5 ms·

Yes, Computers Have Improved. No, Communism Hasn't

21 points by tujv 11y ago

orionblastar 11y ago
Communism is flawed because not everyone is allowed to become a member of the Communist party to get perks and elite treatment. The government also controls prices and if they want the price of toilet paper to be low and the price of bread to be low, there will be a shortage of it because the organizations that make it won't earn much money and make it at a loss. Then there are lines for toilet paper and bread to wait for it to be made. The military is always given priority in food, and the people get what is left over. Some argue that the Communism that the USSR had was not the same as Marxism. I had a Russian coworker once, he tried to quit smoking. He had smoked US cigarettes and he switched to Russian cigarettes because they tasted bad and he claimed having bad tasting cigarettes helped him quit. Something about Russian quality control not being as good as quality control in the USA. But as AI, automation, and robots improve, they will do the jobs of human beings and put most of us out of work and then there will be a basic income to live on. Perhaps that is when Communism works when the technology does the work for us and doesn't need any motivation to work better.
- duncan_bayne 11y ago
  Perhaps that is when Communism works when the technology does the work for us and doesn't need any motivation to work better. No, because you still have the fundamental problem that broke Communism (and which was identified by von Mises and others in the early 20th Century): the calculation problem. https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem This is not a solvable problem. Creating an 'artificial market' is akin to predicting the weather in great detail 75 years from now. You might, might be able to say "it's likely to be a bit warmer on average", but you could certainly never say "it'll be raining at 11:00 that day". It's simply impossible.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    I thought the USA outspending the USSR, forcing resource exhaustion is what broke communism. If you have unlimited renewable energy, self-driving electric vehicles, IBM's watson providing clinical expertise instead of doctors, etc, you could provide socialism without taking from people (because labor no longer has value compared to software and automation).
    - orionblastar 11y ago
      I think Communism broke itself. There is the myth that Reagan created the SDI program that didn't really exist to make the USSR spend more on research for space based defense to catch up, but I think that is a red herring. Communism would pay janitors more money than it paid scientists and engineers, simply because that janitor was a member of the Communist party. Many scientists and engineers defected from Russia to other countries to earn more money. Russia had some great products AK-47, Soyuz rocket and capsule, and sold the MIG to many nations as well. Look at Greece right now, they had major socialist programs and they got into deep debt. The USSR got into deep debt as well with their socialist programs, and their military was expensive to maintain. Nations that owed them money like Afghanistan they invaded and the USA countered by training Osama bin Laden and the Taliban to fight then guerrilla style, on 9/11/2001 we wish we hadn't trained them. The USA didn't outspend the USSR it out innovated it with science and technology. Apple, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, AMD, Dell, HP, Sun, etc all developed better hardware and software and the PC Industry with MS-DOS had programs that automated tasks and saved money. It wasn't Reaganomics that boosted the economy it was the tech industry that did so. US companies sold the technology to other nations and money started to flow into the US economy. This was back when technology was made in the USA, now it is made in China mostly.
      - nosuchthing 11y ago
        Attributing bad economic decisions as inherently a fault of social service programs in the case of Greece or the USSR is a red herring. Canada, Switzerland, Neatherlands, Norway seem to be successfully managed countries with large social service programs.
letster 11y ago
Interesting thing it what will happen, in the future, when computers would-be improved enough to replace most human professions? It is profitable for separate producers to use automated systems but unemployed people have no enough money to buy their products. Will government regulate production like in socialistic economic model?
- deciplex 11y ago
  You're basically talking about a post-scarcity economy, which is coming in bits and pieces already. Based on what we've already seen with digital goods, the answer will probably be artificial scarcity by fiat, with (I would guess) approximately equivalent results. The letter of the law will assign virtually all property to a few holders of (intellectual) capital, who will lease it out at great cost and with unreasonable restrictions. People will break the law regularly of course, and it will be loosely enforced - but most of the population will be law-breakers and thus subject to the whim of a police state.
rorykoehler 11y ago
I don't know many people who want to try Communism again however Capitalism also has it's inherent flaws. While Communism suffers from lack of incentive Capitalism suffers from an incentive to plunder the environment for short term personal gain. Even as a huge fan of Universal Basic Income, a scheme that aims to provide the lowest common denominator with a passable quality of life, I can acknowledge that the environmental problem will not be magically solved. In order to succeed as a civilization we need to give up the idea that a single ideology holds all the answers. Good ideas are everywhere and to stick to one ideology exclusively is akin to religious madness. We have more scientific understanding now than every before yet when it comes to political ideology a large portion of society choses to ignore science and go with whatever narrative they have made up in their head that confirms their own biases.

21 points by tujv 11y ago

Communism is flawed because not everyone is allowed to become a member of the Communist party to get perks and elite treatment. The government also controls prices and if they want the price of toilet paper to be low and the price of bread to be low, there will be a shortage of it because the organizations that make it won't earn much money and make it at a loss. Then there are lines for toilet paper and bread to wait for it to be made. The military is always given priority in food, and the people get what is left over. Some argue that the Communism that the USSR had was not the same as Marxism. I had a Russian coworker once, he tried to quit smoking. He had smoked US cigarettes and he switched to Russian cigarettes because they tasted bad and he claimed having bad tasting cigarettes helped him quit. Something about Russian quality control not being as good as quality control in the USA. But as AI, automation, and robots improve, they will do the jobs of human beings and put most of us out of work and then there will be a basic income to live on. Perhaps that is when Communism works when the technology does the work for us and doesn't need any motivation to work better.

duncan_bayne 11y ago
Perhaps that is when Communism works when the technology does the work for us and doesn't need any motivation to work better. No, because you still have the fundamental problem that broke Communism (and which was identified by von Mises and others in the early 20th Century): the calculation problem. https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem This is not a solvable problem. Creating an 'artificial market' is akin to predicting the weather in great detail 75 years from now. You might, might be able to say "it's likely to be a bit warmer on average", but you could certainly never say "it'll be raining at 11:00 that day". It's simply impossible.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  I thought the USA outspending the USSR, forcing resource exhaustion is what broke communism. If you have unlimited renewable energy, self-driving electric vehicles, IBM's watson providing clinical expertise instead of doctors, etc, you could provide socialism without taking from people (because labor no longer has value compared to software and automation).
  - orionblastar 11y ago
    I think Communism broke itself. There is the myth that Reagan created the SDI program that didn't really exist to make the USSR spend more on research for space based defense to catch up, but I think that is a red herring. Communism would pay janitors more money than it paid scientists and engineers, simply because that janitor was a member of the Communist party. Many scientists and engineers defected from Russia to other countries to earn more money. Russia had some great products AK-47, Soyuz rocket and capsule, and sold the MIG to many nations as well. Look at Greece right now, they had major socialist programs and they got into deep debt. The USSR got into deep debt as well with their socialist programs, and their military was expensive to maintain. Nations that owed them money like Afghanistan they invaded and the USA countered by training Osama bin Laden and the Taliban to fight then guerrilla style, on 9/11/2001 we wish we hadn't trained them. The USA didn't outspend the USSR it out innovated it with science and technology. Apple, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, AMD, Dell, HP, Sun, etc all developed better hardware and software and the PC Industry with MS-DOS had programs that automated tasks and saved money. It wasn't Reaganomics that boosted the economy it was the tech industry that did so. US companies sold the technology to other nations and money started to flow into the US economy. This was back when technology was made in the USA, now it is made in China mostly.
    - nosuchthing 11y ago
      Attributing bad economic decisions as inherently a fault of social service programs in the case of Greece or the USSR is a red herring. Canada, Switzerland, Neatherlands, Norway seem to be successfully managed countries with large social service programs.

letster 11y ago

Interesting thing it what will happen, in the future, when computers would-be improved enough to replace most human professions? It is profitable for separate producers to use automated systems but unemployed people have no enough money to buy their products. Will government regulate production like in socialistic economic model?

deciplex 11y ago
You're basically talking about a post-scarcity economy, which is coming in bits and pieces already. Based on what we've already seen with digital goods, the answer will probably be artificial scarcity by fiat, with (I would guess) approximately equivalent results. The letter of the law will assign virtually all property to a few holders of (intellectual) capital, who will lease it out at great cost and with unreasonable restrictions. People will break the law regularly of course, and it will be loosely enforced - but most of the population will be law-breakers and thus subject to the whim of a police state.

rorykoehler 11y ago

I don't know many people who want to try Communism again however Capitalism also has it's inherent flaws. While Communism suffers from lack of incentive Capitalism suffers from an incentive to plunder the environment for short term personal gain. Even as a huge fan of Universal Basic Income, a scheme that aims to provide the lowest common denominator with a passable quality of life, I can acknowledge that the environmental problem will not be magically solved. In order to succeed as a civilization we need to give up the idea that a single ideology holds all the answers. Good ideas are everywhere and to stick to one ideology exclusively is akin to religious madness. We have more scientific understanding now than every before yet when it comes to political ideology a large portion of society choses to ignore science and go with whatever narrative they have made up in their head that confirms their own biases.