• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is communism possible in the USA?

Is communism possible in the USA?

  • Yes, Soviet type of communism

    Votes: 9 9.1%
  • Yes, community type of communism

    Votes: 10 10.1%
  • Yes, religious type of communism

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Yes, other type of communism

    Votes: 12 12.1%
  • No, not possible

    Votes: 57 57.6%
  • Dunno

    Votes: 3 3.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 6 6.1%

  • Total voters
    99
No, you need a down payment and have good credit for the average person.

No, that's for a business loan. Many people start a business with their own savings. I don't recommend anyone attempt to start a business if they aren't able to save enough to start the business, or able to secure investment or credit to start the business. You can, but it would be like getting up off your couch and trying out for the Olympics with zero training.
 
It shows the tension between officers and enlisted. The enlisted and NCO's does most of the work and get paid the least. The second lieutenant does paper work and gets paid the same as an E-4. The conflict of interest is ignore, if the enlisted got paid more than their grossly low salary, then tensions would ceased. Why should an officer only do two tours then get promoted, while the enlisted has multiple tours and still gets paid the same.

and just how long have you been in the military? I haven't seen much of this alleged "tension". I spent a total of 11 years as an enlisted puke. Been commissioned for 10 years. I can tell you that a 2LT does far more than "paperwork". common misconception by those without a clue how things get done. **** just doesn't happen by magic.

and as far as promotions....unless you are a complete ****-up, enlisted get promoted faster than officers. I enlisted in 1984. came in as an E3. got out after desert storm in 1992 as an E6 and I had been busted from E5 to E4 twice because I was a smart ass and couldn't keep my mouth shut. got back into the Guard in 2000 as an E4 (had to take a voluntary reduction to get back in) and made it back to E6 shortly before I got commissioned in 2003.

I was promoted 7 times in 11 years as an enlisted guy. I am now a Major. been promoted 3 times in 10 years as an officer.

I can tell you from personal experience that I have worked harder and longer hours as an officer than I ever worked as enlisted. When I was in Iraq, we'd run missions all day and then the enlisted guys would be "off-duty" until the next morning while the officers got to stay up and work for another 3-4 hours planning/coordinating the missions for the next day.
 
hmm sounds like a value proposition there eh?
why would a CEO receive greater compensation than a janitor?

Talent and hard work are qualitative factors which cannot be measured quantitatively.

Howard Zinn

They shouldn't, janitors work physically harder than ceos.Ceos don't even exert mental fatigue.They have advisors. The fact that conservatives view people "lower" than them in the social class suggest a primitive mindset.
 
Last edited:
and just how long have you been in the military? I haven't seen much of this alleged "tension". I spent a total of 11 years as an enlisted puke. Been commissioned for 10 years. I can tell you that a 2LT does far more than "paperwork". common misconception by those without a clue how things get done. **** just doesn't happen by magic.

and as far as promotions....unless you are a complete ****-up, enlisted get promoted faster than officers. I enlisted in 1984. came in as an E3. got out after desert storm in 1992 as an E6 and I had been busted from E5 to E4 twice because I was a smart ass and couldn't keep my mouth shut. got back into the Guard in 2000 as an E4 (had to take a voluntary reduction to get back in) and made it back to E6 shortly before I got commissioned in 2003.

I was promoted 7 times in 11 years as an enlisted guy. I am now a Major. been promoted 3 times in 10 years as an officer.

I can tell you from personal experience that I have worked harder and longer hours as an officer than I ever worked as enlisted. When I was in Iraq, we'd run missions all day and then the enlisted guys would be "off-duty" until the next morning while the officers got to stay up and work for another 3-4 hours planning/coordinating the missions for the next day.

You just said that you were an enlisted puke. The fact you use that language shows that even you believe enlisted are inferior.
 
He said with zero money,
 
No, that's for a business loan. Many people start a business with their own savings. I don't recommend anyone attempt to start a business if they aren't able to save enough to start the business, or able to secure investment or credit to start the business. You can, but it would be like getting up off your couch and trying out for the Olympics with zero training.

he said with zero money.
 
hah I was in the hole when I started out!
nuthin' from nuthin' leaves nuthin'
ya gotta have sumthin' if ya wanna be with me!

we all come into this world nekkid, screaming and flat broke
not everyone leaves that way?
 
You just said that you were an enlisted puke. The fact you use that language shows that even you believe enlisted are inferior.

and the fact that all you got from my post is this shows that you don't know what the hell you are talking about. enlisted have their job to do, officers have their job to do. neither is "inferior". maybe if you ever actually serve in the military (or make it beyond lance corporal) you might actually get a clue.
 
he said with zero money.
Zero of your own money, sure. Many people get investment from friends and family to start a business. I'd be skeptical of someone asking me for money, when they are putting up none of their own though. It costs money to file though, maybe around $100-$200. Hardly an insurmountable hurdle.
 
You seem to be confusing the unrealistic ideals on which Communism is based with the empirical results of every attempt that has been made to put those ideals into practice.

Marx did not intent or expect that trying to follow his ideals would lead to mass-murder and brutal oppression. He was, of course, very much mistaken.

While communism of Marx is far different than the law of consecration, the Book of Mormon is a critique against individualistic competitive materialism and supports a collectivist type of economic system. Not a forced one, but one where individuals use their free agency to make covenants to share God's wealth.

2 And it came to pass in the thirty and sixth year, the people were all converted unto the Lord, upon all the face of the land, both Nephites and Lamanites, and there were no contentions and disputations among them, and every man did deal justly one with another.
3 And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift. - 4 Nephi 2:2-3
4 And it came to pass that the thirty and seventh year passed away also, and there still continued to be peace in the land.
5 And there were great and marvelous works wrought by the disciples of Jesus, insomuch that they did heal the sick, and raise the dead, and cause the lame to walk, and the blind to receive their sight, and the deaf to hear; and all manner of miracles did they work among the children of men; and in nothing did they work miracles save it were in the name of Jesus.
6 And thus did the thirty and eighth year pass away, and also the thirty and ninth, and forty and first, and the forty and second, yea, even until forty and nine years had passed away, and also the fifty and first, and the fifty and second; yea, and even until fifty and nine years had passed away.
7 And the Lord did prosper them exceedingly in the land; yea, insomuch that they did build cities again where there had been cities burned.
8 Yea, even that great acity Zarahemla did they cause to be built again.
9 But there were many cities which had been sunk, and waters came up in the stead thereof; therefore these cities could not be renewed.
10 And now, behold, it came to pass that the people of Nephi did wax strong, and did multiply exceedingly fast, and became an exceedingly fair and delightsome people.
11 And they were married, and given in marriage, and were blessed according to the multitude of the promises which the Lord had made unto them.
12 And they did not walk any more after the performances and ordinances of the law of Moses; but they did walk after the commandments which they had received from their Lord and their God, continuing in fasting and prayer, and in meeting together oft both to pray and to hear the word of the Lord.
13 And it came to pass that there was no contention among all the people, in all the land; but there were mighty miracles wrought among the disciples of Jesus.
14 And it came to pass that the seventy and first year passed away, and also the seventy and second year, yea, and in fine, till the seventy and ninth year had passed away; yea, even an hundred years had passed away, and the disciples of Jesus, whom he had chosen, had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry; and there were other disciples ordained in their stead; and also many of that generation had passed away.
15 And it came to pass that there was no contention in the land, because of the love of God which did dwell in the hearts of the people.
16 And there were no envyings, nor strifes, nor tumults, nor whoredoms, nor lyings, nor murders, nor any manner of lasciviousness; and surely there could not be a happier people among all the people who had been created by the hand of God.
17 There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in aone, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God.
18 And how blessed were they! For the Lord did bless them in all their doings; yea, even they were blessed and prospered until an hundred and ten years had passed away; and the first generation from Christ had passed away, and there was no contention in all the land.

So at the zenith of Nephite civilization, they lived a collective economic system where all things were shared in common. Things would later change as they became really prosperous and some began to have pride and seek to prosper above the group:

22 And it came to pass that two hundred years had passed away; and the second generation had all passed away save it were a few.
23 And now I, Mormon, would that ye should know that the people had multiplied, insomuch that they were spread upon all the face of the land, and that they had become exceedingly arich, because of their prosperity in Christ.
24 And now, in this two hundred and first year there began to be among them those who were lifted up in apride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world.
25 And from that time forth they did have their goods and their substance no more acommon among them.
26 And they began to be divided into classes; and they began to build up achurches unto themselves to get bgain, and began to deny the true church of Christ.
27 And it came to pass that when two hundred and ten years had passed away there were many churches in the land; yea, there were many churches which professed to know the Christ, and yet they did adeny the more parts of his gospel, insomuch that they did receive all manner of wickedness, and did administer that which was sacred unto him to whom it had been bforbiddenbecause of unworthiness.
28 And this church did multiply exceedingly because of iniquity, and because of the power of Satan who did get hold upon their hearts.

The Book of Mormon, like the New Testament gospels is clear what riches above your basic needs should go to if you are a true follower of Christ:

17 Think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you.
18 But before ye seek for riches, seek ye for the kingdom of God.
19 And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to do good—to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted. Jacob 2:17-19



The Saints of the New Testament "The Church of Jesus Christ" had the same economic policy:

32 And the multitude of them that believed were of aone heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that bought of the things which he cpossessed was his own; but they had all things dcommon.
33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. Acts 4:32-35

When God restored The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints through the prophet Joseph Smith the same economic policy was implemented:

15 And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine.
16 But it must needs be done in mine own away; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low.
17 For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.
18 Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment. D&C 15-18

In a very symbolic name change to the city they had gathered to, after the latter day saints adopted the Lord's economic system, they changed the name from Commerce to Nauvoo which in Hebrew means "beautiful". And they built the most beautiful city in the American frontier. After the Mormons fled on their exodus they tried to implement this economic policy again but too many of them were too materialist. Brigham Young explained it something like this, a man would have three extra horses he didn't need but instead of giving them to those in need he'd rationalize well I may have more kids and they'll need the horses, etc. Given so many were too covetous, like the Israelites in Sinai, who were chastised and given a lesser law as a way to prepare them at a later date for the higher law, the Church implemented the 10% tithing and welfare fast the first of each month where you can give what your conscience guides as a way to prepare the Church for the future.
 
Last edited:
Zero of your own money, sure. Many people get investment from friends and family to start a business. I'd be skeptical of someone asking me for money, when they are putting up none of their own though. It costs money to file though, maybe around $100-$200. Hardly an insurmountable hurdle.

You don't need to file to start a business. As a sole proprietor, there are no filing fees and as long as you're doing business in your own name, you don't even have to file with the city or state. There are no hurdles to leap over. The government actually does not want to create any obstacle for your doing business and you can just jump right in, provide a service, charge for it and you're in business. Some businesses will require startup money. Some will not. It depends on what sort of business you are doing. You can start a consulting business for zero dollars. You can start mowing lawns for zero dollars (provided you have a lawnmower). You can start a handyman business with zero dollars (although you need some basic tools). You can walk dogs, groom dogs, tutor children, give yoga lessons, detail cars, make custom clothing, tailoring, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc....

If you want to do business, start doing business. There are millions of people in this country and damned near all of them buy goods and services. If you can convince them to buy goods or services from you, you're in business. The bitch is that you have to get off your ass and work. You have to hustle business. You have to handle the accounting. You have to pay your taxes. You have to promote yourself. You have to handle customer service. You don't get to sit on your ass counting money, but that's OK because virtually no one else does, either. The great thing about being in business for yourself is that you are free to negotiate your wages more frequently and do so with more "employers" because essentially all your customers become your "employer" when you are in business for yourself. You still have to keep them happy. You still have to give them what they want. You still have to be more competitive than the next guy who might want the money and the work more than you do. The good news is that you get to keep the profits from your work. The bad news is that if you aren't very good at doing business, you still won't be making any money and worse yet, you can only blame yourself then.
 
My kid graduates lawl school next May
We were talkin' 'bout how he should turn down that 100K a year wage slave position he's bean offered cuz yanno
yer nevah gonna git rich spending all yer time workin' to make someone else rich

and the beat goes on...
 
You don't need to file to start a business. As a sole proprietor, there are no filing fees and as long as you're doing business in your own name, you don't even have to file with the city or state. There are no hurdles to leap over.
Thanks for the clarification. I formed an LLC and never looked at sole proprietorship. $200 was not a huge hurdle either way.
 
The bad news is that if you aren't very good at doing business, you still won't be making any money and worse yet, you can only blame yourself then.

I disagree wholeheartedly :thumbdown

You can have your own deal and be a total mediocre slug
and still make way more income and be twice as happy as you'd be working to make someone else's beemer payments ;)
 
Wrong again, when the rich collects money at the top that is causes low monetary velocity. Which means that the money is not getting back into the economy. Its the middle class who grow the economy because they are consumers not collectors. This is called the redistributive effect, which doesn't happen when the rich collects it all. Thats why I showed the chart where in 1929 the rich collect 44% which cause the great depression.

You really should take some classes in economics because you don't know what you are talking about. The rich don't just "collect cash" and stash it under their mattress. The rich typically have most of their money in assets and not all of them are liquid but even the liquid assets are still at work in the economy. Maybe you want to argue that they have a mansion and that's just money sitting there that's "not in the economy", but if you do then you have to ignore the fact that they had to pay hard cash for that and that the value of that property and all the work being done on it went "back into the economy". When you read about some super-rich mogul worth a billion dollars, you might think that's money that has been "extracted from the economy" but it's not. It's wealth that person created through his business and unless it's cash sitting under his mattress, his wealth is never just "locked up" doing nothing.

Seiously, learn something about economics and then come back and discuss the beauty of communism with us.
 
Wikipedia said:
Another effect of technology is a homogenous workforce that can be easily replaceable. Marx believed that this class conflict would result in the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and that the private property would be communally owned.[15] The mode of production would remain, but communal ownership would eliminate class conflict.[15]

It's not possible, it's just conjecture from someone trying to solve issues from years past, that failed.

Overthrow of the ruling class is certainly nothing new to history. That they would communally own it is fiction. That this communal ownership, even if it were realistic, would eliminate class conflict, is a second fiction. People create classes and differentiate themselves in terms of power naturally, for all sorts of petty and real reasons. That it would be "eliminated" just because of a revolution where they claimed to be sharing, is just absurd.

This is seen all the time when we see Marxist types then claim it's never been tried. Sure it has, but in reality when people are faced with communal ownership, it's like a Ouija board, someone just can't help but manipulate the system and the cycle starts all over again. Such revolution talk is inherently dangerous because based on history, a capitalistic and free nation like the U.S. is like winning the lottery on the spectrum of what you could end up with if you restart your society. Look around in even very modern history to see examples of what their revolutions resulted in.
 
It's not possible, it's just conjecture from someone trying to solve issues from years past, that failed.

Overthrow of the ruling class is certainly nothing new to history. That they would communally own it is fiction. That this communal ownership, even if it were realistic, would eliminate class conflict, is a second fiction. People create classes and differentiate themselves in terms of power naturally, for all sorts of petty and real reasons. That it would be "eliminated" just because of a revolution where they claimed to be sharing, is just absurd.

This is seen all the time when we see Marxist types then claim it's never been tried. Sure it has, but in reality when people are faced with communal ownership, it's like a Ouija board, someone just can't help but manipulate the system and the cycle starts all over again. Such revolution talk is inherently dangerous because based on history, a capitalistic and free nation like the U.S. is like winning the lottery on the spectrum of what you could end up with if you restart your society. Look around in even very modern history to see examples of what their revolutions resulted in.

Marxist/Socialist/Communist societies did achieve communal ownership.... only with a dictator in supreme command of all the communal property. It's societal slavery - I mean, after all, who are the slaves if we ALL are slaves?
 
and the fact that all you got from my post is this shows that you don't know what the hell you are talking about. enlisted have their job to do, officers have their job to do. neither is "inferior". maybe if you ever actually serve in the military (or make it beyond lance corporal) you might actually get a clue.

My argument is that the enlisted get over worked, get less pay, and are devalued in our military. Do you believe that they should get payed more? I mean, you didn't stay enlisted. You became an officer, which may indicate that you were not content being an enlisted.
 
You really should take some classes in economics because you don't know what you are talking about. The rich don't just "collect cash" and stash it under their mattress. The rich typically have most of their money in assets and not all of them are liquid but even the liquid assets are still at work in the economy. Maybe you want to argue that they have a mansion and that's just money sitting there that's "not in the economy", but if you do then you have to ignore the fact that they had to pay hard cash for that and that the value of that property and all the work being done on it went "back into the economy". When you read about some super-rich mogul worth a billion dollars, you might think that's money that has been "extracted from the economy" but it's not. It's wealth that person created through his business and unless it's cash sitting under his mattress, his wealth is never just "locked up" doing nothing.



Seiously, learn something about economics and then come back and discuss the beauty of communism with us.

Its called off shore accounts, swiss accounts, pretty sure you haven't heard of it.

Apple stashing cash offshore to avoid taxes, a congressional investigation says - NY Daily News

Did Some Political Figures Have Secret Swiss Accounts?
 
Marxist/Socialist/Communist societies did achieve communal ownership.... only with a dictator in supreme command of all the communal property. It's societal slavery - I mean, after all, who are the slaves if we ALL are slaves?

I know it's like they have never even seen that absurd reality show Survivor. Everyone has a vote, yet power immediately is stratified and groups in power control the votes. Despite everyone "owning" an equal share of votes, the powers that form naturally and inevitably (and immediately) STILL dictate the outcome. Sure, give us all equal ownership after brutal killing the former owners. Call yourselves virtuous, and the next day charismatic leaders will again be calling the shots, but this time, with blood on their hands corruption as they creed.
 
Papa keeps his stash in a booby trapped floorsafe
 
My kid graduates lawl school next May
We were talkin' 'bout how he should turn down that 100K a year wage slave position he's bean offered cuz yanno
yer nevah gonna git rich spending all yer time workin' to make someone else rich

and the beat goes on...

I don't consider 100k being rich. far from it actually.
 
I know it's like they have never even seen that absurd reality show Survivor. Everyone has a vote, yet power immediately is stratified and groups in power control the votes. Despite everyone "owning" an equal share of votes, the powers that form naturally and inevitably (and immediately) STILL dictate the outcome. Sure, give us all equal ownership after brutal killing the former owners. Call yourselves virtuous, and the next day charismatic leaders will again be calling the shots, but this time, with blood on their hands corruption as they creed.

The russians were ready to accept a romantic marxism revolution, even though their economic wasn't.
 
yer right Jag it's minimum wage that's why he'd not even consider it :p
 
If the current trends of laziness and apathy towards competition accelerate growth, which they probably will largely due to technology, then I suppose other economic systems will become possible. So I think socialism is very possible. Communism? No. People like their own "stuff", myself included. You can't share unless I tell you so ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom