OK, the reason Africa is poor is caused by the dictators. There is no capitalism there. We send them billions of dollars every year and they are still poor. Where is the money going? To the dictators. Communism was tried in the early colonies and it failed. Want to know why? Because a guy under capitalism could work his A.S.S. off and see the results...the reward for his hard work. Under COMMUNISM it did not matter how hard he worked; he always got the same reward because he got to keep some of what he made and the rest was distributed. Those that did little or nothing got rewarded too; for doing nothing. After awhile he saw that it did not pay off to work his A.S.S. off so his productivity dropped and he did the bare minimum or less. There was no more motivation for him to go the extra mile. Before long noone is doing anything yet they expect everything. Communism is and always will be a failure.
2006-09-30 18:45:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ted Kennedy aka Swimmer 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well you raise some good points, but there are also some problems. With Communism, various communes can still be rich while others are poor. You would have rich communes in the United States and poor ones in Africa. Additionally, overall, the mean per capita income would most likely be greatly reduced because there is a lack of incentive to work hard.
Capitalism with a better distribution of wealth through taxation may be the key to fixing the problem of which you speak.
However, in any system, most of the money stays within the boundaries of a country, so you still have poor countries and continents.
The main problem is if you look at animal behavior in many cases, most animals will stand by and watch another get killed without stepping up to the plate. So, until you can address animal behavior, no matter what kind of government you have, there will always be a tendency to short-change the needs of the powerless.
2006-09-30 18:46:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, it isn't just Stalin and Mao and the Vietcong that have failed to make communism work. There have been hundreds of communal societies and none have been particularly successful.
It turns out, as you point out, humans act like humans, and communistic societies don't encourage effort, creativity, or any of the things that build a society and increase overall wealth. If you pretty much get the same lifestyle regardless of the effort you put in, then effort tends to decrease. The goods that people want aren't produced because there is no more personal profit in it than producing whatever is easiest to make.
Capatalism, with its many faults, has one saving grace. It works. The fasting development of wealth for nations has happened under capitalism. The very poorest people in the successful capitalist countries of today are very much better off standard of living wise, than people in countries with less efficient systems.
2006-09-30 18:37:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by enginerd 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Actually the USA tried a form of Socialism in the beginning. They where to share everything.. Everyone was to become equal. It failed then too.
Communism and Socialism can not work. The biggest part of the problem is that it involves Humans. If you gage a Human into no chance of growth mentally or otherwise, then he will not produce as much. Hence why it has failed every time it has been tried.
2006-09-30 18:39:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by lancelot682005 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Communism is great in theory but human nature makes the excecution fail every time. You can't give someone that much power over people they will always take it too far. Yeah, I hate capitalism too but we have to have a middle ground. In communism people have no incentive to work harder. If the amount of work you put in does not affect the results you get, work standards get lowered. In capitalism you have an incentive to work harder, go to school, etc. because you will make more money. The problem is that this is not absolute, and people work their a$$es off and still live in shacks. That's why hardcore capitalism is pretty brutal sometimes. But hardcore communism just gives one person so much power that he will abuse it. So we have to meet in the middle somewhere in order to not screw people over.
2006-09-30 18:49:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Reject187 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Communism is a system bound to fail, as is any system that lacks an incentive for people to achieve.
You obviously do no understand capitalism and the fact that it is, by far, the best system available. Name another that promotes and produces enormous wealth, jobs, and growth? (among other things)
Africa is poor because it is being run into the ground by its own leaders. As a result, it will not attract the investment needed to grow and prosper. They cause their own problems and are as corrupt as they come. The people deserve better and most of the African leaders need to be ousted in order to save the many.
2006-09-30 18:37:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
No. I actually think that communism is a really bad idea. It doesn't motivate people to work and the world would become stagnate culturally. People have nothing to gain from inventing things or painting or whatever if they get no money for it. Plus, think about the jobs- a lot of people would be unemployed. Communism is for stupid people. There's no room for smart people to work in it. A lot of people need to farm or whatever and everyone who works in business (that's a lot of people) would have essentially nothing to do. And we would multiply. And overpopulate the earth. But because nobody bothered to figure out a way to send people to live on the moon (no reason to, no motivation) we all starve to death because there isn't enough food and who's to say who starves and who eats? The people who run the government, of course. And, of course, they decide that they want the food. So the workers die. And that's why communism would never work.
2006-09-30 18:34:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Somebody asked a question here before -- a couple of weeks ago, I guess -- which was something like "what's the difference between and liberal and a communist?" I answered, a la Orwell, that a communist is a person who thinks that communism is a good idea that WILL work and a liberal is a person who thinks that communism is a good idea that will NEVER work.
2006-09-30 18:41:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Correct
2006-10-01 14:40:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Yeti 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Communism allows everyone the same share, no matter how much effort is put in. If everyone is the same, there is no competition, no motivation, so nothing will improve. It sounds good, but there is a reason it hasn't worked.
2006-09-30 18:39:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by SkiGirl04 4
·
1⤊
0⤋