Quote Originally Posted by Universal Mind View Post
Could you give me a list of people Bill Gates has made poor? I can give you a long list of people who have jobs because of him. He employs about a hundred millionaires, each of whom employs tons of people who make good money and spend that money, which feeds other businesses and thereby creates more wealth. Wealth creates business expansion, which creates wealth. Wealth creates wealth. Communism creates the will to do a half ass job, which screws up business, which screws up national wealth.
Haha. When windows 3.1 came out, there were Far more superior operating systems. Windows got so big, because of really good marketing. I however am not going to look up who lost his job because of that

Also, you again fail to see the point. Yes, bill gates probably was better for the average person in America. Yes, I keep saying this, Communism doesn't normally create such innovative people. However I am talking about a hypothetical society, where, despite being communist, it does not effect how hard people work at all.

Get that into your skull, I said it like 5 times already.

And in THAT scenario, The economy of America would have grown just as hard as it has now. You get it? Now stop using that 'blabla, communists are lazy'-typed argument, I already explained I am talking about an (probably impossible) hypothetical form of communism (where the people aren't lazy as shit).

Your main argument, because you can't stop using it, has nothing to do with the discussion. If communism wouldn't hurt our economy, it would only be better for it's people. (however, it does hurt it)

Communism is robbery because it takes away everything a person has except enough to get by.
This is just retarded. I mean, are you high? Watched some old 70s propaganda lately? Maybe you should try READING WHAT I WROTE DOWN. I am talking about a kind of communism where there wouldn't even be more taxes, but everyone's pay check would look (very very much) the same. That would mean the average person, and that means everyone, could afford a car, a house, a hottub, or hell I don't know what the average person can afford in America at this moment.

Communism shows major disrespect for people's property. It also steals their incentive to work hard.
"Get off me property!" "Jiii-Haaaa!"

I don't know or the whole 'no private property' is communism pur sang. (really a backbone of it). I personally don't see why people can't chose for themselves what land they want to buy with the money they make. How does it show disrespect for people's property?

This might surprise you, but my personal view of a good kind of communism, and I think most people's view of a good kind of communism, doesn't include forced relocations like McFacist Stalin did.

Incentive to work hard I already covered.

A lot of people's major spirit in life involves working hard all the time to make money. It is what they are made for.
Yeah, totally correct.

What I am saying is: " Wouldn't it be nice, it people could work that hard not for money, but work for their entire country and people with the same joy" ?

That's all I am saying. I don't see how that is half as bad as the warped, Stalin-raped idea of communism you have.

Communism steals that form of the human spirit. Nobody is going to live the executive life of hardcore money making if they get the same no matter what they do. People should have a right to make fortunes. Communism shows major disrespect for that. Communism is a terrible idea for many reasons.
No, you keep just saying "people don't work like that".

And you can't deny that in a society where it doesn't hurt the economy if people would be communistic, the capitalistic society would create poor people when compared to the communistic one.

-

Lets try again, since you seem to fall back on the same silly arguments I covered -if I recall correctly- somewhere in the region of the first page of this topic.

# Lets Assume people would work just as hard for 'the people' as they now work for their own money.
# Thus, the amount of pay one receives does not influence how hard the person will work.
#Thus, you could pay everyone the same, without negative consequences for the overall world economy.
#Thus no poor people exist. At the level we have come we could have stopped world hunger 50 years ago.

-

It just seems like a nice world, a world without poor people. But that might just be me. If it was possible, I would rather have such a world then the poverty-ridden world we live in today.

Are 3 billions starving people worth your 'freedom' to maybe get rich and powerful?

If you could start humanity over again at the start of societies, would you leave them the same, or make them less egocentric so they could create a society I would call communistic, where there is no poor, the government is there, never getting corrupt like is normal today, but to help everyone, and no-one wants to go to war (and set back everyone)?

I rather see the latter.

But it doesn't matter. It is the word that has been tied up to SO many bad words and associations in your mind that I should just rename my view of communism if I ever want to have an objective debate about it with anyone.