Originally Posted by
HenryDorsetCase
Wait, I thought you were against communism?
If you define communism in terms of state control over production: who gets paid what for it and who benefits from it then yes, I am against communism, it's an inherently unfair system by any definition. So seeing the local marxists using "fair" to describe policy designed to further remove the natural link between production and it's rewards is ridiculous.
I have no problem with the general concept of a collective economy, as long as it's costs and benefits are shared equally. All sorts of reasons it's a good idea, everyone uses some services or infrastructure more or less equally, there's huge economies of scale to be taken advantage of, and there's some costs that are best spread over an individual's lifetime. But when that collective economy becomes larger than the total earnings available to the individuals that generated it you're fucked, it's no longer a viable system.
As I said, a fair system is one where everyone contributes the same and everyone benefits the same. When successive governments have assumed control over the value of both production and the distribution of it's benefits and distorted them to the extent that over half of the population benefits more than they contribute, (at the direct expense of the most productive) then you're well down the same path as every other failed socialist state in history.
Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon
Bookmarks