Why doesn't gommunism work?

Attached: 1504890005651.jpg (400x509, 35K)

>people don't own stuff in communism
people literally own everything.

>you don't run out of resources in capitalism

>I don't care about my family and friends

People are naturally greedy and always want more.

Because it goes against nature

Functionally speaking, no room for correction.
Spiritually speaking, human nature.

>people literally own everything.
if everybody 'owns' everything does anybody actually own anything? How do you go about deciding what the things that everybody owns do and don't do?

how's this an argument against communism?

Stop embarrassing our country, Commie piece of shit.

But it does.

Attached: marx_china.jpg (899x590, 97K)

have you seriously never heard of democracy?

G A N G

A

N

G

Attached: FULLY AUTOMATED.png (1600x1600, 2.08M)

I don't consent.

You gonna have a vote for every hot-dog bun now?

>no arguments, only insults
superb, you mong.

what would there even be to vote about a hot dog bun?

Because you need to decide where every single hot-dog bun goes if everybody owns every hot-dog bun.
Then expand that to literally every single decision across literally every single industry and it becomes extremely obvious why the decision making needs to be distributed.

are you retarded?
the government does that.

Because eventually you run out of other people’s money.

Communism would work if we could just somehow make the laws of economics and human behavior disappear.

Great so now you have a much more unstable hierarchy than capitalism could have ever hoped to produce, and Marx's premonitions become correct.

Not to mention the second there's a state change, the hot-dog industry goes the way of Venezuela's oil industry or the US' healthcare/housing industry.

>I'll repeat this phrase
how does that apply to communism?

Attached: 1532354318159.png (898x720, 353K)

His implication is communism always ends up running in the red, which demands actually prosperous components of society foot the bill.

>Great so now you have a much more unstable hierarchy than capitalism
what? no.
the whole point of collective ownership of the means of production is that there's no wage labour.
you're not getting stolen from by a capitalist.

Lack of incentive structures.

Yea nice fantasy. Scarcity is an extremely difficult problem to solve to any level of efficacy and even trivial things demand serious consideration and thought.

The only reason the USSR was as successful as it was (not very, and not for long) was because they formed their centralized prices according to the capitalist example.

if you look at communism as an economic system used to make a utopia, then no, it doesn't work at all.

If you look at communism as a psychological warfare tool used to destroy the nation that it is introduced to, it works 100% of the time.

So, draw your own conclusions.

why would "human behaviour" affect communism?

Attached: 1528329749927.png (106x30, 2K)

>Yea nice fantasy. Scarcity is an extremely difficult problem to solve to any level of efficacy and even trivial things demand serious consideration and thought.
what the fuck are you even talking about now?

It does work. as a genocide machine. Only the people running the show know it's actual purpose. only a genocidal maniac can run the communist machine. You get too many dumb people... you're about to get some communism to get of them.

But it does work
Its purpose is to make the goyim slaves

It tries to play on human virtues instead of human vises like capitalism does.

based

it's inhuman

there is no labour without self interest

Because it's designed for small tribal life. You can't just scale that shit up to a country of many millions and expect it to work.

Basic economics.

Because Capitalism is about the release of infinite wants rather than just needs and you can't create that without a capitalist class.

Because it goes against human nature. I don't give one solitary fuck about anyone besides my family and I don't want to be part of a society that makes me sacrifice personal success for the benefit of some nameless stranger.

This is very important. And it applies to most modern/post-modern ideologies that have failed/are destined to fail.

It's not reasonable to expect people to work against their own self-interest. If your ideology presumes they will because your system is just so awesome, then it's not and they won't.

Attached: 1535753223299.png (1256x932, 785K)

Except that you don't give a fuck about anyone else because you live under a capitalist system and that is how you are supposed to behave. When success is measured by what you own rather than the nature of your character then narcissism and disassociation is the result.

>you don't give a fuck about anyone else because you live under a capitalist system
You're putting the cart before the horse, bongfriend

>and I don't want to be part of a society that makes me sacrifice personal success for the benefit of some nameless stranger.
that's literally capitalism, not socialism.

Simply not true. A wage for labor is not a sacrifice, it is a trade.

the capitalist is making a "profit" off your work, therefore you're sacrificing your success for somebody else's benefit.
that wouldn't happen in socialism.

Because people like to own stuff.
When the people who control the means of production don't have the legal right to borrow against it or sell it, then economic organization suddenly becomes much more complicated.

Attached: Frank Zappa on Communism.png (615x442, 324K)

You're agreeing to trade your labor for a wage. Then there is overhead associated with turning your labor into workable resources. You cannot possibly be paid exactly what you earn for the owner and risk taker or the owner and risk taker would quickly run in the red, in exactly the same way communism does. Then your job goes away or a subsidy is demanded of the government. The former is bad, and the latter enacted by force sends components of the economy on the brink down into the red, causing a death spiral.

>people literally own everything.

Is your wife attractive gomrade?

How much food do you have on hand?

Any valuable and portable electronics?

because it sucks ass.

Dude , in capitalism you can go out if your way to be farmer for your own consumption, in comunism your are free only to ask a democratic vote for every resource that would take you to get to the farmland, then another vote for what farmland, and what crops can be grown.
You are fucked if the whole prefers you dead of starvation rather than you buying your own seeds for your choice of plants.

People in a comunist system will trade loyalty and power, rather than goods and services, it makes an ilegal act the norm.

Hardly. Surrendering to every desire simply makes you a slave to them. Capitalism simply turns desire for prestige or acceptance into desire for an object. This is why people consume Nike shoes and Apple phones, not for the utility of them but for their relational aspects to lifestyle.

>People in a comunist system will trade loyalty and power, rather than goods and services
Good articulation.
Scarcity is scarcity and either you solve it or starve.

Sorry, I went outside for a walk

Because without rewards people don't take risks, no risk means no development, no innovation, no new products, no new technology besides what the states orders people to develop, which is usually a copy of something already existing somewhere else as the lack or rewards makes it creating something new which will cost resources and potentially fail a pointless act which has to be imposed by the government rather than by an individual inventor.

Also if you pay everyone essentially the same there is no point in taking hard or stressful jobs, no point in working hard as there are almost no differences in being promoted or not, the best jobs became the easiest teaching philosophy becomes a much more interesting career than stressing yourself as a surgeon when you get paid the same.

Also the lack of free markets makes products bland and just as good as they need to be. There is no need for many choices.

Generally due to all this factors the economy of communist countries sucks especially regarding exporting something "just good enough for the masses" generally is not something that sells well abroad unless is dirt cheap.

>You're agreeing to trade your labor for a wage.
no, you have no option, you're absolutely obligated to sell your labour so somebody else can profit from it.
>You cannot possibly be paid exactly what you earn for the owner and risk taker or the owner and risk taker would quickly run in the red
that's what's wrong with capitalism.
that's literally why capitalism is slavery.
you can't get paid what your work is worth under capitalism.
>the owner and risk taker
this is no excuse, risk generates no value.
all value comes from labour.
>would quickly run in the red, in exactly the same way communism does.
why would it?

You don't run out of resources in a true market economy, because prices reflect the supply and demand. As things get rarer, prices go up and people transition to alternative resources.

Try comunism with in your own griup of friends

>no, you have no option, you're absolutely obligated to sell your labour so somebody else can profit from it.
>I have to work to eat? HOW HORRIBLE!
Not to mention many, many people graduate from selling their labor to directly utilizing their labor and buying others' labor in their own businesses.
The turnover on the top levels of society are surprisingly high, where the government isn't involved.

>that's what's wrong with capitalism.
No that's the fundamental scarcity issue. It's not an issue of capitalism and unless you have Star Trekesque replicators you don't get to juke it.

>this is no excuse, risk generates no value.
No, but risk destroys quite a bit of value. You only see the success stories. 9/10 economic operations fail and the government planning them doesn't change anything except how long they cling to life first.

>why would it?
Because there is overhead associated with turning your labor into workable product. You need to pay legal fees, electricity, water, hiring costs, transportation of resources to and fro.
The person cutting logs isn't doing all the work for the lumber industry by cutting the logs.

My point is you're blaming capitalism for human nature. People were always like this, it's just more obvious thanks to the internet and social media.

starvation & repression

>Dude , in capitalism you can go out if your way to be farmer for your own consumption
no you can't, you need money to get the land and resources to do so, and therefore you have to sell your labour for somebody else's profit because they have means of production and you don't.
>in comunism your are free only to ask a democratic vote for every resource that would take you to get to the farmland, then another vote for what farmland, and what crops can be grown.
don't be retarded, that's not how it would work.

>why would "human behaviour" affect communism?

And this is why communism always fails. Communism would work great if it wasn't for all those pesky humans.

>I have to work to eat? HOW HORRIBLE!
what a retarded strawman.
I'm not even going to bother with the rest.

This. Capitalism works precisely because it runs on self-interest, which is natural and abundant.

>China
>gommunist
The absolute state of commies on this board.

Attached: 1482516790186.jpg (252x223, 15K)

You got PAID for your work. Why are commies so dense?

I was gonna frase it like this, you can a be a top level executive and tomorrow a farmer if you wish, you can have as many animals as you want, but in a comunist system if you arent selected fir something by the goverment or local goverment you can't do nothing, even if you could benefit more people by doing it.

We are not defending the current system, we are defending it's base, wich is free trade,no rules, no taxes, no regulations, wich goes hand in hand with human nature, and how we value things at the basic level.

Every ship voyage, every millitary operation, every plane flight, every commercial logistical system is effectively communism.

Fuck - we are stuck on a ship together for 5 months, lets plan what inventory we should have on it and what our roles should be.

Its done every day and, if the CIA isnt fucking with your economy, its fairly easy

>every
every commie post ever made is retarded, this one is a proof

Planned economies aren't fluid enough. The solution for commies is state capitalism, which is really just capitalism which means they've just made welfare state capitalism, which is the only way to make "free" shit like universal healthcare work. You need a strong capitalist economy to pay for gibs.

Yes, these guys should go join a commune and see how well that works out.

There will always be factions with diferent interest, with diferent ideas and methods, a democratic vote over everything will put presure over certain groups that will lead to the breakdown of a central goverment.

In capitalism you can associate with whoever you want and work with them for a common goal if you desire it, a take diferent ways, not without consuquences, at any moment.

How about you clean your room Bucko?

Attached: CLEAN.jpg (500x538, 203K)

>wash your penis kid

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization

If you're stuck on a ship that's a small, closed community where people can keep each other in check. You can't do the same with an entire country.

>People

You mean the cutthroat political class that killed all the altruistic useful idiots?

Except they weren't always like this. People throughout history have not related to each other through objects. In the west it has mainly been the Christian worldview that dominated. Christians throughout history were not overly concerned with how many cows or chickens they could own.

Kill yourself

>proof the earth isnt flat
fuck off

People under communism got paid as well. How did you think it worked?

I’m not sure.

Attached: E936A467-D475-48B6-B3B0-1BD1031217C2.jpg (500x485, 141K)

Its ok to use those historical examples but look at blockchain technology now - society can run on opensource algorithms without the need to trust a overarching authority

>people didn't use to be obsessed with wealth
Dude what is the entire social order lmao

Nice excuse.
Tell me, exactly what did you mean when you said you are obligated to sell your labor? That you must do so to eat?

>Wealth
>Social order.

Not the same thing. You judge a soldiers social status on his pay packet?

It literally makes 0 sense. It works under the presumption that people will willingly give up their belongings (otherwise it inherently implies violence as this is what is necessary to confiscate their stuff) and that black markets won't be created.

Also, the people confiscating the belongings will divide it fairly (yeah right).

All in all, you're delusional in following this irrational bullshit.

>soldiers
>social status
Top kek you do realize American vets live on the streets right? But if you mean the relationship between social status and wealth, they've always been interconnected.

The soviet union collapsed because of a lack of desire. they could produce what the citizens needed but not what they wanted.

youtu.be/h3gwyHNo7MI?t=38m28s

Attached: images.jpg (278x181, 9K)