Capitalism vs. Socialism

[Chris]

My dear friend. I just visited the web site, but I'm unclear as to your question for me. Sorry, I worked hard today.

I was just wondering if you cared to comment on the content of MMC's post. You seem to want to question it but never come out and so so. Was it the 100 years since the Communist Party first joined with labor? Can't be because the Communist Party is now celebrating that. So what is it you wish to say?

[Chris]

Well, no offense, but, "on direct orders from Moscow" sounds it comes from someone's opinion, not some Ruskie documentation. "Objection your honor; hearsay!"

You could easily have looked it up. Here, Communists in the United States Labor Movement

...The CP at that time looked on the American Federation of Labor as an enemy to be destroyed in order to eliminate the temptations of reformism rather than revolution....

The Profintern, or "Red International of Labor Unions," forced the CP to change in 1921, when it directed U.S. communists to work within the AFL in order to make it a revolutionary body – what an earlier generation of SP members referred to as "boring from within." ...

This is consistent with Bell's Marxian Socialism in the US. Bell explains that the socialist were always split between purists and reformist. The purists, who sought, revolution, despised the reformists who always went allong with offers from politicians and business. When they finally came around to supporting them, it was too late politically for the socialists to make any headway politically.

[MMC]

I was just wondering if you cared to comment on the content of MMC's post. You seem to want to question it but never come out and so so. Was it the 100 years since the Communist Party first joined with labor? Can't be because the Communist Party is now celebrating that. So what is it you wish to say?

I was going with.....damn those Jews.

[Chris]

But back to the topic, in the second video, the socialist keeps talking about the failure of capitalism to achieve equality, typical of socialists, the left. The Randian finally responds to his insistence on equality by asking why that is even a goal, it seems impossible given the differences among people. The Randian argues instead that the goal should be fairness, that equality (equity?) is not what you deserve, some people deserve more, some less, based on the value they create.

[Mechanic]

• They think that wealth is a resource like clean water and we only have a limited amount. So becoming wealthy must've happened through theft/coercion.
• They think the worker and his labor is what should drive value, not the business owners/founders who either created the good/service and took on all the risk to produce their ideas and employ people in the process.
• The modern leftists are also postmodernists, so beneath the Marxist/socialist outlooks on the economy and politics, their baseline philosophy is essentially since there isn't just one, de facto interpretation of life and the world so therefore all interpretations are valid.
  
  
  
  
  When someone starts a business, they put labour (their time and effort) and risk (their savings or a loan in their name) into the business. People who join afterwards only put in their labour. The business owner then takes a cut of the profits as a return on their investment.
  Communists are against this, as they see this "owner's cut" as stealing from the workers. Though for some reason, they seem to be unwilling to start their own business and then just choose to not take their worker's cut.
  
  
  
  Then there is the resources reason used by all marxists/communist/socialists/progressives.

You're fing nuts!

[Peter1469]

You're fing nuts!

Any reason? Or just emotion?

[MMC]

Any reason? Or just emotion?

Hooked on a feeling.