Debating a communist, need the best anti-communist points

debating a communist, need the best anti-communist points

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

The USSR, you're welcome

Engine that ran the world. Your point?

>trusting the government to abolish itself

>USSR
>Engine that ran
Itself the ground, yes.

Look up the economic calculation problem.
tl;dr: without prices, there's no way of determining:
>1: How much of which goods/services to devote resources toward producing.
>2: Who should get which amounts of them.

Commies are left to simply guess, which is why horrible misallocations are a staple of their system.

...

> engine that poured so much money into armaments (that were far surpassed by those of capitalist nations) that they couldnt feed their own people, caused mass famine and massive economic collapse, meanwhile the US won the arms race whilst also raising the standard of living significantly over the same period and ushered in many of the things we take for granted today

Fixed that for you lad. Ironically, the only people in the Soviet Union who could get exotic fresh fruit and veg like oranges, bananas etc were the ones who were literal meat shields for Russias nuclear stockpiles, like in City 40.
> the state demands we live in this shitty concrete slab city working for the lowest possible wage, cant have friends visit the city and are only allowed to leave at certain times otherwise we get a trip to the gulag
> 'but hey, theres actually food on shelves! Winrar!'

If you like communism, then you're possibly autistic and you like sonic as well.

Communist revolution involves a violent purge of the upper & middle classes.

Troll him by simply saying "What if I don't want that?" over and over.

Communism would fail economically. Government cannot properly allocate resources.
In Soviet Russia, it was a regular occurrence to have huge surpluses of one good over another even though they are both produced from the same thing.

Also, in a free market system, businesses have to act as efficient as possible, because they have to keep their costs down. If they do not, then their competition will, and they will be put out of business. Businesses are FORCED to produce only the goods that consumers DEMAND.
In the Soviet Union, this pressure did not exist. People like to argue that in a communist system prices would be lower, because businesses are not charging for profit--they are simply charging what it cost to produce the good. However, there is no competition. So, Ivan, in his factory, will realize there is no reason to keep costs down. He'll take his time producing a good, or he might use more electricity than he would otherwise, thereby increasing overhead. This was also a regular occurrence in the Soviet Union.

These are just a couple of random points without proper context, because I can't be fucked.

excuse the typos and grammatical errors atm pls

The famines there occurred in the early days, not the middle and later days. Starvation wasn't an issue after 1947. Also, living conditions were somewhat poorer than those in the US, but everyone had a job, healthcare, education, and guaranteed vacation time. Almost everybody had a house, and many people had a cottage in the countryside.

Dialectical is fucking retarded superstition.
>"Engels made constant use of the metaphysical insight that the higher level of existence emerges from and has its roots in the lower; that the higher level constitutes a new order of being with its irreducible laws; and that this process of evolutionary advance is governed by laws of development which reflect basic properties of 'matter in motion as a whole'."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism

Other economic systems and forms of governance don't need to rely on metaphysics.

>Also, in a free market system, businesses have to act as efficient as possible
lol
I know some people who work in large businesses. The imagined "efficiency" utopia of the private sector is at least in large part political propaganda.

Communism will always fail because it relies on state bureaucracy to allocate resources. No organisation could ever be efficient enough, transparent enough or incorruptible enough to conduct such vast economic planning without something going wrong.

Instead such complex unstable systems will naturally tend towards increasing chaos, inefficiency and corruption overtime as we saw with both the Soviet Bloc and Jurassic Park.

Capitalism is different as if chiefly relies on an organic self-correcting process to allocate resources. The natural law of supply and demand.creating "an invisible hand" that maximises the public good without the need for conscious human intervention.

In short, humans can't be trusted to run an economy on their own.

That simply isn't true.

If your business isn't operating as efficiently as possible, then your competition will.

Nothing that can't be fixed with greater competition.

Exactly: Profit isn't just wasted wealth.

It's an incentive for initial investors to risk their investment in the first place and the foundation on which to build more capital.

...

Statue

Story

Ask them what is their plan to deal with those who won't work, or those who don't agree with communism. Will they cast them out, or force them to work? Either option is authoritarianism.

Follow it up with asking them if they approve of slavery.

This, just call him a hateful bigot

Nope, the economic collapse started in the mid 70's and got worse the more money they pumped into their space and armaments programs.

As an user said above, the problem with total government control and no free market is gross misallocation of the production possibility frontier. For example, you could only buy a car from the card holding party member who happened to own a car factory, and they were expensive as fuck and absolutely shite.
Furthermore, all it did was make a greater divide between the poor and the rich. There was a brand of car made exclusively for the rich, as well as luxury leisure destinations for the rich, staffed by the poor on minimum wage. In capitalist countries, the middle class grew massively and the lower class standard also rose, hence why you can have obese people in the US with no job but 2 plasma screens and an xbox. Communism just makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Before you say 'muh not real communism, muh corruption' shut the fuck up. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The free market puts the power in the hands of the consumer, not the producer and the state. Wherever theres a system of power, there will be corruption. The more power in fewer hands means more corruption; hence communism. Capitalist democracy has bar none been the best economic and ideological measure for the planet; more people have access to education, clean water, electricity and the internet than ever before because of capitalism, profit incentives and economic globalisation and specialisation. If you cant accept this, you cannot accept the basic fundamentals of how the world works, and should mcfucking hang yourself.

You answered your own question; LARGE businesses, i.e ones that are either monopoly or oligopoly shareholders.

The reason they can get away with it is due to cartel actions, price collusion and pricing smaller firms out of the market. The larger a firm is and the fewer competitors it has, the less it has to innovate, the less it has to respond to its customers wants and needs, the higher prices it can chatgr.

In a true free market, if a firm was to do this, they would be pushed out of the market by other firms who innovated better, produced better quality and cheaper.

...

Communism give a leader too much power which leads to corruption and mass murders like what happened in USSR. Communism is all about dictators and the government running everything. Whoever that communist is, he/she is a fucking retard that wants one man to have so much power and fuck with people's lives.

Goal Posts: Moved.