Ian Hickson wrote:
SNIP
> JTK: Can't be you, you don't even realize the evils of Communism.
>
> Clearly not. How can shared wealth, equal work and no poverty be evil?
> Oh wait, you're talking about dictatorships again. Sorry.
>
I am not one of those who claim "It's your methods, not your ideals that I
object to" because the Ideals you mentioned are as bad as the methods.
Shared Wealth means taking from those who produce mare and giving it to those
who produce less. If someone wishes to give their wealth away that is up to
them, but your so called ideal refuses to allow those who don't want to give
the fruits of their labors away to refuse to do so. The only way you will
have shared wealth from everyone is at gunpoint. There is a term for people
who are forced to work for the benifit of others. Shared Wealth == Slavery.
Equal Work ignores the fact that different men have different talents, and
different levels of motivation. The real goal of those who cry "Equal Work"
is to establish "Equal Rewards" and ignore that the contributions of some men
are worth more than others. This is a sure way to destroy the incentive to
excell.
No Poverty. Poverty is relative. A Poor person by US standards is well off
according to the standards in many parts of the world. No Poverty is a
catchall phrase that aims at destroying the wealthy so the poor will not have
a standard of wealth to compare themselves to, and ends in the final result
of shared poverity rather than shared affulance.
Communism is rather like the greek myth where a monster invites his guests to
lie in his bed. Those who were too tall had thier feet cut off so they would
fit the bed. Those who were too short were streached to fit the bed. It's a
system that attempts to alter the nature of men to fit the "bed" rather than
designing a "bed" that fits people.
John
