Communism... ( Archived) (32)

...what do you think? Is it dangerous for humanity or is it a valid (applicable) philoshophy?

I think if Karl Marx could look at it from hindsight that he would say it, too is an opiate.

Marxism is not synonymous with communism. The earliest Christian churches were communist. Many monasteries of various religions exist and have existed in essentially communist fashion. In many ways, families are communistic. A form of communism could easily be the way forward. But any system, communist or other, that turns the state into God is unquestionably wrong.

The free rider problem

Main article: Free rider problem
Public goods provide a very important example of market failure, in which market-like behavior of individual gain-seeking does not produce efficient results. The production of public goods results in positive externalities which are not remunerated. Because no private organisation can reap all the benefits of a public good which they have produced, there will be insufficient incentives to produce it voluntarily. Consumers can take advantage of public goods without contributing sufficiently to their creation. This is called the free rider problem, or occasionally, the "easy rider problem" (because consumer's contributions will be small but non-zero).

For example, consider national defense, a standard example of a pure public good. A purely rational person (also known as homo economicus) is an individual who is extremely individualistic, considering only those benefits and costs that directly affect him or her. Public goods give such a person incentive to be a free rider.

Suppose this purely rational person thinks about exerting some extra effort to defend the nation. The benefits to the individual of this effort would be very low, since the benefits would be distributed among all of the millions of other people in the country. Further, there is a very high possibility that he could get injured or killed during the course of his or her military service.

On the other hand, the free rider knows that he or she cannot be excluded from the benefits of national defense, regardless of whether he or she contributes to it. There is also no way that these benefits can be split up and distributed as individual parcels to people. So the free rider would not voluntarily exert any extra effort, unless there is some inherent pleasure or material reward for doing so (such as, for example, money paid by the government, as with an all-volunteer army or mercenaries).

In the case of information goods, an inventor of a new product may benefit all of society. But hardly anyone is willing to pay for the invention if they can benefit from it for free.

My thoughts exactly. You just express them much better than I ever could, at least in English...

Ultimately, the egoistcal profit-based system of today, prevailing in the name of "free will", just isn't sustainable. It's defenders often claim that everybody knows exactly what they have to do to have a good quality of life (see thread called Quality of life),that it's a matter of choice. Yeah right!

I knew it! Look at that blond hair and pretty blue eyes, I knew you were a commie from day one!

Not quite sure how to react to your comment... So maybe I should ask what you mean before I react. What DO you mean?

Nothing, I'm playing with you.

Yeah, playing it safe... Perhaps wise of you!

Now, to keep with the topic of the thread, any views on communism (besides what you already posted)?