The answer is obvious...this thread is to weed out the feeble minds.

The question was a feeble minded question!

Most if not virtually all have been misled regarding just exactly what the two economic choices are. There exists only two kinds, a system of private property resource management, Capitalism, and NO private property, or community owned and managed resource system, Communism.

Currently the global resource distribution is a private property based capitalism and the resources currently reside at about 90% owned and in control of just one percent of the global population leaving only the remaining 10 % global resources available to be competed for by 99 % of the population.

Imagine a football team that only allows the elite wealthy quarterback to keep the ball, every play, every game. We are pathetically retarded by this depravation of our talent.

Imagine a petree dish with ten cells in a group. Only one cell is the recipient of all the resources available after the bare minimum needed to sustain the enslavement of the other nine cells survival. Such an entity would not survive long in this diverse universe and this is the model of why we are naturally inclined to form communiy, endeavor to create civilizations.

The single most compelling reason for a nation is to protect and nurture the most feeble and vulnerable of our species, (peatree dish). The second is to take advantage of the efficiencies of economies of scale.

Profit is derived from opportunity. Someone else's. It is enslavement.

Private property capitalism is the "forbidden fruit" and is the enemy of state.

I have been given unto a parable to share.

We have 20 racers that split into two separate groups for ten-lap timed qualifying races. The ten in group-A beat and bang their way all the way to the checker flag and some may not even make it while even the winner has been damaged and progress and performance slowed. Group-B runs nose to tail like a freight train right to and beyond the checker. Not even a scratch at the finish on any of the ten competitors in group-B. The winner of Group A has a slower qualifying time/speed then even the last place competitor in the unblemished cooperatively aerodynamically advantaged group B.

Group-A displayed Laissez faire capitalism and raced only for personal victory at all cost even at a personal risk sustained damage in effort to beat and or eliminate competitors. Group-B displayed the democratic Christian communist principle. One for all and all for one. The entire group-B outperformed even the winner of group-A.

The entire group of capitalists do not qualify in the top ten performers. All ten democratic communists survive and thrive.

Cast of Characters

Group A: (Embryo of gods)

1st place through 9th place.....The elite one percenters. They start up front in the newest and most advanced proven equipment and are virtually unchallenged the entire race. Includes some passengers which otherwise would not be in this group. Senior public and corporate administrative executives. The Vatican.

10th place......The other ninety nine percent of the population. Various stages of upper middle economic classes, surplus labor, economically disenfranchised and physically disadvantaged classes. The enslaved classes. Many in this group have no idea that they are limited to at best the front seat of the last car by the deliberate intentions and leverages of the one percent advantaged. Many have been tricked into believing that they are unfairly limited by and supporting their fellow enslaved passengers in the back seat instead of the one percent. Nobody in this car can enjoy the ride as it is a constant uncivil battle to just maintain a seat in hopes of an enjoyable ride.


Group B: (Infant of LORD God)

Equal citizens of civilization. Mature, evolved, and survived.

America is the only country where the poor people are fat.

you will starve...

more food becoming avalible because of...capitalism.

The Greatest Threat to Global Food Security: Capitalism

http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/18011-the-greatest-threat-to-global-food-security-capitalism

Corporations Own our Food Supply

From seed to supermarket, every stage of industrialized food production is owned, managed and manipulated by corporate conglomerates whose annual profits hover in the billions of dollars, more money than many developing nations' entire GDPs. Giant multinational corporate entities like Cargill, Nestle, Monsanto, ConAgra and Archer Daniels Midland have carefully crafted and promoted economies of scale that allow them to dominate domestic and international markets in such a way that only a handful of companies now control both price and supply.

Middle class small business owners create sustainable jobs.

Every small business I was involved with already paid their employees more then $15 an hour. I did. The contractors I worked with did. Home Depot did not, and they managed to destroy two very large countertop companies in my area. As a small business owner, I was hoping for years they would increase the minimum wage so I didn't have to try to compete with cheap service because of their low wages and even shittier contracts with builders.

Hence the whole sustainable job creating. You'll almost never see a middle class business owner take his business over seas to increase profits, but you see it every day with large corporations.

Complete nutso.

You never take away private property.

EVER!~

Middle class small business owners create sustainable jobs.

If you work a job you love you'll never work a day in your life. I see no reason people cannot do what they enjoy instead of a self-imposed prison where there is no opportunity and the 'wages' are poor. I give credit to the Saint of drudgery, personally I have hard with it, I have to find meaning to my work because there is not much time I am not working and I would imagine I'm not alone.

Poor is a state and a matter of mind.

Personal freedom is a choice that ownership can create, surely a conservative such as yourself could understand that.

Not impressed with wealth. One can be wealthy to the tens, and be a complete arsehole. hahahaha

True enough.

@ shywilly.

In response to your question of why private property (widespread) is a must is the idea that surrounds monopolies. You've heard the saying, 'too much of anything isn't good' Its true.

I don't understand your point of proving my case. When no one owns private property no one can accumulate the leverage to enslave, ie.. (monopoly, (too much)).

you fight the conglomerates, but despise widespread property ownership which includes everything from a workman's tools of trade to his acreage of land?

I do not advocate depriving anyone possession and stewardship of any daily needs to achieve his/her harmless intents, but rather the opposite. Without private property influencing an inequitable distribution of resources, (excessive hoards in control and idled by just one percent of the population while the other 99 percent is competing Darwinistically for the remaining ten percent of the globe's available resources, no one would be lacking any daily need to pursuit each individual's maximum potential as a harmless citizen of civilization.

These items are his livelihood and the ability to work for himself and provide for himself, and when the time is ripe possibly open employment to others.

Provided he can pay the capitalist his extorted priofit/opportunities. If not, the capitalist will soon be labeling him a deadbeat etc.... Unwanted burden.

When everything is owned by 1 or 2 or 3% of the wealthiest individuals, WE work for a 'wage' instead of working for a living.

See you do get it, without private property ownership the individuals cannot accumulate this kind of leverage, nor would anyone want to which is the key note to why no private property is required. The removal of private property personal ownership eliminates our selfish motives dividing us and preventing us from blossoming in a vivid bloom of our potential as individuals and a harmoniously prospering species. Not just one percent of us but all of us together.

So .... They found there all in their nothingness ??

Maybe you should have had a bigger desire to exceed ?

Instead of lose ....

Only private property capitalists think selfishness a good virtue, at least, until they are led into a ditch by an agent of self masquerading as a civil servant. And then they watch their glorious Rome burn to ash.

Communist China grows and produces more food than any other country in the world!!

Thank you, I really appreciate the efforts you have been putting forth here in this string. You make some good points without making a good case at all for private property.

Think of communism as if it were a company that each and every citizen owns an equal stake of. No one owns more then an equal share of the output and everything and everyone is supplied as if an equipped work station. I have been very very productive in such a company work station and yet, I owned none of it except my effort. I am not alone in this phenomenon. Many have been productive as stewards of daily resources supplied to them for free use but not owned.

WTF are you talking about?

Communist China grows and produces more food than any other country in the world!!

None of the above, or all of them is the correct answer.

More food is available to more people when it is provided to more people. Less food is available to more people, when some of them are too poor to pay for it, and the society involved insists that no money means no food.

There have generally been fewer starving people in the nominally socialist countries, but a greater variety of choices of what to eat in the more capitalist ones, though lots of people starve in the capitalist ones.

There hasn't been a PURE capitalist country or a pure socialist country on the planet for a long time now, so that's going to be an impediment to your making any serious headway proving anything one way or another comparing the two systems.