
No, any philosophy can achieve great success if implemented properly. Communism just means strong central control, where capitalism means lack of central control. One is not better than the other. </font><font color=00ff33>That's why it has never worked, right? Key word, and I'll use it again, idealistic.

No one wants to work for the better of the whole, when their neighbor us doing half, or even less than half.
<font color=000000>

[This message has been edited by Affectation (edited 07-19-2002).]

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-19-2002, 10:10 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
No, any philosophy can achieve great success if implemented properly. Communism just means strong central control, where capitalism means lack of central control. One is not better than the other. </font><font color=00ff33>That's why it has never worked, right?


No, it hasn't worked because it's tough to put things under strong central control after they've been decentralized for so long. But having strong government ownership in the nation's economy is preferable to what we have now, where business goes mostly unchecked. Why? Because if the government screws you over, you can replace it, but if business screws you over, you're fucked. It's not that complicated.

slunky_munky
07-19-2002, 10:19 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>That's why it has never worked, right?</font>

Name me one communist movement that has ruled for any considerable time WITHOUT some major distraction such as WWII or US/British/IMF/WBO meddling ?

That's not to say Communism can work, but whenever it has been successful in its early stages it has suffered "intervention" and "realignment" by US/British foreign policy and IMF/World Bank interferance, ie Indonesia.

The best examples of cummunism, looking like it might work, has been followed by "civil war", proscriptions, genocide etc. Of course the Western mind thinks that this is all right because communists neverget democratically elected, they just assume power because they're bad.



[This message has been edited by slunky_munky (edited 07-19-2002).]

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-19-2002, 10:26 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
That's not to say Communism can work, but whenever it has been successful in its early stages it has suffered "intervention" and "realignment" by US/British foreign policy and IMF/World Bank interferance, ie Indonesia.</font>

Bingo.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 10:31 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
Name me one communist movement that has ruled for any considerable time WITHOUT some major distraction such as WWII or US/British/IMF/WBO meddling ?

That's not to say Communism can work, but whenever it has been successful in its early stages it has suffered "intervention" and "realignment" by US/British foreign policy and IMF/World Bank interferance, ie Indonesia.

The best examples of cummunism, looking like it might work, has been followed by "civil war", proscriptions, genocide etc. Of course the Western mind thinks that this is all right because communists neverget democratically elected, they just assume power because they're bad.

[This message has been edited by slunky_munky (edited 07-19-2002).]</font>
<font color=00ff33>There is a difference between the ideal communist society, and the working communist society. Ideal communism will never work.

You are out of your mind, and highly unrealistic if you think that it can.

TP, you're just running at the mouth. Trying to rationalize the fact that it can't work. What the fuck are we talking about?
<font color=000000>

[This message has been edited by Affectation (edited 07-19-2002).]

bittertrance
07-19-2002, 10:37 PM
move to cuba, tell us how much better it is there

communism has no chance for improvement, at least with capiltalism/democracy people are constantly striving for better things and changes are feasible

plus there is the whole government run media which pretty much blows

Ammy
07-19-2002, 10:39 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:

<font color=00ff33> Ideal communism will never work.</font></font>


agreed. humans are not good. we must be good and there must be no corruption for the ideal communist society. and that's just not gunna happen. it's nice ot think it will, but fuck, there's no way.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-19-2002, 10:41 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
There is a difference between the ideal communist society, and the working communist society. Ideal communism will never work.

You are out of your mind, and highly unrealistic if you think that it can.

TP, you're just running at the mouth. Trying to rationalize the fact that it can't work. What the fuck are we talking about?</font>

I still can't understand why you think that strong government control and protection is bad, but that big businesses ruining the future financial lives of millions of people is at least tolerable.



[This message has been edited by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller (edited 07-19-2002).]

bittertrance
07-19-2002, 10:47 PM
there's 1, one government and thousands of businesses...with the chance to start your own

tough choice

slunky_munky
07-19-2002, 11:11 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
[B]<font color=00ff33>There is a difference between the ideal communist society, and the working communist society. Ideal communism will never work.
You are out of your mind, and highly unrealistic if you think that it can.

[B]</font>

I never implied that it can work.

We just have examples where parts of it have worked only to be interupted by western-capitalist meddling.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 11:18 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
I never implied that it can work.

We just have examples where parts of it have worked only to be interupted by western-capitalist meddling.

</font><font color=00ff33>Of course anything can work temporarily.

What is your point. You were pressing me to tell you where it hasn't been interrupted. There is a reason that there has always been an "interruption" in communism. Be it internal, or external.

TP, I don't think that either are perfect. I'm more than content in the society in which I live. Bitching and moaning because we aren't at perfection is pointless.

Is this another instance where, "you debated me into the ground?" Dumbass.

slunky_munky
07-19-2002, 11:19 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by bittertrance:
move to cuba, tell us how much better it is there

communism has no chance for improvement, at least with capiltalism/democracy people are constantly striving for better things and changes are feasible

plus there is the whole government run media which pretty much blows

</font>

You do realise the STUPIDITY in using that as your text book example when that nation has had decades of economic sactions ?

Cuba does however offer its citizens better access to health and a higher literacy rate than most developed nations. Unfortunately it means jack shit if the country is financially crippled.

You know if you have a cripple on the floor and someone tells you that the cripple can walk, you might be inclined to kick the cripple while their down. Nevermind that they can't walk anyway, but put the boot in, and proclaim "see, they can't walk. (Cue Clint to tell me that it's a bad analogy).

bittertrance
07-19-2002, 11:24 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
You do realise the STUPIDITY in using that as your text book example when that nation has had decades of economic sactions ?

Cuba does however offer its citizens better access to health and a higher literacy rate than most developed nations. Unfortunately it means jack shit if the country is financially crippled.

You know if you have a cripple on the floor and someone tells you that the cripple can walk, you might be inclined to kick the cripple while their down. Nevermind that they can't walk anyway, but put the boot in, and proclaim "see, they can't walk. (Cue Clint to tell me that it's a bad analogy).

</font>


i was seriously telling you to live there and report to us if it is better....you seem to think it is...soooo?

slunky_munky
07-19-2002, 11:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>
Of course anything can work temporarily.
</font>

So the imposition of capitalist ideology by western governments stalls the progression of Left-leaning systems and you beleive that it doesn't matter that they had some level of success to that point because it was just a "honeymoon period", that eventually they would have to find something new anyway ?

We've never had a communist party in power long enough to establish that they funde****lly can't work. When they fail it is often by force, and that force is often backed, supplied or simply IS from the big capitalist nations (US, UK, Europe, Australia).

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>
What is your point. You were pressing me to tell you where it hasn't been interrupted. There is a reason that there has always been an "interruption" in communism. Be it internal, or external.
</font>

The reason is often that communist systems aren't friendly towards the US dollar. Pure and simple.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 11:37 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
The reason is often that communist systems aren't friendly towards the US dollar. Pure and simple.

</font>
<font color=00ff33>No shit. Simple logic also plays a large part.

slunky_munky
07-19-2002, 11:44 PM
...and the Western (Capitalist) backed deaths of tens of millions of people in South East Asia in the last 25 years.

You could say genocide plays a part too. But that's the Capitalist way and we have to be thankful for that otherwise no Levis or Nikes. Besides, who's going to make them for us ?

After the US moral crusade into Vietnam the nation could proudly boast "the cheapest workers in Asia". They are better off for it.

Affectation
07-19-2002, 11:52 PM
<font color=00ff33>You thinking that everything can be better is nice.

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 12:02 AM
No what is nice is the idea that western governments decide what is best for other nations.

Funding, supplying and trainging Pol Pot did Cambodia a world of good. Sarcasm aside, how could things be any worse ?

These things that our governments do make things better for us, not the vast majority of people in the world living in poverty.

How can a capitalist system imposed on a nation like Indonesia benefit that nation when it owes the US and chums 250% of its GDP ?

When 98% of the population of Timor can vote in an election and then have the US and Britain stir up decades of genocide so that a pro-western (right wing) system can be imposed you can only be offended by it. Of course so few people actually vote in American elections I guess they don't actually value the right to democratic process, ie deciding what is right for yourself.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 12:06 AM
<font color=00ff33>Get the fuck off your pedestal. I doubt that anyone is listening. You are accomplishing nothing.

bittertrance
07-20-2002, 12:07 AM
sally struthers, ladies and gentlemen...she'll be here all week

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 12:08 AM
does it make you uncomfortable ?

Affectation
07-20-2002, 12:09 AM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
does it make you uncomfortable ?</font><font color=00ff33>Hardly.

DeviousJ
07-20-2002, 10:59 AM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>Hardly.

</font>

You do sound like you're struggling under the weight of a better argument. If you're not going to concede to a few points then you're better just leaving the thread than posting 'shut up' and 'nobody is listening.' He has some good points and you know it

Affectation
07-20-2002, 12:32 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by DeviousJ:
You do sound like you're struggling under the weight of a better argument. If you're not going to concede to a few points then you're better just leaving the thread than posting 'shut up' and 'nobody is listening.' He has some good points and you know it</font><font color=00ff33>His/Her "points" are irrelevant. They are preaching about the greatness that communism "could" become. However, it's 100% impossible. It's human nature to strive to become ones best. And without recognition with money/power/respect, no one will feel like anything is worth it. I hate this word because I've used it so many times in this post. But their ideas of Communism are a fanciful idealistic utopia. Something that is never going to happen.

This Naked Chef
07-20-2002, 12:41 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ammy:

agreed. humans are not good. we must be good and there must be no corruption for the ideal communist society. and that's just not gunna happen. it's nice ot think it will, but fuck, there's no way.</font>
Well, thanks for adding something new and insightful into the conversation, Idiot.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 12:53 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by This Naked Chef:
Well, thanks for adding something new and insightful into the conversation, Idiot.</font><font color=00ff33>Nice username, faggot.

DeviousJ
07-20-2002, 01:24 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>His/Her "points" are irrelevant. They are preaching about the greatness that communism "could" become. However, it's 100% impossible. It's human nature to strive to become ones best. And without recognition with money/power/respect, no one will feel like anything is worth it. I hate this word because I've used it so many times in this post. But their ideas of Communism are a fanciful idealistic utopia. Something that is never going to happen.</font>

Communism isn't supposed to be a utopia any more than capitalism. I mean, Capitalism is about doing it for yourself, making it on your own - kind of an autonomy if you like. What we have instead is a few people at the top of the pile, making it as hard as possible for anyone else to get their share of the potential. So much so, that corporations are able to influence governments around the world with their sheer economic weight - it's not a good situation as it is. Communism has its potential flaws in the same way, but you can't dismiss it on that merit. Hell, Cuba's not doing too badly considering

Affectation
07-20-2002, 01:30 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by DeviousJ:
Communism isn't supposed to be a utopia any more than capitalism. I mean, Capitalism is about doing it for yourself, making it on your own - kind of an autonomy if you like. What we have instead is a few people at the top of the pile, making it as hard as possible for anyone else to get their share of the potential. So much so, that corporations are able to influence governments around the world with their sheer economic weight - it's not a good situation as it is. Communism has its potential flaws in the same way, but you can't dismiss it on that merit. Hell, Cuba's not doing too badly considering</font>
<font color=00ff33>Cuba is probably the worst example that you could have thrown out. They now have their upper and lower class people, with little in the mid range.

Communism is a joke. It's a self fulfilling answer. It can't work because the structure is flawed. And this is the example that pro communists (like slunky_whateverthefuck) use. It doesn't work because it can't. Not because it's been interrupted.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 01:38 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Cuba is probably the worst example that you could have thrown out. They now have their upper and lower class people, with little in the mid range.

Communism is a joke. It's a self fulfilling answer. It can't work because the structure is flawed. And this is the example that pro communists (like slunky_whateverthefuck) use. It doesn't work because it can't. Not because it's been interrupted.</font>

If it "doesn't work", then why is it that everytime capitalism begins to falter (early 30's, late 60's), we turn to pro-socialistic/communistic solutions to bail it out (New Deal, Great Society).

[This message has been edited by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller (edited 07-20-2002).]

Affectation
07-20-2002, 01:42 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
If it "doesn't work", then why is it that everytime capitalism begins to falter (early 30's, late 60's), we turn to pro-socialistic/communistic solutions to bail it out (New Deal, Great Society).

[This message has been edited by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller (edited 07-20-2002).]</font><font color=00ff33>Full time, Mr. I need to edit every post that I make?

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 01:46 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Full time, Mr. I need to edit every post that I make?</font>

yeah, i was pretty sure you weren't going to have an answer for that one. http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/smile.gif

Affectation
07-20-2002, 01:53 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
yeah, i was pretty sure you weren't going to have an answer for that one. :)</font><font color=00ff33>Do you have problems with valid answers? Roosevelt's First and Second New Deal had nothing to do with communism. It was a temporary attempt to fix the economic recession of the '30s. Like I posted earlier, "Of course anything can work temporarily."

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 02:06 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Do you have problems with valid answers? Roosevelt's First and Second New Deal had nothing to do with communism. It was a temporary attempt to fix the economic recession of the '30s. Like I posted earlier, "Of course anything can work temporarily."</font>

Can you please tell me how temporary the following major New Deal programs were:

Social Security
FDIC bank insurance
Securities and Exchange Commission
Minimum Wage Act

Affectation
07-20-2002, 02:16 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
Can you please tell me how temporary the following major New Deal programs were:

Social Security
FDIC bank insurance
Securities and Exchange Commission
Minimum Wage Act

</font>
<font color=00ff33>Good point. However none of these are completely communistic/socialistic in nature. Most of them simply made people feel a little bit better about what tomorrow would bring. And once again, as I said earlier, Capitalism isn't perfect. But it is a great deal better than the other options. You can work hard for your own outcome, or you can do a half assed job of doing everything for the better of the whole. People aren't as willing to work their asses off when it really doesn't benefit them more than doing a shitty job.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 02:20 PM
<font color=00ff33>I'll come back to this debate in about an hour. I have to reinstall 2K on one of my production machines.

I'm enjoying this very much. Who are you, Mr. Restroom TP Refiller?

darcy_is_sexy
07-20-2002, 03:19 PM
To quote Frank Zappa: "Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff."

bittertrance
07-20-2002, 04:04 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
Can you please tell me how temporary the following major New Deal programs were:

Social Security

</font>

i'll take my company's 401k over this anyday

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 04:10 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Good point. However none of these are completely communistic/socialistic in nature. Most of them simply made people feel a little bit better about what tomorrow would bring. And once again, as I said earlier, Capitalism isn't perfect. But it is a great deal better than the other options. You can work hard for your own outcome, or you can do a half assed job of doing everything for the better of the whole. People aren't as willing to work their asses off when it really doesn't benefit them more than doing a shitty job.</font>

I disagree that, under socialism, people won't work their asses off. They do work their asses off, but they don't do it for themselves. Human are animals. Like you said, human instinct is to strive to be the best. This goes for all humans, whether its those in a capitalistic society or those in a socialistic/communistic society. Look at Russia, they were Communist but still strived to get to the moon before us. The problem is that capitalism is a ME centered society. Look at ME, worship ME, give ME attention, follow ME, look how much better I can be than you. Capitalism works under the premise that if those who are the best show off and rub it into the faces enough of those who not as good, then those "lesser" people will work harder to become just like them, so that they, in turn, will eventually one day be able to show off and rub it into the faces of those under them. But that doesn't work. It just makes people envious and pissed off. And then when those who are the best and have everything not only rub it in, but then start stealing from those less fortunate, as is happening right now with stocks, then you have a divided country that goes down the shitter.

Under socialism, there is no showing off. If someone thinks they are better at something, they will immediately share that idea or talent with their peers, and they gain satisfaction knowing that they were able to help their peers become better at something. What socialism does is basically CIVILIZE the animalistic human species into doing things that progress the human race as a whole. People are more concerned with security and making others better than accumulating wealth. There is true love between people, TRUE love. Unlike in capitalism, where love is defined as: the more money you spend on ME, the more you must truly love ME.

Socialists are not just concerned about their physcial security but financial as well. Total government ownership of the economy provides a security that corporations cannot, because if the economy starts going to shit, the government is better able than private businesses to obtain however much money they need to keep things going. Look at Russia, they just borrowed something like $20 billion from the World Bank a few years back. Do you think they are ever going to pay it back? Hell no. But could a business or a collection of businesses ever pull off something like that? No way. So there is a true safety net that the government provides. People don't have to worry about losing all their life savings to stupid, crook CEO's, and then having to go work at McDonald's when they're 75.

Edit(oops again): So the problem with capitalism is that it demands that people trust their lives to people who are instilled with this ME notion. And that is just stupid, because those entrusted will always look out for themselves first, obviously. I personally will never pay into any retirement account except Social Security, no matter who much the employer matches it, because you cannot trust people who look out for themselves first, and others second.



[This message has been edited by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller (edited 07-20-2002).]

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 04:15 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
I'm enjoying this very much. Who are you, Mr. Restroom TP Refiller?</font>

Why, I am the Restroom Toilet Paper Refiller. Without my undying commitment, you might find yourself trapped in a stall only armed with your newspaper. Like a brave soldier, I storm hostile territory delivering much needed supplies to my men. Because if I don't do my business, you can't do yours.

I've been around the block a few times.

bittertrance
07-20-2002, 04:24 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
I disagree that, under socialism, people won't work their asses off. They do work their asses off, but they don't do it for themselves. Human are animals. Like you said, human instinct is to strive to be the best. This goes for all humans, whether its those in a capitalistic society or those in a socialistic/communistic society. Look at Russia, they were Communist but still strived to get to the moon before us. The problem is that capitalism is a ME centered society. Look at ME, worship ME, give ME attention, follow ME, look how much better I can be than you. Capitalism works under the premise that if those who are the best show off and rub it into the faces enough of those who not as good, then those "lesser" people will work harder to become just like them, so that they, in turn, will eventually one day be able to show off and rub it into the faces of those under them. But that doesn't work. It just makes people envious and pissed off. And then when those who are the best and have everything not only rub it in, but then start stealing from those less fortunate, as is happening right now with stocks, then you have a divided country that goes down the shitter.

Under socialism, there is no showing off. If someone thinks they are better at something, they will immediately share that idea or talent with their peers, and they gain satisfaction knowing that they were able to help their peers become better at something. What socialism does is basically CIVILIZE the animalistic human species into doing things that progress the human race as a whole. People are more concerned with security and making others better than accumulating wealth. There is true love between people, TRUE love. Unlike in capitalism, where love is defined as: the more money you spend on ME, the more you must truly love ME.

Socialists are not just concerned about their physcial security but financial as well. Total government ownership of the economy provides a security that corporations cannot, because if the economy starts going to shit, the government is better able than private businesses to obtain however much money they need to keep things going. Look at Russia, they just borrowed something like $20 billion from the World Bank a few years back. Do you think they are ever going to pay it back? Hell no. But could a business or a collection of businesses ever pull off something like that? No way. So there is a true safety net that the government provides. People don't have to worry about losing all their life savings to stupid, crook CEO's, and then having to go work at McDonald's when they're 75.

Edit(oops again): So the problem with capitalism is that it demands that people trust their lives to people who are instilled with this ME notion. And that is just stupid, because those entrusted will always look out for themselves first, obviously. I personally will never pay into any retirement account except Social Security, no matter who much the employer matches it, because you cannot trust people who look out for themselves first, and others second.

[This message has been edited by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller (edited 07-20-2002).]</font>

sooooo you say that people should just be faceless and have no chance of striving in stead of being free to?

try looking at people as being people, not mere animals

Affectation
07-20-2002, 04:25 PM
<font color=00ff33>That is probably the biggest mistake that you will ever make. Social Security is probably not going to be around when you are old enough to take out. It's nice to see every dime that you put in there disappear.

You are under the false premise that capitalism revolves around self centered fucks. It doesn't. It revolves around people that strive to make life better for themselves.

You have said nothing that eludes to communism being a more stable socio-economic system than capitalism. All you have done is pointed out the faults of capitalism. Did you have a good time thinking up all of the bad aspects that you believe are detrimental to society? Good job!
<font color=000000><font size=0>


[This message has been edited by Affectation (edited 07-20-2002).]

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 05:14 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
His/Her "points" are irrelevant. They are preaching about the greatness that communism "could" become. </font>

That "point" was not to claim that communism is great but that it is unproven. I wanted you to show me examples of communism failing entirely on its own accord, which you couldn't or chose not to do. I said repretedly that communism, despite its external difficulties in the last 50 years may still be unworkable, but we haven't seen it fail purely on its own merits. THAT is not being pro-communist, and it's not being anti-capitalist. It's called basing a beleif on what has played out on history. Just because communism hasn't worked doesn't imply that it can't work. It more than likely can't, but it is unproven.


<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
It's human nature to strive to become ones best. </font>

It's also human nature to be a political animal, to work in a community (hmmm etymology) for the benefit of the whole before the self. As the cornerstone of western philosophy I think we'll just discount Aristotle as just another Commy.


<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Something that is never going to happen.</font>

I agree with you there. But only in that it will never fail on its own merits.


<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
It can't work because the structure is flawed. </font>

because we're naturally striving for selfish ends ?

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
And this is the example that pro communists (like slunky_whateverthefuck) use. </font>

pro-communist ? Throw the labels around. I'm pro-democratic (meaning if people elect a communist system then they deserve to have that system run its course). How many pro communists use phrases like "That's not to say Communism can work" ? I'm just prepared to accept that it is a work in progress. That won't please the anti-communists (since we're drawing lines in the sand) since they'll think we're wasting time "thinking" when we could be buying shares in McDonalds and making the world better.

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
It doesn't work because it can't. Not because it's been interrupted. </font>

And yet after all this you can't name one location where communism has failed 100% because of its actual deficiency. Something that "can't" work seems to need an awful lot of help in failing. You might be right with your "it would have failed in the long run" argument, but we don't know and I guess that is why I'm the "pro-communist", because I'd rather know for sure, than think I know.

bittertrance
07-20-2002, 05:24 PM
eating shit for breakfast everyday hasnt been proven to be bad for you, but we can pretty much guarantee it isnt

Affectation
07-20-2002, 05:27 PM
<font color=00ff33>Very fine points.

As I've already stated, it's a self fulfilling answer to the question of whether or not Communism would work.

I can't give you an example of where communism has failed 100%. Civil war plays a large part pretty much every time. Can you say Yugoslavia? In the late eighties Communist States were about 1/3 of the world. Nearly all of these have failed. <u>Plain and simple</u>.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 05:29 PM
<font color=00ff33>Let me say this again, <u>plain and simple</u>.

It's not as complicated as you are trying to make it.

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 05:31 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by bittertrance:
eating shit for breakfast everyday hasnt been proven to be bad for you, but we can pretty much guarantee it isnt</font>

Great argument.

Everyone seems to be an authority on what is best for everyone else. There must be something wrong in leaving people to do what they want with their democratic process and to live with the consequences and failures that result.

I think some of you people equate anything that isn't capitalist as being some form of tyranny or repression. Maybe people are right when they talk of western impreialism. Several hundred years ago Europeans looked at the rest of the world as somewhere that needed to be enlightened, realligned with their own ideas.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 05:33 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:

Everyone seems to be an authority on what is best for everyone else.


</font><font color=00ff33>No, they are the authority on what is best for themselves.

bittertrance
07-20-2002, 05:35 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:


Everyone seems to be an authority on what is best for everyone else. There must be something wrong in leaving people to do what they want with their democratic process and to live with the consequences and failures that result.

</font>


cool you just proved yourself wrong

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 05:58 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>Very fine points.
I can't give you an example of where communism has failed 100%. </font>

So at best you can only assume that it is a system doomed to failure ? You are more than likely right but the evidence shows that communism has always been brought down by other factors that arn't necessarily linked to the political system itself.

Look at Eastern Europe, it wasn't the most democratic place after the war was it ?
East Asia ? lots of nice western troops running around playing the righty's and lefty's off against each other. I dare say the US policy in the region made it damned near impossible for any communist system to rule undisturbed. Need I tell you of the proscription lists supplied by the US to Indonesia ?


<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>Civil war plays a large part pretty much every time. Can you say Yugoslavia? In the late eighties Communist States were about 1/3 of the world. Nearly all of these have failed. <u>Plain and simple</u>.</font>

If the communist government wasn't elected then I'm not going to defend it. I don't care for tyranny and people need to seperate communism from that. People have and do elecet communist systems on their own free will.
Those unelected systems deserve to fail regardless of their intentions. I'm defending communist systems elected by the public. Where civil wars occur in these places we have to consider what backing is given to the pro-capitalist factions. And remember, often the official backing by London or Washington on "anti-communist" factions in civil wars is simply for the most pro-western/capitalist side, they might still have communist credentials. I wouldn't be surprised if there are examples of two equally communist sides fighting for control in a civil war and the victor is the one that whores themselves out to western support. Consider Sukarno and Suharto. As for Yugoslavia, its breakup hardly came at a time of communism. Yugoslavia was viewed by the west as a "progressive" and newly enlightened nation. The German and US manipulation of nationalism within its factions spelt the breakup more than anything else.

sawdust restaurants
07-20-2002, 05:59 PM
I am a hopeless liberal, but even I recognize the inherent ... well, basically, animalism in human nature that prevents communism from ever really taking hold.

Can there be a society with more governmental control than what America has now? Sure. Half of Europe has it right now. But pure communism? No way in hell.

And I don't necessarily think capitalism is, in and of itself, wrong or a bad system. However, unchecked capitalism is, and right now, we are definitely heading in that direction if we already aren't charging towards it full steam ahead. Economic disparity is growing at an alarming rate, and nobody's doing a damn thing about it. That's where capitalism goes wrong.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 06:08 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
1. I'm defending communist systems elected by the public.

2. The German and US manipulation of nationalism within its factions spelt the breakup more than anything else.

</font>

<font color=00ff33>1. Something that will never happen.
2. Bullshit.

There is no way to prove, using your logic, that communism can work.

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 06:17 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by bittertrance:

cool you just proved yourself wrong</font>

how ?

bittertrance
07-20-2002, 06:18 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by sawdust restaurants:

Economic disparity is growing at an alarming rate, and nobody's doing a damn thing about it. That's where capitalism goes wrong.</font>


come one man stop being a doomsday liberal!

the market will go up and the market will go down does no one know this anymore?

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 06:37 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>1. Something that will never happen.
</font>

Care to explain how ? Or do you know what is best for other people, like what I said further up ? How do you know it is impossible for a communist party to be democratically elected ? Granted we have shades of communism throughout the world but these parties wouldn't exist in democratic countries without support and membership. France has a strong communist following. Some places may never have enough communist support but its a matter of pursuasion. Communist parties are popular at times and in certain places. This fact alone means it isn't impossible.

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>There is no way to prove, using your logic, that communism can work.</font>

I don't see your point, but if I take it as truth, then the same goes for capitalism and all other systems. They can't be proven, there will never be a pure experiment to validate them, and to my original point, communism remains untested, unproven and undefeated. It has yet to succeed, but like all systems, at what point do you decide that goals have been acheived ?

If you believe communism is a closed book, can't be worked and is a waste of time you are basing your idea on gut feeling over fact. History shows communism hasn't worked so far. That isn't the same as it being a proven failure.

It's about agrument. You might be right about it being unworkable but there's no solid basis for drawing any conclusions as to its ultimate viability. Unless you have the ability to attack the source, but when people continually talk about human instinct they seem to miss the boat completely with this idea of ruthless selfism.

It's like saying a dog is a mammal because it has 4 legs. Everything there is right but there's no valid argument. Communism can't work because it hasn't yet worked is the same. Might be 100% right but it's not an argument.

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 06:44 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by bittertrance:

come one man stop being a doomsday liberal!

the market will go up and the market will go down does no one know this anymore?</font>

yet they were talking about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poor. We all know capitalism is supposed to get wealth flowing downwards but when the wealth is bulking up at the higher end of the system cynicism sets in.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 06:48 PM
<font color=00ff33>Let's look at this scientifically. If you perform an experiment three hundred times, and every time it ends the same way, it's fair that you can come to a near certain conclusion.

Communism is only attractive to the lowest class of people. The people that want everything taken care of for them. People that don't want to work for themselves. Successful people aren't supporters of communism. Quit being so red.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 07:05 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by bittertrance:
sooooo you say that people should just be faceless and have no chance of striving in stead of being free to?

try looking at people as being people, not mere animals</font>

Nowhere did i say that socialism prevents people from striving, but I did say the opposite. Try reading it again. And also, don't try to separate humans from animals. Humans are an evolved animal species. There really isn't anything that we do that other animal species don't do, but there are some things that we do better.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 07:13 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:
Humans are an evolved animal species. There really isn't anything that we do that other animal species don't do, but there are some things that we do better.

</font>
<font color=00ff33>Here are 49:

1. Writing and reading.

2. Mathematical calculation.

3. Making and playing of musical instruments.

4. Creating and using a calendar.

5. Engaging in commerce.

6. The practice of law.

7. The practice of medicine and veterinary medicine.

8. Pyrotechnics.

9. Cooking food.

10. Studying.

11. Tracking the movements of celestial bodies.

12. Whale watching.

13. The use of graphic arts.

14. Provision of artificial light.

15. Provision of artificial heat.

16. Home decoration.

17. Modeling clothing.

18. Making jewelry.

19. Fashion design.

20. Plumbing.

21. Telegraphy.

22. Telephony.

23. Broadcasting.

24. Furniture design.

25. The practice of religion.

26. Storytelling.

27. Kindling fire.

28. Body decoration.

29. Printing.

30. Musical notation.

31. The presentation of argument.

32. Photography.

33. Inducing or utilizing abstract principles.

34. Going on a vacation.

35. Construction of wheels for transportation.

36. Construction of artificial wings for flying.

37. Planning for retirement.

38. Sailing.

39. Investment.

40. Farming and ranching.

41. Mechanical engineering.

42. Transportation and use of stored power.

43. Mailing or shipping.

44. Piloting craft.

45. Recording music.

46. Inventing games.

47. Distilling alcohol.

48. Shopping.

49. Avoiding or inhibiting the spread of natural diseases.

DeviousJ
07-20-2002, 07:13 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>Let's look at this scientifically. If you perform an experiment three hundred times, and every time it ends the same way, it's fair that you can come to a near certain conclusion.

Communism is only attractive to the lowest class of people. The people that want everything taken care of for them. People that don't want to work for themselves. Successful people aren't supporters of communism. Quit being so red.</font>

Well to be fair, it's more like performing an experiment 300 times, and having someone run into the lab each time and knock over all the test tubes. There have been socialist and communist governments elected numerous times - look at countries which use proportional representation to see their influence. I don't think it's necessarily solely attractive to the lower classes, although anyone who relies on welfare as an excuse to never do anything for themselves would definitely appreciate the benefits of a socialist state. Capitalism is competetive - watch your back, take advantage of everyone and claw your way to the top. Communism is about everyone doing their best to help the group - isn't that something to aspire to? If the world was about pooling resources and helping each other up, our civilization would advance at a much faster rate. Communism's one fatal flaw is that some people are power hungry, and as such they need to be controlled - and more control means less freedom. It would be great to see a Communist nation actually develop naturally and find a balance, instead of getting screwed over by foreign interests

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 07:14 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
That is probably the biggest mistake that you will ever make. Social Security is probably not going to be around when you are old enough to take out. It's nice to see every dime that you put in there disappear.</font>

Social Security will not be around in the same form that it is now, but there will be some kind of government system that provides retirement and medicaid benefits for retired people. Do you really think we would ever get to the point where retired people are left to starve and freeze in their homes, and where old sick people are refused treatment because their insurance ran out? There's no way that would ever happen. Ever. If it got bad enough, then we would just adopt a more socialistic-style government, that's all. Japan will have to deal with this kind of situation long before we will, let's see how they do first.

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">You are under the false premise that capitalism revolves around self centered fucks. It doesn't. It revolves around people that strive to make life better for themselves.</font>

False. Perhaps capitalism consists mostly of good-willed people who strive to make life better, but it certainly revolves around the self centered fucks because they are the ones who shape U.S. policy. They are the ones with all the power. They are the ones who hold those powerful CEO and COO positions, and who can buy members of Congress on just about any issue. Capitalism is little more than rule by the self-centered elite.

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">You have said nothing that eludes to communism being a more stable socio-economic system than capitalism. All you have done is pointed out the faults of capitalism. Did you have a good time thinking up all of the bad aspects that you believe are detrimental to society? Good job!</font>

It really isn't that difficult to fathom Communist systems elected by the people. You could, for example, have a multi-party Communist system with term limits, just like you can a 2-party capitalist system in the U.S. with term limits. Not all communists think alike, you know. There are political variations of Communist philosophy just like there are variations in capitalistic thought. This way, with 2 or 3 parties, there would not be this single entity in power that grows stronger and eventually strips citizens of all freedoms, like you see in China.

And I've already said why a democratically-elected Communist government would be more stable than a capitalistic one: because every aspect of the country is controlled by an entity that is accountable to the people. Whereas here in the U.S., big business is not accountable to the people and are therefore inclined to do what suits THEM best, not the nation as a whole.

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 07:19 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>Let's look at this scientifically. If you perform an experiment three hundred times, and every time it ends the same way, it's fair that you can come to a near certain conclusion.
[B]</font>

So you think communism fell each time in the same way ?

If we draw the scientific approach, think of genetic science and cloning and things like that. Imagine making clones and the first 300 attempts fail for varying difficulties (as they do in reality). Does that mean the results are conclusive ? No, it means it doesn't work yet. Pure and simple. If you have a result you want to aim for you work at it until you can no longer find a way to reach it.

Now with communism that point of failure is rarely the exhaustion of the system itself, which you yourself have admitted, so in terms of scientific experiments, no conclusion can be made.

The problem is you think it's rotten from the core, which it may be, and so the absence of evidence (in the conclusive sense) is irrelevant. But then you're taking this stance from a viewpoint of a system that you support and you beleive to be successful.

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
[B]<font color=00ff33>Communism is only attractive to the lowest class of people. The people that want everything taken care of for them. People that don't want to work for themselves. Successful people aren't supporters of communism. Quit being so red.</font>

communists don't want to work !! where did you hear that ? If we're throwing around accusations why not say capitalists are only interested in greed.

I think your perception of "communism" and the people who want it (which you think I'm one despite statements to the contrary) is seen through a very tinted lense.


And what makes you think I'm red anyway ? Are you frightened or something ? Last elections I voted for ACT. You don't know who they are but they're about as pro-buisness, anti-benefit as you can get, complete anti-liberals. They could provide me with the best system had they gained any power.

I'm just unwilling to discredit something based on no evidence.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 07:20 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
Here are 49:</font>

I guess I should have left that sentence out.

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 07:28 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>2. Bullshit.
</font>


Adopted in several stages since the early 1980s, the reforms imposed by Belgrade's creditors wreaked economic and political havoc leading to disintegration of the industrial sector and the piece-meal dismantling of the Yugoslav Welfare State. Despite Belgrade's political non-alignment and extensive trading relations with the US and the European Community, the Reagan administration had targeted the Yugoslav economy in a "Secret Sensitive" 1984 National Security Decision Directive (NSDD 133) entitled "United States Policy towards Yugoslavia". A censored version of this document declassified in 1990 largely conformed to a previous National Security Decision Directive (54) on Eastern Europe issued in 1982. Its objectives included "expanded efforts to promote a `quiet revolution' to overthrow Communist governments and parties"... while reintegrating the countries of Eastern Europe into the orbit of the World market.



Following the decisive victory in Croatia of the rightist Democratic Union in May 1990 under the leadership of Franjo Tudjman, the separation of Croatia received the formal assent of the German Foreign Minister Mr. Hans Dietrich Genscher who was in almost daily contact with his Croatian counterpart in Zagreb. Germany not only favoured secession, it was also "forcing the pace of international diplomacy" and pressuring its Western allies to grant recognition to Slovenia and Croatia.


- Prof Michel Chossudovsky, University of Ottawa.

Find me something to sway my opinion on the matter. You obviously know something else since you regard it as bullshit.

Mr. Restroom TP Refiller
07-20-2002, 07:30 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Affectation:
<font color=00ff33>Let's look at this scientifically. If you perform an experiment three hundred times, and every time it ends the same way, it's fair that you can come to a near certain conclusion.

Communism is only attractive to the lowest class of people. The people that want everything taken care of for them. People that don't want to work for themselves. Successful people aren't supporters of communism. Quit being so red.</font>

You would have made much more sense if you had worded this as: "people who place a high priority on security, and people who want to work as part of a team, as part of a nation, instead of working for themselves."

And if successful people allegedly don't support communism, then why would the mentally handicapped Republican party launch all of these investigations into finding Hollywood celebs who were Communists?

slunky_munky
07-20-2002, 07:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by DeviousJ:
Well to be fair, it's more like performing an experiment 300 times, and having someone run into the lab each time and knock over all the test tubes. </font>

you should wash your mouth out with soap you commy scum.

Affectation
07-20-2002, 07:56 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:


And if successful people allegedly don't support communism, then why would the mentally handicapped Republican party launch all of these investigations into finding Hollywood celebs who were Communists?</font><font color=00ff33>The red scare, chump. It wasn't logical, or even really planned out well. People didn't want to fall into the great evil that they thought communism was.