Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Communism is the way to go

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 9, 2011, 2:49 p.m. EST by elpinio (213)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Communism is the only way to go. Look at China. They are doing well. We gotta end capitalism as implemented in the US.

OWS has to further support socialism until we get to communism.

338 Comments

338 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by genanmer (822) 2 years ago

All governments fail as soon as they cease to be ethical regardless of the labels or structural organization.

What's most important is eliminating the incentive and perceived need for unethical practices.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

what do you expect when the government tears down religion. look at the Supreme Court decisions of the 1960's & look at the decline in morality that followed.

[-] 1 points by genanmer (822) 2 years ago

Religion has its benefits in teaching certain ethical concepts but I can not advocate the blind following and faith so many different sects of organized religion demands. Especially when the interpretations of such spiritual ideas can also be easily corrupted.

But yes, a guideline for ethical behavior it is needed and one which is grounded in understanding, having compassion for suffering, and utilizing the trial and error scientific method to progress beyond tradition when proven false.

[-] 0 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

yes - and the government has decimated religion because it wants you to look to them for your salvation. Now you are getting the picture. Dependency on government is the goal. replace God with Government, give out free stuff & you retain power.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Capitalism and leninism are both awful.

We need libertarian socialism

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

yours struggleforfreedom

[-] 1 points by zymergy (236) 2 years ago

Remember that incentive is innate, and ethics are relative, and humanity is still an evolutionary experiment. But, both of your points, GENANMER, are in the right direction.

[-] 1 points by screwtheman (122) 2 years ago

I think to say "as soon as" is extreme. Countries survive all the time without morals.

[-] 2 points by genanmer (822) 2 years ago

It's relative. The time it takes for unethical groups of power to be replaced vary.

If the incentive for amoral behavior exists in the environment, then new unethical groups will simply take their place allowing the self destruction to continue until people decide enough is enough. But there is a threshold for unethical practices based on how conditioned/indoctrinated people are to accept self-destructive behaviors.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

It's called fiat money. Deal with the goons controlling the currency and central banks (Rothchilds et al) and symptoms will recede http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/

[-] 2 points by genanmer (822) 2 years ago

I agree to an extent. I don't believe it is the fiat money as much as it's the manipulation and control over the quantity of fiat money which is important (as you mentioned the central banks).

Tax the Fed/central banks and give control over the money supplies back to the people.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

Let me rephrase then-focusing on your last sentence and the word "give.". You seem unaware of how it is they "get" what they have.

Blaming the fiat money (paper) WOULD be assinine...like blaming the bullet i the murderer uses to kill his victim.

When you figure out how to get the murderers to "give" anything to their victims, you let us know, would you?

Suggest you read through the link i posted above before slinging back pablum. The problem is a cancer that can't be just yanked out or given over with a tax...when all they need to do is move a decimal to adjust their comfort zone.

[-] 1 points by genanmer (822) 2 years ago

This extends into a much broader topic of non-compliance as the people ultimately hold the most power if they ever decide to use it.

Unfortunately, there exist plenty of sycophant minions under the current corrupt elite. Our ability to reach these minions will determine whether power is returned peacefully or forcefully from the 'murderers' pulling the strings. Murderers can be restrained if they are recognized as such. However, if they are recognized as 'heros' or benevolent authoritarians to the masses then they will continue their activities unhindered.

Regardless, many people must experience a conscious shift in their values quickly as the global economic collapse approaches. The coming transition must stand for ethics if society is to progress forward otherwise different groups will violently fight for power and greed.

And yes, I am already aware of admiralty law, the district of Columbia, and the fact the united states and all it's PEOPLE are declared corporations. Here's a documentary based on this very idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tScuHwVtRcY

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

We're on the same page. When enough people wake up to these facts we can make the transition. Thanks-I'll check out the video.

[-] -1 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

That might take a little effort... I mean look at the Maya - they sacrificed the first born as a moral "good" and were very successful. And the only way to end the "unethical" practice of the ultimate evil was to cut off their heads.

[-] 2 points by genanmer (822) 2 years ago

They also planned full-scale warfare in accordance with astronomical events. Sacrifice, slavery, fear, and religion were used as tools to maintain their rule.

They justified causing suffering due to their belief in cyclical time (reincarnation after death) and their people prospered because of their conquests. They were desensitized to the suffering they caused. Unethical to them was likely associated with material wealth (crop growth) and phenomena they might have believed to affect their wealth. (astronomy, weather, etc.)

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Unethical has it roots in our perception of morality; I suspect the Maya applied this sense of wrong to far more than economics.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

While I don't exactly view Chomsky's anarchism as a coherent political ideology, I do agree with the basic idea (inherent in anarchist thought) that top down doesn't work, and any successful society has to be built from the ground up. That said, I don't even really support the idea of a French style revolution. I do not think a bloodbath is the path to human betterment. I know many OWS founders are influenced by anarchism (and its intellectual tradition), and I do find value in many of the writings by anarchists (I'm particularly attracted to the idea of democratic capitalism), but I also live in the real world, and I don't let my idealism get the better of my rational thinking. I've come to the conclusion that some degree of political activism IS necessary. If anyone likes Martin Luther King, and finds inspiration from the civil rights era (as I do), then please realize, it was not a movement that overthrew our existing system, it was a movement that changed laws, won in the courtroom, and changed hearts and minds. That said, democratic capitalism will NOT happen from the top down. We already have co-ops, employee owned firms, etc., and these firms were not started by government, they were not initiated by laws (whether statutory or case law), they were founded by people (so there's no reason why people can't get together and do more of this). So political activism combined with ground up hard work to make democratic capitalism more pervasive in our society, is I think the way to go.

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Hi. Please read The Society We Should Strive For

We need Libertarian Socialism/anarcism because it´s a more democratic and just society. Capitalism weakens democracy, it must dismantled: Replace Capitalism with Democracy

Come visit my blog:) http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I agree (with qualification, but I won't digress and discuss my wishlist, beyond making some broad points), but I still think Chomsky's political theory is somewhat problematic. For instance, he supports more "state sponsored" social welfare, yet he's also a proponent of anarcho-syndicalism. Okay, the obvious problem with this is that anarcho-syndicalism is against the existence of a state (so how you can logically support this form of anarchism, while at the same time endorsing "state sponsored" anything?).

I do like some ideas that can be characterized as anarchist (even though I think it's a poor choice of a word). I would like to see more employee owned firms, co-ops, etc. I also like some aspects of direct democracy, namely referendum voting, recall elections, and similar ideas (although I don't support the idea of an Athenian style direct democracy). Nonetheless, I do support social welfare, and do not support the idea of completely vanquishing the state.

All the evidence points to the idea that hierarchical structure emerges naturally. Therefore, I cannot support the idea of moving away from the concept of constitutional republic, when in all likelihood, what will ultimately emerge will be much worse. I agree with the premise of our founders, unlimited majority rule will likely result in minority oppression. If we're to think that certain rights are inalienable (whether or not you want to use the idea of a deity to support this idea, which I personally don't, is immaterial), then that necessarily implies that certain rights cannot be subjected to majority vote; ergo, some form of legal structure is necessary to protect minority rights.

[-] -1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Anarcho-Syndicalism/Libertarian Socialism is the long term goal. Working for taxing the rich, better welfare for working and poor people today is short term. We cant establish AS over night obviously it has to come in to place piece by piece, so we have to separate the two issues. There´s no contradiction here.

"All the evidence points to the idea that hierarchical structure emerges naturally"

Thats no law of nature. In fact, most of human history has been more or less egalitarian "Human Nature and Libertarian Socialism"

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Well, to say there's "no law of nature" ... is I think something we don't completely understand yet, so perhaps I should have said something like pattern human behavior (nonetheless, it's not impossible to think AS could work, but to use our most primitive evolutionary history as an example of a functional sociological model, is also not very convincing to me). I mean, we don't understand early evolutionary history (from a "sociological" perspective) as well we might like to think we do. When we first emerged from the evolutionary soup so to speak, we were a paranoid and tribal species. Why do we like to trim the bushes, cut lawns, manicure everything? The theory of evolutionary biologists is that we did this sort of thing early in our evolutionary history, to protect ourselves from predators.

So is "early man" really the thing we should base our societal model on? What changed us over time was largely technology and information dissemination. Also, structure and egalitarianism are not necessarily mutually exclusive (it obviously depends on the structure). Moreover, structure does spontaneously emerge in nature (this is a subject of fractal geometry, and some aspects of biology, particularly the study of emergence). Take ant colonies, packs of wolves, etc. While it is true that we had less structure early in our evolutionary history, it's likely that we still had some form of tribal structure, and there was intense competition between individuals (particularly sexual competition), and between tribes (very deadly competition in many cases). I think it would be very foolish to deny that our constitution and enlightenment was a progressive milestone in human history, while idealizing the most primitive stages in our development (when it's far more likely that life for our most remote ancestors was, as Hobbes described, brutish and short). This doesn't mean I'm endorsing historicism, or nostalgia (both of which are, in many cases, very poor tools to guide our sociological approach).

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

like I pointed out in my article: we´ve been living in relatively egalitarian social organizations for millions of years - of course this has formed our nature as the biological creatures we are today. In human history, and in our evolutionary history, hierarchies have existed for an extremly short amount of time. This stuff is important, because it can help explain our complex nature better. And its relevant because a decent society should be one that is suited human nature.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Right, well, even assuming your premise that "we´ve been living in relatively egalitarian social organizations for millions of years" (which btw I don't assume, and I think is a very tenuous proposition), can we really say that a "decent society should be one that is suited human nature"?

I assume you're only referring to the GOOD ASPECTS of human nature, and not our propensity for tribalism, paranoia (and poor agency detection), war and violence, sexual exploitation, etc.?

I truly think this line of thinking is guilty of the fallacy of over-assuming, and idealizing human nature in a way that is not consistent with the facts. So I must respectfully disagree with SOME aspects of this thinking (even though I think I agree with most of your bullet points, meaning most of the specific grievances you have, I disagree with the underlying reasoning, or I at least think that this is far from well settled, empirically speaking).

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

In a libertarian socialist society these good things would come to the fore. Violence, war exploitation etc are often caused by bad elements in society. Humans don´t just go around hitting or killing each other for no reason. In a LS society we´d have no classes or rulers and reasons for becoming violent and exploiting would mostly vanish. btw, I don´t disagree that we don´t know everything about human nature. I pointed that out in my article. did you btw watch the Chomsky Foucault debate?

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Bad elements in society? I mean, fight or flight, sexual jealousy, etc., these are attributes nature selected for, as in, we are to some extent hard wired for this type of behavior. We do have altruistic aspects to our nature. The predominant theories explaining this are reciprocal altruism and kin selection, but underlying these theories is the concept of "mutual benefit" (and it's been shown through sociobiological and rigorous statistical research that humans, on average--as in over large population numbers and long periods of time--behave consistent with our underlying genetic/evolutionary attributes).

There is therefore disagreement between social researchers (who do not take a multidisciplinary approach, which employs hard biological science) and "hard science" based research.

I admit ... I prefer hard science over the sort of research underlying the theories of people like Chomsky (who's a pioneer in linguistics, but not a biologist, and in my view not adequately qualified in this area). I simply think that hard scientific research is more rigorous and far more reliable.

I love literature, enjoy reading philosophy, but it's no substitute for rigorous scientific research.

[-] 1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 2 years ago

But, mommy! I don't want a nation run with anarcho-syndicalism...

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Well, that´s the way it´s gonna be, and that´s that. Now go to your room!

[-] 1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 2 years ago

Oh no... mommy! The OWS anarchists really want to be totalitarians. They're trying to dictate their ideas on the rest of us. Their general assemblies are nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Oh, you´re still young and dumb. You´re very, very wrong.

[-] 1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 2 years ago

Wrong? In which way? You seem to indicate that the long term goal of OWS is to use anarcho-syndicalism to run the whole nation. Shouldn't the people who constitute the 99% have a say in this? What if the vast majority of Americans merely want to fix the shortcomings of the current political system? Is that OK, or is it the minority of anarchists who will decide for us all?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No, my personal opinion is we should be working for an anarcho syndicalist society (which I hope and believe many occupiers agree with) An Anarcho-Syndicalist society can only come to into existance when the vast majority of the population wants it. AS is all about democracy http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

and putting it into place should also be done thru democratic process, of course.

[-] 1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 2 years ago

That makes sense. Mommy! I was wrong! We do get to decide after all.

Thank you for your clarification. That's very appreciated. Anarcho-syndicalism is interesting. I certainly can't disagree with that.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

The best example of the failure of communism is the what happened in one of the only really communist systems that existed.

The Plymouth Plantation of the pilgrims was a communist system. The land was shared, worked communally and the harvest was owned by all. It was a miserable failure because some were not working but taking food. By 1623, it was obvious the colony was barely producing enough food to keep everyone alive. Fresh supplies from England were few and far between. Without some major change, the colony would face famine again.

The Pilgrims divided the parcels among the families and told them to grow their own food. They found that those who would pretend they couldn’t work due to infirmity, weakness or inability gladly went to work in the fields. Corn production increased dramatically and famine was averted because communism was eliminated.

In his writings Governor Bradford is basically saying that communism failed because of the corrupt nature of humans.

[-] 1 points by Algee (182) 2 years ago

Always the same excuses and examples. Have you taken into perspective all factors that could lead a new colony toward failure? This was in 1623, what were the chances of survival in any colony at that time in the new world? You speak of human nature, but how do know that human nature is corrupted? What is your proof?

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Well I could give you more than 1,000 examples but here are a few from today's news:

http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=1789131

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11350/1197250-54.stm

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/americas/Carlos-the-Jackal-Sentenced-to-Life-in-Prison-135721533.html

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000048427&cid=4&ttl=Four%20injured%20in%20Garissa%20grenade%20attacks

Even Cuba is giving up on communism. Just this past month (Nov 14) they started allowing private ownership of real estate a huge change from more than 30 years of communist rule.

[-] 0 points by Algee (182) 2 years ago

The cubans are under pressure from all the other countries around. Communism if it fails in some parts of the world, does not fail because of the ideology itself. It fails because many different factors, one of them being "counter-revolution". Others come from the inside of Cuba. A new bourgeoisie being created. Those that are currently in power build this up. Communism demands rulers to constantly fight self-corruption, many do not survive this fight, just the politicians of America, Canada, France and other places. They may not be communists but they say they aspire to democracy. And then they get paid by corporations to make things better for them and the people are forgotten. Any person who says "communism or socialism is a failure" is wrong. If I use their reasoning I could very well say the same about democracy! You have not seen everything to judge if anything has failed, in fact communism has not failed in any way, because there are still people that follow it and want it.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

The problem is that we cannot find a successful implementation of the system. It is an idealic utopian concept that will in my humble opinion never work with humans. There will always be issues like the tragedy of the commons. Also, like it or not, people are motivated by self interest.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Algee (182) 2 years ago

I'm sure not everybody is motivated by self-interest. I for one am not. You doubt in your species and it is because of people like who doubt that now we are at standstill. This world calculates to much, and dreams to little. You cannot find? Please you are not even searching! All you do is put down people who try. We criticize the world only to make it better, accepting that human nature is supposedly evil means you are giving up.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Of course you are motivated by self-interest.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

Well, the "hippies of the 60's" tried the same thing and it didn't work for the reasons "Joe the farmer" mentioned.

Unless everyone is willing to participate communes don't work.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Yes, the village level failure can be attributed to the "Tragedy of the Commons" however every attempt has been a failure.

On a larger scale the problem is without private property rights and freee enterprise there is no motivation to make a better shoe or laptop or invent the next cool "thing".

Even Cuba has moved away this past Nov 10 when they annouced they now allow private ownership of real estate. A big step away form their policy of the past 30 years.

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

Humans also need incentives to produce efficiently. Communism takes that away.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

You seem to have a warped view of human nature. Please read "Human Nature and Libertarian Socialism"

struggleforfreedom

[-] 0 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

Surprisingly, many such collectivist communities existed during Spain's civil war period. They were very small though.

[-] -1 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

With socialism, communism, there is no incentive to work, to produce, to take care of yourself.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

In actuality, it depends. In Marx's communist utopia, people would actually work and put into society what they could. In return, they would receive in proportion to their need.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

how did that work out in the USSR? how is it working in Cuba? North Korea? China is moving away from Communism & their standard of living is rising.

[-] 1 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Actually the USSR went from being a backwater peopled by illiterates to a major power, with an enviable educational system and medical system too in spite of having been devastated by two world wars and a civil war coupled with foreign invasion and occupation. The Communist manifesto envisioned a world system. Communist led revolutions triumphed (for a time) in many of the most backward and undeveloped parts of the planet.

Cuba has stood up pretty well considering the economic and psychological warfare paired with sabotage.

China, I like. They saw how the USSR broke and decided it was better to bend than to break. They allow capitalist mechanisms within a planned economy. The political system actually permits the government to function and it sees its number one priority as appeasing its masses. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/asia_pac/02/china_party_congress/china_ruling_party/problems_mount/html/social_disorder.stm

I like a country where the government is functional and is more afraid of the people than what we have here (the reverse).

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

so why are you still here !? sounds like you have a menu of Utopan choices !

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

Well, China's government isn't completely planned, considering the large private sector. The economy is very regulated though, and you make a good point.

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The old "Stalinist" model had the central authorities in Moscow or Beijing deciding how many brown shoelaces size 10 were going to be produced. Factory managers in remote places would make up figures "demonstrating" that they had exceeded such quotas.

In China we have a ruling group scared to death of the masses who make decisions and even change the plan if it isn't working because they believe if the conditions of the masses don't continuously improve their own days get to be numbered.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

Yes, the fear of the masses and the reduction of authoritarianism is the first step in the collapse of an authoritarian communist regime.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

One of the two main pillars of orthodox Marxism - historical materialism - states that communism is man's final destiny. This was Marx's prediction. Any orthodox Marxist would not take political office in an attempt to revolutionarily convert a nation into a communist state, because any orthodox Marxist would predict that it would happen eventually as a result of class struggle.

These countries that you are mentioning do not have Marxists as leaders; these leaders were all authoritarian douche bags. All of these people tried to use authoritarian means in order to achieve this utopia (or something near it), and it simply ended in blunt, silly authoritarianism. Specifically for the case of the USSR, a new ideological term - 'Stalinism' - has been developed partly to denote the authoritarian nature of his supposedly communist ideology.

Any Marxist wouldn't try to start a revolutionary war - or something similar - because he would know that it would simply end in shit. This Marxist 'utopia', was predicted by historical materialism to be achieved via long term class struggle, not by some asshole coming in and trying to convert it instantly.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

so name me one true Marxist leader in history.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

DIdn't I just explain that to you? There are none! Marxists believe that the abolishment of capitalism is a gradual process, and that it will happen over time as a result of class struggle! No Marxist in his right mind would try and change it instantly.

However, there did exist Marxist politicians, mainly before the 60's.

Disclaimer: I'm not a Marxist.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

oh - so this is part of the Marxist experiment to gradually abolish the Capitalist system. Yet you say you are are not a Marxist? Then how can you support a Marxist movement like OWS? Isn't that what this is?

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

Okay, some more information. An orthodox Marxist would not do anything to help the poor, because he/she would see that as simply holding back the proletariat revolution that he/she would hold to be so feasible. So how in the hell would the movement be Marxist?

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

How do you expect to achieve the redistribution of wealth to the degree you want & not call it Marxist? Your movement requires Force to achieve it's goals.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

sigh You really do not know what Marxism is. Nor do you understand the goals of the movement.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

Hm - The post is "Communism is the way to go" and you are telling me that Marxism is not communism. Interesting Lenin, Stalin & Mao didn't feel that way. Why dont you explain the goals of the movement to me since I have it all wrong apparently.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

When did I say that Marxism is not communist?

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

1) It is not an experiment. It is a prediction. 2) The movement is not Marxist. That is silly.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Cool. I need a lot.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

There is NO utopia.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

That depends too. Although my knowledge on the topic is limited, this 'utopia' might have been predicted by Marx's theory of historical materialism.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

there is no perfect world. no perfect society.

[-] 1 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

No, there is not. I use the term 'utopia' very loosely.

[-] 2 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

The Chinese government issues and manages the national currency. The U.S. Constitution states that Congress SHALL coin and regulate the value of our currency. Unfortunately, we are not following the highest law of the land.

[-] 2 points by AllianceForPeace (40) 2 years ago

The Federal Reserve which is a private institution regulates and controls all currency in the U.S.

[-] 2 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. – Thomas Jefferson in the debate over the Re-charter of the Bank Bill (1809)

… The modern theory of the perpetuation of debt has drenched the earth with blood, and crushed its inhabitants under burdens ever accumulating. -Thomas Jefferson

If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations. -Andrew Jackson

The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity. -Abraham Lincoln

Issue of currency should be lodged with the government and be protected from domination by Wall Street. We are opposed to…provisions [which] would place our currency and credit system in private hands. – Theodore Roosevelt

When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes… Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” – Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of France, 1815

“Money plays the largest part in determining the course of history.” Karl Marx writing in the Communist Manifesto (1848).

“Banks lend by creating credit. They create the means of payment out of nothing. ” Ralph M Hawtry, former Secretary to the Treasury. “… our whole monetary system is dishonest, as it is debt-based… We did not vote for it. It grew upon us gradually but markedly since 1971 when the commodity-based system was abandoned.” The Earl of Caithness, in a speech to the House of Lords, 1997.

[-] 1 points by whisper (212) 2 years ago

No, the Fed is.

[-] 2 points by Misfit138 (172) 2 years ago

China is a hybrid capitalist/communist nation now. They have grown more materialistic and seek to earn profits in business. They import and export goods and have a relatively free market while the communists have full control over the state, military and media. The fact is, China is slowly moving towards democracy and greater capitalistic freedom every year, so maybe communism isn't so much the way to go.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

China never was Communist. They were Socialist and are now mostly capitalist. There are by far more privately owned companies than state owned

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 2 years ago

They were and are definitely Communist

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

China is neither classless, nor stateless :)

sff http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

It appears you do not know what communism is.

The Peoples Republic of China was Socialist and is now cpaitalist. The state contols certain aspects of peoples lives but that has nothing to do with communism. You can own private property in China in a communist system goods and production are owned in common (by the state). For example until this year you could not own real estate in Cuba. That changed this November.

There are actually less government regulations in China then there are in the United States. It is easier to open and run a business in China than it is the in the US.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Their Communist government sets a 5 year plan that is strictly adhered to. Our democratic Congress can't even set next year's budget.

[-] 2 points by Misfit138 (172) 2 years ago

Hell, I would be happy if Congress could set a 5 month plan and stick to it.

[-] -1 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

Sorry, they are not moving towards capitalism. china is a police state.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Communism has to do with ownership of property. Property and busiinesses are owned in common. There is no private property.

You can have a socialist or capitalist police state.

[-] 2 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

Any form of Government can have a Police State. Just look at Amerika today. Its just with Communism you get it a lot sooner than later.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

Sooner with communism? It's immediate.

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

Well its generally right before immediate lol.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Not true. China has been letting farmers protest recently.

In America, OWS protesters are being arrested daily. And peppered sprayed while sitting down in a university campus.

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

In China there have been successful strikes. There are protests and petitions.

[-] 1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Capitalism and socialsim are equally as bad.

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

elpinio Hey Mooooochelle is that you

[-] 1 points by nichole (525) 2 years ago

Their People are working harder for less than we are. Do you call that a People's Victory?

[-] 1 points by TheGreedyCapitalist (47) from Long Beach, CA 2 years ago

Communism is the perfect system idea wise and on paper, but when implemented just does not work. There is nothing wrong with it and it is not evil, it just does not work.

China is not a true communist country. They have adopted many capitalist principles making them quite successful.

[-] 1 points by ETHABHAE (13) from Seattle, WA 2 years ago

China is just as capitalist as America. GTFO debauchery is unwelcome here we are trying to save our country. We need democratic reform, and a return of the power to the people and ousting of corporate interest. Radicalism is not going to take us there, whilst it is unorganized.

China want's to continue to have dictatorial rule over its people, but doesn't realize that the fast pace development of their middle class will will entirely hinder that control. When people are economically empowered they want full control over their finances/lives. Also wealth has not been evenly distributed (as has been done in this country) and they disproportionate number of poor will want equality.

Hong Kong has an occupy movement for a reason.

[-] 1 points by l6griffin (5) from Oakdale, CA 2 years ago

Communism hasn't worked for any country yet including China. Consumerism is the problem. Particularly now that big business can hire an ad agency to use psychology to create a need for what ever they have to offer.

[-] 1 points by RevolutionCA (33) 2 years ago

There is a Communist town in Spain. Its called Marinaleda. Theres no rich or poor people, no poverty, no unemployment, no crime, no police. All houses are 3 bedroom, and rent is a maximum of 15 euros. It sounds like how communism was supposed to be. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marinaleda,_Spain

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I think if anyone did seriously "look at China" .... they would not be very impressed. Coastal China is experiencing super-normal economic growth, but move just a little bit into the interior, and you'll find a China with very few public roads, a scarce supply of things we take for granted (like electricity), and relative to western standards, extreme poverty.

Furthermore, China is a totalitarian state (where its people lack many of the freedoms we enjoy). This is not to minimize the problems we're facing, the threats to our own freedoms, etc., but I'm just sayin (China is not a system we should seek to emulate).

[-] 1 points by elephant (19) 2 years ago

the problem isn't capitalism, or communism its CORRUPTION of government by the rich 1%-

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Capitalism and leninism are both awful.

We need libertarian socialism

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

I suspect you of being a troll btw

struggleforfreedom

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

LOL, gotta hand it to you troll, this is original. Did you really expect anybody but another troll to say, hell yes, lets do it. Thanks for the joke butthead, was bored this morning. By the way, whats next, lets join Al-Qaeda.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

MOST OWS members want socialism. And MANY want communism. Hop on board man - get with the program.

[-] 0 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Hey Comrade, Ya know this is a free country, if you want to be a communist you have the right to be. I will support you doing that but i wont join ya. As far as you getting me to believe the people of this movement told you that or that you could perceive this somehow then you need to Bullsh*t the left wing ignorant because i do know, by taking the time to, what this movement is about. And socialism you say, what kind, the left wing blow outta proportion, even distort, as a way to contradict or the right wing get carried away version at least with good intentions. You'll trolling is so lame it's ridiculous. You and you'll pal's coming to this site to push misinformation and falsehoods are wasting your time because many are too intelligent to fall for this non sense but you morons think you'll going to accomplish something here. There's too much information around what this movement is really about and more joining in all the time. Byte me.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

a lot about OWS is really about communism dude. you are a fringe part of the movement. we appreciate your support, but it would be better if you support us fully.

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Hey, where ya been. Be glad to join. I've seen the errors of my ways. Who are you all by the way. Tell me where i can join. Leave a message and will get back to you.

[-] 0 points by avery724 (60) 2 years ago

If that's what they want , why don't they move to Cuba? Michael Moore says it's a wonderful country.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Travel ban to Cuba

[-] 0 points by avery724 (60) 2 years ago

How did michael moore get in?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Does everyone have his connections and money?

[-] 0 points by avery724 (60) 2 years ago

michael moore thinks cuba is a paradise. why hasn't he moved there?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

I dunno. Why don't you ask him and let me know.

[-] 0 points by avery724 (60) 2 years ago

we don't speak to each other anymore.

[-] 1 points by username2011 (59) 2 years ago

China has a brutally oppressive government, and their fraudulent, corrupt economic system is already showing the cracks that will eventually cause it to crumble. Have you been paying attention? Were you even born yet when the tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

I protested Tiananmen Square in the US when it happened kiddo. But it has shown that over the last decade, there can be another type of communism. That's the one that OWS has to support for the US.

[-] 0 points by avery724 (60) 2 years ago

Any form of communism stinks.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 2 years ago

Marx was great at criticism, but what did he offer as an answer - the dwindling away of that state? That is a dillusion, and offers no real answers. That's why communisn has so often proved a complete failure, because the "dwindling away" of the state just devolves into a new tyranny.

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

China has a bigger gap between the poor and wealthy then we do in the US. Their success came with introducing some capitalism into the economy. The poor here are far better off then the poor in China.

Communism might work very well if it weren't run by human beings.

[-] 2 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

Ooooh Ooooh Ooooh! Pick me, I'm a cardboard cutout and I make my own clothes!

[-] 0 points by DRSTNDESILVA (4) from Colombo, Western Province 2 years ago

Hi comrades.

CIA and Mossad are trying their utmost to infiltrate the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party on a long-term basis to derail Mao Tsetung's ideology for China. As such, present day Chinese leadership (mainly People's Liberation Army) must not allow this to happen.

By any chance, if American dollar / Euro bribes succeed to corrupt the central committee, that will be the end of visible social justice for the entire world population during the next hundred years. So, with Buddha's (Reverend Confucious's), God's, and Allah's blessing for a unified socialist Chinese communist party to rule the world economy during the next century.

"Socialismo o Muerte"

"Tutto puo cambiare, basta immaginar lo"

"Liberte - Egalite - Fraternite"

Keep in touch.

Dr. S.T.N. De Silva 21/28 Polhengoda Gardens, off Polhengoda Road, Colombo 5, Sri Lanka

[-] 0 points by DRSTNDESILVA (4) from Colombo, Western Province 2 years ago

Hi comrades.

CIA and Mossad are trying their utmost to infiltrate the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party on a long-term basis to derail Mao Tsetung's ideology for China. As such, present day Chinese leadership (mainly People's Liberation Army) must not allow this to happen.

By any chance, if American dollar / Euro bribes succeed to corrupt the central committee, that will be the end of visible social justice for the entire world population during the next hundred years. So, with Buddha's (Reverend Confucious's), God's, and Allah's blessing for a unified socialist Chinese communist party to rule the world economy during the next century.

"Socialismo o Muerte"

"Tutto puo cambiare, basta immaginar lo"

"Liberte - Egalite - Fraternite"

Keep in touch.

Dr. S.T.N. De Silva 21/28 Polhengoda Gardens, off Polhengoda Road, Colombo 5, Sri Lanka

[-] 0 points by timir (183) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

socialism has many different forms and everybody even Wikipedia represent it in their way. here is direct translation of socialism from russian wiki: Socialism - a socio-political, economic system of social equality, characterized in that the process of production and distribution of income is under the control of society. [1] here i found out interesting article: http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/redefining_the_political_spectru.htm

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by streetpeople (9) 2 years ago

communism = judaism = murdering and theft

[-] 0 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

China is doing well? For who?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

The Chinese?

[-] 0 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Okay, if you say so . 200 million people live below the poverty line of a $1.25 a day. 482 million people live with under $2.00 a day. 55% of China's population live in rural areas where the poverty is concentrated. Along with the lack of personal freedoms I don't think I would want to copy China's model. http://laowaiblog.com/banking-for-the-poor-2/

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Despite your stats, 80+% of Chinese approve of the government and their country's direction. These are stats from studies conducted by Western, non-partisan think tanks. No need to compare that with our perception of Congress and the direction of our country.

Sure, many are still poor, but hundreds of millions have improved mightily over the last three decades. And they have hope for better.

As you know from the Charter of Human Rights, human rights include social and economic rights (right to healthcare, a decent job, education, etc.) as well as political rights (vote, religion, etc.).

China has improved mightily in human rights over the past decades. That the focus has been more on social/economic rights than political rights does not distract from the improvement. And continued improvement is the key. Unless you think US had perfect human rights from the moment of its foundation.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Look, as imperfect as we may be I wouldn't welcome a Communist government for love nor money.

Try reading about China's great human rights: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

As you point out, China is a developing country.

When the US was a developing country, look at its human rights: slavery, no vote for women, concentration camps for Japanese. No link required.

In fact, the US continues to have widespread human rights problems - the death penalty (just see the many innocents recently exonerated by DNA evidence), no gay marriage and outright hostility to gays particularly in the south. Even major political leaders in the US openly support discrimination (e.g. Santorum is openly hostile to gays).

And you complain about poverty in the US. Where are the economic and social human rights in the US to a decent standard of living, economic opportunity, health care, and education? Or as the Constitution puts it, the right to life (health) and pursuit of happiness.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I'm not going to get into an argument with you about this.... All the things you listed for the US you can double for China....

How can you even make a comparison?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Yes, but US is a developed nation now. When the US was the manufacturing capital of the world (like China is now), how were its human rights then?

China was a devastated nation after the Japanese invasion, WWII and the cultural revolution. In contrast, the US had the world's only remaining industrial base left after WWII. The timelines and starting points are different.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

You keep thinking that China will evolve into a free society.... Communism by it's very nature will not allow that....

[-] 0 points by ciaoant1 (16) 2 years ago

Here's Albert Einstein: "Why Socialism?" http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism

[-] 0 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

Communism was invented by the one thousandth of one percent. A very small group hoarded all of the wealth and the people received nothing.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

OWS must support it!

[-] 0 points by sameastheoldboss (0) from Los Angeles, CA 2 years ago

Yes....let's look at China....they would be so open to this kind of thing...millions massing demanding equitable policies, demanding humane treatment, demanding government change...and they were honored and respected and listened to .....Oh wait...no that was Tiananmen Square and they were more less mowed down taken away or never heard from again.....uh...next suggestion?

[-] 0 points by OccupyCapitolHill (197) 2 years ago

Communism has killed millions upon millions of people. Communism is simply the concentration of the ENTIRETY of a nation's wealth within the leader's inner circle known as the "party". You think corporations have all the wealth, but yet you advocate COMMUNISM? And China is slowly shifting towards capitalism. Try crawling out from the rock you live under for once. I normally try to refrain from saying stuff like this but you are a complete and total IDIOT. Communism is nothing more than a global disease that will go extinct once it fails in its last few remaining iterations. Marx was a lunatic, and the culture he created was one of bloodshed, sorrows, and UNIVERSAL suffering.

[-] 0 points by metapolitik (1110) 2 years ago

Depends on what you mean when you say "Communism":

Provided you mean Trotskyist / Leninist based progressive Marxism complete with Deep Direct Democracy (preferably: Digital and Direct as well) - and not that totalitarian crap Stalin tried to sell...

Then YES!

I agree!

  • Permanent Revolution!
  • Direct Democracy!
  • No Gods No Masters!
  • All are EQUAL!

http://occupywallst.org/forum/economic-freedom/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/nutshell-is-back-new-and-improved/

http://metapolitik.org/nutshell

http://metapolitik.org/article/approaching-metapolitical-discourse

[-] 0 points by Pottsandahalf (141) 2 years ago

Communism is certainly more popular than congress right now

[-] 0 points by forOWS (161) 2 years ago

Duh. China is not Communist. It is a totalitarian capitalist state. It controls everything with some private control allowed only under the close watch of the Chinese government. And no one can say anything about work or environmental conditions. You could say that China is the way the NeoCons here in the United States would love to let the fat-cats run the country. And it could happen and is pretty close to that now. That is why you see the Dog faced Boehner on the MSM saying we'll shut down the government first before we allow any changes that will hurt our vision of what we want America to be.

We want it to be just like China. Completely unregulated. Thick smog every day all over the country. Chemicals from factories and coal burning pouring into the sky and into the water. Under paid workers. No health insurance for anyone except the very rich who can afford to pay. That's okay with the Republicans. That is heaven to them.

[-] 0 points by Merchant228 (1) 2 years ago

Surrendering freedom for economic security?

No thank you, besides, there are plenty of hard working poor people in China that probably disagree with you.

[-] 0 points by nkp (33) 2 years ago

Chinese economic policies are actually very captialist. They are only really communist in name

[-] 0 points by Algee (182) 2 years ago

China is not a communist country. It is a capitalist man wearing a communist costume.

[-] 0 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

answer - rights are endowed by our creator - not doled out by government to the biggest voting block. hey genius - China is doing well because they are departing from communism lol!

[-] 0 points by Kevabe (81) 2 years ago

Go to hell Communists! or just go to your choice of the following, but get out of the United States:

Cuba China Vietnam Laos North Korea Venezuela

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

I have been thinking of going to China. Low taxes and more money. Some of my colleagues have been giving up their US citizenship because of the US global tax (US taxes its citizens even if they are working in China). Vietnam also growing nicely these days. US = fall of the Roman Empire man. One hit wonder. China has been the leading civilization for 17 of the past 20 centuries buddy - go with the sure thing.

[-] 1 points by Kevabe (81) 2 years ago

Sounds like you made up your mind. Hurry up and go to China!

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Not quite yet because the competition in the US is easier. Ppl are lazier here.

[-] 0 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 2 years ago

Communist state capitalism was a mistake, market based communism is fine.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (22234) 2 years ago

China has a communist government with a capitalist economy. The OWS message is anti-communist. It is about fairness, about getting money out of politics so that the government works for the benefit and general welfare of the majority of people, not just the wealthy.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

No, we are about socialism. A lot of us think we should take it to communism.

[-] 0 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Strange how this comment keeps coming back up, its nothing but troll commentary time to feed the opposition to this movement.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Then move to china while the rest of us try to fix whats here, bozo. LOL, gotta hand it to you troll, this is original. Did you really expect anybody but another troll to say, hell yes, lets do it. Thanks for the joke butthead, was bored this morning. By the way, whats next, lets join Al-Qaeda.

[-] 0 points by TheMaster (63) 2 years ago

Yeah, their per capita income of $4500 a year would play well in the US.

Ever been to China? Ouch!

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

It's about growth. And yes, many times.

[-] 0 points by metapolitik (1110) 2 years ago

I don't think that Soviet style "Communism" as it existed in the 20th Century was remotely sustainable or that it constitutes a viable model for humanity's future.

Also, referring to China as "Communist" anymore is slightly absurd when you consider all of the laissez-faire economic policies that they've adopted in recent years to allow access to export markets. China currently boasts better wealth mobility and more new millionaires each year than most western economies. If anything, China has become hyper-capitalist.

While I support Marxist economic policies and Marx/Trotsky idea of "permanent revolution", I do not support the quasi-fascist nation states that have been passed off as "Communist" over the years. They are usually more accurately describes as "fascist", in that they are based on a commitment to the national community as an organic entity, and in that individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of state. This creates a sociopolitical and economic "monoculture" that is too rigid to adapt and too bloated to be sustained.

Here we have the opposite problem. The cults if "individual identity", "the American Dream", "Economic Prosperity" and "Rational Self Interest" have turned us into a schizophrenic society hell bent on it's own economic self-destruction.

We need a fair, balanced, democratic model for a sustainable mixed-economy that rewards the hard working and allows everyone an opportunity to participate in economic activity.

The problem with "capitalism" is that it is based on the "private ownership of the means of production". It is time to call into question whether this is truly the preferred economic model. Personally, I think that a "co-op" or "worker-owned" model is a far more sustainable and efficient approach.

Thus a type of "Grass Roots Communism". A sustainable, anti-authoritarian, community-driven, decentralized, cooperative form of stateless, free-market, anarcho-communist, Capitalism 2.0.

A new, hybrid economic model that takes the best, most workable ideas from each system and discards the rest.

http://metapolitik.org/article/approaching-metapolitical-discourse

[-] 0 points by nichole (525) 2 years ago

Look at labor conditions in China and tell me the People are doing well.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

80% of people are satisfied with the government and the direction of the country. According to western non-partisan studies (e.g. brookings institute)

[-] 1 points by nichole (525) 2 years ago

That's the biggest load of bull I've ever heard. This bull market is running out of steam. Your perceived immunity puts you in a funny head space. They'll never indefinitely detain me, I'm an upstanding citizen. I'm hard working, too, unlike those people who are working 40+ hours being ground down daily and going home poor. That will never be you, you should write the government a thank you note.

[-] 0 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

Communism is fascism and fascism is communism. So why are people debating which despotic form of totalitarianism has gripped our nation?

[-] 0 points by opensociety4us (914) from Norwalk, CT 2 years ago

no it's not and OWS should not support communism.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

OWS already does.

[-] 0 points by tomcat68 (298) 2 years ago

OooooRahhhh!
THATS what I'M Talkin' About!!!!!

Let's Get DOWN with Barack Hussein Osama and The NEW World Order!

The Communist State of Amerika.

(infidels shall be spared providing they convert and live as second class slaves)

[-] 0 points by Fraqtive42 (87) from Herndon, VA 2 years ago

elpinio, China is capitalist. That is why it is doing so well. You are misinformed. China has a booming manufacturing economy, which has been generating a lot of wealth.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

Ever Wonder Why All The Communist Countries Lock Their People In ?

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

Please commit suicide or go subject yourself to Communist rule in any country of your choice. Start one here, if that suits you, it didn't work out well for Charles Manson.

[-] 0 points by AllianceForPeace (40) 2 years ago

China is not communist anymore they are in a capitalism mode now is why they have developed so quickly. I know this off hand because I work in China most of the time so do not think that their system is the best, it is the same as America's, just new way for their society. Many taxes in China now, more than before and they have banks everywhere now and Chinese citizens are all applying for credit cards. Seems capitalism to me!

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

I too work in China-and you are mistaken. What you see is not what you get. It is communism/fascism-total govt control from top down (top being the Rothchild bank cartel that owns their central bank).

Same internal cancer we have in America-abated with "infusions" of capital from central bank swaps you wouldn't understand, as you clearly regard the symptoms (corruption) of our constitutional republic, as the problem. Before making the utterly disastrous tragic mistake of reaching for a bright shiny new system(all been done before) take time to study the system we have, and how we re-capture our rights http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/

[-] 1 points by AllianceForPeace (40) 2 years ago

I am not talking about Chinese government but their system of economy which America forgot all about and its People!

[-] 0 points by LeandroCSD (2) 2 years ago

I'd suggest a government with some communist criteries while some capitalist ones, let me set two examples: 1-Someone who works alone, wich is rare, would simply earn his pay with what he does. 2-As an enterprise, all workers would receive same salaries and the profit of the enterprise would be divided equally, so despite the same salaries, it would encourage the workers to work more and earn more profit. Of course, cooperation and assemblies would be necessary. This just a raw scheme i thought it would help eliminate the lack of motivation. Of course, every system is subject to corruption.

[-] 0 points by aleoracle (8) 2 years ago

No way, Communism no. Something new yes. OWS needs fight for 7 billions people. So OWS needs feed some plan to make democracy 2.0. This really will be revolutionary. All the world follow the US democracy. So if OWS get some democracy update all the world will follow.

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

The reason China is doing so well is because the people in charge rule with an iron thumb.

[-] 0 points by SmithGoesWashington (72) 2 years ago

Let the history unfolds itself; perhaps a novel idea prevails at the end.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Fedup15 (30) 2 years ago

China is no longer communist. Its a one party controlled capitalistic society.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Even Cuba has moved away from Communism. This past month on November 4th they annouced they now allow private ownership of real estate. A big step away form their policy of the past 30 years.

Coba is moving from a communist system to a facist system as we speak. Why do I say fasism as opposed to capitalism? Because they are still maintaining heavy state control. As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power.

Where socialism seeks totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism seeks that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalizes property explicitly, fascism does so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”

[-] 0 points by Puzzlin (2898) 2 years ago

China is doing well. Where the hell is the evidence of that?

The slaves are doing well?

Does this thread care about the truth and is this just another misguided thread that will put the OWS in a bad light.

History, if anyone ever cares to read it instead of repeating it, can answer this question. It has nothing to do with the OWS movement.

THE PUZZLER

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

10% annual growth over the last 30 years, consecutively. hundreds of millions lifted out of poverty. many OWS protestors support socialism and communism.

[-] 0 points by rightniche (12) 2 years ago

China is doing far from well. And the current situation of China has little to do with communism. China is what I myself term as a "government-on-the-top Keynesian capitalism". This system is not a bad one in terms of building up economy.

China's economy is doing ok not because things are really ok but Chinese people are ok with the economy. China is a very different country, a very different people and culture. In this country there is an overwhelmingly efficient mind control mechanism that makes people think, talk and act alike and Chinese government is doing some work to contribute to this mechanism. In China, it is called "harmony", a very profound concept.

Under "harmony", radical changes and risky or bold actions are less likely to be considered and this is why things look just fine.

[-] 0 points by Jflynn64 (337) 2 years ago

China is doing well because their labor costs are so much lower than everybody else. As these costs have risen, many other countries have risen up to compete with them. We are already seeing many US companies moving production back to the US as the labor cost advantage is waning.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Great. We can have people sewing again. Way to become a top-notch country.

[-] 0 points by badconduct (550) from Ottawa, ON 2 years ago

China is a horrible example of communism. And with the except of the cities that run on Capitalism; everyone is poor and starving in the country.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

False. I've traveled throughout the country extensively. Lived there too.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) from Ottawa, ON 2 years ago

Oh, ok. China is a lovely place, they never arrest people for speaking out against it. Communism is awesome, it has such a wonderful history. I can't wait to be a part of it.

As well; they are a horrible of example of communism because it's capitalism that makes them what they are today.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Just like they never arrest OWS protestors for speaking out?

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) from Ottawa, ON 2 years ago

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2011/0221/1224290426292.html

18 months of labour and reeducation? You get, what? 3 days in the states?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

at least these evil communists have never like invaded say iraq for oil, causing 200,000 civilian deaths.... or say nuked civilians... or gave billions to mubarak in egypt for decades as he was repressing and torturing his own people.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) from Ottawa, ON 2 years ago

What about Vietnam and Korea?

What about the USSR? They invaded a ton of countries. They didn't install dictatorships?

What about Tibet?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Sure, so communists are not nice. And democratic countries are not nice. You were saying communists are so much more evil. Clearly not true. So point is invalid. And a communist America doesn't have to follow any communist legacy either.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) from Ottawa, ON 2 years ago

...

The fact that you can even say that democratic countries are bad and communism is good in a democratic country just proves how wrong you are. The internet in China is censored and watched, you could be arrested for speaking out against the Government.

I'm certainly not saying that our current system isn't corrupt. But communism doesn't work. And I can give you one reason why it won't work.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by bemindful (23) 2 years ago

They force women to have abortions. They are doing sooooo well. It wasn't until China began economic reforms towards a market-oriented, State capitalism based system that it was able to pull millions out of poverty, illiteracy and improve the health of it's population. The United States is never going to adopt Communism. If you want to delude yourself and continue to believe that its the "way to go" , what the hell are you doing here? You're FREE to move. But good luck voicing political dissent online as you are here, without the government's censor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6inWKFKv9UA&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-nXT8lSnPQ

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

I am considering it. They pay 80k more for the same job I am doing here. Many Americans are moving. And giving up their citizenship because you have to pay US tax even if you work in China - aka US's "global tax"

[-] 0 points by avery724 (60) 2 years ago

If you live , you'll live to regret moving there.

[-] 0 points by nitrusb (8) 2 years ago

China is hardly communist. They have a form of state capitalism where business colludes with government to trample upon the rights of their people. Some have complained about abuses of eminent domain here in the U.S., but the Chinese government bulldozes entire towns in an authoritarian manner such that there are no appeals and the most powerful capitalist dictates what happens. There is no environmental review and no hearing, it just happens. Democracy is messy and contentious, therefore it is more difficult to accomplish big things in a democratic society where everyone has rights. China is eating our lunch when it comes to public investment because their state is simply more powerful than ours and they don't have things like "filibusters" to worry about. It may work for them right now, but imagine if there were a real tyrant with the same power... It's not such an attractive notion, is it?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

That's how things get done efficiently. Good of the collective. That's why we have been talking about high speed rail in the NE corridor, and between SF and LA for decades, yet nothing is ever done and is 4x over budget. Because some farmer objects. Good for the random farmer. Bad for the country.

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

China has worse problems than here. However, I'm all for Communism as long as I'm in charge.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Their communist government has 80% support and satisfaction of the people. They have problems but see the opportunity and have hope. These studies are done by non-partisan US think tanks. Easy to Google if you want to take a look. In contrast, the approval rate for our democratic Congress is 15%.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Yep. Almost everyone knows how to get around it.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Tech savvy Chines can subvert their nation's fire walls.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 2 years ago

And how many people, on a percentage basis, would that be?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Information is infectious. So say I am able to subvert the wall, well, every one I know would know what I know, and 'cause I know a lot of people, a lot of people know what I know. There are a lot of Chines who come here and learn the skills needed to subvert. Also, seems we are on the subject; have you ever seen how fast their top down economic controlled economy puts up one building? It is a thing of beauty. Ten to fifteen cranes working in unison put a building up so much quicker than our market oriented circle jerk.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 2 years ago

You didn't answer the question, so you are a dumbass for not being able to read what is directly written to you. Do you know how long it took for the Empire State Building to be built? Google it dumbass. What is different now? Useless regulation.

Now, since you are too inept to answer the questions I pose to you, I will tell you that the very existence of this website is not known by the Chinese population. If you were Chinese you would be arrested for even posting here.

In 2001, Wang Xiaoning and other Chinese activists were arrested and sentenced to 10 years in prison for using a Yahoo email account to post anonymous writing to an Internet mailing list, which Yahoo, after pressure from the Chinese government eventually blocked. However, with the help of the World Organization for Human Rights, Wang and Shi Tao, another online activist sued Yahoo, accusing the Internet provider of abetting the torture of pro-democracy writers by providing information that allowed the Chinese government to identify them.

On 23 July 2008, the family of Liu Shaokun was notified that he had been sentenced to one year re-education through labor for “inciting a disturbance”. As a teacher in Sichuan province, he had taken photographs of collapsed schools and posted these photos online.

On 18 July 2008, Huang Qi was formally arrested on suspicion of illegally possessing state secrets. Huang had spoken with the foreign press and posted information on his website about the plight of parents who had lost children in collapsed schools

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Grow up and have an adult conversation simpleton. I can not believe a mouth like yours is able to do anything but water my crops.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 2 years ago

When you know the truth and dodge it you are both a liar and a dumbass. What crops grow in Phoenix anyway? Tumbleweeds? That city is a perfect example of the abuse of natural resources. How many green lawns exist in your desert?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

first of all, i would never advocate growing a lawn here. to clump us all together as resource wasting, non compost using,nincompoops who can't grow vegetables is generalizing. my front yard is vegetated with desert type foliage. my back yard, in the late fall is used for growing tomatoes and in early spring lettuce. I've got a green house that allows me to grow cucumbers. now, I will tell you that most of the growth is for hobbies, But if the shit ever hit the fan, I doubt it will, food can be grown in the dessert. You are right though, growing grass is not a wise idea, and will cost the home owner severally.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

You haven't been there lately, eh?

It's hitting the fan there as well and they too have money problems acerbated by a drying up United States market for their slaves' production.

Seriously, Communism will never work here unless I am the Supreme Commander in Charge.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Nope, was there 2 weeks ago.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

Obviously not in the Secret Nuclear Backroom Club.

[-] 0 points by Mowat (164) 2 years ago

NO WAY!

Communism is dictatorship.

[-] 1 points by Frizzle (520) 2 years ago

There are reasons why most communistic countries turned into dictatorships. It isn't by definition that way.

I don't like taking communism as example though. The word is to tied to the past and restricts our way of thinking forward. We can escape Capitalism without falling back to another outdated system.

[-] 0 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

why do you think China is doing so well? They are moving away from communism & toward free markets hello!!!

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

And why are we doing so badly here, considering that we already have free markets?

I believe we are doing badly here because of the kind of capitalism we have here. There are different kinds of capitalism. Here, finance capitalism dominates, while in China, they are practicing more of an industrial kind of capitalism, like what we had in the 50s and 60s.

I think China's progress is also do to investments in high tech infrastructure, such as fast trains and nuclear power.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

I agree. If high taxes, burdensome regulation & Union extortion weren't driving industry out - we'd be in better shape like China.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Finance capitalism and free trade is what drove industry out. The desire to increase profits by paying labor less and less is what moved our industries to China.

A better approach to making money would be to pay the workers enough so that they can educate themselves and their children, so that we would have people who are capable of inventing more efficient modes of production.

[-] 0 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

"A better approach to making money would be to pay the workers"

Hence higher costs to business. - you just proved my point.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Consider this, it may cost more for a company to purchase higher quality machinery than it's competitor buys, but then the company that buys the better quality equipment will be able to out produce it's cheaper competitor.

The same with people, it may cost more for a company to pay its workers enough so that they can develop to a higher level, but once they reach that higher level, they will be more productive than the in company that pays it's employees less.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

that's all up to the business to decide - not you or some communist dictator.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

The US constitution says that it is the government's responsibility to promote the common good. This is not communist ideology.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

define "Common Good"

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

The "common good" would be that which is good for all of the people. For me, economic development is the greatest of the common goods, because it is what provides the revenue to support all other worthy causes.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

"other worthy causes" your idea of what is worthy might be different than mine etc. by the way - it doesn't say "common good" - it says "general welfare"

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

To me, the general welfare would be the same as the common good. The idea is to create a rising tide that improves conditions for everybody.

The best way to improve conditions for everybody is to foster new inventions and discoveries. Therefore, the government should set policies which ensure that the greatest number of people are educated to the extent that they can make discoveries and develop new inventions.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

sounds good. what policies can ensure that the greatest number of people are educated to the extent that they can make discoveries and develop new inventions?

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago
  • sounds like a great idea. How do you see this happening?

What I'm talking about is at heart a classical education system. Considering how classical western culture has been denigrated over the past 50 years, it would be difficult.

There are, however, people on the sidelines, like Lyndon Larouche, whom you may despise, that is training a group of young people in both political activism and classical culture. If that group could continue to grow substantially, it could make such a thing happen.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Those would be policies which insure that primary and secondary education adequately train children in a creative, scientific approach. William Von Humbolt, architect of Prussian education, implemented a classical education system which transformed Germany into the industrial power house of the world.

Than higher education, also with an emphasis on scientific creativity should be affordable to a substantial number of students. But technical schools and apprenticeships should also be widely available, since skilled practical work would be equally important, as a means of implementing scientific discoveries.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

sounds like a great idea. How do you see this happening?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

The common good is creating an environment where occupy movements are unheard of and unwarranted. Where a great number of the population is not behind bars, and people's sexual orientation is not politically questioned. Where people can unwind any way they choose after a long day's work.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

That's your definition. My definition is different. Why do we get to use yours?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Well, we use the definition that the majority believes in. That's how are system of government works. Though the free exchange of ideas, in this forum, hopefully I can persuade the majority, not you, to come to my line of reasoning. Ain't democracy great. Cheers! But a caveat being, I don't have to capitulate to the majority's reasoning, I 'll just try harder in two years if I loose,

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

That which leads to "a more perfect union".

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Lots of us at OWS support communism here because it works. Communism directs their economy. They mandate what industries get focus. Lately, it has been solar. They have decimated the US solar industry (you may have heard of the numerous US bankruptcies) and are very successful at solar now, making billions because of central direction.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

so you disregard the reason why China is improving - they are moving away from communism & toward free markets.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Central planning and direction is why they are succeeding.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

hahahaha! are you kidding !? Put down that crack pipe - it's starting to take effect.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

e.g. china's central gmt decided 10 years ago to focus on renewables, like solar and wind. they now dominate those markets. look at market share stats. previous market leaders in spain and usa have been decimated and many are bankrupt. almost no solar companies remain in the us. solyndra is the latest to fail. they are doing this industry by industry.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

yes - and they are moving towards free market economics as we are moving toward central planning. Thank you - you proved my point exactly.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

i wouldn't say that exactly. we haven't had free markets for a long time. the very idea of trickle down economics is central planning by definition. so the cry about obama picking winners and losers is more of the same, nothing new here to see.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

totally disagree - how is trickle down central planning? it means when business does well everybody does better. simple fact. a rising tide lifts all boats is another way to put it - JFK

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

However, "trickle down" isn't working here, the disaster is all around is now. We would be better off with a "bubble up" approach in which the workers are paid well and that money bubbles up to the higher levels.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

it's not working "now" because capital is on the sidelines waiting for a more business friendly environment to put their money at risk.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

By "business friendly environment" do you mean conditions like those that exist in China?

Paying workers as little as possible is not a business friendly practice, because, for one thing, it eliminates the consumer base.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

business always pays workers as little as possible. If you want more money you need to provide a more valuable set of skills that are more scarce. cheap products sold at Walmart etc are great! More people have more money to buy more product and spurs even more business to keep up with demand. That's how it works. Any time you try to artificially inflate costs - Capital will seek to lower their costs to compete.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago
  • so why dont you occupy congress?

Maybe I should.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Personally, I think the problems that our government has are due to it's corruption by the global financial empire.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

so why dont you occupy congress?

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

I think that sub prime lending was probably done by the banks and government in collusion. But I see the banks as controlling the government.

I think it is wrong to expect private companies to be responsible for economic development. The purpose of corporations is to pursue the advantage of their private owners.

Economic development is in the realm of the general welfare so it is a natural thing for government to handle. I think we should let the corporations do what they are intended to do, and let the government do what it is intended to do.

Government is not necessarily a bad thing, now it is quite corrupted, but it doesn't have to be that way. Big government and big business should be able to work together in a productive way to improve our economy.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

limited government. the founders knew well about a government out of control. that is why they set it up the way they did. yet somehow - we've found away to treat the constitution as toilet paper. It's over. Nation in decline. Just like the other great powers. Athens, Rome Britain, everyone has their run.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago
  • what happened to all that stimulus money that was supposed to keep us below 8% unemployment?

I think most of that money went to bailing out the banks. We would really have to start with a new system. Put the current one through bankruptcy reorganization with Glass Steagall, then create a national bank. Then we would be in a position to create credit to invest in economic development.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

No - that was TARP that repaid the banks. keep up. I agree Glass Steagall was good. although we wouldnt need it if the govt didnt force banks to lower lending standards so the govt can experiment in social engineering wanting everyone to be able to own their own home regardless of credit downpayment etc. We dont need a National bank. More government! are you kidding !?

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago
  • what "policies" would those be that ensure employment is widely available and that workers are paid a living wage?

For our current situation, I advocate a return to the New Deal policies of FDR which brought us out of the great depression. That is, first the Glass Steagall bankruptcy reorganization of the financial system, then the establishment of a national bank. This would be able to make loans available at low interest rates, since it would not have to earn profit for private owners.

The money would then be invested in infrastructure projects that would improve the productivity of society. For example, the Tennessee Valley Authority electrified a vast region of the south east which had previously been the poorest in the nation.

The jobs created would not just be make work or stimulate consumption, but rather, they would be intended to improve productivity. For example, the electrification project allowed farmers in the south to work more efficiently as well as enabling the establishment of manufacturing.

Public sector jobs in infrastructure development also create many private sector jobs in manufacturing.

A science oriented project, like JFK's space program, would also be important. This program is said to have returned ten dollars for every dollar invested in it, in terms of economic development.

The space program produced whole new industries, the aerospace industry, which had not existed previously, and which employed many workers in good paying jobs.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

what happened to all that stimulus money that was supposed to keep us below 8% unemployment?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

But if the surgeon wants enough clients to support his practice, he should support policies that ensure that employment is widely available and that workers are paid a living wage.

To give in example, on a recent visit to my dentist, he was terribly concerned about the future of his practice. The number of his clients had dropped off dramatically in recent years due to unemployment.

Many companies now are going out of business for the same reason.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

what "policies" would those be that ensure employment is widely available and that workers are paid a living wage?

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Yes, I know the Chinese standard of living is on the rise, I lived in China for a year.

There are also Chinese people who do high skilled work, such as computer programming at a much lower cost than American programmers.

I don't think that a surgeon and a burger cook should be paid the same, but if the workers are not paid enough to afford the services of a surgeon, what good will it do him to get an expensive medical degree?

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

But if the surgeon wants enough clients to support his practice, he should support policies that ensure that employment is widely available and that workers are paid a living wage.

To give in example, on a recent visit to my dentist, he was terribly concerned about the future of his practice. The number of his clients had dropped off dramatically in recent years due to unemployment.

Many companies now are going out of business for the same reason.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

if a worker wants enough money to afford a surgeons services they need to learn skills that will pay enough to afford said surgeon's services. The same way they need skills to earn enough to eat, & house themselves.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

If you include within the price of a product the amount that is needed for the worker to improve himself, than the price of the product will gradually come down, or the product will be replaced by a totally new and improved product that the improved worker invents.

Prices should be reduced not by paying workers less, but by paying them enough so that they can develop new ways to produce products more efficiently.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Workers need to be paid enough so that they can acquire higher skills. This creates an upward spiral rather than the downward spiral that we are now in.

Profitability should be increased by making workers more capable and creative rather than by reducing their pay.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

So do you want to see American workers reduced to the level of Chinese workers?

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

The Chinese standard of living is on the rise by the way. Americans will only be "reduced" to the level of a Chinese worker performing low or no skill jobs if the American worker refuses to do anything more than a low or no skill job. It's all about skills. Do you believe a Surgeon & a guy flipping burgers at McDonalds should be paid the same?

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Is it really "greedy" for workers to want to make enough to give their families a decent life? You don't really want to see American workers reduced to the level of Chinese workers, do you?

I think the greedy one are those who want to pay their workers a sub minimal wage.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

if you want to make enough to give your family a decent life you need to acquire skills for a high wage occupation. Actually - you should be doing that BEFORE you have a family to provide for! I shouldn't have to subsidize your family by paying higher prices because you need higher wages to feed them. Having a family is not a right .

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Businesses did not always pay workers as little as possible. In the 50s and 60s, industrial workers with high school educations were paid enough so that they could buy houses and cars, let the wife stay at home, and send the kids to college. This is what we called "the American dream".

Cheap products result in cheap people. I would rather have fairly priced, high quality products that are affordable to well paid workers.

Sure, higher level skill sets should pay better, but even the unskilled should be payed enough so that they can improve themselves. This is what makes the economy grow.

I don't see people as having more money today to buy products. In fact, people have less and less expendable income.

I believe capital can compete more effectively by paying their workers enough so that they can improve themselves.

[-] 2 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

industrial workers in the 50's & 60's were heavily unionized hence higher wages hence eventually they got greedy & Industry fled overseas. Pretty simple stuff. wages are set by the market.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

i wasn't debating benefit. i was pointing out that giving subsidies to one company or industry and not to the rest is central planning by definition. can't change the definition by arguing it with me.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

I agree - I am against all subsidies. I am against all crony capitalism. I am for free markets.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

what separates trickle down from ordered philosophies is that the lower class is taken out of the calculus. before, more of the taxes came from the wealthy and went to the poor. now, more of the taxes are taken from the middle and given to the rich, while placating the poor with crumbs. dude, you need to read more books and stay away from corporate sponsored public relations sites.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

ah - so your peddling your book. excellent Capitalist lol! first of all the bottom 47% pay zero federal income tax for starters. the tom 1% pays 37% of the federal income taxes collected by the IRS. the top 10% pays 70% - look it up - if you dont like my link go directly to the IRS for the same data.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html#table1

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

I read books, I have yet to write one. I'm still debating on letting america choke on its own hubris. and that is 70 percent of the total not 70% of their income. people like you should be band from voting. when you pay so little of your percentage of income and receive so much in subsidies that is called communism. plus that is not a government site, but a think tank site.

[-] 0 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

Name one Communist leader that isn't a Capitalist when it comes to their own cash flow.

[-] 0 points by vtexx (6) 2 years ago

Yea,,,and look at Cuba...and Venezuela, and Russia...

dumb ass commies..A society fit for gullible sheep

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Why don't you look at democratic countries? Iraq, Afghanistan, Greece, Iceland, USA.

[-] 0 points by screwtheman (122) 2 years ago

Yeah, the Chinese people aren't oppressed by the govt at all. They work for way less per hour than in the USA. They have massive information censorship and horrible living conditions.

[-] 0 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

They were even worse off before. They have had 10% growth for over 30 consecutive years now.

[-] -1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

That's due to leadership, not system. We have information censorship and horrible living conditions here to. So whats you argument to that??

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

You might want to read the Patriot Act before you show your ignorance. They are censoring our news. Period. They want to know what you believe at this point so they let you write to your hearts content for now.

[-] 0 points by simplesimon (121) 2 years ago

I am FINE with the Patriot Act. You are a dumbass for thinking news is censored, but you are entitled to your own dumbass opinion. We need people like you int he world, otherwise we would have to do our own dishes.

[-] 1 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

The MSM prints agenda, they do NOT report unbiased news.

[-] 1 points by nitrusb (8) 2 years ago

The news is not censored. Nothing prevents them from reporting events. The problem is that the mainstream media outlets CHOOSE what the news is, thereby lying to you every day through omission. Moreover, the information is geared toward the lowest common denominator and there is little regard for facts, and no actual INVESTIGATION. Instead, they are obsessed with access to politicians, and politicians do not offer access to journalists that actually do their job! We allowed politicians to develop this sense of entitlement. We, and only we, can change it.

[-] 2 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

And that is not censorship?? Lot's of news outlets censor. A republican network isn't going to cover Bush's Arabusto oil company trading money with the Bin Ladens, just as a democratic station didn't cover Clinton getting a BJ in office. Whether through ommision or whitewashing or "ignorance", it's still censorship

[-] 0 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

Like I said about your ignorance but you had to go and leave no room for doubt how ignorant one can be.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 2 years ago

Try english so I can understand you. Type slowly please.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

You are uninformed.(and I find it funny someone who's monkier is simple calls me a dumbass,BTW). Did you not hear about the bill that was on the floor to censor the internet?? It was called PROTECT IP. Who do you think makes the laws anywhere you go?? The leaders, that's why they are called leaders. If there were no leaders, conditions would be much worse. It would be anarchy. You can post tripe any where you go. Such as reverting to childish name calling, because I think in a different manner.I never said they are not communist. I said it was the leaders oppressing their people, not the system they live by.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 2 years ago

I am well informed, and you are still a dumbass. If you want to live in a communist country then by all means go and do that.

You are really a sniveling idiot to dissassociate communism with communist leadership. There is really no other way to communicate it to you.

[-] 1 points by screwtheman (122) 2 years ago

People there work for a dollar a day. Homeless people begging for change make more.

[-] 1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Not everyone. Just because that's what they want to air on TV to get you out of your money, doesn't mean that's the story. I've personally been there. It's a nice place with nice people(it's a creepy niceness, but at least they don't yell fuck you for stopping at a Stop sign like here), and a ton of wierd shit. There are slums there, but then there are slums here too. And to saythey work for a dollar a day is innacurate as they don't use the dollar there, and you didn't say what occupation this dollar a day figure comes from

[-] 1 points by nitrusb (8) 2 years ago

Every society has its strengths and weaknesses relative to one's notion of good and ill. Someone once told me that most Chinese people know that their government is fundamentally corrupt, so it is not news to them and therefore they do not depend on it as we do here. In that light, is the Americans that are the fools for giving our heads of state the benefit of the doubt when they do not deserve it. Perhaps the most egregious problem in Chinese Society is the justice system, as many have documented. The courts in China once ruled that if you help someone in need on the street who has fallen over, it is probable cause that you knocked them over yourself. They "reason" that the only reason you would help is because you feel guilty about having knocked them down in the first place. Good samaritans have been sued and bankrupted under this, and now most people are too frightened to help victims on the street. Nice society, China.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

That's a better argument than some half baked reality that some in this country don't understand.

[-] 1 points by screwtheman (122) 2 years ago

I would suggest you move there then.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

I lived there for 3 years, once my job was up, I came back home. You move and get some exposure.

[-] -1 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

China can hardly be called a communist state.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

China is a communist state. There.

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

Just find out the number of billionaires in China. Also collective ownership is long gone.

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

It is a communist state only in theory. In practice it is anything but. Sure it's not as capitalist as US, but it is a mix of capitalism and socialism.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

You got it wrong both ways. It is actually more capitalistic than the US. Money rules over there. Entrepreneurship is exploding. GDP is rising at 10% a year. If you've lived there, you would understand.

At the same time, it is still communist. One party rule with 5 year economic plans that direct the country's industry. They plan it and they execute it, no excuses or exceptions.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22234) 2 years ago

China has a communist political system with a capitalist economic system.

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

I dont really fancy living in China or even doing business there. It's a harrowing time. The few encounters I have had with chinese firms and chinese bureaucrats have been not very pleasant.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

They are hard core capitalistic and don't care about niceties, that's for sure. Might also be why they are a dominant force of growth worldwide at the moment.

And I agree that I wouldn't want to live there long term at the moment.

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

The problem is that they care way too much about niceties. Any business negotiations begin with a lot of rituals, meeting so many people including provincial authorities, host of bureaucrats etc. The actual round of negotiations begin much later. Too many formalities.

As for their dominance, they have always been dominant. So far 20 centuries, the chinese have not been a dominant power in only 2 centuries. They consider themselves as the 'middle kingdom', the kingdom between heaven and lowly earth. They are frighteningly ambitious.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Agree with 2nd paragraph. First paragraph true for some people - it depends on who you are and if you have a pre-existing relationship.

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

The first para is to be taken only in the context of business negotiations.

[-] -1 points by danmi (66) 2 years ago

Go live in Europe dummy if you want socialism. It is not going to happen here, sorry libtards

[-] -1 points by blackbloc (-19) 2 years ago
[-] -1 points by Tinhorn (285) 2 years ago

China is doing well because of there ability to inflate there own worth. That bottom is soon to fall out as well and for them and unfortunatly for alot of other countries who have bought into there BS inflated currency, will be even more catistrophic than the rest of the world is feeling right now. You can already begin to see the start of it with the pictures of New large cities throughout China that are almost completely empty.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

inflated currency? You mean depressed buddy. The US has been trying to get them to inflate it for years. Educate yourself.

[-] 0 points by Tinhorn (285) 2 years ago

Sorry, I forgot the word under in front of it. I'm quite educated, but thanks for correcting my post.

[-] -1 points by REALamerican (241) 2 years ago

"look at China, they are doing well" Yeah they do a GREAT job controlling their people, forcing people to behave certain ways, causing millions of baby girls to be murdered or sold into slavery, and censoring all forms of media. Your right, I LOVE IT!

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

ya, they kill millions of baby girls... racist.

[-] -1 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 2 years ago

The first defining feature of a Communist system is the monopoly of power of the Communist Party

[-] -1 points by Karl101 (-6) 2 years ago

China is going to crash and burn, maybe not next year or the year after but china style capitalism and communism aren't compatible, one of them is going to break.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

They've been saying that for 30 years. Yet USA is the one crashing and burning now.

[-] 0 points by Karl101 (-6) 2 years ago

mr elpinio, then go live in China, i hear it's a wonderful place for america haters.

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

Bullshit. China is owned by the same zionists who own Washington.

Neat how you decide to occupy - Nothing better to do -no post that fits you quite as well.

Hasbara is a concept "normal" people here aren't familiar with. It takes so many forms. Zionism is the political manifestation of Talmud, most holy book of Jews (most Jews) it’s fair to say. Until we are willing to address the fact that this is a “religious” supremacist movement used from one end to the other by Rothschild et al at the top end of the $ pyramid to dominate and manipulate the rest of the world including those at the bottom end of the "Jewish" pyramid and the entire pyramid scheme is designed to rest directly on the backs of “Goyim” non Jews the world over, we are subdividing the problem only looking at pieces of it, apologizing for the SOURCE. Talmud, it’s adherents, Jewish and non Jewish (I know people who operate by Talmudic principle who have never heard of it) are antithetical to common law principles. If you can agree that the 7 laws of Noah or the Ten Commandments are basically sound in principle, you can also say that Talmud is an 18 volume collection of Rabbinical sophistry designed to circumvent the law for Jews and only Jews. No such thing as "Jew" Things have specific names that represent predictable qualities and quantities.  Things like "frisbees(tm)" get special recognition for being representative of a product that is a small plastic flying disc.   Frisbees fly in any direction you throw them, with predictable results based on how you throw the disc, and let's say, weather conditions. Frisbees are made from plastic (other things are plastic that aren't frisbees)  I could probably list dozens of types of plastic.  There are cloth frisbees (flying discs) there are disc golf discs (or "frisbees"-to most observers who don't play frisbee or frisbee golf / disc golf, there is no difference between frisbee golf and any other game of frisbee.  There is ultimate frisbee-some type of team frisbee with scoring. How many colors are there of frisbees? How many sizes?  How many shapes? They ALL sail through the air gracefully when you throw them properly. Where does the Jew label come in?  There is NO predictable set of things a Jew is known to do.  All the things they ARE capable of: Infinite list of every kind of positive thing they can do and every kind of negative thing, every kind of imaginary thing.  The fiction is self perpetuating...a lie that got started, and rolled out of control.  The harder they try to make it all true, the more lies must be told. We have "Jew" as a racial distinction and disagreements as to qualifications within each of those subdivisions.  (Sephardic, Ashkenazi, Spinoza, yada yada...)  We have "Jew" meaning adherent to a religious doctrine.  Within this subset we have orthodox, reform, and others. Why "Jew" is SO diverse and unbounded by qualitative and quantitative meaning that this label can be of no use to us in reasoned discussion.   By allowing any discussion to be framed around anything "Jew"ish, it's as though we accept and ratify, sight unseen, tomes of Talmudic Sophistry, every person place thing or act that has ever been attributed to "Jews" since the beginning of written records (including all the fakes).   Why start from a lost position? Time to move on to addressing the problems that are being associated with Jews and Israel and make clear distinctions so we can divide and separate the real crimes of commission from the false ideas of pseudo religion/false origin and most especially, the ingrained squeamishness that prevents most people from seeing the problem.  The term "Jew" serves to obscure these criminals.  It has only the life we give to it.  Jew is a fiction-a STRAW MAN.   If frisbees started coming off the line that didn't fly-we wouldn't call them frisbees.  Why do we afford Jews the same kind of leeway.  That label doesn't fit anything.  It's pure equivocation.  It falls flat-it does NOT fly. I suppose It would be impossible for me to come to this conclusion without the entirety of my experience and education, and without the Jewish label attached to ao many people i have dealt with directly and indirectly. I'm sure we could not have caught the tail of the problem without an overwhelming mountain of evidence. The continuous identity theft and self abusing sophistry is a paper trail like none other.   These diverse tribal gangs march to a familiar drumbeat that is inaudible to the rest of us "normal" people.  However, by the time we "normal folk" waking as truth seekers, seem able to grasp at the name of this problem, history shows that we may again find the strawman * has a new name, and that we really only have hold of the tail. Forget the name. It's the thing they fear most-irrelevance. Truth. We must identify their codes, their systematic criminal methods. Read the manuals full of hate speech they use to train generations of extremeist supremacist criminals.   Talmud is one of these hatefull manuals (Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion is like Talmud for Dummies or Cliffs Notes).  Kaballah caballah -another. We lose the game before we even start when we write or speak "Jew" in a thought that is supposed to address concrete crimes they have commited or may be suffering (as a result).   The word itsself is subtle poison - toxic in any amount, and lethal in many cases, where people mistook strawmen for humans.

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Get help for your problem bozo

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

Sad you can't render your problem in cogent sentence form without ad hominems.

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

excuse me, were you commenting or writing a book, you seem to drift off.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 2 years ago

I feel so sorry for the trolls-you're so indirect it's SCARY

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Indirect you say, i like to keep things to what this movement is really about. And i dont waste time with those who wish to oppose this movement with indirect falsehoods

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Our movement supports communism. Don't malign it!!!

[-] -1 points by mediaauditr (-88) 2 years ago

Troll. You can't possibly believe this. You want to live in a country where the government would make a forum like this one illegal?

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Wouldn't mind it if I there was nothing to complain about. Also, communism doesn't mean censorship.

[-] -1 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

If you really feel that way, move to Cuba. See how wonderful life under a communist dictator is.

[-] -1 points by utahdebater (-72) 2 years ago

Over 50% of China is free market now. They followed our example to Capitalism. China only started to do well when they relinquished their death grip on controlling their economy.

[-] -1 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

You are SO misguided.

[-] -1 points by Farleymowat (415) 2 years ago

China is an oppressive shithole. It's commie neighbor north Korea is a deeper shithole. No system is perfect, because human nature, tends to gravitate toward corruption, causing even the best systems to become oppressive. Our government, particularly the judiciary, spits on our constitution, tending to cite precedent over constitution in many cases, thus watering down and molesting a great document, for more control over the civil society. Every time a new law is passed , a new group of criminals is made. Take incandescent light bulbs. It is soon a crime to sell them. Forcing mercury filled fluorescent bulbs on us. Just one example of how criminals are made.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

China is not so bad, I lived there for a year and never once experienced any oppression. As an English teacher, I held discussions with Chinese people all day, five days a week, and rarely heard any complaints about oppression.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Agreed. I have lived there before as well. Unless you are retarded enough to make a fuss in the middle of Tienanmen square, you are pretty much allowed to do and speak as you please.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Where did you live, and how long were you there? It turns out, I'm going back pretty soon to teach English. I think I'll be going to Shanghai.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

5 months, in Beijing. Teaching English is fun for a while. Korea is also a good place to go for that.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

Andy Stern , former head of SEIU , thinks Chins is just great.He wrote an op-ed about it. 100 watt bulb , illegal to sell after dec.31 2011, 75 watt bulbs illegal to sell after dec. 31 2012. an undergound black market for lightbulbs will spring up.

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 2 years ago

People are hoarding what is left on the shelves. Price is way up.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

I know.

[-] 0 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

China's communist government has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty over the past few decades, with sustained 10% annual growth. Capitalism has done jack all for us here recently.

[-] 2 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

You forget about where China gets their money. That would be from Hong Kong, China's Capitalist providence.

[-] 2 points by Misfit138 (172) 2 years ago

That growth in China is due to their change towards capitalism. Their government is full of communists, but their economy has been getting much freer over the years. If anything, their communist government is holding them back from even greater growth.

[-] 0 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

No, China's centralized communist leadership provides for efficiency. In the US, a 300 million person country, our Congress can't even decide on next year's budget.

What would happend if China, a 1.6 billion person country, tried our system? Mass anarchy.

They are able to set objectives and 5 year plans. We should do the same instead of Dems and Republicans vetoing each other - i.e. nothing getting done. Communism is the answer and OWS should be spreading the message.

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 2 years ago

We should do what China has done. The liberals can live in the Communist part of our country and the rest can live in the Capitalist part. Hong Kong is a Capitalist providence of China and Taiwan is also to a certain extent.

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 2 years ago

You need to go to china and spend a few years there. Come back and give us a report in 2015. Better yet, try north Korea, or perhaps Russia. Putin is dragging that country back to it's great communistic glory days.

[-] 0 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

Been there, done that. The dynamism is incredible. US feels like a third world country. We need communism.

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 2 years ago

The Chinese have thousands of labor camps, staffed by religious and political prisoners. When a member of the party needs an organ transplant, gulag labor is murdered to supply the organ. Have the dough to buy a kidney? Go to china and you will be taken care of, with a slaves harvested organ.

[-] 0 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

None of that is true. Besides, that is not what I am advocating for in a communist America.

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 2 years ago

It is a fact. Do some homework. No communist system has ever existed that hasn't murdered millions of it's citizens. I'll take my chances in the system we have here, thank you, as flawed as it is. We have socialism for the very poor and for the very rich, and we people who go to work everyday have a struggle. I can at least take time off and be free to some extent. It would be much better if the government got it's boot off of our damn throats, and left us all the hell alone. Gridlock is a good thing. At least when we have gridlock, laws can't be passed to screw us over more.

[-] 1 points by elpinio (213) 2 years ago

You need to read some history textbooks. Too many false statements to even respond. Must be a troll.

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 2 years ago

Are you related to Josef Stalin?