Because here is how wealth is created: you create or provide something that another person values so much, that they pay or trade you something that is worth more than the time and resources that went in to supplying the need. In other words, you used your human ingenuity to add value to raw material. You are rewarded with profit. The result is wealth-creation. By definition, wealth creation is the only thing that eliminates poverty, since wealth is the absence of poverty.
Simple enough, but the key is that you need to know what other people value. You need to know you are creating something that is of more value than the effort you put into it. You need to know whether the resources you have available are best devoted to making X or making Y. Otherwise, you are destroying wealth.
There are two requirements for transmitting this kind of information: free markets and a monetary system with pricing signals.
Communism tries to eliminate both. "Markets" are not free, and prices cannot react to market forces. This is all it takes to forever doom communism. Information about value creation is destroyed and cannot be relayed. People inevitably wind up destroying value, destroying wealth. Without the value information, those in charge cannot make effective decisions about what to produce and how much to produce and whether limited resources should be used to produce X or Y. The result is inevitable economic catastrophe, resulting in poverty.
2006-12-12 10:02:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by KevinStud99 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Communism propagates State ownership of factors of production. Therefore, all benefits of human efforts accrue to a small set of people (as a State is still a collective of people) and disincentivises honest effort.
Moreover, State-organised businesses have all have pockets of power and if you do not curry favour with this category, then you are one of the "withouts" and will fall out of favour with the rest of this unseen machinery. Poverty is not far on the horizon.
Since, efficiency of capital is not the guiding principle behind investments, there may be a lot of focus on social development but the direction of funds/grants et al will be determined on opinions rather than market signals. Hence, poverty and inequalities tend to creep in.
2006-12-12 23:08:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Arjun C 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Simply put, communism removes Judeo-Christian morals, and replaces them with "politically correct" behavioral requirements.
The biggest irony is that while communism represents itself as a system where everyone is equal, there exists absolutely no way of structuring it so that everyone has an equal voice. Inevitably, those at the top of the communist food chain become "more equal" than everybody else, and abuse their positions of power (they removed Judeo-Christian values, remember?).
Communism, without exception, always degrades into a corrupt autocratic police state where people have no rights, and a privileged class emerges to rob and oppress the masses.
We in America so glibly look down our noses at communism as if its original framers were evil villians. At least their intentions were honorable, albeit misdirected (atheistic). In America we've departed from our own Consitution, which made this country great, in favor of a defacto monetary dictatorship handing power to a handful of banksters whose names we don't even know. These banksters are far worse than the communist party bosses. Rather than simply enslave us, they manufacture wars, econmic upheavals and other crisis large an small just to keep the US government in a borrowing mode. Always borrowing, and never able to pay it back has robbed the American people of their home, heritage and bank account.
All this because a fellow named Charlie had a theory. The Lie.
Sad.
.
2006-12-12 09:14:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by s2scrm 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Communism did just the opposite of what it was intended to do in 1917-1919. The Communistic purpose was to create a society of a perfect utopia where everyone would be happy. In fact, just the opposite occured when those of the leaders of CCCP became the "favored ones". Obviously it did not work thank goodness.
2006-12-12 09:13:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Merrill V 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Where communism really "caused" poverty is when shortages arose or the system of centralized distribution broke down. For example, food shortages or lack of heating oil.
2006-12-13 16:23:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by annettemrichter 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Communism does NOT cause poverty...People do! Greedy people cause poverty.
2006-12-12 09:26:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
By eliminating the incentive to work to acquire more property and by eliminating the incentive to invest one's capital to make more. It also encourages a large black market as people are able to hide that income from the government.
2006-12-12 09:05:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by aiguyaiguy 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Simply because it is not a viable economic system. When the economy doesn't work right there will be more poor people.
2006-12-12 09:09:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by jeffrcal 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
communism is equal distribution of wealth which would help the lower and lower middle class america but would take the motivation out of acquiring wealth (they say) and america would grow weak,,
supposedly
2006-12-12 09:06:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋