Communism Hitler.Continued.

[Gentle Norsemen]

Continued from this thread so It will not be diverted furhter.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2765358#post2765358

[ronnieraygun]

http://www.cqcapd.state.ny.us/Danweb/images/The%20right%20to%20fail.jpg

[Smersh]

very stupid thread. I'm glad you at least tried to move it here:

Communism butchered more Russians then the largest invading Army in the history of warfare on the Eastern Front. how many has capitalism and "democracy" butchered?

[Thor]

Market economy is a natural state, a reality that exists whether you want it or not. It hasn't butchered a single soul. Political ideologies though have caused a lot of suffering.


But I agree that this thread won't lead to any good.

[Smersh]

^Nothing natural about it. The only economic system I would say is "natural" would be hunter-gatherer.

It hasn't butchered a single soul.You know anything about the situation in the former Soviet Union in the post Soviet era?

Why is this thread in military history and tactics?

[Gentle Norsemen]

I tried to salvage the other thread from being diverted.Go me! :oops:

It was about WW2 and a mix of other crap.So I guess it kind of fits in here.But It would of been better in off topic.To lazy to scroll down with my mouse.

[AZRON]

very stupid thread. I'm glad you at least tried to move it here:

how many has capitalism and "democracy" butchered?

What I read over and over is those who defend the Kommie cause don't realize that democracy and capitalism are two distinct things.
I do realize that those who defend the Kommie cause refuse to understand the differences.

Today you have a non-democratic mainland China with capitalism but not democracy. Capitalism doesn't mean democracy.VN is also on that track . On the other hand Cuba has a demand economy and a non-democratic gov't so Kommie it is.
NAZI Germany wasn't a democracy but was capitalistic in a general way .

Capitalism is a market based economic system which may or may not include competitive free markets. Kommunism uses a demand economy which which doesn't reflect any real purpose but to meet the political goal of 5 people to screw in a light bulb , whether light bulbs are available or not. However there is no unemployment so the Kommisars are happy.

[Smersh]

What I read over and over is those who defend the Kommie cause don't realize that democracy and capitalism are two distinct things.
I do realize that those who defend the Kommie cause refuse to understand the differences. I was speaking about modern Russia...responding to the quote in my post.

I understand what you're saying. Too many times people on various threads have linked capitalism and democracy. although the last section of your post makes almost no sense.p-)

[AZRON]

I understand what you're saying. Too many times people on various threads have linked capitalism and democracy.

Good , we agree on that point as the automatic linking bothers me every time I see it.

The problem with capitalism is that it doesn't always mean a truly a free market.
In many countries certain people get the exclusive rights to sell or control products or segments of the markets having a monopoly or a cabal.
That is a prime problem in Mexico.
For capitalism to be successful for the majority a true competitive market must exist . That isn't always easy as it may seem.

[Thor]

^Nothing natural about it. The only economic system I would say is "natural" would be hunter-gatherer.
I dare to challenge the educational level in this thread.

And I'll leave it at that.

[Smersh]

For capitalism to be successful for the majority a true competitive market must exist In what cases has it existed? I think you'll have a tough time finding examples.

[Flamming_Python]

Despite all the talk about 'free trade' and 'fair competition', capitalism by its very nature encourages the opposite; nation-states to seek advantages over others, institute protectionism, and even go as far as start wars and instability in order to keep their place at the top. This Heirarchy of Nations is what really keeps the 3rd world at the bottom of the pile.

The European Union has long been lobbying resource rich nations to open themselves to their investment (i.e. takeover), such as Nigeria with its Oil industry which is just about completely in the control of foreigners (a whole resistance movement in Nigeria has sprung-up to combat this), knowing full well that although Nigeria can theoretically invest and take-over EU industries, it practice it never will due to its lack of capital.

Now that Europe is experiancing the full wrath of ruthless Russian capitalists buying pipelines, manufactories, natural resources, etc... left right and centre, it is moving rapidly to close it's key industries to foreign investment (smart thing to do, effectively mimicking Russia's move of a couple of years prior). China is playing a similar game, except in the less developed countries of Asia and Africa, who often don't have the leverage to prevent Chinese take-over, because of their extensive trade links with the nation, and lack of foreign investment from elsewhere.

http://www.youtube.com/v/znMkqEnO6d4

Amazing how accurate a 150 year old text still is.

[AZRON]

Despite all the talk about 'free trade' and 'fair competition', capitalism by its very nature encourages the opposite; nation-states to seek advantages over others, institute protectionism, and even go as far as start wars and instability in order to keep their place at the top. This Heirarchy of Nations is what really keeps the 3rd world at the bottom of the pile.



I won't deny what you say. A constant tug does exist and to keep a sense of balance isn't easy.
But no other economic system comes close to providing what capitalism can .
As to 3rd world nations corruption is just as evil as Hierarchy of Nations.
Mexico again as an example. Gasoline generally is more expensive in Mexico than in a nearby U.S. border town and the Mexican gov't owns the only oil company. Pres. Calderon just passed legislation to reduce cartels and open up the internal Mexican economy.
The U.S. has a more , but not totally free capitalist system then ever before with the usual tug between over regulation and monopoly dreams competing to control the economy.
The key to a good economy is an existance of a large middle class with the ability to accumulate wealth and property. Either a nation's economy supports the middle class or it doesn't.

One only needs to compare N. Korea and S. Korea , Taiwan of 1990 with mainland China of 1990.W. Germany with E. Germany in 1988. The problem lies in the amount of corruption within a specific culture with capitalism. Demand economies don't work with or without corruption.

[Smersh]

The key to a good economy is an existance of a large middle class with the ability to accumulate wealth and property. Either a nation's economy supports the middle class or it doesn't.
. I think you just changed your definition of what a successful economy is.

For capitalism to be successful for the majority a true competitive market must exist

[Flamming_Python]

I won't deny what you say. A constant tug does exist and to keep a sense of balance isn't easy.
But no other economic system comes close to providing what capitalism can .
As to 3rd world nations corruption is just as evil as Hierarchy of Nations.
Mexico again as an example. Gasoline generally is more expensive in Mexico than in a nearby U.S. border town and the Mexican gov't owns the only oil company. Pres. Calderon just passed legislation to reduce cartels and open up the internal Mexican economy.
The U.S. has a more , but not totally free capitalist system then ever before with the usual tug between over regulation and monopoly dreams competing to control the economy.
The key to a good economy is an existance of a large middle class with the ability to accumulate wealth and property. Either a nation's economy supports the middle class or it doesn't.

One only needs to compare N. Korea and S. Korea , Taiwan of 1990 with mainland China of 1990.W. Germany with E. Germany in 1988. The problem lies in the amount of corruption within a specific culture with capitalism. Demand economies don't work with or without corruption.

Corruption I believe exists in any situation where the benefits of breaking the law outweigh the risks of getting nicked.

i.e. If a government buerocrat or a policeman earns a below-substinance or else very low wage, he may find it irresistable to start taking a little extra. If he gets caught it will likely get overlooked because the next higher-up on the list is likely just as corrupt as him, and even if he does get kicked out of his job as a repurcusion, his job wasn't worth much to him anyway.

You will find corruption in every poor to middle income country, because this very same situation arises in them. Once the economy improves, a semi-stable system will develop in which it is possible to earn more money with less risk through legal means than it is for through illegal means and ignoring the law. That's the situation when a middle class starts to arise; i.e. when a government starts to earn money to pay it's own employees, when it starts to focus on industry and economic growth that requires skilled workers and specialists (i.e. middle class) and when it provides political stability. Corruption has little to do with cultural differences or structures, it's simply tied to the wealth and production of a Nation, factors which are subsequently tied to what place in the international food chain that particular Nation occupies. If it is too far down, tough luck, it will have to sell control of all of its resources and industriess to the financial institutions of its richer peers before it has a chance to build a middle class.

Of course the key to a successfull capitalist economy is the existance of a large middle class. My point is that you can't just build a middle class by snapping your fingers, it is in fact the other way around, a nation has to mobilise it's economic potential, and only then will a middle class arise to support the system and help continue its growth.

[M1A2U2]

They don't talk about killing for the "revolution"

[AZRON]

Corruption I believe exists in any situation where the benefits of breaking the law outweigh the risks of getting nicked.

i.e. If a government buerocrat or a policeman earns a below-substinance or else very low wage, he may find it irresistable to start taking a little extra. If he gets caught it will likely get overlooked because the next higher-up on the list is likely just as corrupt as him, and even if he does get kicked out of his job as a repurcusion, his job wasn't worth much to him anyway.

You will find corruption in every poor to middle income country, because this very same situation arises in them. Once the economy improves, a semi-stable system will develop in which it is possible to earn more money with less risk through legal means than it is for through illegal means and ignoring the law. That's the situation when a middle class starts to arise; i.e. when a government starts to earn money to pay it's own employees, when it starts to focus on industry and economic growth that requires skilled workers and specialists (i.e. middle class) and when it provides political stability. Corruption has little to do with cultural differences or structures, it's simply tied to the wealth and production of a Nation, factors which are subsequently tied to what place in the international food chain that particular Nation occupies. If it is too far down, tough luck, it will have to sell control of all of its resources and industriess to the financial institutions of its richer peers before it has a chance to build a middle class.

Of course the key to a successfull capitalist economy is the existance of a large middle class. My point is that you can't just build a middle class by snapping your fingers, it is in fact the other way around, a nation has to mobilise it's economic potential, and only then will a middle class arise to support the system and help continue its growth.

Some disagreement on my part with your statement.
Can agree with what creates a middle class which usualy starts with city building as a focal point for commerce. Middle classes can be created quickly as in Holland right after Spanish rule stopped in 17th century or modern Mainland China and Korea. Venice probably created the modern middle class based on being a focal point of commerce and early capitalism. Agree with skill jobs create it.
As I see it corruption can be part of a culture as once it is in practice for 3-4-5 generations it would seem to me to be embedded in the life style being practiced hence part of the culture.

Back to Mexico , corruption reportedly consumes about 14% of GNP and low pay to gov't employess is a root cause. The Mexican tax rate is 11% of GNP so oil revenues and corruption are embedded in the culture to make up for the lack of generated taxes. But that is the way the ruling elite class has made the rules for 300 years and I call it embedded culture.

In the U.S. the tax rate runs about 30% of GNP and corruption isn't based on being poor but as you say getting away with it. In many big cities jobs such as building inspectors have a history of corruption going on for generations which to me means it's in the culture.

[Flamming_Python]

Some disagreement on my part with your statement.
Can agree with what creates a middle class which usualy starts with city building as a focal point for commerce. Middle classes can be created quickly as in Holland right after Spanish rule stopped in 17th century or modern Mainland China and Korea. Venice probably created the modern middle class based on being a focal point of commerce and early capitalism. Agree with skill jobs create it.
As I see it corruption can be part of a culture as once it is in practice for 3-4-5 generations it would seem to me to be embedded in the life style being practiced hence part of the culture.

Back to Mexico , corruption reportedly consumes about 14% of GNP and low pay to gov't employess is a root cause. The Mexican tax rate is 11% of GNP so oil revenues and corruption are embedded in the culture to make up for the lack of generated taxes. But that is the way the ruling elite class has made the rules for 300 years and I call it embedded culture.

In the U.S. the tax rate runs about 30% of GNP and corruption isn't based on being poor but as you say getting away with it. In many big cities jobs such as building inspectors have a history of corruption going on for generations which to me means it's in the culture.

Yes the migration of the Rural population to the Cities is definetly one of the main triggers for the creation of a Middle Class, completely forgot about that one :)

As for the culture... Well I never been to America, so I don't know how corrupt it is now, and in what areas. It may well be more corrupt than Europe, because the GDP per Capita is significantly lower in the USA.

What I do know however, is that during the Great Depression of the 30's, America was a notoriously corrupt place, with mafia's springing up everywhere, much unemployement... effectively what Russia for example became in the 90's, and in some ways what I could imagine Mexico to be like today (however it is improving from what I heard), but of course I have never been to Mexico.

All 3 of these countries landed in similar situations at different time periods, and ended up with the exactly the same symptoms (corruption, etc...) as a result. If America has a corrupt system now, for sure it is nowhere near as corrupt as the America of the 1930's. Corruption will only be part of the culture for 3-4-5 generations or whatever provided that the economy doesn't improve or reform at all during that period. The minute it does and a wealthy, stable middle class starts to arise, corruption and breaking the law will no longer be tolerated in that society/culture, as the legal ways of making money will become far more appealing.

[AZRON]

As for the culture... Well I never been to America, so I don't know how corrupt it is now, and in what areas. It may well be more corrupt than Europe, because the GDP per Capita is significantly lower in the USA.

What I do know however, is that during the Great Depression of the 30's, America was a notoriously corrupt place, with mafia's springing up everywhere, much unemployement... effectively what Russia for example became in the 90's, and in some ways what I could imagine Mexico to be like today (however it is improving from what I heard), but of course I have never been to Mexico.



There is an internet corruption index , the U.S. rates O.K. with corruption being in the middle of the less corrupt countries.
Mafia influence plus other mobs still exist.
As to lower GDP , most public employees are paid competitive wages and don't need to steal except for feeding greed or bad habits.
The poor really can't easily partake in too much corruption unless you consider a degree of welfare fraud , but that gets harder and harder to pull off.

[Flamming_Python]

There is an internet corruption index , the U.S. rates O.K. with corruption being in the middle of the less corrupt countries.
Mafia influence plus other mobs still exist.
As to lower GDP , most public employees are paid competitive wages and don't need to steal except for feeding greed or bad habits.
The poor really can't easily partake in too much corruption unless you consider a degree of welfare fraud , but that gets harder and harder to pull off.

Hmmm...

You may be right. It is still very ambigous as to how corruption comes about and how to get rid of it, but I suspect that if there was an easy solution than there wouldn't be so much of it worldwide.