SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SilentZ who wrote (302207)9/4/2006 3:25:58 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1576855
 
> I think the problem with Marx's theorem is not that its flawed but rather that it doesn't take into account the nature of people.

No, it's that "all or nothing" philosophies rarely solve complex problems. Communism on its own certainly isn't the solution to our country's economic issues, but neither is capitalism.


To be honest we don't know what communism can do. Its never been given a chance on the national level. Certainly, what passed for communism in Russia was a joke. Except for the errant kibbutz in Israel, no one has implemented communism as it was proposed by Marx. And that's my point........sharing property equally among everyone seems to go against human nature.

Hell, the co-op concept of owning a property where you have an interest in the building and not the apt. unit has rarely been done outside of NYC......and when it has its been poorly received. There is a small co-op project in LA. The prices of its apts. consistently trail the market prices for equivalent condos by 30-50%.

I think it may be human instinct to want to have your own things......for most of us it starts when we are kids. FWIW.



To: SilentZ who wrote (302207)9/4/2006 4:54:14 PM
From: TigerPaw  Respond to of 1576855
 
Marx's theorem is not that its flawed

Marx theory was flawed when he thought that there could be a "dictatorship of the proletariat" as a temporary and transitory step. The founding fathers were closer to correct when they determined that checks and balances had to come first, and then the more perfect union and common welfare would follow.

TP