|
I think people often worry too much about the 'rules'.
To me comunism is about the results rather than the practice.
Cal Marx states the result should be hapiness.
The argument that if you have the system right people are basicly happy.
The resulkt being people would not want to take any form of drug (inc alcohol) or indeed be interested in porn.
The argument that he puts is that people only use these are they are not happy.
And indeed we see the abuse of these when people are not happy.
Thus as long as the system preduces hapopiness then its basicly comunism.
Thus we see often forced laws in so called comusist states where drugs, porn, prostetution, gamberling are made illigall. Thus you can claim your system works. Even in non comunist countries we see the same thing.
Comunism is not realy about goverment controll.
Some see it as non democracy, though no country is truly democratic. For instance if you belive your in a democratic country, did you get to vote on them putting a building up in your area. Of couse not. And it would be nuts if we voted on everything. But thats what full democracy is.
We basicly have a system of voting for who you like. Often regardless if they will do the greatest good. Often you vote on gut feelings rather than evidence based. For instance if the evidence was that making drugs legal would in fact reduce drugs and crime, people would still vote for the chap who says ban drugs.
China is moving away from the populist vote to having one party in power but taking the thoughts of the people into mind. Though this may seem alien, and wrong its what many in china seem to want.
USSR had problems with comunication. The cremlin never found anything out. In fact the USSR jokew was that to find out what was going on in the USSR the cremlin had to contact the FBI and CIA as they knew more what was going on. It turned out this was not just a joke but in fact fact.
Though when the nuclear plant blow up, it changed USSR poloticts vastly as it turned out most of the nuclear plants had known problems but no one wanted to rock the boat, so everyone sent in reports of clean health.
But capatalim does work in parts. It does help creayte better products and servises. It cleates better ways to produce them. Quality increases. Cars today are a million times better than the rubish made in the 70's that were often not well put together and had faults. Many british and american cars in the 70's were junk when you conpaire cars of today.
But also onbe must recognise that some state run things work better than being in the private sector. For instance, the police, army, and lets be honest NASA. In fact it was a year or so ago that NASA told the Russain space system off for selling holidays to rich people. I found that most amuzing.
Often the problem is that the state fails to understand how to run things well.
WhileI love the NHS, it is badly run. It probably costs 2 or 3 times more to run than it should.
Often in the UK we do not do things well.
For instance we build cheap flats. We contracted builders who cut costs. Now only after a few years they are being pulled down or re-built. They are also ugly.
In contrast USSR did understand the importance of pride and built a lot of attractive bbuildings for its people. The train stations are stunning. Yet in the UK our train stationms are gray concrete junk. Very ugly.
In the UK though millions is raised in road fund licence our roads are bad. Realy bad. So bad that BMW have found that its the only country that its alloy wheels break, due to the bupy roads.
The question is what should the state run and what should be private. And how many regulations should be in place for both public and private.
I do belive that the USA should have state health care. I think as long as its run effectivly everyone would benafit.
But somone said that if the state provides hand ouyts then people will not want to look after themselves.
And its a point.
In the UK Labour goverment bribed certain voters by making them dependent on the state from birth to death. It encouraged girls top keep having baboies as they woulkd get more benafits and a bigger house. This made them a Labour votor as they knew other partes would or could take there benafits away.
And that is a problem. Its easy for some goverments to buy votors with benafits.
But the problem has become those on benafits find very soon there health drops. They then become the main user of the NHS.
Thus while its important to help people who cannot help themselves its also important its not used to trap people into a system.
State health is no more socalism as it is capatalism. No more than the police or army are. It benafits business as workers are less lickly to be sick. It benafits the people of the USA as it lowers your costs. Costs are spread out.
Hospitals can still be private, but rather than giving you every test going toi bump up the bill, they would have to justyfy giving you every test. It would be more likly doctors would make desisions for health reasons rather than to bump up profits.
In fact I am suprised hospitals in the USA can legally get away with bumping up these pointless tests.
America and in deed the UK needs far more small businesses. They not only enrch the lives of people by often offering a more quality product or service, as well as more custom to peoples needs, somthing large firms could not achive easily. They also help stabalise the job martket. Small firms are less likly to sack people to save money. They are seen are people rather than numbers on a spread sheet.
|