Communism. Good or bad. What do you really know about Communism?

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

About fructose. That's one more time a pseudo-diet business problem. If you eat an apple or a banana, you need to eat a lot of them to get some diabets. If you drink pure fruit juice, apart the fact that you would drink 2 liters per day, there are few risks to develop the same troubles than if you only drink a Cola.
Now they take the fructose from fruits and artificially add them in other products. That's not really natural. We get problems of concentration and quantity.

I guess you either forgot or do not fully understand when I said

Originally Posted by diamelsx

and realize that they put this stuff in just about everything we eat.

if it comes in a box, can, jar, or bottle there is a good chance that stuff is in there, add to that there are a lot of places where access to fresh produce is not there and you may begin to understand the problem

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

I guess you either forgot or do not fully understand when I said




if it comes in a box, can, jar, or bottle there is a good chance that stuff is in there, add to that there are a lot of places where access to fresh produce is not there and you may begin to understand the problem

I wrote an answer and then watched your video and was too lazy to delete my comment.
But it doesn't change that much what I think.
Eat first natural products and not manufactured ones.

Originally Posted by brk549

69,all the things you say about committees and delegating and bringing in all these different groups has never happened in a communist state.Usually the number of people pushing the buttons becomes fewer and fewer.Your advocating for a communist state that has never existed.Power corrupts and is evident every time a few have taken control over many.A person only has so much time on earth to see their vision carried out,that's where the bullet comes in trying to speed that up when they see things are not as easy as they thought.

I know it has never existed. I never mentionned that the Stalinism looked fair on every point.
But I still believe that a good Liberalism can't exist. There are too many crapy individuals on this planet.
If you considered the view of the "new" Communism that I exposed as an improved Communism, that's maybe not that bad.

I believe in regulation. If you don't regulate an engine, it explodes, it breaks.
Liberalism is an unregulated system.

[brk549]

Crappy individuals yes in all forms of government but with communism your usually stuck with them for life.Do you think the N. Koreans really want the guy they have now,probably didn't want the one before him but their only way out is for a lot of them to die trying to change it.

[chris chunt]

Originally Posted by chris chunt

They had to build a wall to keep people in .
Nuff said

And when the wall was torn down the first thing the east Germans did was go shopping .

Look !
More than one choice of toaster !
And they actually make toast !

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

And I, personally do not believe in total freedom, when the huge majority of the people of my species behave even worse than rats.

I believe that humanity as a whole is acting with the same larger consciousness as yeast in a vat of sugar. We will keep breeding and poisoning the environment until it becomes so toxic that it kills us all off. New species that can thrive in that environment will then take over.

Originally Posted by xyzde69

They cost billions to the health insurance and each year we have to pay more primes because of these unhealthy people, like the smokers.
I don't know how works your health insurance in the USA, but in several countries in Europe, everybody has to pay his own insurance and the price of your prime is relied to the costs of the global health system.

Healthy population = low primes to pay each year.
Unhealthy population = high primes to pay each year.

Here in Europe, fat people took money from the wallet of all the healthy citizen.

So I'm sorry, but IMO, the state has to contribute to keep fat people fit and healthy.

I read that research in Holland shows that it our current path is cheaper. It is far better that smokers, obese people, drug addicts, and alcoholics receive treatment now, but die young, than it would be if their behavior changed, they lived another 10 to 35 years, and society had to pay to treat their ailments in the geriatric stage of life.

Do you have any idea how expensive it was to keep treating my Mom after her strokes? She spent the last years of her life in a wheel chair, unable to read or keep track of the plots of TV shows, and requiring attendants to bathe,feed, and dress her and to change her diaper in a timely fashion.My Dad is in much better shape. He only needs the staff to prepare his meals, do the housework in his room, dispense his medications and pick him up after one of his frequent falls. He has been in the assisted living facility for over five years with the government picking up the tab because he is a World War II vet. He has complained about lacking a purpose and being alive for 15 years, but his religion prohibits suicide.

(Diversionary note, Mom & Dad split up when I was 23. Dad remarried a couple of times. Mom spent the last two years living almost directly across the hall from my father. The staff loved them both, but asked all us kids how it was that these two people managed to live together in the same house. It did not go smoothly, let me tell you. But all seven of us are still alive and the baby just turned 49.)

Originally Posted by xyzde69

If you eat proprely the correct quantity of energy corresponding of what you physically spend, you can't be fat.

I'm one of this guy who believe that China was right to control its birth rate.
I even would be institutionalize this all around the world, before we put ourselves in such pressures that will surely cause wars.

I'm even to promote the following concept.

If someone want to be a political candidate in any governmental function.
He (or she) would have to do several tests made by psychologists and ethologists to know if this person want to improve the well beings of the citizen and not the well beings of himself and his friends.

I know that is what you believe, but some babies are born fat and stay that way, while others are born skinny. It is true that many truly obese people come from families of fat folks, while others overeat due to psychological problems, abundance of food, and the nutritional quality of the available food. Your personal biases and judgmental attitudes seem outright cruel given the actual life stories of fat people you condemn out of hand.

China's birth rate program turned into a disaster. They are facing both a labor shortage and a demographic imbalance of too many older people for the working age population to support.

Your approach to selecting government officials is similar to Plato's proposal in Republic. It seems attractive although the method needs to be worked out. However, experience has shown that the rulers become a class, build relationships with each other, and begin giving themselves little goodies. When it comes to their children, all bets are off,the corruption of the system begins in earnest, and the design begins to break down. Being childless, you have no idea how strong the urge to benefit one's children is. At its most extreme, Moms begin to murder the cheerleaders selected to the squad over their daughters.

Marx and the other classical socialists believed that the state would wither away as socialism morphed into communism. Your program sounds an awful lot like those adopted in the USSR and PRC. Both failed and were abandoned, but only after millions of people were murdered or starved to death.

[AmateurEmale]

@xyzde69: Do you think that the solution to junk food is "sin taxes" similar to Canada, to penalize people who sell and/or consume junk food, and to fund a national health care program to make them healthy again? [A lot like "sin taxes" on alcohol in the U.S. that lead to beer guts and the obesity epidemic, plus in some cases cirrhosis of the liver.]

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by brk549

Crappy individuals yes in all forms of government but with communism your usually stuck with them for life.Do you think the N. Koreans really want the guy they have now,probably didn't want the one before him but their only way out is for a lot of them to die trying to change it.

Do you agree that's the monarchy of NK is far for what I proposed?

Originally Posted by Brian249x

I believe that humanity as a whole is acting with the same larger consciousness as yeast in a vat of sugar. We will keep breeding and poisoning the environment until it becomes so toxic that it kills us all off. New species that can thrive in that environment will then take over.

And do you believe that we have to stay like that... the hands along our body or to react?
A mother is sometimes strong with her children and for their well beings.
At least 30 years that scientists warn us that we are destroying our ecosystems... and people elect Donald Trump!

Originally Posted by Brian249x

I read that research in Holland shows that it our current path is cheaper. It is far better that smokers, obese people, drug addicts, and alcoholics receive treatment now, but die young, than it would be if their behavior changed, they lived another 10 to 35 years, and society had to pay to treat their ailments in the geriatric stage of life.

Did one of your children died of a lung cancer, of drug addictions, of liver disease or get diabete of type 2?
In my point of view, we are far too laxist and I know why. It's because all these silly businesses bring a lot of money.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Do you have any idea how expensive it was to keep treating my Mom after her strokes? ... He has complained about lacking a purpose and being alive for 15 years, but his religion prohibits suicide.

I know how it is expensive. I collaborated with a guy who saw all his potential heritage going into the pocket of doctors. Her mother was consciousless in a hospital with an Alzeihmer disease.

I'm sorry for your father.
Look, Communism prohibits at least archaïc religions.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

I know that is what you believe, but some babies are born fat and stay that way, while others are born skinny. It is true that many truly obese people come from families of fat folks, while others overeat due to psychological problems, abundance of food, and the nutritional quality of the available food. Your personal biases and judgmental attitudes seem outright cruel given the actual life stories of fat people you condemn out of hand.

Come on. You are really unfair. I never said like some of the other protagonists of this topic, that fat people were lazy people and I didn't condemn them.

I believe that they are fat because they eat too much junk food.
So if you carefully read all what I wrote in the past, I always condemn junk food and told that must be not allowed to be sold.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

China's birth rate program turned into a disaster. They are facing both a labor shortage and a demographic imbalance of too many older people for the working age population to support.

That's your opinion. But if China didn't react, how many people there would be on this planet today? For sure there are other possibilities to regulate the population. The best one is to give a good education to the women (and the men too).

We also face a demographic imbalance in Occidental countries and we import African and Latino people to do the worst jobs and to pay our pension. That's our reality.
That's ridiculous. We need robots to make the jobs, we need to produce less stupid things, we need to reduce our population (the best way to do it, is to give a good education to the women all around the world instead to regulate like China), we need to admire the beauty of our planet, live our life and not exploiting the youngest generations, the poor people of this planet.
We don't need to make richer people who don't need to be that rich.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Marx and the other classical socialists believed that the state would wither away as socialism morphed into communism. Your program sounds an awful lot like those adopted in the USSR and PRC. Both failed and were abandoned, but only after millions of people were murdered or starved to death.

But we rarely read how many people were murdered by Liberalism and lived all their life in misery.

I still report this number... 46 millions Americans and 9 millions French people live under the line of poverty.
Our media are well paid journalists who don't insist on a lot of problematic facts.
Look... it was the case with global warming. Their microphones were mute during at least 30 years.

I let you read the following answer I wrote to brk549

I believe more in a real participative democracy like in Switzerland, than a wobbly democracy like in the USA.
But there are also poor people in Switzerland. That's why I'd prefer a more Social participative democracy.

That means, an executive commitee, a legislative commitee AND an ethics commitee.
If the job of the legislative and the executive commitees fail to pass the exam of the ethics commitee, they must rewrite the law.
The ethics commitee would be constituted by high-level scientists and random selected civilian people of the younger generations.

We don't have to forget that our actions contribute to forge their future and their life.
Maybe the weight of the old generation is too weighty.

Originally Posted by AmateurEmale

@xyzde69: Do you think that the solution to junk food is "sin taxes" similar to Canada, to penalize people who sell and/or consume junk food, and to fund a national health care program to make them healthy again? [A lot like "sin taxes" on alcohol in the U.S. that lead to beer guts and the obesity epidemic, plus in some cases cirrhosis of the liver.]

No I don't think we have to penalize. It must be banned.
I'm for a strong intervention of the state.
You want to eat bananas? Eat bananas. You want to eat apples? Eat apples.
You want a mixture of mangos with pears? Ok you buy your mangos and your pears and you make your own mixture.

You want to eat junk food with added sugar and salt and dextroenginething? Sorry, that's impossible, it doesn't exist anymore.

Amateuremale: - But why?
State answer: - That's our nutritionist commitee who observed that was a junk food. So that's no more available.

[bowlinggreen]

Insofar as Communism vs. the western system goes, let me just compare the lifestyles of working class families in the later 20th century under the two systems.

I come from a working class family, so let me enumerate some of the "perks" we enjoyed, (for me as a child in the 70s to middle 80s) even though we were being "exploited" by the evil capitalists.

We had our own home. Detached, with plenty of rooms.

I had my own bedroom.

We had a working color TV.

We rode about in our own privately owned automobile. (actually our family owned 2 motor vehicles, what a luxury)

We ate meat every day. Actually, at pretty much every meal, unless Mum went off on a tear and decided to make something vegetarian out of the garden stuff.

My father (a staunch union man) could protest for higher wages and benefits without getting on a secret police list or possibly getting arrested and sent to the gulag for anti-state activities.

I could read a lot from the library, and did. And none of the books were censored, or "unbooks" (i.e. not on the shelf, and prohibited).

I could freely buy and listen to antisocial rock and roll once I was old enough.

We could travel where we liked for vacations, even out of the country, without an onerous examination from the government coupled with a good chance of being denied "travel permits".

And my mother NEVER had to stand in line for hours to buy bread, or a cabbage, or fruit.

Just some of the things that come to mind. Can you say the average working class Soviet family enjoyed any the above? I seriously doubt it.

So, from a totally pragmatic view, as I remember things being, its no contest. Capitalism wins, hands down.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

So, from a totally pragmatic view, as I remember things being, its no contest. Capitalism wins, hands down.

Read this.

Nice Capitalism

And both reports don't speak that all the humanity will suffer the 8 planets per individual that you were consuming only in the USA.

Liberalism is a loan without refunds on the back of the future generations.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Read this.

Nice Capitalism

And both reports don't speak that all the humanity will suffer the 8 planets per individual that you were consuming only in the USA.

Liberalism is a loan without refunds on the back of the future generations.

That doesn't change the fundamental balance of the equation. People by and large in the West have had MUCH better standards of living than people living behind the Iron Curtain did.

If I could, I would build a time machine and send you back to 1930s Soviet Russia so you could experience true Communism firsthand. I'd drop you right into Comrade Stalin's lap.

At first he'd probably be interested in hearing your tales from the future. But later on he'd grow tired of your pseudo-intellectual babblings and realize you were just another deviationist wrecker and saboteur.

Not long after that you would find yourself a zek in a Siberian camp, or perhaps a shock worker laboring on the White Sea Canal.

I wonder what you would think of Communism then, after a long day of brutal labor under the stewardship of sadistic guards? Would you still admire the works of Engels and Marx as you stuffed your meager bread ration into your starving belly?