Pol, why doesn't communism work. I know it's caused massive starvation and deaths but is there more to why it fails?

Pol, why doesn't communism work. I know it's caused massive starvation and deaths but is there more to why it fails?

Other urls found in this thread:

wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism
theguardian.com/world/communism
theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/dec/19/vaclav-havel-another-side-to-story
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Communism's stated goal isn't the actual goal intended. Lets call it the new boss is worse than the old boss if you will.

because humans are naturally flawed

Communists can't keep the lights on

>Pol, why doesn't communism work.

first off all i thank you for your Post Mister Sheckelstein.
Second: i would really recomend you a real job. working as a social media shill for israeli state is not working out for you.
Third: please dou your home work and come back after you discovered that there was no communism in the history of this world.

Under communism, the state owns the means of production, and there is no free market.

If there is no free market, there is no way to set output prices.
If the state owns the means of production, then there are no input prices.
If you cannot subtract the output from the input, you cannot do cost accounting.


You buy flour, yeast, rent an oven, ect. Why? to bake bread. You bake 50 loaves. If the cost of producing 50 loaves of bread is $50 then as long as you sell the 50 loaves for more than $50 then you will make a "profit" if you sell for exactly $50, you just break even, minus your lost time and effort. So to invest time efficiently, one must sell bread for more than $1/loaf. But, people will only pay up to $2 a loaf for good bread, .50 cents for crap shit.
If you are pretty sure you can bake great bread, it might be worth it, but if your shitty, you might lose money, go bankrupt ect.

There is no way to do cost accounting under communism. That's why there's always bread lines and stavation genocides under communism

Communism and socialism work in terms of families. That's why women are all for it. Because they don't understand the difference between the family and society. It does not work in terms of society.

That's why Soros is targeting women to push the Socialism in the US

Rick and Mike both do the same job at the same place. No matter how hard Rick works, he doesn't get paid more. Rick notices this and starts to work less than Mike, and he still gets paid the same. Mike notices this and works less than Rick and still gets paid the same. Rick notices this...

This
quite simply, it does not take human nature into account in the slightest

Communism turns men into unproductive protoniggers. The farmers stop farming thanks to their guaranteed state gibs and everyone starves.

You can't fix this without a gun to their head. But then that's just slavery.

This thread is full of niggers
wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

...

What if you use labor vouchers instead of money?

...

That is still just money.

Economically it just couldn't compete with capitalism. Command economy doesn't compare to a free market.

...

Its not transferrable though. If you do one hour of labor you take out a commodity that cost 1 hour of labor to produce.

if you conveniently change the definition of words anything is money

Cringe.

Why, because it's true?

There is no such thing as an objective definition. As long as you're consistent you can use any definition you want.

The Black Book Of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism

Because you think social democracy welfare is socialism

Tell me how you plan on keeping people from trading labor vouchers for shit among eachother. I have bought food stamps from crackheads for 1/4 the price, but those aren't transferable amiright?
Any circulating medium of exchange is money. That is the definition of money.

Source on that quote?

labour vouchers don't circulate

Well they won't be physical objects. Probally more like digital cirtificates that show you have done some kind of labor.

...

>concupiscence
>humanity needs God
>Jesus

...

Because they fundamentally misunderstands why there's differences between people and ascribe this to absurd reductionist arguments based on class (Now on gender, race, and subjective factors); they fail so hard at the simple concept that even if people were 100% equal inequalities would rise inevitable due to circumstances, chance, and our human nature. To adjust this they're treating humans as purely social constructs, as if nature has no sway or influence. Adjustment of the applied treatment, such as social programs and re-education, will increase in severity by each fundamental failure of their ideological understanding of human societies — soon they'll use violence for expediency.

This is the development of all of West today, but this time it will be PoCs acting as the sledgehammer to crush the new wicked bourgeois, White people. After their genocide of Whites and nothing changed for the better they will move the goal post and attack another group, most likely light skinned people (A trend that is now developing), thus repeating their utter degeneracy. 'Theirs' glorious society, that which once were maintained by Whites, will be ridden with social strife and they will gravitate to the baser part of their nature. Murder, genocide, and environmental degradation will likely be rampant. Technological advancement will stall and leave them living in the limbo of the ruins of Western civilization, they will be attempting to resuscitate intellectual progress and all its beneficial expressions through mechanical inventions and of likewise application of knowledge, remembering the glorious days of the White man and cursing his name all the while.

It goes against fundamental human nature, and really the lifecycle of nature on this planet. Driving forces of society, and really all animal life.

>Competition
>Austerity
>Love
>Selfishness

Love is genetic for you to protect offspring to pass on genes, selfishness to provide resources for yourself and offspring to live. Austerity because that's a motivation factor to get anyone to do anything...here's a secret we're all naturally designed to be unbelievably lazy to conserve energy to survive with low resources. If you give people shit for free they'll continue to be lazy. Obviously competition, because we've always competed against eachother as individuals, family, tribes, cities, states, nations, etc etc for resources. Communism literally goes against human nature, it's as simple as that.

It's a stupid idea for people who want to feel good about themselves.

>calling somebody else a jew while posting that communism has never been tried.
KILL YOURSELF JESUS CHRIST YOU FUCKING RETARDED DROOLCUP.

...

When you aren't allowed to own the results of your labor there is no incentive to be productive. If you had previous owned a farm that took back-breaking labor to make successful and suddenly the new communist government takes it over why would you continue the back-breaking labor? Communism results in brutality because the threat of violence is the only way to keep people working when they can't keep the fruits of their labor.

...

>If you do one hour of labor you take out a commodity that cost 1 hour of labor to produce.
According to whom? That is the problem. In communism, prices are not regulated by the laws of economics. So two workers can produce different amounts of labor in the same hour. They will still get payed the same, though. If the productivity of the people whose products you need declines, it would be as if the price has gone up for you, and you can't even work more or work harder for what you need, you simply will not get paid more.

Since there is no incentive to work hard, everyone will work the bare minimum, because working hard gives you nothing and working less costs nothing. That is why communist societies are technologically backward and are perpetually falling apart.

Any slight glance at an intro book to economics demonstrates why communism simply does not work, at least with humans.

Communism is Jewish tyranny.

>it's impossible to exaggerate its failures
You obviously either haven't heard of the Black Book of Communism or are a devotee of it.

Why would this be better than money?

I should have specified. Its social labor. If you produce 3 times as much as the average then you get 3 hours.

Why don't they do that with the food stamps example I used earlier? It would make people like myself not exploit others and get their untradeable food stamps right?

>criticism: "one can tentatively estimate the total number of the victims at between 65 and 93 million"--not 100 million
>intentional murder

muh kommie neglect and famine

Who oversees the labor of others? Does overseeing other people laboring count as laboring?
Who decides the price of a product? Is it by the time of labor spent by the individual worker to make it, or is it an average of all workers?

National Socialism is dictatorship of the race.

People are not equal.
The only way to make them equal is to hinder the productive and successful.
Once you remove the incentives to be successful, society stops being successful

Close enough. You'll still run out of other peoples money either way.

In National Socialism everyone us a servant of the race.

Because it destroys incentives. That should be pretty fucking obvious. No one is willing to go the extra mile if they don't get rewarded for it. Unless you put a gun to their head. Thus why communism always leads to killing and slavery, because they refuse to incentivize hard work because 'muh equality'.

70iq idiot.

negligent homicide?

>Who oversees the labor of others?
I'm not a utopian. I can't tell you exactly how everything would work but someone would have to do it.
>Does overseeing other people laboring count as laboring?
Well I would assume they would managers of some kind so thats part of their job.
>Who decides the price of a product?
Average socially needed labor.

I'm also interested in the source for that quote, but I wouldn't put it past The Guardian. They literally have a Communism section on their website.

theguardian.com/world/communism

But then you're not taking from each according to their abilities to each according to their needs. If you pay workers based on their performance, you are underpaying the lazy.

Maybe they just haven't updated their site since the Cold War?

I first stage is from each according to their abilities to each according to their contribution. Marx described the system I am talking about (lower phase communism) in his letter critique of the gotha proggramme.

theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/dec/19/vaclav-havel-another-side-to-story

I'm asking because I have never met anyone with an answer, again leading to the conclusion that communism simply doesn't work.
So an hour of watching 20 people labor under the sun is equivalent to working under the sun for an hour?

How do you measure "socially needed labor"? What is "socially needed" and who determines it? How do you separate the superfluous from the fundamental?

The only ones with the capabilities to eatablish a Marxist state are the rich and bourgeoisie who establish a dictatorship of their class or race the Jewish race where they dominatente masses.

Looks like they were referring to it in the context of Eastern Europe, mainly Czechoslovakia. Somewhat less insane than referring to North Korea.

How is labor determined? What factors besides time?
How does a communist society produce things that require non-trivial education? Why would anyone study engineering for 10 years and design microchips to exchange for moldy bread?

communism basically turns you into a slave for the bottom.

someone cures aids and the bottom retards take your work with no compensation.

the ones who actually do work get most of the reward taken from them and split apart.

eventually nobody works at all or all the intelligent people leave and start their own country instead.

You can't successfully centrally plan any society. Humanity is far too complex to just have blanket rules and force people to do whatever the person in power wants. You have to let each individual make the choices otherwise they won't feel free and won't be productive.

Communism just goes against so much of human nature it's not even funny.

Human nature is to typically take the path of least resistance. In a system where you get payed regardless of how much effort you put into work, people will do as little as possible.

>How is labor determined?
hours + skill
>How does a communist society produce things that require non-trivial education?
Well the large amount of time you spent laboring to learn to become a doctor or engineer contributes to what your labor is worth.

People can't do central planning effectively. It is too complicated a problem to solve and everyone that has tried to do central planning on a grand scale has ended up murdering and destroying significant amounts of their population only to fail.

Even when tried on a smaller scale, like trying to control rent prices it creates more problems than it solves. Read the accounts of Soviet central planners if you'd like to know more.

Society wants/needs people to bake bread. It probally doesn't want/need people to make mudpies. We are not going to fill up an area at the grocery store with unsold mudpies.
1 hour of being a manager and figuring out how to cordinate that labor is worth the same as doing the labor.

>criticism: "one can tentatively estimate the total number of the victims at between 65 and 93 million"--not 100 million
>intentional murder

muh kommie neglect and famine

This is what wages already do...

Wages are based on the commoditys needed to substain the worker. This is not.

How is skill measured?

>1 hour of being a manager and figuring out how to cordinate that labor is worth the same as doing the labor
That is much worse and much more unfair than some boss taking 0.5% of your earnings. In fact, how is this different than slavery? You have people working simply to eat, and then you have people simply observing and getting payed for by the others.

>Well the large amount of time you spent laboring to learn to become a doctor or engineer contributes to what your labor is worth.
You didn't answer the other posters question, he asked WHY someone would study to become a doctor when the actual labour of the job is equal in time to say a food ration clerk. Someone who spends 10 years training to be a food ration clerk should not be "payed" or rationed or whatever the same as someone who studies 10 years to be a doctor. Forcing markets to bend to your will is evil and counter productive.

It isn't in accordance with nature. Equality doesn't exist, so trying to make it exist usually ends in disaster.

Skill is measured in how much time it takes to "produce" the skill.

>That is much worse and much more unfair than some boss taking 0.5% of your earnings. In fact, how is this different than slavery? You have people working simply to eat, and then you have people simply observing and getting payed for by the others.

they have the same function as modern managers. They also get paid far less than a modern manager.

>You didn't answer the other posters question, he asked WHY someone would study to become a doctor when the actual labour of the job is equal in time to say a food ration clerk. Someone who spends 10 years training to be a food ration clerk should not be "payed" or rationed or whatever the same as someone who studies 10 years to be a doctor. Forcing markets to bend to your will is evil and counter productive.

they are not they are paid more.

Because people are so full of pomp and arrogance that they think they are some heaven-descended paragon of goodness. They aren't. They're greedy and selfish just like the rest of us and when they wield enough power they exploit it. Even if they you are truly a saint, there is always someone lurking in the shadows waiting to put a knife in your back. This is exactly what Stalin did. Once he came to power he either exiled and/or executed all of the "old guard", all of the Bolsheviks who rose up with Lenin.

Communism looks good on paper -- it's a nice sentiment, a fairy tale dream of everyone getting along and sharing and holding hands and singing kumbaya. Doesn't it sound great? A world where nobody goes without, where nobody suffers. Communists are so idealistic and so heavily dissonant that they either cannot or will not accept the fact that human nature itself precludes anything like this from ever happening.

Wages are based on the value of a worker to the employer, and by extension society. The job market is just a market and you prostitute yourself. How much you make for every trick depends on
>hours + skill
as well as the needs of the consumer. Since anyone can flip a burger the pay is shit. Since not everyone can be a rocket surgeon they make a fuckload. This is basic supply and demand.

The consumers as a whole dictate what society needs, the price they are willing to pay for what it needs, and as a result how much the suppliers of those goods and services are paid.

Human nature and the fact that you can point to failed communist nations while advocates of it shove their fingers in their ears and ignore said examples and human nature.

>rocket surgeon

Why did I giggle?

Communism is like a casino. But instead of spending a few dollars on a slot machine or poker, you give literally everything you own to the owner.
Money
Clothes
Computer/Technology
Car
Food
Land
House
Everything that you own
And then with all your properties and money given away to a single guy, you demand he take away everyone else's property and money too through ultimatums.
And then when everyone in the casino has either been killed or had all their properties taken away, you trust the casino's owner to not only not be selfish, but come up with a plan to let everyone be a NEET for generations. And you also trust the people who are still alive will work for free to help each other.
This is also why Mini-Communism (Trusting your money with other people under Capitalism) and Socialism fail. This is also why everyone got BTFO during the Great Depression since everyone put their life savings in the banks when the economy crashed (along with the population growing way too fast from mass immigration making unemployment high).
Don't trust people with your money kids.

Basically, prices control what should and should not be produced. It's very effective and only the free market can use it to the fullest.

When you buy something, you sent "signals" to the person who produced it that they should produce more.

Under communism, it's not the prices that control production, it is some entity. That entity can never be as efficient as the price system. They don't have sufficient knowledge to run everything as smoothly as the price system does.

>nature
>static
>implying capitalist nations don't fail all the time

>saying price system is efficient or good
That's a bold strategy, Cotton.

I'm suprised people aren't bringing up the transformation problem.

He's right about price signals though. Marx would agree.

people like eating food and not being poor

>consumer data on what was and wasn't bought is unique to free market

No he would agree on the fact that supply and demand reallocates labor and acts back on production.

Yes. It's called socially necessary labor time.

thats not what SNLT is.

I'm not denying that, just your system has a higher failure rate compared to others ;)

>entire world declares war on you
>loses
>acts butthurt
>tries to politically and economically isolate you
I'm sure that has nothing to do with it. :^)

Because real communism doesn't exist. It's just a totalitarian dictatorship but they use that word to make it sound nice.