Communist Views

[Cavernio]

I really have to be here more often if I'm going to say all the pertinent things that come into my head, so I'm just going to try and get a few in.

First of all, I clearly didn't know what communism, as a label, was, because I somehow managed to imagine it without it being something 'centrally located', but as something much more utopian, like a children's book about sharing and getting along. When I ask myself whether communism is possible without having everything state controlled, I say no, because then I don't think it's called communism anymore. However, I'll leave all that to another post some other time, maybe.

Kilroy and I have gotten into arguments before, and one thing I did concede was the main point it seemed she is making throughout these posts: a government can never decide what's best for everyone. What follows is that capitalism inherently works in the opposite way, because it is individuals who decide what they want for themselves, it will work better.
What I have a problem with is that a capitalist society not just allows for inequality, it absolutely supports it. Yes, us in north america have it great. For countries who have not grown economically as fast as us, businesses take full advantage with things like sweat shops and disparaties in the value of different nation's currency. I mean, if we had slaves, the non-slaves wealth would also be really good. I want to explore better options for humanity than this.

"Yes, a nationalized healthcare system can provide everybody with healthcare. This is not because nationalized services are more efficient."
You are wrong. You go on to talk about a formula and demonstrate it, while acknowledging it's oversimplification. Rule #1 in a social science: any math used to explain something will never be complex enough to explain it properly. My experience is is that it can be so far off that it's more of a hindrance than a help. When that formula was developed, it was a model, and a representation. You are presenting it the other way round though, that we must follow that model.

In any case, centrally run healthcare, when comparing the US and Canada, is far more efficient, and yes, because it truly is more efficient.* My brother has worked the past 10 years in a consulting company who has worked on systems in both Canada and the US, on various aspects of healthcare. He has seen, first hand, the costs of healthcare. And he's told me, more than once, that the cost of running healthcare and related services in the states is waaay more than in canada. Why? Because there's much less duplication of work in a centrally run system. In this case, the largest duplication of work was insurance companies that each have their own beaurocracy and paperwork. Of course, the fact that increased costs in healthcare comes largely from insurance is sweetly ironic in this discussion. Insurance companies make profit from a group of very willing people paying monthly fees for services they may never use. Not only do people who can afford it already pay a 'tax' for healthcare, (and from my understanding, you're nuts not to have it) but it doesn't even go directly into the paying for their 'care' at all. The profit made just goes to people who are using capitalism to make money while not actually offering a service.

When I say that insurance companies don't actually offer a service, it is because their service only exists because of capitalism. Kilroy has claimed that there will be way too much effort by a centrally run nation into figuring out who gets what. (Note that before I've already agreed that it is impossible for a centrally run system to figure out what people actually want in what quantities where.) However, what has not been mentioned is the flipside into all the extra work people do because of capitalism. Insurance companies are one of them. Advertising is another. Ok, well, not ALL advertising would go away with communism, but there certainly wouldn't be nearly as much. I'm positive there are more, very common jobs that exist purely because capitalism exists, but I hate business and haven't bothered to learn about it. I've definitely seen more blatant examples of capitalist 'busy-work' though. I know factories who are run by people who want to do good for their community, who will purposefully keep people employed rather than update their machinery. I can't blame them for what they do, but that that situation should ever occur is stupid, plain and simple. Kinda like insurance.

*Assuming that people actively try to find better ways to do things, the free market (or as much of it as we actually have), itself demonstrates that centrally run things are often much more efficient. Companies grow and are managed in a top-down way...that's how business works. Of course, when the market does manage great effiency like this, it turns into a monopoly, where we basically have a government-like corporation instead. This is my perception of things, and why I like my government and socialism. I'd rather have government than corporation.

Also, it's blatantly obvious that Devonin has a raging hard-on for you Kilroy.