Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Believing that you know more and asserting such doesn't mean you know more.
True Communism is an idealized system that dismisses self-interest as a motive. It's never been implemented. The Soviet system was a class system where Party members were treated as aristocrats and had special privileges that ordinary citizens did not. That's completely the opposite of true Communism.
Of course communism has been implemented in Russia: private property and land was nationalized, proletariat took over the country and the original rulers were disposed off.
Even the original rullers of the Red Empire lived pretty much according to their own teachings. They were idealists and Utopians.
Of course it all ended up as disaster as you can't really change human nature. Those who came after idealists were simple opportunist who cared more about their own self-preservation and well-being. This combined with lack of checks and balances of democracy created opportunity to steal and corrupt beyond any democratic country. Yes, communism devolved into plutocracy but it could not go any other way...
C'mon genius, that's the main fallacy of communism: inability to recognize that classless society is impossible since once you dispose of one upper class another will fill the void That's human nature. Unfortunately millions paid with their lives for the unsuccessful attempt to implement this utopia we call communism.
Of course communism has been implemented in Russia: private property and land was nationalized, proletariat took over the country and the original rulers of the Red Empire lived pretty much according to their own teachings.
Nationalization of industry is fascist possibly socialist, but not communist
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
They were idealists and Utopians. They were communists.
Of course it all ended up as disaster as you can't really change human nature and those who came after them cared more about their own self-preservation and well-being. These were opportunists who replaced the idealists.
So, let me get this straight, the first real post imperial government, led by the Bolsheviks (who actually considered themselves already a class above the rabble, and were composed 20% of wealthy elites), led by Lenin (who came from Russian nobility) and Trosky, who ALL annointed themselves "leadership", were idealists and proletariats?
The same ones that immediatley started jailing opponents in 1918 and suppressing descent of any kind with imprisonment and death? The same ones that enacted the Red Terror?
Lenin and the Bolsheviks were nothing more than power hungry oppressors who used the name of the proleteriat to claim ultimate power for themselves, and Stalin followed with more of the same on steroids.
Yes there is. For instance in New York State "parkways" do not allow commercial traffic at all. Grand Central Parkway is a good example of such road.
Anyways, your point is moot, commuting to work is a "personal use". Businesses neither force people to commute to work nor pay for it. You could walk or live near by if you wanted to.
If you count cars versus tracks during rush hour you'll get the idea what is the percentage of commercial versus individual use is on American roads.
Sorry, you're wrong, employment is a commercial contract, you're selling your labor in exchamge for a paycheck.
There are away exceptions to any rule, those exceptions you might find don't negate the principal. Limiting traffic to certain types of vehicles, COMMUTERS, has practical purposes, lower head room clearances, lower wheel loads, tighter turning geometry. Those roads still carry commerce in the form on commuters traveling back and forth to WORK.
When I considered a job offer the primary concern I had when they asked how much I needed was the cost and time of the commute. I know what I needed for me, I would have to figure what a particular job would cost me in travel costs. That calculation enters into every employee's negotiations for a job contract. Commuting costs are part of a business transaction. I being an independent contractor for most of my jobs was extremely sensitive to those costs.
Workers are bringing their skills to their employers the same way the bread delivery man is delivering the bread to the food store.
You might try spinning a commute thru rush hour traffic as a joy ride but I think few are biting. Commuting is a function of business activity.
How much would the road cost if it wasn't a federal project subject to the service contract act and the artificially high wages it requires? And the union CBA?
There are thousands of Mexicans down the road in Yakima who could build the road for about $99 bucks a day. Since you guys support illegals so much it shouldn't bother you. Liberals in Washington love Mexican laborers as long as they stay on the farm and earn peanuts. Talk about exploitation.
If they're around Yakima they can earn apples instead of peanuts.
Do you realize what taking a minimum wage job would do to a persons career? Say you are a CPA, get laid off, take a job at McDonalds out of desperation, end up there a year.....if you didnt just completely destroy your accounting career, you made it extremely difficult to ever get back in it, and even if you did, it would likely be years before you got to the same level you were when you got laid off originally.
Unemployment should not be system used by business as an unlimited source of desperate cheap labor. The place where you can get an MBA for $9 an hour to work your cash register.
If they can get a CPA for $9 an hour, he wouldn't need to use a cash register.
Nationalization of industry is fascist possibly socialist, but not communist
So, let me get this straight, the first real post imperial government, led by the Bolsheviks (who actually considered themselves already a class above the rabble, and were composed 20% of wealthy elites), led by Lenin (who came from Russian nobility) and Trosky, who ALL annointed themselves "leadership", were idealists and proletariats?
The same ones that immediatley started jailing opponents in 1918 and suppressing descent of any kind with imprisonment and death?
Yes. Communism means revolution as a way to take over the government, class warfare and tyranny of the working class, " who is not with us is aigainst us."
Like the French revolution before, Russian revolution started with wave of terror against its opponents and then started killing its own children. Nothing really new here.
And yeah, communism is against private property. Read the Manifesto again.
Sorry, you're wrong, employment is a commercial contract, you're selling your labor in exchamge for a paycheck.
There are away exceptions to any rule, those exceptions you might find don't negate the principal. Limiting traffic to certain types of vehicles, COMMUTERS, has practical purposes, lower head room clearances, lower wheel loads, tighter turning geometry. Those roads still carry commerce in the form on commuters traveling back and forth to WORK.
When I considered a job offer the primary concern I had when they asked how much I needed was the cost and time of the commute. I know what I needed for me, I would have to figure what a particular job would cost me in travel costs. That calculation enters into every employee's negotiations for a job contract. Commuting costs are part of a business transaction. I being an independent contractor for most of my jobs was extremely sensitive to those costs.
Workers are bringing their skills to their employers the same way the bread delivery man is delivering the bread to the food store.
You might try spinning a commute thru rush hour traffic as a joy ride but I think few are biting. Commuting is a function of business activity.
No it is not. Workers are generaly not compensated for the commute.
1. Communism doesnt advocate a "bloody takeover" of anything. It advocates a bottom up revolution. It doesnt have to be bloody.
2. In the Soviet Union, nor Cuba, was the coupe in anyway representitive of the population on a whole. They werent the "working class", at all. In fact, the working class became completely oppressed and a source of capital for the new ruling class.
Wrong. "Revolution" means violent event as opposed to evolution. Have you ever seen non-violent revolution? LOL
Both in Russia and Cuba revolutions were of course bloody and undertaken predominantly by poor masses: laborers and farm workers.
The same masses who later became oppressed. You are right. There is a penalty for stupidity
Tax policy seldom aligns with the interests of the working man.
What does tax policy have to do with being compensated for commute to work, comrade?
What does anything you posted have to do with common sense?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's human nature. Unfortunately millions paid with their lives for the unsuccessful attempt to implement this utopia we call communism.
