Pope: Economy Needs to Change

[Smersh]

Pope: Economy Needs to Change

*******

VATICAN CITY -- The global economic system must be radically altered if the world is to start reducing the number of people who live in hunger, Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday.

Citing a recent United Nations report, the Pope condemned "structural" problems in the global economy that diverted riches to a minority of the world's population.

"There is certainly a need to eliminate the structural causes linked to the system of governance of the economic model which allots the majority of resources to a minority of the population," the Pope said in his weekly Sunday address.

The UN's Human Development Index for 2006, released last week, said the combined income of the 500 richest people in the world now exceeds that of the poorest 416 million people.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization said in a report last month that there were 854 million underfed people in the world and that number was increasing by 4 million per year.

[kinsella]

ill listen to the Pope on catholic issues. not on econmic ones. sounds like he is leaning towards a socialist way of handeling the economy.

im more interested in his meeting with the muslim cleric that denounced him then his view on the economy.

besides that. i think we should worry about the conflicts going on before we worry about money. but that is probably just me.

[Smersh]

worry about money? money has nothing to do with it. We should worry about people. Nearly 1/6th of the world population is underfed and lacks clean water,the number increases by 4 million each year, and 1/3rd of the world's population doesn't have access to sanitation.

here is more about the UN Human development index which promted the pope to unprecendly talk about economic and not religious problems:

"Debunking the myth that the crisis is the result of scarcity, this report argues poverty, power and inequality are at the heart of the problem.
In a world of unprecedented wealth, almost 2 million children die each year for want of a glass of clean water and adequate sanitation."

[kinsella]

how many of these countries that need help are given aid by the US, or others, but it never makes it to the people? how many billions have we given to to N. Korea ( just one example) that never made it to the people?

please dont get me wrong here, it really is sad that so many go without when so many have so much. but if the US intervens, then we get called bullies, or told we shouldnt be messing with other countries. i just dont think that the Pope is a good spokes person for this cause. the up side though is that if he speaks out, then more catholics will give to countries where that money also wont make it to the people.

we should as a world community lend a helping hand, but not do it for them. maybe some these countries will be better if the Pope encourages the people to rid themselves of the govn't that is keeping the countries in that state. then they could better their country themselves, from within, instead of just taking handouts from others. one can stand tall and proud if one does it themselves with a little help instead of just being bailed out by others that have more.

the money part was said because that is the basis of an economy. i should have just used that word instead i suppose.

[Smersh]

how many of these countries that need help are given aid by the US, or others, but it never makes it to the people? how many billions have we given to to N. Korea ( just one example) that never made it to the people?

what does aide have to do with structural flaws in the world economic system. you have an incredibly basic and narrow focus.



like you said, your noting going to solve these problems by throwing aid and money at them. No one is proposing we give these countries aide. Thats not what the pope said and thats not what the report says either.

[kinsella]

i do see that we was addressing the strucal problems. its late here and i failed to fully take it all in...........took it to mean we should give more (catholics are very big on that and yes im catholic so dont think im starting anything there) guess i just added 2+2 and got 5. damn big brother got me all twisted again.

the one thing i will stand by however is that he should have urged people to stand up and get rid of the leaders that are keeping their people in poverty. well, that and that i will lsten to him on catholic issues. i think most could too ealily write him off and not listen to him due to the religious strife going on and all, but that is just me.

since i have already made it clear to you , and all else that read this thread, that i have misunderstood the orginal permise, i do want to ask this, you said that 1/3 dont have acccess to sanitaion, where did that stat come from. seems kinda high to me.

[Smersh]

you said that 1/3 dont have acccess to sanitaion, where did that stat come from. seems kinda high to me.

from the UN report 2006. here is a direct quote:

"2.6 billion people lack access to decent sanitation ".

I've got to get to work myself, thats why my posts are so brith.

[kinsella]

from the UN report 2006. here is a direct quote:

"2.6 billion people lack access to decent sanitation ".

I've got to get to work myself, thats why my posts are so brith.

still sound high. i know this sets me up even more then my initial misunderstanding, but if that is true (and that decent sanitaion means some kind of running water and a place to goto the bathroom) then i really havent taken noticed of how 1/3 of the world is living. dont suppose they defined what "decent sanitation" means did they?

i know it makes me look bad if that is true and i admit that i didnt realize it, but oh well. gotta learn somehow.

[AK74]

from the UN report 2006. here is a direct quote:

"2.6 billion people lack access to decent sanitation ".

I've got to get to work myself, thats why my posts are so brith.

and 99.7% of the funds you donate goes to "ADMINISTRATION" IMHO.

0.3% goes to actually helping. Gotta love those AID and SH1T.rofl

[Thor]

Pope: Economy Needs to Change

*******

VATICAN CITY -- The global economic system must be radically altered if the world is to start reducing the number of people who live in hunger, Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday.

Citing a recent United Nations report, the Pope condemned "structural" problems in the global economy that diverted riches to a minority of the world's population.

"There is certainly a need to eliminate the structural causes linked to the system of governance of the economic model which allots the majority of resources to a minority of the population," the Pope said in his weekly Sunday address.

The UN's Human Development Index for 2006, released last week, said the combined income of the 500 richest people in the world now exceeds that of the poorest 416 million people.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization said in a report last month that there were 854 million underfed people in the world and that number was increasing by 4 million per year.

The Pope can start by donating some of the Vatican's vast wealth, after that he can take some economics classes at the university to get an understanding of how things work.

The system is just fine, the real challenge lies within making economic growth environmentally sustainable.

[Smersh]

how will this feed people and give them toilets thor?

[Thor]

how will this feed people and give them toilets thor?
Hard work and free trade will.

It's just that some parts of the world haven't jumped on the bandwagon yet.

[Friendly Fire]

The Pope can start by donating some of the Vatican's vast wealth, after that he can take some economics classes at the university to get an understanding of how things work.

The system is just fine, the real challenge lies within making economic growth environmentally sustainable.


The system is wrong, and holds on segmetation. Now could we stop about how it works. The way it is the pope is just showing off and taking a part of the cake the Commies left after end of CW.

This system has inherent flaws (both technical and philosophical) but no one (that has a word to say) wants to change.

[Friendly Fire]

Hard work and free trade will.

It's just that some parts of the world haven't jumped on the bandwagon yet.

Free trade doesn't exist...and you've made the most moronic statement about world growth. Trade excludes the production *******s and production means. Trading is defined by a power balance. There can't be only victors in a power balance. So free trade will only hide the reality not change it.

[Smersh]

the way the world economic system is structured today, international division of labor. makes it impossible for all nations to be 1st world and "developed". There has to be an international strata for economies to work.

The economies of developed Nations like the USA and Western Europe ride on the backs of cheap foreign laborers. from raw material extraction to production, even some services now.

free-trade like US government subsidized aricultural products destroying domestic agriculture industries of third world nations?

[Kilgor]

Capitalism and the global economy sure isnt perfect, but maybe the post missed the fact that histories worst famines have occurred due to the policies of marxist based governments.

[AK74]

Capitalism and the global economy sure isnt perfect, but maybe the post missed the fact that histories worst famines have occurred due to the policies of marxist based governments.

*cough* chairman mao's thousand mile march*cough*

umm...did i say anything?wrong?rofl rofl rofl

[Smersh]

these are one time famines with limited duration. But 4 million people according to the UN join the underfed category every year, already over 800 million people strong.

For instance in post soviet armenia, 30% of the population is underfed. The other caucasian nations goeriga and azerbajan fairing little better. Before 1991 these nations had consumption at western european levels.

marxist famines caused by rapid economic change for a limited time, or indefinite slow starvation of 1/6th of the world population?

[AK74]

these are one time famines with limited duration. But 4 million people according to the UN join the underfed category every year, already over 800 million people strong.

For instance in post soviet armenia, 30% of the population is underfed. The other caucasian nations goeriga and azerbajan fairing little better.

marxist famines caused by rapid economic change for a limited time, or indefinite slow starvation of 1/6th of the world population?

Sadly most politicians prefer the latter.

[Friendly Fire]

Capitalism and the global economy sure isnt perfect, but maybe the post missed the fact that histories worst famines have occurred due to the policies of marxist based governments.

Actually not but what ever. Marxist based policies?

Pfff it's getting old.

Indian famines in 18th century
Chinese Famines occurred by Civil unrest following the Opium Wars. 19th Century.

Respectievely 29 and 40 million dead!


On agriculture, Collectivisation (there is nothing marxist in a forced Collectivization) and famines look the results of Hungary during it's Communist years. Same is to be said for China in the 70's after that the Collectivization was consolidated.

But hey you think what you want.

[Smersh]

good point Freindly fire.

The famines in the late 19th century in india caused directly by artificial shortages resulting in Brithish colonial policies (inflationary measures that increased the price of food, and substantial exports of staple crops from India to Britain: that sounds like capitalism to me) killed at least 40 million people. And the British government was against providing any aide to their starving indian workers, because they felt it would make the aviod their duties, a very smithian theory. This is the greastest in human history.

[rb132]

who cares what the pope says


he lost any moral credibility he might have had after deciding that upholding the rediculous concept of 'abstinance' for the sake of tradition was more important that preventing milions of people dying horribly painful deaths from AIDS in africa


what a wanker

[Smersh]

true,

but the real significane is that the pope and catholic church for once aren't upholding the status quo, (their not known for being very progressive :)). The pope calling for radical economic change.

[Thor]

The system is wrong, and holds on segmetation.
Nope, very much the opposite.

Socialism is when everyone is equally poor, Capitalism is when everyone is unequally rich.


Free trade doesn't exist...
Yup


...and you've made the most moronic statement about world growth. Trade excludes the production *******s and production means.
No logic, no connection to the real world... The welfare of nations comes with investments, trade and economic growth.


Trading is defined by a power balance. There can't be only victors in a power balance. So free trade will only hide the reality not change it.
Just communist semantics again. Trade benefits everyone in the same way that a society benefits from specialization and trade within. Undeveloped nations benefit from the comparative advantages that give them the opportunity to attract investments and benefit from economic growth and development.


the way the world economic system is structured today, international division of labor. makes it impossible for all nations to be 1st world and "developed".
Sure, and with your system everyone would be rich just like Cuba and North Korea. You don't have the slightest clue about how economics works. The third world would suddenly don't have any markets, and we would lose access to emerging markets for our products and services, less trade, higher consumer prices, recession, higher unemployment and so on.


The economies of developed Nations like the USA and Western Europe ride on the backs of cheap foreign laborers. from raw material extraction to production, even some services now.
Everyone starts out with comparative advantage as their huge advantage, it was the story in my country, the western world, asia etc. With economic growth and development welfare kicks in. I don't think I need to give any examples.


free-trade like US government subsidized aricultural products destroying domestic agriculture industries of third world nations?
That's not free trade, subsidies are part of the reality all over the world and are not beneficial to anyone in the long run.

[Friendly Fire]

Nope, very much the opposite.

Socialism is when everyone is equally poor, Capitalism is when everyone is unequally rich.


Yup


No logic, no connection to the real world... The welfare of nations comes with investments, trade and economic growth.


Just communist semantics again. Trade benefits everyone in the same way that a society benefits from specialization and trade within. Undeveloped nations benefit from the comparative advantages that give them the opportunity to attract investments and benefit from economic growth and development.


Sure, and with your system everyone would be rich just like Cuba and North Korea. You don't have the slightest clue about how economics works. The third world would suddenly don't have any markets, and we would lose access to emerging markets for our products and services, less trade, higher consumer prices, recession, higher unemployment and so on.


Everyone starts out with comparative advantage as their huge advantage, it was the story in my country, the western world, asia etc. With economic growth and development welfare kicks in. I don't think I need to give any examples.


That's not free trade, subsidies are part of the reality all over the world and are not beneficial to anyone in the long run.


So you're saying actually communism holds on segmetation but the actual system relies on specialisation! It's the same thing dude.

Underlined is the most beautiful semantic spin I've ever heard! Keep it going!

You better throw Adam Smith and Ricardo. Comparative advantages are bogus they rely on an socio-historical nation building that defies trade and international rule of law! The colonisation is a blatant example!

Don't ridicule youself.

[Cedan]

I think capitalism had its place in history, to develop industry to the extent industry is developed today, kinda like slave society made feudalism possible, so has capitalism made a planned economy possible, thats why I think its stupid to use underdeveloped nations as examples of a planned economy because the economic conditions for such a system to work simply wasn't there.....

[seraosha]

Dharma Initiative.

Release the plague, 30% death rate will drop us beneath the threshold of global sustainability.

Have a nice day!p-)

[2Sheds_Jackson]

who cares what the pope says


he lost any moral credibility he might have had after deciding that upholding the rediculous concept of 'abstinance' for the sake of tradition was more important that preventing milions of people dying horribly painful deaths from AIDS in africa


what a wanker

Moral credibility? Tell me who's being immoral; a man who tells you that *** carries great responsibility and risk, and you should not do it unless you are ready to fully accept the consequences and obligations, or a man who tells you that you can have *** without any risk if you use one of these little rubber things that has a failure rate of 8% and is only 85% effective against HIV?

Apparently the Pope seems to think that people are able to civilize themselves to a level whereby they're able to think with their heads and not their genitals. People are able to do that. It's not as fun as poking yourself into anything that will have you, it doesn't create as many high-paying jobs for educated white folk as offloading personal responsibility to some international NGO, and it won't sell as many condoms or pharmaceuticals as the Western life-without-consequences capitalist illusion, but it's certainly not immoral.

[Smersh]

Sure, and with your system everyone would be rich just like Cuba and North Korea. You don't have the slightest clue about how economics works. The third world would suddenly don't have any markets, and we would lose access to emerging markets for our products and services, less trade, higher consumer prices, recession, higher unemployment and so on.

Two points here:

Firstly, Cuba is probably one of the best places to live in Latin America, despite the US embargo. Standard of living is higher than mexico (and most of latin america), which is right under the US door step, and considered a "free-market economy", with "free trade" agreements with the USA. and for poverty for "developing countries" Cuba ranks 6th best out of over 100 countries, according the UN report.

N. Korea's economy was superior or matched the South Korean until the mid 70s. When, guess what, South Korea adopted planned economics and five-year plans. And at the same time, since the mid 70s, N. Korea ceased to be a "communist state" officially (removed marxism-leninism from the constutition) and in practice (isolated itself from the world, including the soviet union and china).

secondly, then you admitt and your right, our developed economies are based on labor and resources from the thirld world. Exactly, without a impoverished third world and the break up of international division of labor, we [1st world economies] would go into a depression or collapse. It was Cecil Rhodes the man who conquered Africa who said ,"If you want to avoid civil war, you must become imperialists." . Anyone who thinks imperialism ended with the collapse of the colonial system is living in a fanstasy world.

He also said," We must find new lands from which we can easily obtain raw materials and at the same time exploit the cheap slave labor that is available from the natives of the colonies. The colonies would also provide a dumping ground for the surplus goods produced in our factories." -This statement would not be out of place today, and indeed it still works that way. You said it yourself Thor, when you called it "emerging markets" and higher consumer good prices

[annihilation]

Hard work and free trade will.

It's just that some parts of the world haven't jumped on the bandwagon yet.

Yes because free trade wont make the situation worse for the poor and uneducated. We need more fair trade than free trade. The only thing thats not getting globalized today is fair working conditions / laws and enviroment protection.

[annihilation]

Moral credibility? Tell me who's being immoral; a man who tells you that *** carries great responsibility and risk, and you should not do it unless you are ready to fully accept the consequences and obligations, or a man who tells you that you can have *** without any risk if you use one of these little rubber things that has a failure rate of 8% and is only 85% effective against HIV?



As we can see that "don't have ***" policy is working great in Africa.........

[Smersh]

the current trend is elminating fair working conditons and enviornmental protection laws since this is seen as hindering business.

[annihilation]

the current trend is elminating fair working conditons and enviornmental protection laws since this is seen as hindering business.

Yup looks like the return of the Jungle in the early 1900's america.

[Kilgor]

good point Freindly fire.

The famines in the late 19th century in india caused directly by artificial shortages resulting in Brithish colonial policies (inflationary measures that increased the price of food, and substantial exports of staple crops from India to Britain: that sounds like capitalism to me) killed at least 40 million people. And the British government was against providing any aide to their starving indian workers, because they felt it would make the aviod their duties, a very smithian theory. This is the greastest in human history.

The famine caused by the great leap forward is considered by most historians to be the worst in human history. So my point stands.

[Smersh]

If you combine all the famines in India, Brazil and China between 1860-1900, caused by colonial business pracitces, we are looking at the deaths of 60 million people.

you again, talk about "communist governments", specifically mao like thier in a bubble and donf't make any comparison to capitalist governments.

I also like how the core of your argument is arguing about which is the greastest famine in world history. Which has almost no relevance and is a minor point.The points I made at the end of page 2, still stand.

[M4ko]

Hard work and free trade will.

It's just that some parts of the world haven't jumped on the bandwagon yet.

Free trade means you work, acquire something and trade it for profit with that profit you buy someone else's work. Making money by counting numbers is not free trade.

[Laconian]

Smersh wrote:
Firstly, Cuba is probably one of the best places to live in Latin America, despite the US embargo. Standard of living is higher than mexico (and most of latin america), which is right under the US door step, and considered a "free-market economy", with "free trade" agreements with the USA. and for poverty for "developing countries" Cuba ranks 6th best out of over 100 countries, according the UN report.

Yeah, the Cubans hate it when all those Floridians try heading over there in rafts of every shape size and dimension, risking their lives to get to Cuba...Are you kidding me?
and
N. Korea's economy was superior or matched the South Korean until the mid 70s. Key words there UNTIL THE MID-70s. That's 30 years ago! Again the numbers of South Koreans running North is what?

I suppose that the Iron Curtain went up to stop all the westerners from fleeing to the good life in the East?

[Smersh]

Yeah, the Cubans hate it when all those Floridians try heading over there in rafts of every shape size and dimension, risking their lives to get to Cuba...Are you kidding me?

I said one of the best places to live in Latin America. Its idiotic to compare standard of living in cuba with the USA, you should compare it to other similar countries, like those of latin america. "are you kidding me" What about the millions of mexicans illegally immigrating to the USA? and numerous other nationalites fleeing poverty under capitalist economies. a very shallow argument if you think outside "the bubble"


N. Korea's economy was superior or matched the South Korean until the mid 70s. Key words there UNTIL THE MID-70s. That's 30 years ago! Again the numbers of South Koreans running North is what?

Did you actually read and understand what I wrote? The South Korean economy was anything but free trade, post 1960s. Only by planned economy was South Korea able to free itself of needing perpetual and massive foreign aide from the united states.

[LaoSexMachine]

Pope: Economy Needs to Change

*******

VATICAN CITY -- The global economic system must be radically altered if the world is to start reducing the number of people who live in hunger, Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday.

Citing a recent United Nations report, the Pope condemned "structural" problems in the global economy that diverted riches to a minority of the world's population.

"There is certainly a need to eliminate the structural causes linked to the system of governance of the economic model which allots the majority of resources to a minority of the population," the Pope said in his weekly Sunday address.

The UN's Human Development Index for 2006, released last week, said the combined income of the 500 richest people in the world now exceeds that of the poorest 416 million people.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization said in a report last month that there were 854 million underfed people in the world and that number was increasing by 4 million per year.


People go into business to make money not help the poor. Nice thought though but the world doesn't run on nicey and fairness.

[Smersh]

People go into business to make money not help the poor. Nice thought though but the world doesn't run on nicey and fairness.

Nicely said Ezekiel.

[SBL]

The new Pope is making all kinds of new friends, it seems.

[rb132]

Moral credibility? Tell me who's being immoral; a man who tells you that *** carries great responsibility and risk, and you should not do it unless you are ready to fully accept the consequences and obligations, or a man who tells you that you can have *** without any risk if you use one of these little rubber things that has a failure rate of 8% and is only 85% effective against HIV?

Apparently the Pope seems to think that people are able to civilize themselves to a level whereby they're able to think with their heads and not their genitals. People are able to do that. It's not as fun as poking yourself into anything that will have you, it doesn't create as many high-paying jobs for educated white folk as offloading personal responsibility to some international NGO, and it won't sell as many condoms or pharmaceuticals as the Western life-without-consequences capitalist illusion, but it's certainly not immoral.


The vatican's policy makes it clear they are more interested in controlling people's lives rather than protecting peoples lives. All it would take is a few words to save millions of lives, but no, we must uphold tradition for the sake of tradition.

You see, the pope lives in his pretend perfect world, where people abstain from *** before marriage and do everything the church tells them until the day they die. Unfortunaltly the reality on the ground is that people are dropping like flies because, as they are free to do, they are having ***. The church is more concerned with upholding pride and integrity rather than truly helping people and improving lives, as it might threaten the pope's position of god on earth.

[Smersh]

I do not see many defenders of the current global economic system on this thread.

[perdurabo]

Free trade means you work, acquire something and trade it for profit with that profit you buy someone else's work. Making money by counting numbers is not free trade.
but counting numbers is same ability like making towels or computers, if you are good at counting your skills can be sold... there is no diffrence beatwin mind job and physical one.


I do not see many defenders of the current global economic system on this thread.
maybe because there is no global economic system there are diffrent national systems protected by goverments diffrent taxations regulations etc... look how sucesfull is EU we don't have any bariers beatwin our countries and our economics is booming

what poor countries need are roads and railroads, knowhow, more skilled and specialized personell (technicians, engeneers), ppl must belive that if they work hard enough they can be ritch for egzample in midleages you had on 1 ritch person 9 in poverty, in 19th century there was 3 ritch, 2 middleclass and 5 poor, now in ritcher countries we have 3 ritch 6 midleclass and 1 poor (those numbers are from my memory i had them on my history of economics classes but it was 3 yrs ago so they can be bit diffrent) in comunism you can't make all equally ritch but you can make all equally poor, in free makret everyone goes its own path.

[Friendly Fire]

The famine caused by the great leap forward is considered by most historians to be the worst in human history. So my point stands.


Wrong, the Great Leap Forward was looked by the LAncet has having killed around 19-25 million people (half of them in civil strife).

It's insane to argue wich famine was worst and even more insane and indecent to use relatively innaccurate numbers to prove that collectivist policies cause famines (heck history wise they're largley incidental) worse than "individualist" ones! Especially when you think that individual actions against collective farms cause the disruptions and the decay of the collectivist initiatives.

[Friendly Fire]

but counting numbers is same ability like making towels or computers, if you are good at counting your skills can be sold... there is no diffrence beatwin mind job and physical one.


maybe because there is no global economic system there are diffrent national systems protected by goverments diffrent taxations regulations etc... look how sucesfull is EU we don't have any bariers beatwin our countries and our economics is booming

what poor countries need are roads and railroads, knowhow, more skilled and specialized personell (technicians, engeneers), ppl must belive that if they work hard enough they can be ritch for egzample in midleages you had on 1 ritch person 9 in poverty, in 19th century there was 3 ritch, 2 middleclass and 5 poor, now in ritcher countries we have 3 ritch 6 midleclass and 1 poor (those numbers are from my memory i had them on my history of economics classes but it was 3 yrs ago so they can be bit diffrent) in comunism you can't make all equally ritch but you can make all equally poor, in free makret everyone goes its own path.


There is a basic difference between "manual" and "intellectual" jobs...

It's his personnal background!

And when you speak about middle ages then learn that proportionnally speaking the difference between the "classes" were far more insignificant (except for the rulers).

The most retarded comment ever made.

Now think about this genius! If we were all to benefit from the "growth" who would be nice enough (read dumb)to (having all reached a certain high level of wealth) clean your toilets? Who would work for you fo the indecent wage "competitivity recquires"? And further more what you moronic dumkopfs make of inflation! Are we here in NutLand?

Sometimes I feel that Marx should have shoved it nicley so that somewhere in the late 20th century a good old global civil war would have sent us back to the stone Age in no time!

[perdurabo]

Dude check my profile before you start lecturing me about living standards in past times ok?

Do you agree that all ppl have difrent backgounds and difrent abilities? Do you agree that moust of the time if not all our life depends on decisions we make? Do you agree that we should all have equall rights and be equall in face of court,goverment etc?
So belive me there will be allways moron who prefers to smoke pot instead of study, so there allways be someone to clean toilets.

We all benefit from growth but percentage of our benefit depends on our status so if we are bank menagers we benefit greatly if we cut grass on public land we benefit on much smaller scale.

About comunism making everyone equally poor again check my prfile because you know i remeber comunist times in Poland waiting in long lines to just buy toilet paper, empty shoops, madnes of beurocracy, police beating the crap out of everyone...

But back to economy. Lets take some african young person he migrates to Europe, UK for egzample, he has ambitions and whole comunity counting on him, so in days he cleans the streets and at nights studies something, UK economy has benefit from his work (cheap work force means cheaper products and this means ppl can buy more so factories can invent new products or produce more so they need to hire more ppl so more ppl have work and can buy products...) but also his vilige has benefit because he sends money to his own country (for egzample Turkey has large% of investments coming out from their countrymen working or living on german welfare) also when he goes back to his country he has a bit of know-how and a bit of money so if he is enough active he can start his own busines....
What africa needs is good transportation system, stable goverments, and know-how.
Those big concerts "lets feed the world" or something caused that population of underfed or starving in Etiopia and other places has rised two times! Because they don't work on their fields they just wait for food coming from USA/Europe!
Dont give them fish give them fishing rod!

BTW Marx falsified all his data! if data wasnt "rigth" to his thesis he just twisted it to be right.

[Esszett]

The vatican's policy makes it clear they are more interested in controlling people's lives rather than protecting peoples lives. All it would take is a few words to save millions of lives, but no, we must uphold tradition for the sake of tradition.

You see, the pope lives in his pretend perfect world, where people abstain from *** before marriage and do everything the church tells them until the day they die. Unfortunaltly the reality on the ground is that people are dropping like flies because, as they are free to do, they are having ***. The church is more concerned with upholding pride and integrity rather than truly helping people and improving lives, as it might threaten the pope's position of god on earth.

So, people don't give a damn about what the Catholic church's rules say about having ***, yet they do obey to what they say regarding the usage of condoms?
I don't really believe that... And I'd say there are other, more important reasons why condoms aren't used that much in the third world.

[Friendly Fire]

Dude check my profile before you start lecturing me about living standards in past times ok?

Do you agree that all ppl have difrent backgounds and difrent abilities? Do you agree that moust of the time if not all our life depends on decisions we make? Do you agree that we should all have equall rights and be equall in face of court,goverment etc?
So belive me there will be allways moron who prefers to smoke pot instead of study, so there allways be someone to clean toilets.

We all benefit from growth but percentage of our benefit depends on our status so if we are bank menagers we benefit greatly if we cut grass on public land we benefit on much smaller scale.

About comunism making everyone equally poor again check my prfile because you know i remeber comunist times in Poland waiting in long lines to just buy toilet paper, empty shoops, madnes of beurocracy, police beating the crap out of everyone...

But back to economy. Lets take some african young person he migrates to Europe, UK for egzample, he has ambitions and whole comunity counting on him, so in days he cleans the streets and at nights studies something, UK economy has benefit from his work (cheap work force means cheaper products and this means ppl can buy more so factories can invent new products or produce more so they need to hire more ppl so more ppl have work and can buy products...) but also his vilige has benefit because he sends money to his own country (for egzample Turkey has large% of investments coming out from their countrymen working or living on german welfare) also when he goes back to his country he has a bit of know-how and a bit of money so if he is enough active he can start his own busines....
What africa needs is good transportation system, stable goverments, and know-how.
Those big concerts "lets feed the world" or something caused that population of underfed or starving in Etiopia and other places has rised two times! Because they don't work on their fields they just wait for food coming from USA/Europe!
Dont give them fish give them fishing rod!

BTW Marx falsified all his data! if data wasnt "rigth" to his thesis he just twisted it to be right.


Marx falsifying his data ?

Have you read Marx? If yes then you’re comment should have to be attributed either to a momental brain fart or a massive hangover (Shvejk style ones).

Marx had his epistemics right, for his time! Now he is rather a classic and as a classic you’ll always have things to disprove or to rediscover.

And as you want to show me you liver under communism, well that’s a lie! Poland in regard to Albania (the country I was born and brought up) was f****** Disneyland. Yet I’m the first to openly reject any assumptions those were commie times because they were not much more than elemental decayed serial policies. I won’t begin with how Poland was structurally far more free economically wise than even the USSR (I won’t mention Albania since we were the NK of Europe) because you won’t listen.

I agree than personal backgrounds are twin bladed sabres to anyone. Now just think again mister Polish-I-know-Communism-better-than-myass-but-yet-am-able-to-contradict-myself-on-the-same-phrase!

Statutory profit? Well, but wasn’t that what Thor thrown out as Communist garbage?
Now on the more essential debate on how I drink beer and you drink wine! Bull crap! Without “communism” you wouldn’t even be able to write down you own name. Actually you don’t profit the same way from “growth”. People actually also loose despite general growth. That’s called inflation. See it’s the main flaw of Free Market. Inflation basically inflates. The Market economy as it is a growth-oriented will always push the prices up quicker than the wages!

Socialist Poland did just this it smashed the statutory pyramid without replacing it and that’s how it quickly came back. By massively inserting poor people in Universities, opening your sorry asses to a limited consumption society, even giving you the possibility to own cars!

Just get a Grandpa of yours that lived in 30’s Poland (not even thinking about futher) and ask him how Poland was before…well you’d be ****ing surprised. Socialism rebuilt that country, pretty woefully and badly but you’d be surprised to know that what saved capitalism was indeed State-Intervention!

Welfare…that’s what communism ended up forcing on Western market oriented systems, and that’s what keeps these systems afloat!

Your fascinating story about cheap labour is scary because you don’t see what is at the end of the tunnel! If free trade was so great and we embraced it all and that some day the indigence became confidential how would we settle up the international distribution of work? With rich countries everywhere and people having enough money to live without working…that’s what free trade has been christened here who would work? You say the poor? I’m telling you no…because mathematically if the Inflation was to be technically effective even the Pee cleaning guy would be freaking rich.

So your point is crappy! But you tried though.

[Smersh]

About comunism making everyone equally poor again check my prfile because you know i remeber comunist times in Poland waiting in long lines to just buy toilet paper, empty shoops...

this means poverty? This is constantly brought up. If you don't mind I'm going to cut and paste from previous threads about this same exact topic:

firstly, bread lines where at their worst in the late 80s, as reforms and choas dismantled the socialist economies. Even then consumption was still growing despite empty store shelves.

"secondly, what caused empty store shelves and lines before Gorbys experiments [and the dismantling of socialist economies in Europe]. It wasn't lack of production or that there was little of everything. In fact consumption was very high, at european standards, even ahead of some countries. then what accounts for empty store shelves? High income of people and low price of goods. for example the price of bread and beef hadn't changed in decades (a socialit principle of fixing prices) yet income had dramatically grown.

Imagine if say Plasma Tvs were affordable to everyone? Everyone would go out and buy one, leaving emty shelves."

These deal with specifically the Soviet Union, but I imagine the suitation in Poland was similar or even better:

"Soviet levels of consumption for more than a quarter of a century have been on a par with those of many of the world's affluent nations. During the period 1964-1966, for example, the Soviet per capita daily intake of calories and proteins exceeded those of Sweden, Norway, West Germany and Japan."

" Per capita meat consumption in 1988 was at a level slightly below that of Sweden, higher than that of Norway and more than double that of Japan."

"The Soviet Union has a big agricultural economy. In 1989, for example, it had more cattle, hogs and sheep and produced more wheat, rye, oats, barley, cotton, potatoes, sugar, wool, milk, butter, eggs and fish (among many other products) than the US"

"The shortages again where caused by high consumption, not lack of supply. One of the reasons you don't see lines and empty store shelves in "capitalist" nations, like the USA and Europe you mentioned. Is because of price. Soviet and Socialist Eastern Europe had artifically extremelly low prices of produce. the price of bread hadn't changed in decades, yet peoples incomes had dramatically increased. Shortages and Lines are caused by high consumption levels, because the prices are so inexpensive.

for example the price of beef in 1965 was 2 roubles per kilo, it was the same in the 1980s! in the 65 the average salary was around 97 roubles a month, in the 1980s 257 [roubles]"

I don't think I would be wrong to say that consumption is lower and poverty levels are significantly higher today then they were in the 1980s in the CIS and Eastern Europe. even 15 years later.

[Smersh]

Dont give them fish give them fishing rod!

I agree. But we have no incentive to do this. The biggest profits come from exploiting cheap labor in third world nations, and exploiting their missing enviornmental and labor laws. Would it be better or harmful for western businesses if child labor and living wages were given to people? of course it would be.

the interests of people and businesses are usually opposite.


BTW Marx falsified all his data! if data wasnt "rigth" to his thesis he just twisted it to be right.

you want to find some proof and evidence of this. Or did you just get mad and type this up.

[rb132]

So, people don't give a damn about what the Catholic church's rules say about having ***, yet they do obey to what they say regarding the usage of condoms?
I don't really believe that... And I'd say there are other, more important reasons why condoms aren't used that much in the third world.


Some of the only places in Africa where information from the outside world is available is through the catholic church. They weild immense influence.

[Smersh]

Some of the only places in Africa where information from the outside world is available is through the catholic church. They weild immense influence.

what does this mean then for Africans, when the Pope says we need economic change.

this really suprised me since the church is usually a ally of vested power.

[perdurabo]

I agree. But we have no incentive to do this. The biggest profits come from exploiting cheap labor in third world nations, and exploiting their missing enviornmental and labor laws. Would it be better or harmful for western businesses if child labor and living wages were given to people? of course it would be.

the interests of people and businesses are usually opposite.

no no busines is ppl behind it, they aren't oposite! intrests of diffrent ppl and groups are oposite! for egzample VolksWagen group and africa what would be more in their intrest poor africa that can't afford to buy their cars?(when moust of their production comes from developed countries - Germany, CzechRep., Spain etc...) or enough ritch market? and they are big busines yes? and oposite intrests minig industry what is in their intrest? of course poor africa without any envoirment regulations and cheap labour. they are also big busines. And now lets look at workers intrests, VW workers have intrest in bigger sales cause they get better pensions if financial condition of company is better, on the other side we have miners witch have bigger intrest in developing own country than working for company (if country is more developed they can have better jobs)

look at any developed country and how big % of their import comes from undeveloped countries? the bigest money comes from internal market and from trade with other developed nations!


About Marx and Engels work good book: http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/212a_47e.htm


this means poverty? This is constantly brought up. If you don't mind I'm going to cut and paste from previous threads about this same exact topic:

firstly, bread lines where at their worst in the late 80s, as reforms and choas dismantled the socialist economies. Even then consumption was still growing despite empty store shelves.

"secondly, what caused empty store shelves and lines before Gorbys experiments [and the dismantling of socialist economies in Europe]. It wasn't lack of production or that there was little of everything. In fact consumption was very high, at european standards, even ahead of some countries. then what accounts for empty store shelves? High income of people and low price of goods. for example the price of bread and beef hadn't changed in decades (a socialit principle of fixing prices) yet income had dramatically grown.

Imagine if say Plasma Tvs were affordable to everyone? Everyone would go out and buy one, leaving emty shelves."

These deal with specifically the Soviet Union, but I imagine the suitation in Poland was similar or even better:

"Soviet levels of consumption for more than a quarter of a century have been on a par with those of many of the world's affluent nations. During the period 1964-1966, for example, the Soviet per capita daily intake of calories and proteins exceeded those of Sweden, Norway, West Germany and Japan."

" Per capita meat consumption in 1988 was at a level slightly below that of Sweden, higher than that of Norway and more than double that of Japan."

"The Soviet Union has a big agricultural economy. In 1989, for example, it had more cattle, hogs and sheep and produced more wheat, rye, oats, barley, cotton, potatoes, sugar, wool, milk, butter, eggs and fish (among many other products) than the US"

"The shortages again where caused by high consumption, not lack of supply. One of the reasons you don't see lines and empty store shelves in "capitalist" nations, like the USA and Europe you mentioned. Is because of price. Soviet and Socialist Eastern Europe had artifically extremelly low prices of produce. the price of bread hadn't changed in decades, yet peoples incomes had dramatically increased. Shortages and Lines are caused by high consumption levels, because the prices are so inexpensive.

for example the price of beef in 1965 was 2 roubles per kilo, it was the same in the 1980s! in the 65 the average salary was around 97 roubles a month, in the 1980s 257 [roubles]"

I don't think I would be wrong to say that consumption and poverty levels are significantly higher today then they were in the 1980s in the CIS and Eastern Europe. even 15 years later.
I know that in official data socialist paradise looks good meat consumption, potatoes etc everything is ok in par or sometimes even ahead, but compare those products, west color TVs gazilions of programs usually vcr, soviet block monohrome tv sets 1 2 sometimes 3 programes no vcr, cars soviet block Fiat 126p, Trabi etc west VW, BMW, MB, Renault etc... east lots of trains but technology from 40 or 50ties west TGV, Shinkansen.... or rate of homless socialist paradise noone is homless but sometimes 2 families live in 2 room flat!
About salary and prices, with fixed prices you don't have real value of money so you would have to check what was black market price of $ or gold you would see if growth in numbers was real growth in value.

[AK74]

words words words.

Give the pope some moola and he'll be as silent as the lambs.

[perdurabo]

Marx falsifying his data ?

Have you read Marx? If yes then you’re comment should have to be attributed either to a momental brain fart or a massive hangover (Shvejk style ones).

Marx had his epistemics right, for his time! Now he is rather a classic and as a classic you’ll always have things to disprove or to rediscover.
http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/212a_47e.htm



And as you want to show me you liver under communism, well that’s a lie! Poland in regard to Albania (the country I was born and brought up) was f****** Disneyland. Yet I’m the first to openly reject any assumptions those were commie times because they were not much more than elemental decayed serial policies. I won’t begin with how Poland was structurally far more free economically wise than even the USSR (I won’t mention Albania since we were the NK of Europe) because you won’t listen.

I agree than personal backgrounds are twin bladed sabres to anyone. Now just think again mister Polish-I-know-Communism-better-than-myass-but-yet-am-able-to-contradict-myself-on-the-same-phrase!

whoo whooo you are comparing one ****hole to another great, so i will give you a medall for living in bigger ****hole than me, you won.



Statutory profit? Well, but wasn’t that what Thor thrown out as Communist garbage?
Now on the more essential debate on how I drink beer and you drink wine! Bull crap! Without “communism” you wouldn’t even be able to write down you own name.
spare me bulsh* about socialism rebuilding my country, for egzample before world war two poland produced one of the medium best bombers(PZL-37) in world, also locomotives (Pm36-1 won award in Paris), now in soviet times we produced locomotives with technology from 40ties and 50ties up until 90ties, apart from licensed MiG15 and 17 we didn't bouild a single one combat plane, all city markets and main streets until 90ties still had bruises afther war now look at Germany at Hamburg it was almoust flatened out or better on Berlin west and east witch was rebuild faster?



Actually you don’t profit the same way from “growth”.
of course because we aren't equall in our status, if you invest more you ern more.


People actually also loose despite general growth. That’s called inflation. See it’s the main flaw of Free Market. Inflation basically inflates. The Market economy as it is a growth-oriented will always push the prices up quicker than the wages!
In short term changes means usually prices go higher than wages but there is also longer term in witch market forces start to cach up and search balance and in long term market is in stability. Witch means that if any change in balance occurs, market will start to search new balance.



Socialist Poland did just this it smashed the statutory pyramid without replacing it and that’s how it quickly came back. By massively inserting poor people in Universities, opening your sorry asses to a limited consumption society, even giving you the possibility to own cars!

Just get a Grandpa of yours that lived in 30’s Poland (not even thinking about futher) and ask him how Poland was before…well you’d be ****ing surprised. Socialism rebuilt that country, pretty woefully and badly but you’d be surprised to know that what saved capitalism was indeed State-Intervention!
you don't want to hear what my grandfather thinks about socialism. belive me you even don't want to be near.



Welfare…that’s what communism ended up forcing on Western market oriented systems, and that’s what keeps these systems afloat
welfare was much erlier invention, but if you think that it is so great look at german welfare and whole state, or french one.



Your fascinating story about cheap labour is scary because you don’t see what is at the end of the tunnel! If free trade was so great and we embraced it all and that some day the indigence became confidential how would we settle up the international distribution of work? With rich countries everywhere and people having enough money to live without working…
who said about life without work? sorry but thats comunist wet dream, lay back drink vodka and do nothing. you didn't get one point we are diffrent, we go own paths so we earn diffrent money and we work difrent.



that’s what free trade has been christened here who would work? You say the poor? I’m telling you no…because mathematically if the Inflation was to be technically effective even the Pee cleaning guy would be freaking rich.

So your point is crappy! But you tried though.

inflation isn't tool used to get better growth, its just part of the process, one of its symptomes. Everyone needs to work, even those freaking ritch guys work you know? They can afford for more and work less but they still work (well paris hilton is exception altough we can place her as a kind of **** star that works with her ass....)

but lets get back to our pee cleaning guy, lets think about this situation every one can get better payed job(very fantasy cause it will never occure) but someone needs to clean pee, so how to find this guy? give him better wage, now the pee guy earns more than computer scientist(herrmanekrofl), so all those geeks throw their jobs and start carreer as peecleaners (rofl) so there is noone to menage computers so how we find workers? rise wages. so we end up with new balance(look up in long term market is allways in balance!)

[perdurabo]

words words words.

Give the pope some moola and he'll be as silent as the lambs.
moola? is it some kind of voodka? if yes it ain't working look at solidarnosc it was workers movement and all of them had cheap vodka in large quantities.

BTW friendly fire, what is your proposition to change situation in poor countries?

[Smersh]

no no busines is ppl behind it, they aren't oposite! intrests of diffrent ppl and groups are oposite! for egzample VolksWagen group and africa what would be more in their intrest poor africa that can't afford to buy their cars?(when moust of their production comes from developed countries - Germany, CzechRep., Spain etc...) or enough ritch market? and they are big busines yes? and oposite intrests minig industry what is in their intrest? of course poor africa without any envoirment regulations and cheap labour. they are also big busines. And now lets look at workers intrests, VW workers have intrest in bigger sales cause they get better pensions if financial condition of company is better, on the other side we have miners witch have bigger intrest in developing own country than working for company (if country is more developed they can have better jobs)
the business owners (capitalist) interest is too get the most work out his worker and pay him the smallest amount possible. The workers interest is exactly the opposite. in this fundamental way. the interests of business and people are opposing even contradictory.

This means in the third world with limited workers rights, extremely grueling work, at long hours and extreme low pay, less then a living wage. You could say why don't these places get better worker rights and minimum standards. Simple, Captial would instanstly leave the country and move to another developing nation wich doesn't have minimum standards.

Thats a clever motiviating device invented by capitalists. "work hard for the company because it benefits everyone, when the company does well". I think every employee has heard this before. What isn't said is that the lion share of the increased profits goes to the capitalist (or the owner) and not the the employees. workers need to work hard so a parasitic capitalist, who in most cases uses hired management (so he takes no part in the production at all) can get richer?

this quote is from your link, (which has nothing to do with this debate): " One third of the world's population today lives under tyrannies that call themselves Marxist. No other worldview commands this many people.."

this has is to be joke, and again critizes marxism without making any comparison to capitalism. Since 80% of world was once a direct colony of an imperialist nation until the 30s and 40s and Africa the 70s. However, This does not mean that colonialism has ended, but it has only just become inderict. no longer is direct military-political control necessary. The major industries of developing nations are owned by foreigners ( USA, Europe)

[perdurabo]

the business owners (capitalist) interest is too get the most work out his worker and pay him the smallest amount possible. The workers interest is exactly the opposite. in this fundamental way. the interests of business and people are opposing even contradictory.

This means in the third world with limited workers rights, extremely grueling work, at long hours and extreme low pay, less then a living wage. You could say why don't these places get better worker rights and minimum standards. Simple, Captial would instanstly leave the country and move to another developing nation wich doesn't have minimum standards.

Thats a clever motiviating device invented by capitalists. "work hard for the company because it benefits everyone, when the company does well". I think every employee has heard this before. What isn't said is that the lion share of the increased profits goes to the capitalist (or the owner) and not the the employees. workers need to work hard so a parasitic capitalist, who in most cases uses hired management (so he takes no part in the production at all) can get richer?

you put workers in oposiete side than owners, but ask yourselfe what would worker do if factory didn't existed?
factory owner rides on same cart as his workers his factory can't work without workers, workers cant work and earn without job and factory is their job...
You say capitalist takes moust of the profit, did you saw any wages chart? yes owners usually take more money than one single worker but labour costs (so wages, taxes for emploees and other things like health care) take much much more than profit. Also remember about who build factory who bought all the machines, it wasn't colective of workers(of course there are companies in witch owners=workers i know few egzamples espetially in food production) but it was factory owner, he is risking own money if the factory will be missed investition and will not bring profits he will loose much more money than worker.
About
the business owners (capitalist) interest is too get the most work out his worker and pay him the smallest amount possible.
thats also not full truth, (you know this old saying half truth is full lie?) let's take another two egzamples boots producing company like Nike(adidas or whatever) and some AGD company hmm Whirpool in Poland. In 1st egzample we have company that produces in china for as minimal wage as it can (altough we may ask what is better to chinese viliger to work on minimal wage for Adidas or starve on his vilige?) so of course their intrest is to keep wage as minimal as it can be. On other side we have producer that needs skilled workers, and in his intrest is to have best personell and pay them good wages cause badly produced goods is loose for company.
There is no class interest there are personal and group interests you can't draw line beatwin classes. War of classes is very stupid invention of Marx witch took it from Saint-Simon witch was realy retarded student of Charles Comte and Charles Dunoyer witch where students of famous briliant Jean Baptiste Say. Both Charles had teory in witch society divides on those who exchange goods with freewill and those who obtain goods without freewill of other side of exchange, Saint-Simon mixed those things labbeled first group as workers and second group as capitalists, witch isn't true. Because first group creates free market(with all workers, owners, engeneers etc) and second one creates lobby (in witch goverment can be part of)....


this quote is from your link: " One third of the world's population today lives under tyrannies that call themselves Marxist. No other worldview commands this many people.."
this has is to be joke. Since 80% of world was once a colony of an imperialist nation until the 30s and 40s and Africa the 70s.

dose it contradicts? can former imperialistic colony be ruled by marxist? can former colony citizens follow marx ideals?

[Smersh]

About consumer goods in the Soviet Union and European socialist states. Since "the food problem" was already shown to be a myth:

Firstly, by the 80s these nations releazied they were falling behind dramatically in consumer goods. Only in the 80s did planners finally put priority in producing televisions, etc. But the governments where dismantled before any results.

Lack of consumer goods was not something inherent in the system either. Planners chose to focus on heavy industry over light industry (consumer goods, housing). This is proven by the limited time of the kruschev years, in which consumer goods where given a little extra emphasis. and the result was a dramatic rise in consumer goods and standard of living, thousands of apartments were also built. tremendously elevating the housing problem. If this trend had continued into the 70s and not been reversed by conservatism. There is no reason to think, the consumer goods gap would have been as large. For instance much of the housing today in the CIS is from the krushchev period.

[Smersh]

you put workers in oposiete side than owners, but ask yourselfe what would worker do if factory didn't existed?...factory owner rides on same cart as his workers his factory can't work without workers, workers cant work and earn without job and factory is their job

this doesn't make sense, socialism doesn't get rid of the factory, only the owner. Can you tell me what besides capital does the non-managerial owner contribute? The workers don't need the owner, the owner needs the workers, his income comes from their labor.

oh, Nike shoes, are made by unskilled "villagers"


did you saw any wages chart? For example a CEO of an large corporation makes bettween 500 to 700 times the wage of an average employee. Gorbachev made something like 1200-1500 roubles a month, whole an average citizen made 260 roubles a month.


There is no class interest there are personal and group interests you can't draw line beatwin classes. War of classes is very stupid invention of Marx You obviosly don't know your history. Remember how the "middle class" "beorgeoisie" fought liberty from feudal aristocracy? What about the conflict between slaves and slave masters?

[perdurabo]

this doesn't make sense, socialism doesn't get rid of the factory, only the owner. Can you tell me what besides capital does the non-managerial owner contribute? The workers don't need the owner, the owner needs the workers, his income comes from their labor.
isn't capital enough?


oh, Nike shoes, are made by unskilled "villagers"

check china.


For example a CEO of an large corporation makes bettween 500 to 700 times the wage of an average employee. Gorbachev made something like 1200-1500 roubles a month, whole an average citizen made 260 roubles a month.
where is contradiction to my post? i realy know how CEO is payed and how much worker earns, i asked you if you saw wages chart? who gets more one single CEO or 1000 workers?



You obviosly don't know your history. Remember how the "middle class" "beorgeoisie" fought liberty from feudal aristocracy? What about the conflict between slaves and slave masters?
duuh :cantbeli: remeber both Charles idea how they divided population?

[perdurabo]

About consumer goods in the Soviet Union and European socialist states. Since "the food problem" was already shown to be a myth:

Firstly, by the 80s these nations releazied they were falling behind dramatically in consumer goods. Only in the 80s did planners finally put priority in producing televisions, etc. But the governments where dismantled before any results.

Lack of consumer goods was not something inherent in the system either. Planners chose to focus on heavy industry over light industry (consumer goods, housing). This is proven by the limited time of the kruschev years, in which consumer goods where given a little extra emphasis. and the result was a dramatic rise in consumer goods and standard of living, thousands of apartments were also built. tremendously elevating the housing problem. If this trend had continued into the 70s and not been reversed by conservatism. There is no reason to think, the consumer goods gap would have been as large. For instance much of the housing today in the CIS is from the krushchev period.

Thats right, planners choosed to focus on something, now look at liberal country in witch consumers choose on witch they put money, you can easly see that they develope in all areas without focusing on anything they produce high quality tanks with producing enough food with building enough housing with producing high technologies, now you know why socialist countries allways had gaps to cach up? NOONE knows better what i need than me. So why someone needs to decide for me what i shoud buy?

[Smersh]

isn't capital enough?
Is it? Thats their sole job then?

who gets more one single CEO or 1000 workers?

hahaha, you don't see anything funny about that. your telling me your worth 1/1000th of a CEO.


check china.
seems like you don't know much about china either. The vast majority of chinese factory workers are migrants from rural villages. A huge majority of chinese population is rural (villages)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also like the acheivements you mentioned are tanks and high technology. You forget about how for some time soviet tanks were superior to western designs. The Soviet Union was a leader in tank design and technology. and what about Soviet acheivments in space technology?

Now we can get into a big argument about soviet and western tank designs. I don't want to do that.

[perdurabo]

Is it? Thats their sole job then?
if you talk about not menaging owners then yes, look at stock markets, if you own stocks of any company you don't menage company but you choose who will be dooing this and you are risking your money. But 90% of owners is more than funds donors, they usually give idea, menage company, risk health( you don't even imagine how stresfull is CEO job)



hahaha, you don't see anything funny about that. your telling me your worth 1/1000th of a CEO. no i'm telling that i anyone have muscles and can dig coal but not all have brain and knowledge to menage company, also workers work ends with his shift, CEO job dosen't end, workers dosen't have responsibility CEO has bad decision of one worker means one bad product bad decision of ceo means colapse of factory and loots of unemployed, now you get why 1 CEO erns more than 1 worker?



seems like you don't know much about china either. The vast majority of chinese factory workers are migrants from rural villages. A huge majority of chinese population is rural (villages) so where i was wrong? i gaved you egzample of company that uses work of chinese viligers so whitch part was wrong?



------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also like the acheivements you mentioned are tanks and high technology. You forget about how for some time soviet tanks were superior to western designs. The Soviet Union was a leader in tank design and technology. and what about Soviet acheivments in space technology?

Now we can get into a big argument about soviet and western tank designs. I don't want to do that.
i agree you had lead space race, you also had great tanks, subs are still in some areas superior not to mention aerodynamics, but as you said planists focused on it, while in liberal country there is no planist and all areas grow in the same time so they had color TV and modern tank while we had great tanks and ****y tv's, so was my egzample wrong?

[Friendly Fire]

no no busines is ppl behind it, they aren't oposite! intrests of diffrent ppl and groups are oposite! for egzample VolksWagen group and africa what would be more in their intrest poor africa that can't afford to buy their cars?(when moust of their production comes from developed countries - Germany, CzechRep., Spain etc...) or enough ritch market? and they are big busines yes? and oposite intrests minig industry what is in their intrest? of course poor africa without any envoirment regulations and cheap labour. they are also big busines. And now lets look at workers intrests, VW workers have intrest in bigger sales cause they get better pensions if financial condition of company is better, on the other side we have miners witch have bigger intrest in developing own country than working for company (if country is more developed they can have better jobs)

look at any developed country and how big % of their import comes from undeveloped countries? the bigest money comes from internal market and from trade with other developed nations!


About Marx and Engels work good book: http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/212a_47e.htm


I know that in official data socialist paradise looks good meat consumption, potatoes etc everything is ok in par or sometimes even ahead, but compare those products, west color TVs gazilions of programs usually vcr, soviet block monohrome tv sets 1 2 sometimes 3 programes no vcr, cars soviet block Fiat 126p, Trabi etc west VW, BMW, MB, Renault etc... east lots of trains but technology from 40 or 50ties west TGV, Shinkansen.... or rate of homless socialist paradise noone is homless but sometimes 2 families live in 2 room flat!
About salary and prices, with fixed prices you don't have real value of money so you would have to check what was black market price of $ or gold you would see if growth in numbers was real growth in value.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahhah

GARY NORTH

Do you know who Gary North is friend? He's a freaking Christian wacko of the best Stalinian kind. The guy falsified his work and even subsequantly found "Marx's" Diary to be filled with gay letters to Engels, one of the best forgery cases in the West!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_North

Ahahahah Gary North?

OMG are you all like that in Poland? I mean christian wackos? No because i had some friends of mine yesterday in my home watching a Euro 2008 qualification game (Belgium-Poland, Belgium lost) and they seemed quite normal to me...there must be something with Poland per se.

Huh about Gary North...http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/fundienazis/gary_north.htm

Kid get out of my sight.

Ah and about autoregulation in a market economy...Humes wrote it and simply stated that autoregulation works as far there is no "growth in the system" that why monetarist policies still belive in the autoregulation BS.

But fact is that if you get back in the 20th century...you'll see that growth simply outplays the monatry balance since people produce more money while speculating. It's called "reescompte" in french... Your local bank produces money value by reissueing your deposit. It works like this. You deposit 500 zlotys on the bank, the bank keeps 10% as immediate liquidity/liability stock and gives you in exchange a piece of paper and a card that allows you to make use of your 500 ZTL. In the same time your 450 of your physical 500 ZTL have been granted to another dude as credit. This guy thus is using your physical money ... without you knowing it. that's one part of monetary growth.

Hum what bombers have to do with general level of litteracy, the average income and other HDI related

The ability to produce bombers shows you got a certain level of developpment yes but tell me where were the rest of your fighters then? Just cut this crap about developpment. Any dictatorial state will be able to produce fine weaponery (hence the Czarist example) in order to keep it's head above water, and that without having any effect on the general living conditions of it's population. So was poland in the 20's. A nice Dictatorship.

You loose...again.

Hum what the fact that you're born in a rich family has to do with "investment in education"? Especially when you're not the one "investing"? See here you've killed your self! Your education is largely depend of your social background. The only thing you can do is "working hard"...but for the rest the state or your parents play the decisive role! This means Marx was right and you're (along with Gary North) dead wrong!

Hum for the rest just get alook on the polish economical numbers of 1920/30!

[Smersh]

But 90% of owners is more than funds donors, they usually give idea, menage company, risk health( you don't even imagine how stresfull is CEO job)...no i'm telling that i anyone have muscles and can dig coal but not all have brain and knowledge to menage company, also workers work ends with his shift, CEO job dosen't end, workers dosen't have responsibility CEO has bad decision of one worker means one bad product bad decision of ceo means colapse of factory and loots of unemployed, now you get why 1 CEO erns more than 1 worker?

oh yeah, I forgot CEO and major stock holders have such a tough life,workers have it easy :). I find it hard to understand thay you can sympathize with CEOs and gaint stockholders. they have huge unearned incomes. The CEO of enron made 49.8 million a year. The former CEO of Volkswagen was paid 48 million dollars when he left, recently.

when did I ever say anything about 1 for 1 wages? The share owners take is extremely disproportianate to the amount of labor they put in. How can you say this extreme huge social-economic inequality is justified and right ! (and its only getting worse!)

Its not the 1950s anymore. when workers in capitalist nations had a much better position in society. what did that other thread say, the USA with the world largest economy and 2nd highes per capita in the world (after luxemburge) has 35 million people "with food security problems", and a income equality (gini index) similar to Uragauay! according the the UN 20% of America has a HDI (human development index) of that of Cuba (ranked 50th in the world) or lower thats 60 million people. No wonder the US prison population has tripled since 1980, (the 1980 rate was 139 per 100,000 population, 701 per 100,000 population in 2004), following a pattern or increasing social and economic inequality.

lets not even get into global inequality,which is unbeliavable, and is constantly perpueated and worsened by capitalism. leaving most of the world in perpetual underdevelopment, and only as a source for cheap labor and raw materials.


so where i was wrong? i gaved you egzample of company that uses work of chinese viligers so whitch part was wrong?
I misunderstood you here. I thought you meant china was not a rural (village)population.

[perdurabo]

ok so guys tell me how to lift poor from their poverty? i showed my point, your turn.

[Cedan]

ok so guys tell me how to lift poor from their poverty? i showed my point, your turn.

implement a economic system that doesn't focus on creating wealth but redistributing it

[Jobu]

implement a economic system that doesn't focus on creating wealth but redistributing it

Recipe for disaster.

[Jobu]

The Catholic Church is obnoxiously wealthy. The pope needs to stfu because he's a hypocrite.

[Friendly Fire]

Recipe for disaster.

Oh says who...:roll:

[Friendly Fire]

ok so guys tell me how to lift poor from their poverty? i showed my point, your turn.


The Soviet exmaple was a blatant proof oh how to do it...just compare Czarist Russia and the 70's USSR.

[annihilation]

You know what I think the Pope should call for. He should call for a change in the way the church handles priests that have ******ly abused children. Now when they do that, then I might listen to them on other issues.

[Friendly Fire]

You know what I think the Pope should call for. He should call for a change in the way the church handles priests that have ******ly abused children. Now when they do that, then I might listen to them on other issues.


I almost thought you were calling a Revelation from the Pope. We screwed for 2000 years, God is Lie, etc etc...

[annihilation]

I almost thought you were calling a Revelation from the Pope. We screwed for 2000 years, God is Lie, etc etc...

They will never bite the hand that feeds them. If its a lie or its a truth, they would never say as they know they would be out of a lucrative business.

[Friendly Fire]

They will never bite the hand that feeds them. If its a lie or its a truth, they would never say as they know they would be out of a lucrative business.


Aye, brother!:hug:

[Smersh]

I don't have much free time right now to elaborate but freindly fire is on the right track. A better comaparison would be mid 70s soviet union with CIS in 2005.

Even though the Soviet Union collapsed from internal forces, it did show that through socialist planning a backwards underdeveloped nation could become a superpower.

Secondly, the high standard of living in western countries owes much to workers rights movements. For instance work conditions in underdeveloped countries (run by western and native 'capitalists') would be illegal in developed nations. sadly however, much of this is now being reversed.

When I have more time I will give a larger reply.

[Smersh]

ok so guys tell me how to lift poor from their poverty? i showed my point, your turn.the markets vs. socialism debates are always interesting.

As promised a longer answer. although this issue is very complex and I can't cover everything.

first of all, perdurabo, what point did you show exactly? how do you propose to 'lift' people from poverty?
I'm going to focus mostly on the developing nations, but this also mostly implies to developed nations as well. since they also have large populations of poor. most capitalist economists acknowledge a healthy capitalist economy has to maintain an "under-class"of 15 to 25% of the population.


'Free-market' supporters and International economic organizations (led by developed nations) say that the way to reduce poverty and develop economies is through 'free-markets'. But where is the proof that this is true?


But how is it that ordinary people in developed nations have high standard of living? Isn't this proof that capitalism benefits everyone and leads to high standard of living? absolutely not. firstly, much of the high standard of living is owes to worker struggle. for better work conditions, decent wages, social programs, social welfare. (this is constantly under threat) Because as pointed out numerous times. the interest of business (capitalists) and workers is opposite. Secondly, high standard of living is acheived by exporting the horrible conditions abroad. The international division of labor. High standard of living for the 1st world nations at the expense of low standard of living for most of the world.


Every where where free trade is applied leads to enormous social and economic inequality and disparity between a minority and majority.


On the other hand in the underdeveloped areas of the soviet union: Central Asia, Caucasus, and much of Russia. Socialist economics geninuelnly improved the conditions of ordinary people in a short period of time (literacy and education, health care, economic development, disease elimination, equal right for women) Thats why friendly fire is correct when he answered "The Soviet example was a blatant proof oh how to do it..." Socialism is my propasal for elminating poverty, underdevelopment, exploitation, extreme violence inducing inequality and poverty.

[Kilgor]

Even though the Soviet Union collapsed from internal forces, it did show that through socialist planning a backwards underdeveloped nation could become a superpower.


Id say Stalinist industrialization and then 4 years of war had more to do with it.
And neither events were good for the population.

[Smersh]

The Soviet economy was not like the american kilgor, it didn't benefit from the second world war.

Industrialization has nothing to do with Stalin crimes.

[Kilgor]

The Soviet economy was not like the american kilgor, it didn't benefit from the second world war.

You would understand that super power means military might. So when you say "superpower" understand that military might is included in that definition. Regardless, the fact still stands. The soviet union although horribly scared by ww2, emerged a industrial and military giant.

[Smersh]

sorry I meant as an economic super-power. What fact? to say that the Soviet Union became a industrial super-power as a result of the war is a joke and completely untrue. Since pre-1941 levels of production where not regained till the 50s!

Industrialization was largely completed by the end of the 30s, the war had a negative affect on industrial development.

[Kilgor]

Industrialization was largely completed by the end of the 30s, the war had a negative affect on industrial development.

Have you read genuine reports on the working conditions of this industrialization ? It was not something you would want to go through.

[Smersh]

ha-ha. Their you go again Kilgor, making critisims without making any comparison and out of context

You should read about the working conditions during European and American industrialzation. Definetly not something you would have want to go through.

here is a funny example:after the British Factory reform act in the 1840s, a child could only work 14 hours a day.

[Kilgor]

here is a funny example:after the British Factory reform act in the 1840s, a child could only work 14 hours a day.

Another funny example, soviet workers in the 1930's were forced to work 14+ hour days to fulfill absurd quota's and if they did not they could be arrested for "treason" and "wrecking" . And considering a significant amount of the economy during this time was a product of gulag or slave labor, your not really in a position to lecture anyone about immoral working practices.

[Smersh]

gross over estimations.

sacrifices where made to industrialize at such a tremendous pace (in 10 years). even then standard of living improved for a majority of the population.

by at most 1960 the average number hours of work in all industries was around 40. more hazardous industries such as coal mining where between 33-37 hours a week. this is good for 1960-91.

the work hours and conditions you talk about apply best to 1928-1932. during the first five-year plan. (ended after 4 years)